Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Herremann the Wise" data-source="post: 4546709" data-attributes="member: 11300">Thanks for the detailed discussion. I don't know anything about Torg so the above is enlightening, I'll have to have a closer look. From what you're saying though, I've envisaged the expenditure of combat points a little differently than the above. Essentially, you spend combat points to let you do specific abilities/feats/powers rather than add a bonus here or there.For example: Power Attack [1cp; 4cp]Special: -2 to hit +4 damageGeneral: -4 to hit +4 damage For the specialist (someone who has the feat/ability/power), it costs less to do (1cp vs 4cps) and it's more effective. However, having a slog is something any character can do albeit not as well as the specialist. A few other possible uses include: - Tumble: Automatic success on a tumble/acrobatics check plus either a bonus +2 to AC, or a bonus +2 to hit an adjacent target.- Defensive Stance: Attackers do not get flanking bonuses, (combat advantage is not granted), AC (Defenses) receives a +2 bonus until start/end of your next turn.- The Luck of the Gods: Attacker must re-roll to confirm a critical strike. [This assumes 3E's critical threat, then confirm mechanic - just no multiplication of damage]- Shield Block: Reactively add 1d4 to your AC versus an attack - handy in avoiding an attack or making the confirmation of a critical more difficult.- Deadly Shot: If within 30ft. and firing or throwing a ranged weapon, increase the threat range by 2. (For example, a crossbow with a threat range of 18-20, would expand to 16-20 for that shot). So as you can see, the aim is to spend combat points to let your character do something special or heroic. As for costs, there are a few things that are relative and need to be considered. - How much damage does a variety of attacks do? What is the risk/reward balance in terms of spending combat points to avoid the damage or receiving the damage? Where's the balance point for this?- Look at the two extremes in terms of combat point expenditure. The character who never spends combat points (and just uses them defensively) and the over-active combat point spender. Can a balance between these be achieved while allowing for the tactical cp spender (spends points when they are most effective) to be better/more effective than the two extremes?- Perhaps the base assumption is that half of one's cps are devoted to defense while the other half are devoted to action. However, this presumes that you also have in mind a number of rounds that you expect a combat to last. - The "when" of the spending is dependent upon the ability. Some are reactive, some must be spent beforehand and some require other circumstances to be met (for example, being bloodied, having just been criticalled, in a flanking position etc.), or perhaps these other circumstances reduce the cost. There are a plethora of options that could be explored here, all in giving more "character" to an ability and the narrative heroics that go along with it. Anyway, thanks for taking an interest in my ideas, your reply's appreciated. Best RegardsHerremann the Wise</blockquote>

Verification