| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 2:16 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Naaman wrote: | | Mace Windu reflected Palpatines lighting back at him.... |
Could've just been because the power of the Dark Side is insignificant next to the power of Samuel L. Jackson...
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier
Complete Starship Construction System |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14045
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: |
Why would you pay 10 CP for a static +1 bonus? You can raise the entire skill for less than that. |
It's for the flat having a specialty in the power.. Much like some have 'character traits' that cost 10cp etc to get, that give only a small bonus...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd probably go with one of two options.
Option (1): is treat the enhanced power as something like a specialization of the force skill(s) in question. So to be better at absorb/dissipate energy you pay 1/2 the cost of increasing the Control skill. For example say the character had Control 4D. They want to be better just at a/d. They pay 2 CPs. They now have: Control 4D, (s) absorb/dissipate energy 4D+1.
The downside is, just like with any specialization, when they up Control to 4D+1 their specialization still remains at 4D+1.*
For a multi-skill power, you could add a specialization for any or all of the underlying force skills. So Affect Mind you could choose to specialize in any or all of Control, Sense, or Alter.
Option (2): trade off a bonus to one power for a minus on a different power. Want to be +1D better than your Control skill at absorb/dissipate energy? Then choose something like -1D to magnify senses. All such trade offs subject of course to GM approval. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Naaman wrote: |
Why would you pay 10 CP for a static +1 bonus? You can raise the entire skill for less than that. |
It's for the flat having a specialty in the power.. Much like some have 'character traits' that cost 10cp etc to get, that give only a small bonus... |
Meh... I could see spending half the current dice for a +1 for a specific power, but I wouldn't require it to be raised separately from the base skill. Control of the how high the bonus gets is already in place by limiting max bonus according to the base skill.
The way I see it: if you spend a couple CPs on a specific power, it takes you that much longer to be able to raise the whole skill. Therein lies the trade-off. No? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14045
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Almost sounds like you would rather each force power be it's own dice pool rather than under the C/S/A attributes.. much like the witches of dathomir are like.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2011 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mmmmm... not exactly. I just like to promote individuality between characters and between NPCs.
I'm always looking for ways to limit how many Force powers a character knows. NOT because I want to nerf Force users, but because I want players and GMs to have to actually make decisions when deciding how to spend their CPs.
What I'm going for is this: I want to give players the ability to express their character's concept as fluently as possible. Since I already reduced the number of Force powers known (two with the 1st die in a skill, 1 per full die after that, so a character with 2D in sense knows 3 powers, not 6), being able to boost up one or two main powers to represent specific familiarity with that application of the Force skill sounds like a great idea to me. And it promotes uniqueness between characters that might have the same die code in a skill for different reasons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2011 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | I'd probably go with one of two options.
Option (1): is treat the enhanced power as something like a specialization of the force skill(s) in question. So to be better at absorb/dissipate energy you pay 1/2 the cost of increasing the Control skill. For example say the character had Control 4D. They want to be better just at a/d. They pay 2 CPs. They now have: Control 4D, (s) absorb/dissipate energy 4D+1.
The downside is, just like with any specialization, when they up Control to 4D+1 their specialization still remains at 4D+1.*
For a multi-skill power, you could add a specialization for any or all of the underlying force skills. So Affect Mind you could choose to specialize in any or all of Control, Sense, or Alter.
Option (2): trade off a bonus to one power for a minus on a different power. Want to be +1D better than your Control skill at absorb/dissipate energy? Then choose something like -1D to magnify senses. All such trade offs subject of course to GM approval. |
So you see this as a balance issue? I don't really get it: the player is spending character points in order to gain a very narrowly focused bonus. The trade-off is the CP expenditure. Those CPs could be used to raise the whole skill (and thus the effectiveness of all the corresponding powers). My original idea of 1CP for three +1s does sound a little absurd, but 1/2 the current skill to raise a single power (with no other down side) sounds perfectly reasonable: gain a +1 bonus on two force powers, or gain a bonus to the entire skill for the same price... it's more expensive to "specialize" in this case, but when you have a couple of extra character points that you're not sure what to do with, or you want to push the force power up along with the skill, I see no problem.
Granted: I'm going to do what I want, but I'm just not seeing why it should be any more costly than 1/2 cp cost...
As for exchanging a bonus here for a penalty there, that would make sense if no CPs were being spent, but CPs are the currency of the game. Introducing a new option or "product" for sale is totally cool, as far as I'm concerned. Lots of people think that this product should cost way more than just raising the skills normally. I just don't get it  What am I missing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14045
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2011 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Would that 'half cp cost' be the same whether it was a control, control/alter, or control/sense/alter skill?
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | Would that 'half cp cost' be the same whether it was a control, control/alter, or control/sense/alter skill? |
Of course, those details are to be worked out through play testing, but the original concept is that you pay for each portion of the power individually. If you want to specialize in the alter portion of control breathing, you only get the bonus on the alter roll, not both rolls. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naaman wrote: | | So you see this as a balance issue? |
I always want to consider balance when looking at any rule change. On the Balanced Abilities vs. Powerful (Jedi) Actions* I see myself as towards the middle.
But in this case, I was just trying to use an existing RAW mechanic (specialization) to try to address your idea of Force Users who are better at certain powers than their force skills would otherwise indicate. Since this is how specialization already works for Han Solo and his heavy blaster pistol, intuitively it seemed reasonable, fair, and balanced. Do you use specializations for other skills, and if so do you follow the RAW or a different rule?
In general the balance concern with specialization is that if you can buy the skill as a specialization at a low general skill level it is cheaper than if you buy the skill at a higher level. For example:
Character #1 has blaster 4D. Then specialization in heavy blaster pistol only costs 2 CPs per pip (as opposed to 4 CPs for the general skill). If a character buys specialization to 5D this only costs 6 CPs. If you then increase the geneneral skill and automatically boost the specialization as well. The character in effect gets a higher dice specialization at low cost. To illustrate. Suppose the character now increases the general skill to blaster 6D. If we allow the specialization to also increase he has (s) heavy blaster pistol 7D. For which he spent a total of 27 CP to raise the base skill from 4D to 6D and 4 CP for the +1D specialization. Compare that to character #2 who first increases the base skill then buys the specialization. He too spends 27 CPs to increase the base skill but since he buys his specialization later it costs him 3 CPs per pip or 9 CPs total to increase the specialization to 7D. He paid 5 CPs more than the other guy did.
On a separate matter, by limiting powers to 1/die instead of the RAW 1/pip (after the first die) you have made a significant change to the underlying force power dynamic. I'm not sure what that does, overall to balance. Does a power like affect mind use up 1 power from each of the three skills it requires? If so, your Jedi must either have only a handful of powers or extremely high force skills.
* Imagine a a board balanced on a fulcrum with the left side of the board labled as Balanced Abilities and the right side of the board labeled as Powerful Actions. When interpreting or designing rules, most of us could then be characterized as either more or less to the left or to the right of the fulcrum. I see this as a left-side/right-side question, not a right/wrong question.
Last edited by Bren on Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: | I'd probably go with one of two options.
The downside is, just like with any specialization, when they up Control to 4D+1 their specialization still remains at 4D+1. |
Another way to handle specializations is the method used in the Legend D6 systems. In those variants, the specialty is added to the base skill, and costs the same as the base skill. Basically like advanced skills but without the prerequisites or the doubled cost.
I've been running specialties this way for several years and it works okay. The two drawbacks I've noticed to this method are:
1) Slightly faster advancement. For example, a character with a 3D attribute can get an effective skill of 7D, for only 21 CP vs. 27 CP with the existing specialty rule.
2) It is slightly more cumbersome to add up the die scores. A 4D+2 skill with a 1D+2 specialty takes a second to work out to 6D+1. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | Another way to handle specializations is the method used in the Legend D6 systems. In those variants, the specialty is added to the base skill...It is slightly more cumbersome to add up the die scores. A 4D+2 skill with a 1D+2 specialty takes a second to work out to 6D+1. |
Maybe several seconds. I prefer easier calculations in play and, if necessary, harder calculations for improvement as opposed to harder calculations in play and easier calculations for improvement. You do the in play calculation a lot and the improvement calculation one time.
I suppose you could add a space on the character sheet to include the total of Skill+Specialty...though I'm not sure I like what it does to the look of the sheet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14045
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bren wrote: |
In general the balance concern with specialization is that if you can buy the skill as a specialization at a low general skill level it tit is cheaper than if you buy the skill at a higher level. For example:
|
IIRC if you increase your base skill, specialties you already have do NOT go up.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | IIRC if you increase your base skill, specialties you already have do NOT go up. |
That's correct. That's why I previously mentioned "The downside is, just like with any specialization, when they up Control to 4D+1 their specialization still remains at 4D+1."
But in the quote* you referenced, I was discussing what Naman had proposed, which is different than the RAW.
* And when I read my quote, I went back and edited the original post to remove the somewhat humorous, though unintentional typo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
And for what it's worth, I realize that with regular skills, specializations are treated as separate skills from the base skill.
The problem I have with translating THAT to this proposed idea is that an individual force skill is used for many, many different things. Whereas the blaster skill is used for shooting, and a specialization is still used for shooting, a Force skill governs a myriad of applications.
So it quickly defeats the purpose (especially when paying 1/2 CP cost) to use the "traditional" specialization rules. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
