What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Join the never-ending battle for truth and justice in the world's greatest super-hero universe, using the world's greatest super-hero roleplaying game! This forum is for discussion of DC ADVENTURES.
Stigger
Cohort
Cohort
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:03 am

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Stigger » Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:34 pm

Heh, thanks FuzzyBoots.

Though to be honest, I like the Flat Extra term myself, makes it easier for my head to organize what costs what when calculating PP costs. As to Create versus Create Objects, I'd suspect that it was to remove certain self-imposed limitations on what a player could and couldn't do with it. One could certainly use Create to bring a structure into being, but I've known a few GMs in my time who would disallow it because a structure wasn't an object to their way of thinking, which Create Object would only encourage in that mindset. That's actually one of my favorite parts of 3e actually, that ambiguity and encouraging us to think outside of relatively confining terminology in favor of a broader and much more open to interpretation approach. Certainly it's subtle and not immediately apparent, but I see a lot of psychology in the terminology approach that favors creativity in interpretation, which was something that has always bugged me in other systems, how cut and dried things were, which I found very suffocating, creatively speaking. Certainly a lot of game systems said you should feel free to come up with your own stuff, but I've not found one better than M&M 3e that actually provided a decent framework to do so with. YMMV of course.

@ Kenseido, that was one of my favorite aspects of White Wolf's Storyteller System when it came to skills, and I treat them pretty much the same way when it comes to subskills and check DC's.

User avatar
Lord Fell
Overlord
Overlord
Posts: 4358
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Lord Fell » Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:58 pm

Stigger wrote:Not to be dense, but why not just use an Expertise - Computers/Security/OtherSubskill to represent differing abilities within that given skillset? Use the General Technology skill for some tasks, and the Expertise skill for the more specific task. Isn't that one of the points of Expertise really?
I disagree with this. 1 rank of Expertise (for any given thing) should be worth just as much as 1 rank of Technology, because they have exactly the same cost, and provide exactly the same bonus to rolls. I think if you instead wanted to come up with a Specialization system (where say, 2 ranks in Technology (specialization Security) meant that you had effectively 1 rank in general technology but 4 ranks in Security would be OK. Alternatively, what I like is a return to 4r/pp for Skills but a broadened skill set.

I also really like the idea of Attributes being fluid in respect to Skills. Here's a good example... I know a fair amount about Figure Skating; a stack of amazing skaters made my hometown their home town. If I were to watch skaters, I have a reasonable idea of what they're doing, how difficult it is, and how well they did it. On the other hand, I'm big and not agile, I haven't been on a pair of skates since I was 12. So... I can know things about it (Int + Figureskating) but not be very good at doing things about it (Agl + Figureskating), without having to have two separate skills.

SilvercatMoonpaw
Cosmic Entity
Cosmic Entity
Posts: 10068
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:57 am

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby SilvercatMoonpaw » Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:37 pm

Lord Fell wrote:I also really like the idea of Attributes being fluid in respect to Skills. Here's a good example... I know a fair amount about Figure Skating; a stack of amazing skaters made my hometown their home town. If I were to watch skaters, I have a reasonable idea of what they're doing, how difficult it is, and how well they did it. On the other hand, I'm big and not agile, I haven't been on a pair of skates since I was 12. So... I can know things about it (Int + Figureskating) but not be very good at doing things about it (Agl + Figureskating), without having to have two separate skills.

I thought this was already part. :?

User avatar
Lord Fell
Overlord
Overlord
Posts: 4358
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Lord Fell » Fri Dec 28, 2012 5:48 pm

Nope.

Although if it were, your resistance to Ability Scores would make even less sense...

As it is, M&M has a firmly defined attribute for each skill.

User avatar
Superkid
Groupie
Groupie
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 8:31 pm
Location: Supercave

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Superkid » Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:26 am

My qualm with Fighting is that ranged combat is governed by physical abilities (Agility & Dexterity), but Fighting is a mental ability.

I would prefer Fighting to be a physical ability.

Stigger
Cohort
Cohort
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:03 am

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Stigger » Wed Jan 02, 2013 11:50 am

I would argue that the being able to use alternate Ability modifiers would be covered under Miscellaneous Modifiers, since those are essentially up to the GM to determine. Nothing in there says you can't at any rate, so I see no compelling reason to disallow it.

As to the specialization idea, that'd be something I could get behind pretty nicely, moreso than others actually, though whether a cost should be associated with being allowed to specialize is pretty debatable. 1pp per specialization seems reasonable though, but I could see it being free with enough ranks in the base skill too, when you have say 5 or more, my reasoning being that you no longer qualify for using the Beginner's Luck advantage with it, so could be said to be competent enough to specialize in something.

An alternative idea would be to take the specialized Expertise skill and add its modifier to existing ranks of whatever greater skill it applied to... seems a bit clunky though, but workable enough if one is of a mind to do so and it made more sense. But ultimately, there's a lot of different ways to get to the same end, some more efficient point-wise than others, but ultimately coming down to personal tastes in house rules.

@ Superkid - As to Fighting being a mental ability, I've no idea where that one came from. The description given in the DCA book pretty strongly suggests that it is more physical in nature than anything else.

User avatar
Lord Fell
Overlord
Overlord
Posts: 4358
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Lord Fell » Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:25 pm

@Stigger
Regarding Fighting... in the chapter on Attributes, it explicitly states that the physical attributes are: Strength, Agility, Dexterity and Stamina and that the mental attributes are Intelligence, Awareness, Presence and Fighting.
I don't know exactly how this makes any difference... but there you go.

In regards to Specialization, I didn't intend for this to be a feat or anything like that. It would look something like this:
Technology 2 (unspecialized) gives you a +2 to all Technology rolls.
Technology 2 (Specialized: Security) gives you a +1 to all Technology rolls, except a +4 to all Security rolls.
...Same cost, but without modifying the cost of Skills (or the need for points) we can now make a Catwoman build that can bypass the key-pad lock on a vault without also being smart enough to make a suit of Iron Cat armour.

re: alternate abilities
This is definitely something a GM could house-rule. I was just thinking back, though, to a game where my character had Perform (DJ) which I figured should be Charisma based, and Perform (Dance) which I figured should be Agility based, but Hero Labs threw a fit over it.

User avatar
Lord Fell
Overlord
Overlord
Posts: 4358
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Lord Fell » Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:31 pm

...did anyone bring up the fact that absolutely no one likes Penetrating/Impervious in 3e?

User avatar
MistahFixIt
Cohort
Cohort
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:12 pm

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby MistahFixIt » Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:44 pm

Lord Fell wrote:...did anyone bring up the fact that absolutely no one likes Penetrating/Impervious in 3e?


If by 'don't like' you mean 'frequently confuses the ever-loving crap out of me/people I play with', then yes, absolutely.
Active Characters:
Crinoverse: Nights of Horror - Edward Carnby
Destiny Origins - 'Brea' MacLaughlan
All-New Doom Patrol - Firepower

User avatar
Earth-Two_Kenn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:13 pm
Location: Outer Chicagoland, Earth-Two
Contact:

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Earth-Two_Kenn » Wed Jan 02, 2013 3:47 pm

Hello, my name is Absolutely No One, and I prefer capitalisation and forgoing the underlining of my name.

I also love being generalised out of existence.
Over eleven hundred DCA/M&M Character builds at http://www.rcuhero.net

User avatar
saint_matthew
Overlord
Overlord
Posts: 4381
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 9:31 pm
Location: Perth, AUSTRALIA

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby saint_matthew » Wed Jan 02, 2013 5:54 pm

Lord Fell wrote:...did anyone bring up the fact that absolutely no one likes Penetrating/Impervious in 3e?


I don't dislike it.
“Anti-Intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge’.”
-Isaac Asimov

User avatar
Doresh
Sidekick
Sidekick
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:32 am

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Doresh » Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:36 am

Lord Fell wrote:...did anyone bring up the fact that absolutely no one likes Penetrating/Impervious in 3e?


Bummer, I always thought I was someone :shock:

Stigger
Cohort
Cohort
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 11:03 am

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Stigger » Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:55 am

Lord Fell wrote:@Stigger
Regarding Fighting... in the chapter on Attributes, it explicitly states that the physical attributes are: Strength, Agility, Dexterity and Stamina and that the mental attributes are Intelligence, Awareness, Presence and Fighting.
I don't know exactly how this makes any difference... but there you go.

I guess it might make a difference in terms of broad Weaken effects and similar sorts of effects. It does make sense though, in that it's a mental ability to bring all of your other physical abilities together to form a coherent fighting ability, though it's not immediately apparent until you think about it.
Lord Fell wrote:In regards to Specialization, I didn't intend for this to be a feat or anything like that. It would look something like this:
Technology 2 (unspecialized) gives you a +2 to all Technology rolls.
Technology 2 (Specialized: Security) gives you a +1 to all Technology rolls, except a +4 to all Security rolls.
...Same cost, but without modifying the cost of Skills (or the need for points) we can now make a Catwoman build that can bypass the key-pad lock on a vault without also being smart enough to make a suit of Iron Cat armour.

I wasn't really getting at having a feat/advantage associated with it, that's prohibitively expensive and just sort of stupid. I was more thinking of exactly what you wrote down there, so yeah. Though the mental image of the Iron Cat armour is priceless.
Lord Fell wrote:re: alternate abilities
This is definitely something a GM could house-rule. I was just thinking back, though, to a game where my character had Perform (DJ) which I figured should be Charisma based, and Perform (Dance) which I figured should be Agility based, but Hero Labs threw a fit over it.

You know, that sort of stuff is exactly why I don't bother with things like Hero Lab, and finally just came up with my own character sheets using CC3.

User avatar
Earth-Two_Kenn
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:13 pm
Location: Outer Chicagoland, Earth-Two
Contact:

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Earth-Two_Kenn » Thu Jan 03, 2013 12:12 pm

Hero Lab lets you take Expertises based on other Abilities. Maybe it didn't when you tried it, but it does now.

Just a few hours ago I gave someone the Expertise: Performance (PRE) on top of her Expertise: Acting (INT).
Over eleven hundred DCA/M&M Character builds at http://www.rcuhero.net

User avatar
Lord Fell
Overlord
Overlord
Posts: 4358
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: What needs addressing in 3e to 4e update?

Postby Lord Fell » Thu Jan 03, 2013 1:07 pm

re: Impervious/Penetrating
First I'm sorry I apparently dissed a bunch of people here. I also need to confess that I'm not entirely clear on the impervious/penetrating rules as written. The reason for this is that I have yet to play in a 3e game where the GM didn't house-rule them into something different (most often the 2e rules). Can I maybe bother someone who does like these rules to explain them and explain why they like them?

re: Hero Lab
I don't use it. Never have... I cannot be confined by your little boxes!
However, a GM ran one of my characters through it as a confirmation process, and it choked on my numbers because I used alternate attributes for some skills. There is no rule in 3e (that I am aware of, anyways) that allows you to substitute different attributes for different aspects of a skill. It is easily house-ruled, but to my way of thinking it broadens how skills work to a point where maybe it should be an official rule.


Return to “DC Adventures”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest