comedyofhate
|
VITALITYA thorny issue. Should we cap it. At what point should we cap it? should we scrap it and use a different mechanic altogether?
All this is to do with power creep, btw I have requested a copy of all the character sheets, so I can have a look at exactly how powerful the characters are, after all with the permanent feat increase costs introduced and retroactively applied, it should have slowed down permanent feat progression quite a bit.
|
darren1
|
Instead of putting a cap on vitality how about a curve.
What I mean is, say after 10 vitality (or whatever) you then have to attend two events to go up to 11 vitality, and 2 events for 12 etc up to say 15. Then attend 3 events to progress up to 16 etc.
This has two benefits, it slows down vitality creep,, and it lets newer players catch up so to speak (as they will be earning 1 vitality for there 1st 4 events)..
|
comedyofhate
|
nice.
I like the idea that vitality can increase at 1 per 1 up to 10
vitality events required
11 2
12 2
13 2
14 3
15 3
16 3
17 4
18 4
19 4
20 5
cap at 20.
so a player who started at event 1, has attended all 9 is currently on 15 vitality, under the new system they would now be on 12 vit.
It allows for that initial flood of vit. at the start, but at the higher levels starts a gradual slowdown.
|
Woody
|
If you then get to 20 how about the idea mooted where vitality can be traded for say an extra point of body? Or some other benefit?
|
Woody
|
PS also I think that you should not cap it with actual numbers but in terms related to starting vitality as you can get extra with startign points and if you use set numbers that penalises those that spent points at the start on it.
|
Freeman
|
Well if the average Joe starts with 6 vit, Cap it at Starting Vit + 14?
|
Harry Font
|
i would like to point something out..
I started monday on 14 vitality and after 3 missions was on -3 body
so tha maths is 14 + 4 + 3 cor i got whacked 21 times...
no actually i got whacked a further 15 times due to other peoples skills and my own...
36 combat hits without body armour.. and i know one or two other players were hurt just as much
yets at the end of the game the people in the icu should have been
Harry -3 body
Modeski -2 body
Daniel -1 body
The para captain snippered to hell
thats 4 people down after heavy combat day.. there should have been more.. perhaps battle refs are needed to amek sure that the damages called are noticed by the players.. several times refs had to point out calls to me..
people who engage get hit, dont pena;ise them again for playing their combat chatracters properly. Perhaps you should only get vitality if you actually get smacked in combat..
|
sm0keyb
|
Some people will always be tougher than others. Capping vitality goes against this.
As I understand it vitality represents a combination of physical fitness, experience, combat savvy & so on that helps keep you out of trouble, so perhaps it should be accumulated on the number of combat missions you survive, not just the number of events you attend.
|
Meyrick
|
| Quote: | | Some people will always be tougher than others. Capping vitality goes against this. |
Whatever may be the truth in the real world, this is a game within our control. We can decide whether some people get to be tougher than others. In doing so we should remember that Vitality is only one part of what makes up a combat character's prowess. They also amass feats, kit and player experience.
The problem is in gauging the level of oppostion necessary to challenge the players. What is a walkover to an experienced character is certain death to a new one. The wider the gap between the weak and the powerful, the more likely you are to see new characters killed while old ones walk away unscathed. That might feel great for the old hands, but it isn't much fun for those lower down the totem pole. Players are paying for their game and to me that means nobody should have to play a red shirt.
Everyone gets to be a hero.
To keep the game as fair as possible, for new and old players alike, I think Vitality needs to be capped and progression slowed down for the most experienced characters. I think it's the best way to keep everyone involved and enjoying themselves.
|
Fenric
|
And that sums up my thoughts exactly - I couldn't have said it any better.
|
sm0keyb
|
In which case go for the curve idea. You really don't need an outright cap, 'cos on Tony's scale it'd take you ten years at three events per year to get to twenty.
|
comedyofhate
|
| sm0keyb wrote: | Some people will always be tougher than others. Capping vitality goes against this.
As I understand it vitality represents a combination of physical fitness, experience, combat savvy & so on that helps keep you out of trouble, so perhaps it should be accumulated on the number of combat missions you survive, not just the number of events you attend. |
it is more this
Human beings with the UKSP start with a Vitality of 6. This represents running about and not being hit, that favourite of cinematic action everywhere. It also represents get up and go energy and general health. Poisons and toxins may also affect vitality, progressively weakening the character. Vitality cannot drop below 0. If it does, damage is done to the body itself.
As per the rulebook.
|
Fenric
|
Yes, I would say that Vitality should NOT be based on Combat missions only - as that would negatively effect the people who never do combat (scientists, medics except Benton, civil servants except Manning)
|
|
|
