Game Mechanics - Open Discussion

305 posts / 0 new
Last post
Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
In fact, I'm pretty sure that

In fact, I'm pretty sure that definitely can't be done because recharges specify that they can't be sped up.

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
Personally, non-winged flight

Personally, non-winged flight should stay in the REF/COO camp - Somatics is about control and management of stamina and strength - basically how well you can use the raw physical capacity of your morph. While this works for "winged" flight as an analog for a natural function (which is even native to avian uplifts) the "Dexterity" analog I think way more suits having fine control over something like Thrust Vector or water impellers even if they're sticking out of your body.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

Decivre Decivre's picture
UnitOmega wrote:Personally,

UnitOmega wrote:
Personally, non-winged flight should stay in the REF/COO camp - Somatics is about control and management of stamina and strength - basically how well you can use the raw physical capacity of your morph. While this works for "winged" flight as an analog for a natural function (which is even native to avian uplifts) the "Dexterity" analog I think way more suits having fine control over something like Thrust Vector or water impellers even if they're sticking out of your body.

Flight is the most energy-intense and muscle-intense mode of movement for any organism. Birds glide so that they can have moments of rest, and it's a key reason why their body is covered in fast-twitch muscle.

Furthermore, if you want to fly fast, it's about pushing your strength. Which is just as much athletics as running is.

The big issue is that there is blur between SOM and REF right now. Some skills seem like finesse, some like strength, and some like both. I mean, I understand the logic behind Pilot being a REF roll, but Pilot also represents your ability to push a vehicle to max performance... shouldn't that be SOM, especially if you're jamming? To that same vein, why is it a REF check to do something like balance? This creates unusual questions, like "is a handstand a REF check or athletics check?". Both could apply, since it's a test of strength and finesse.

The same is true for COG/INT. Research and Interface blur the line, because INT is about perception (Research) and intuiting things (Interface), yet COG is the hard-thinking skill, which feels right for both as well.

Ironically, this might mean we need certain skills split. Athletics/Gymnastics (which might be better than Athletics/Free Fall), Some finesse version of piloting.

Alternately, we can create a new REF skill called "deftness" or something, and have it represent fine motion for other skills the character has. Deftness can be used for both slipping your fingers in someone's pocket and manually docking in the crevice of an asteroid that's only inches longer than your ship.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:The big issue is that

Quote:
The big issue is that there is blur between SOM and REF right now. Some skills seem like finesse, some like strength, and some like both. I mean, I understand the logic behind Pilot being a REF roll, but Pilot also represents your ability to push a vehicle to max performance... shouldn't that be SOM, especially if you're jamming? To that same vein, why is it a REF check to do something like balance? This creates unusual questions, like "is a handstand a REF check or athletics check?". Both could apply, since it's a test of strength and finesse.

The same is true for COG/INT. Research and Interface blur the line, because INT is about perception (Research) and intuiting things (Interface), yet COG is the hard-thinking skill, which feels right for both as well.

Ironically, this might mean we need certain skills split. Athletics/Gymnastics (which might be better than Athletics/Free Fall), Some finesse version of piloting.

The more I think about it, the more I lean towards the dramatic move of eliminating SOM entirely and keeping COO, the aptitude that got nuked. That would leave us with REF/COO, COG/INT, and SAV/WIL. SOM (or perhaps STR) would be a morph-only trait like DUR. The existing SOM skills would all go to COO, and "brute strength" checks would be done purely against the morph's STR.

I'm not sure this is a good idea but it feels like the inherent squirreliness of classic EP1 SOM (simultaneously modeling 'ability to use the body' AND 'raw strength' in a single stat) and some participants' frustration with decoupling SOM from morph stats in EP2 ("Why is a scurrier as strong as a Remade?") both come back to this.

Decivre Decivre's picture
eaton wrote:The more I think

eaton wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I lean towards the dramatic move of eliminating SOM entirely and keeping COO, the aptitude that got nuked. That would leave us with REF/COO, COG/INT, and SAV/WIL. SOM (or perhaps STR) would be a morph-only trait like DUR. The existing SOM skills would all go to COO, and "brute strength" checks would be done purely against the morph's STR.

I'm not sure this is a good idea but it feels like the inherent squirreliness of classic EP1 SOM (simultaneously modeling 'ability to use the body' AND 'raw strength' in a single stat) and some participants' frustration with decoupling SOM from morph stats in EP2 ("Why is a scurrier as strong as a Remade?") both come back to this.


That might actually work. SOM could be the gauge for morph strength (which this game sorely needs), and determine damage in melee or crashes, while REF and COO determine your actual skills with the body. Raw power shouldn't be an ego trait anyways.

How's this for a proposed layout?

REF
Athletics
Fray
Free Fall
Melee

COO
Guns
Infiltrate
Pilot

The division I went for was intuitive motion (REF) vs coordinated motion (COO)

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

eaton eaton's picture
In previous poking around, I

In previous poking around, I suggested the following:

Ego Stuff

COG: Hardware, Medicine, Infosec, Programming (as well as all knowledge skills)
INT: Interfacing, Research, Perception, Survival
REF: Fray, Free Fall, Pilot, Guns
COO: Infiltrate, Athletics, Melee
SAV: Deceive, Kinesics, Persuade, Provoke
WIL: Psi

Morph Stuff

DUR: Wound threshold, death threshold, collision damage
SOM/STR: Melee damage bonus dice, brute force tests

eaton eaton's picture
It just occurred to me that

It just occurred to me that COO/SOM split between ego and morph would make the "Can you land the punch" vs "how much damage does the punch do" split very obvious. Hmmmm.

Decivre Decivre's picture
eaton wrote:COG: Hardware,

eaton wrote:
COG: Hardware, Medicine, Infosec, Programming (as well as all knowledge skills)
INT: Interfacing, Research, Perception, Survival
REF: Fray, Free Fall, Pilot, Guns
COO: Infiltrate, Athletics, Melee
SAV: Deceive, Kinesics, Persuade, Provoke
WIL: Psi

I'm torn on Free Fall (to me, it's the "Microgravity Athletics" skill, so it should be under the same aptitude) and Kinesics (it's about perception, which tends to be Intuition), but otherwise I like this. I actually like having Athletics on the same aptitude as Infiltrate and Melee.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

gleech gleech's picture
Proposal: replace pools with Morph Boosts

Decivre wrote:
eaton wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I lean towards the dramatic move of eliminating SOM entirely and keeping COO, the aptitude that got nuked. That would leave us with REF/COO, COG/INT, and SAV/WIL. SOM (or perhaps STR) would be a morph-only trait like DUR. The existing SOM skills would all go to COO, and "brute strength" checks would be done purely against the morph's STR.

I'm not sure this is a good idea but it feels like the inherent squirreliness of classic EP1 SOM (simultaneously modeling 'ability to use the body' AND 'raw strength' in a single stat) and some participants' frustration with decoupling SOM from morph stats in EP2 ("Why is a scurrier as strong as a Remade?") both come back to this.


That might actually work. SOM could be the gauge for morph strength (which this game sorely needs), and determine damage in melee or crashes, while REF and COO determine your actual skills with the body. Raw power shouldn't be an ego trait anyways.

How's this for a proposed layout?

REF
Athletics
Fray
Free Fall
Melee

COO
Guns
Infiltrate
Pilot

The division I went for was intuitive motion (REF) vs coordinated motion (COO)

Er, I put a proposal that plays off of this in the other thread. I probably should have put it here.

Basically, I wanted to replace the pools we have now with three STR-like numbers, and then use those for Aptitude Checks (as APT + Morph-Derived Boost, instead of APTx3) - so you'd have a "Have an Idea" roll as (COG + Mental Boost) instead of (COGx3), but your Mental Boost wouldn't affect your target-numbers and you wouldn't have to recalculate your skills.

That way, I get an "always-on" mechanical benefit from having an upgraded morph, we don't have to recalculate skills when we resleeve, and it's even simpler than pools because we're not keeping track of pools and rests.

Does that sound like that could work?



eaton eaton's picture
Quote:Basically, I wanted to

Quote:
Basically, I wanted to replace the pools we have now with three STR-like numbers, and then use those for Aptitude Checks (as APT + Morph-Derived Boost, instead of APTx3) - so you'd have a "Have an Idea" roll as (COG + Mental Boost) instead of (COGx3), but your Mental Boost wouldn't affect your target-numbers and you wouldn't have to recalculate your skills.

That way, I get an "always-on" mechanical benefit from having an upgraded morph, we don't have to recalculate skills when we resleeve, and it's even simpler than pools because we're not keeping track of pools and rests.

I chimed in in the other thread, so I won't go into too much depth here, but I'm actually very much in favor of pools as a core mechanic. Basically, I'm 100% on board with the idea of explicitly separating morph stats from ego stats, and using morph-based "stretch" pools as the mechanism for directly influencing skill checks and combat actions.

To me at least, that's separate from balancing the distribution of skills across the various aptitudes, and separate from the question of whether morphs need an explicit strength/som value the same way they have an explicit DUR and Movement Speed.

ubik2 ubik2's picture
Quote:Fate found a way to

Quote:
Fate found a way to counter this by making Fate points easy to tweak through Stunts, thus giving players an easy way to make Fate points into a primary resource. You just have to do something similar.

A decent house rule approach is to remove two tokens from your pool for a +5 bonus to linked skills (e.g. Vigor would grant a bonus to REF and SOM skills) until refresh. This would let resource hoarders avoid wasting the points. I think that's about right for power, but if you want to make it a little better, you could have it apply to the aptitude checks as well.

One of the annoying things about the old aptitude+skill system was that you ended up wanting to dump your aptitude, then max the skill, then get a morph with a big bonus to that attribute. Made no sense (if you care about immersion), but it gets you really high skills. This addition after the fact wouldn't be gamed, but it does mean more math. Fate does fine with the various +2 stunts, which are mechanically similar.

Overall, I like the pool approach, since it lets you be good when you think you should be, and prevents you from always being good (which just changes the baseline). I only suggest the house rule in case your players really hate pools.

From a cost standpoint, a pool point would cost as much as a point of aptitude (though Morphs are discounted to 25% cost, perhaps because they get lost/destroyed). Based solely on that, 2 dice would give a +2 bonus (or even +1 to each of the 2 linked aptitudes), but if you don't get any of the other benefits (like the aptitude checks), maybe it's ok to make it +5. If you're spending 2 pool points on it, you could have gotten 2 +20 checks, so with this costing, this is better if you use it 8 times between short rests (though it's less flexible).

gleech gleech's picture
ubik2 wrote:A decent house

ubik2 wrote:
A decent house rule approach is to remove two tokens from your pool for a +5 bonus to linked skills (e.g. Vigor would grant a bonus to REF and SOM skills) until refresh.

I'd actually be OK with that as an option: that lets me basically always burn my pools to have an ongoing bonus, and allows people who don't want to adjust their skills to get other bonuses. I'd rather see one-for-5, but that's a detail we can negotiate. :P

Although at that point, we've basically arrived back at APT-bonuses by walking backwards on our hands.

ubik2 wrote:
One of the annoying things about the old aptitude+skill system was that you ended up wanting to dump your aptitude, then max the skill, then get a morph with a big bonus to that attribute. Made no sense (if you care about immersion), but it gets you really high skills. This addition after the fact wouldn't be gamed, but it does mean more math. Fate does fine with the various +2 stunts, which are mechanically similar.

That's more or less what I did, and I told my players to do - never buy Aptitudes, just put ranks in skills and get a morph with appropriate bonuses. I don't see what the problem with that is, or how it "breaks immersion".



eaton eaton's picture
Quote:Although at that point,

Quote:
Although at that point, we've basically arrived back at APT-bonuses by walking backwards on our hands.

I dunno — "+5 to all linked skills until the next refresh" feels like an appropriately extended version of the "1 point = +20 to one roll" rule that's already there. It's a choice, it doesn't affect resleeving math, it stacks nicely with stuff like aptitude-boosting-drugs, AND it's not a new complicated mechanism, just one more way to use points.

I'm rubbing my chin thoughtfully. I like it.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
eaton wrote:Quote:Although at

eaton wrote:
Quote:
Although at that point, we've basically arrived back at APT-bonuses by walking backwards on our hands.

I dunno — "+5 to all linked skills until the next refresh" feels like an appropriately extended version of the "1 point = +20 to one roll" rule that's already there. It's a choice, it doesn't affect resleeving math, it stacks nicely with stuff like aptitude-boosting-drugs, AND it's not a new complicated mechanism, just one more way to use points.

I'm rubbing my chin thoughtfully. I like it.

Probably with the clarification that Flex Points can't do it.

A slight smell of ions....

Decivre Decivre's picture
o11o1 wrote:Probably with the

o11o1 wrote:
Probably with the clarification that Flex Points can't do it.

Think of it as a throwback to the aptitude bonus of your choice perk that morphs used to have. Flex points can be used to provide that bonus where you need it. Morph flex points never exceed 2, so it's a single bonus at most.

Ego flex points, that's a different story. Unless we're okay with this idea that the mind can just spontaneously start pushing itself on a specific subset of skills harder for a while. That said, I'm not really okay with the game treating flex points from different sources differently, either.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

eaton eaton's picture
I'm more and more convinced

I'm more and more convinced that this "two points for +5" makes sense. Although! For simplicity's sake, one pool point for one aptitude might work just as well. +20 for a single roll is a powerful, focused effect. +5 is a broad, subtle effect. Especially if a few skills are peeled away from COG and categorized under INT, I don't think it would be radically unbalanced.

How about adding this to the list of possible actions under "Using Pools":

• Before roll: Add +5 to tests for one aptitude and its linked skills. This bonus lasts up to 24 hours, or until your next refresh.

Making it ONE aptitude instead of both pool-linked aptitudes, and making it consume just one point, makes it operate similarly to other die-fudging point effects. Capping it at 24 hours or until pool refresh makes it feel similar to the wound/trauma ignoring feature. And it also leaves us with a pleasantly symmetrical 3 "before" actions and 3 "after" actions.

And finally, it has the pleasant effect of duplicating most morph bonuses from EP1 if players want to use it that way. Given the point pools for most morphs, investing points in persistent bonuses after *every* refresh could get you the equivalent of a +5/+5/+5/+5 set of morph bonuses… but you'd have to sacrifice the equivalent of your EP1 Moxie to get it, too.

A Remade, for example, could theoretically sink all of its non-Flex points into aptitude bonuses, giving it a +5 across the board to every skill check. *But* it would be left with just +2 flex for emergency use. In addition, the fact that it's a check bonus rather than an aptitude boost means that both skills checks AND aptitude checks would receive a +5. EP1's morph bonuses happen before APTx3 check tripling occurs, so this point buy mechanism wouldn't make (say) stress checks or COG-based recall tests as powerful.

Man. I'm really liking this, and I *think* it is pretty balanced.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
eaton wrote:

eaton wrote:

How about adding this to the list of possible actions under "Using Pools":

• Before roll: Add +5 to tests for one aptitude and its linked skills. This bonus lasts up to 24 hours, or until your next refresh.

Making it ONE aptitude instead of both pool-linked aptitudes, and making it consume just one point, makes it operate similarly to other die-fudging point effects. Capping it at 24 hours or until pool refresh makes it feel similar to the wound/trauma ignoring feature. And it also leaves us with a pleasantly symmetrical 3 "before" actions and 3 "after" actions.

And finally, it has the pleasant effect of duplicating most morph bonuses from EP1 if players want to use it that way. Given the point pools for most morphs, investing points in persistent bonuses after *every* refresh could get you the equivalent of a +5/+5/+5/+5 set of morph bonuses… but you'd have to sacrifice the equivalent of your EP1 Moxie to get it, too.

A Remade, for example, could theoretically sink all of its non-Flex points into aptitude bonuses, giving it a +5 across the board to every skill check. *But* it would be left with just +2 flex for emergency use. In addition, the fact that it's a check bonus rather than an aptitude boost means that both skills checks AND aptitude checks would receive a +5. EP1's morph bonuses happen before APTx3 check tripling occurs, so this point buy mechanism wouldn't make (say) stress checks or COG-based recall tests as powerful.

Man. I'm really liking this, and I *think* it is pretty balanced.

Yeah, that is pretty handy overall, even with the option to, say, do a SOM bonus one day and a REF bonus the other day, that just means you're planning in advance what you expect to need to do. Given that you're probably trained in skills for whichever, any given player will probably be decently consistant.

And then "do I want the passive bonus, or do I want to keep one more extra action in reserve" becomes an interesting choice. Upvoted!

A slight smell of ions....

eaton eaton's picture
So. I went back through a few

Quote:
And then "do I want the passive bonus, or do I want to keep one more extra action in reserve" becomes an interesting choice. Upvoted!

Yeaaaaaaah, that kind of trade-off feels interesting and even more nuanced than the static morph bonuses. I'm tempted to play next week's playest game with my group using these house rules to see how they go.

So. I went back through a few threads and rolled up the specific rule change/clarification suggestions that I've put forward that have received positive feedback, and I (think) they're less sweeping than I'd been thinking. I'm curious how others feel about these when they're all put together, rather than threaded into longer conversations:

Point pools/bonuses

  • Move Interfacing and Research from COG to INT, and Psi from COG to WIL.
  • Allow pool points to be spent for a +5 persistent bonus to one aptitude and its linked skills. This bonus lasts 24 hours, or until the next refresh.
  • Allow players to use each known Interest: [Field] for an NPC to gain a one-time +10 to an opposed social roll, and each known Motivation to gain a one-time +20.

Action economy

  • Eliminate "rushing," make full movement a quick action.
  • Make all types of movement follow the same free/quick action standards regardless of linked skill (Flight, swimming, walking, etc), as long as there's no difficult terrain/task actions involved.
  • Replace ambiguous "standing/going prone/taking cover" language with "taking cover/leaving cover," both being a quick action.
  • In combat, make the second shot for semi-auto and burst fire weapons a quick action rather than "two-per-complex-action."
Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
I think we should keep in

I think we should keep in mind that we haven't yet seen the rules for combat or other parts of playing the game. It's quite possible that the social rules have changed already since original Eclipse Phase, and I expect the combat rules to be similar. That's why I've been holding off on making or playing characters.

Surly Surly's picture
eaton wrote:Morph Stuff

eaton wrote:
Morph Stuff

DUR: Wound threshold, death threshold, collision damage
SOM/STR: Melee damage bonus dice, brute force tests

What about making DUR and SOM/ STR the same stat? There might be edge cases, but usually strength and durability go together. I can't see many players wanting to sleeve "delicate wad of nanotube yarn muscles" or Fun-Size Mini-Meathab.

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:What about making DUR

Quote:
What about making DUR and SOM/ STR the same stat? There might be edge cases, but usually strength and durability go together. I can't see many players wanting to sleeve "delicate wad of nanotube yarn muscles" or Fun-Size Mini-Meathab.

Interestingly enough, that's not too far off the alternate rules from Transhuman, pg 96:

Quote:
For a more ne-tuned approach to melee damage, calculate a character’s Damage Bonus (p. 122, EP) as (Somatics + Durability) ÷ 20, rounding normally. So a character with SOM 20 in a dragon y (DUR 25) would have a Damage Bonus of 2…

Alternatively, use SOM + DUR for brute force tests, rather than SOM x 3…

As a rough guideline, assume a character can lift (SOM + DUR) x 4 kilograms off the ground, can lift a weight equal to their (SOM + DUR) x 2 in kilograms over their head, and can push or drag (SOM + DUR) x 10 kilograms…

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
The alternate rules in

The alternate rules in Transhuman are pretty good - and should probably be carried over as optional rules in 2E. SOM is important because that's an Ego measure of how well you can leverage and manage your strength and stamina - but if you are just a giant robot man you have physics on your side.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
The only issue I see with DUR

The only issue I see with DUR as strength is that a few mods like Extreme Heat Shielding and the pressure version would increase melee damage a fair amount. I don't think that's much of an issue though, and probably makes some sense. A Q-morph can really slap people around if they can get there, but that's probably appropriate.

Decivre Decivre's picture
I've been pondering the issue

I've been pondering the issue with Knowledge skills, and it just hit me that maybe the best solution is already in the rules. What if Knowledge skills worked somewhat like languages already do, but where you are allowed to do an aptitude check if you have the Field in question as opposed to having a skill value? Lack of a Knowledge Field leaves you rolling Aptitude*1 (as if defaulting). Alternately, you simply can't make the check.

In other words, Knowledge Fields cost 1 CP each and just expands aptitude checks more.

I feel that the aptitude checks present are vaguely defined in some cases (why is navigate an Intuition check when it's also a survival skill property?), and it'd be better if they were expanded upon. Basically it's folding Knowledge skills into the Recall Memory mechanic.

I think I remember someone else pitching this too. Count me in on it.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

gleech gleech's picture
to the extent that we're voting...

Like I said before, to the extent that we're voting:

eaton wrote:
Move Interfacing and Research from COG to INT, and Psi from COG to WIL.

Seconded, especially Psi -> WIL

eaton wrote:
Allow pool points to be spent for a +5 persistent bonus to one aptitude and its linked skills. This bonus lasts 24 hours, or until the next refresh.

Seconded with some edits. Remove the 24-hour restriction, I don't see a need for it.

I make the following suggestion: this potentially brings us to a situation where you enter a rest, your pool points and bonuses get reset, you loose +5 WIL thereby, and immediately go insane. Possible solution: add the special rule that you can elect to not 'regenerate' that point of pool to correspondingly not interrupt that bonus. It's a special case, but it's not a complicated one, and it prevents a bunch of other problems.

And it allows me to maintain my Apt boosts all the time, which makes me happier, without costing anyone else anything as far as I can tell. =)

eaton wrote:
Eliminate "rushing," make full movement a quick action.

Opposed. I liked how Basic / Full / Sprinting worked in EP1, and this is just that as far as I can tell. The ability to push your morph/shell to move faster is a nice way to reward investing in movement skills, and is important for making chase scenes work out right. I'd rather have Full movement stay a Free-action-with-a-penalty than become a quick action.

eaton wrote:
Make all types of movement follow the same free/quick action standards regardless of linked skill (Flight, swimming, walking, etc), as long as there's no difficult terrain/task actions involved.

Isn't that how it's written now? What am I missing?

eaton wrote:
In combat, make the second shot for semi-auto and burst fire weapons a quick action rather than "two-per-complex-action."

Opposed: I'm not sure why you want to make taking multiple attacks with ranged weapons worse. That also interacts really badly with the "make full movement a Quick Action" rule above.

eaton wrote:
DUR: Wound threshold, death threshold, collision damage
SOM/STR: Melee damage bonus dice, brute force tests

Mostly seconded. I support adding an STR score, since it helps clean up a bunch of corner-cases (see the arm-wrestling scurrier) while being a relatively simple and compact change.

I think we should either keep SOM or identically-swap it with COO, mainly because we need some kind of "use your body" APT so that it can be the base APT for skills like Athletics. Someone almost certainly said that, sorry that I haven't tracked this conversation.

Just to sound smrat: for the record, this is how your brain actually works: most of the initial improvement in strength when you start working out is from your brain learning to better recruit muscle fibres, or so I was taught in college health class.

Surly wrote:
What about making DUR and SOM/ STR the same stat? There might be edge cases, but usually strength and durability go together.

Opposed. "Making a minimal rules change to clean up the corner-cases" was kind of the goal. I think adding an STR score to morphs is a pretty compact way to represent "scurriers can't arm-wrestle" (and giving a swarmanoid an STR of 0 is a good way to imply that "it just kind of can't do physical tasks at all").

Surly wrote:
I can't see many players wanting to sleeve "delicate wad of nanotube yarn muscles" or Fun-Size Mini-Meathab.

You have played with very different people than I have. :P



gleech gleech's picture
Add Scenes

Suggestion Re: rests. Instead, add the concept of a "scene", and say that pool refresh when scenes end.

That way:

  • Player pool refresh will naturally follow the rhythm of the campaign. You won't need to make sure you have "exactly this many encounters to this amount of in-world time" like you do in Pathfinder. (And correspondingly, you won't have players moaning about need to have nap-time so they can get their pools back.)
  • Players can spend points more liberally, since scenes will usually be a lot shorter than a third of a day
  • The weirdness with Infomorphs will go away naturally (since there's no longer a "rest" action that a) they could theoretically do at 60x time and b) they shouldn't even need anyway, lore-wise)

Someone's probably already brought this up; I'm sorry if I've missed it.



o11o1 o11o1's picture
gleech wrote:Suggestion Re:

gleech wrote:
Suggestion Re: rests. Instead, add the concept of a "scene", and say that pool refresh when scenes end.

That way:

  • Player pool refresh will naturally follow the rhythm of the campaign. You won't need to make sure you have "exactly this many encounters to this amount of in-world time" like you do in Pathfinder. (And correspondingly, you won't have players moaning about need to have nap-time so they can get their pools back.)
  • Players can spend points more liberally, since scenes will usually be a lot shorter than a third of a day
  • The weirdness with Infomorphs will go away naturally (since there's no longer a "rest" action that a) they could theoretically do at 60x time and b) they shouldn't even need anyway, lore-wise)

Someone's probably already brought this up; I'm sorry if I've missed it.

I dunno, EP hasn't used "Scene" style time before, bringing it in to solve just one kind of problem seems like it's going to really confuse people who've never played at "narrative time" style games where that's normal. If anything, the short rest / long rest style that is already in the rules seems like it's good enough. With a 10 minute rest being normal, it seems like a GM can decide how much time they're willing to give to people, and by proxy how many pools. That said, some guidance on "how rough is a typical op supposed to be" might be good GM advice in the narrator's section.

With your setup, players are basically coming in to every encounter with a pretty-much full pool.

Also, the rules already point out that you cannot use simulspaces to "rest more", recharges operated according to wall-clock time.

Playtest Rules wrote:
REFRESHING POOLS
You recover the points you have spent from pools by taking a recharge action to rest and recalibrate. You can’t increase a pool above its original rating; unspent points are lost. There are two types of recharge actions: short rechargesand long recharges.

Short Recharge (2/day): Short recharges are a task action with a timeframe of 10 minutes. You may take two short recharges per 24-hour period. Each short recharge restores 1d6 pool points; you decide where to allocate them. Some gear or psi sleights may provide bonus refreshed points.

Long Recharge (1/day):A long recharge is a task action with a timeframe of 4 hours (8 for flats and other biomorphs without biomods). You may only benefit from one long recharge per 24-hour period. A long recharge completely restores your pools to their full value.

While recharging, you may only engage in light, non-strenuous activity: eating, browsing the mesh, talking, reloading, taking watch, etc. Recharge timeframes may not be shortened or interrupted.

Emphasis mine. Hope that clears up a few things.

A slight smell of ions....

gleech gleech's picture
o11o1 wrote:I dunno, EP hasn

o11o1 wrote:
I dunno, EP hasn't used "Scene" style time before, bringing it in to solve just one kind of problem seems like it's going to really confuse people who've never played at "narrative time" style games where that's normal. If anything, the short rest / long rest style that is already in the rules seems like it's good enough. With a 10 minute rest being normal, it seems like a GM can decide how much time they're willing to give to people, and by proxy how many pools. That said, some guidance on "how rough is a typical op supposed to be" might be good GM advice in the narrator's section.

The problem isn't that people might not realize how it's supposed to work, it's that GMs might have to torture the scenario to make it fit. This problem happens all the time in Pathfinder: part of the thing that's supposed to balance Wizards is that they run out of spells over the course of a day, but to make that work out right, GMs have to make sure that people get exactly four significant encounters in a day - not more, or you'll short-change the Wizard (they'll run out of spells by no fault of their own); and not less, or you'll short-change the Fighter (the Wizard will be able to go all-out and leave the Fighter in the dust). Even knowing I'm supposed to do that, I frequently find it difficult or impossible to arrange for that to happen. Even worse, it creates absurd incentives for players - I've had players use Rope Trick to sleep for 8 hours in the middle of a dungeon, for example.

We're getting into the same kind of problem: I know have to make sure that my players have X number of encounters per 24 hours of game-time, otherwise the pool economy will break.

o11o1 wrote:
With your setup, players are basically coming in to every encounter with a pretty-much full pool.

Yes. I don't have a problem with that, as a GM or a player.

o11o1 wrote:
Also, the rules already point out that you cannot use simulspaces to "rest more", recharges operated according to wall-clock time.

Playtest Rules wrote:
REFRESHING POOLS
You recover the points you have spent from pools by taking a recharge action to rest and recalibrate. You can’t increase a pool above its original rating; unspent points are lost. There are two types of recharge actions: short rechargesand long recharges.

Short Recharge (2/day): Short recharges are a task action with a timeframe of 10 minutes. You may take two short recharges per 24-hour period. Each short recharge restores 1d6 pool points; you decide where to allocate them. Some gear or psi sleights may provide bonus refreshed points.

Long Recharge (1/day):A long recharge is a task action with a timeframe of 4 hours (8 for flats and other biomorphs without biomods). You may only benefit from one long recharge per 24-hour period. A long recharge completely restores your pools to their full value.

While recharging, you may only engage in light, non-strenuous activity: eating, browsing the mesh, talking, reloading, taking watch, etc. Recharge timeframes may not be shortened or interrupted.

Emphasis mine. Hope that clears up a few things.

That says nothing about simulspaces, which can explicitly be time-accelerated. Reading that as real-world wall-clock time implies that an infomorph running at maximum acceleration would get one full refresh per 60 subjective days, and that that full rest would take them more than subjective week of laying around doing nothing. Reading it as subjective time means that an infomorph in time acceleration would get one full refresh every half hour of outside-time or so. Neither assumption works elegantly when you have some people running on servers and some people not.

While it doesn't say it explicitly the fact that full rests are tied to the times that morphs normally sleep is why I said it makes no sense lore-wise: infomorphs neither tire out nor sleep, so why do they still need Full Rests in the first place? If a Full Rest doesn't represent sleeping, then what is it?



Decivre Decivre's picture
gleech wrote:That says

gleech wrote:
That says nothing about simulspaces, which can explicitly be time-accelerated. Reading that as real-world wall-clock time implies that an infomorph running at maximum acceleration would get one full refresh per 60 subjective days. Reading it as subjective time means that an infomorph in time acceleration would get one full refresh every half hour of outside-time or so. Neither assumption works elegantly when you have some people running on servers and some people not.

While it doesn't say it explicitly the fact that full rests are tied to the times that morphs normally sleep is why I said it makes no sense lore-wise: infomorphs neither tire out nor sleep, so why do they still need Full Rests in the first place? If a Full Rest doesn't represent sleeping, then what is it?


I would actually rule that the limit on rests is subjective to the body being rested. In simulspace, you can long recharge the virtual simulmorph you're in within the virtual world every 24 virtual hours (which would be 24 virtual minutes), but this will neither affect your infomorph or your physical sleeve.

It's not necessarily sleep, just rest. Non-strenuous leisurely activity.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
Thoughts on sleep and Pools.

gleech wrote:
It's not necessarily sleep, just rest. Non-strenuous leisurely activity.

Which is why Synthmorphs can do it, despite not sleeping. (There does seem to be a defrag and cleanup process they go through though).

gleech wrote:
This problem happens all the time in Pathfinder: part of the thing that's supposed to balance Wizards is that they run out of spells over the course of a day, but to make that work out right, GMs have to make sure that people get exactly four significant encounters in a day - not more, or you'll short-change the Wizard (they'll run out of spells by no fault of their own); and not less, or you'll short-change the Fighter (the Wizard will be able to go all-out and leave the Fighter in the dust). Even knowing I'm supposed to do that, I frequently find it difficult or impossible to arrange for that to happen. Even worse, it creates absurd incentives for players - I've had players use Rope Trick to sleep for 8 hours in the middle of a dungeon, for example.

Now that you bring up pathfinder, theres actually an interesting case of the scale of the problem there. Say you have a 5th level wizard, he's got 4+3+2+1 spell slots of various levels (not counting bonus slots, which tends to be be one for each level or so. Call it 14 spells a day.). He can recharge those slots exactly once per day. His buddy, the 5th level Fighter, has no particular powers with either slots or daily recharges, all his powers are as much as he likes. If the wizard is throwing 4 spells per encouter, he's at risk of running dry in the middle of the fourth encounter of the day, while the fighter doesn't run dry like that.

Now let's look at EP, we have an Olympian gunbunny and a Menton drone jammer (both cost 4 CP). gunbunny has 3 Vigor and 1 flex to work with for ensuring their attacks land or to take extra attack actions. Our drone jammer on the other hand has.... 3 insight and 1 flex to work with for ensuring their hacking checks pay off and to take extra attacks with their drones. If they get a ten minute rest, they can roll a d6, and at least half the time get what's close to a full restore of their abilities. They can do this twice, before needing to take a proper 4 hour sleep. (2 if Hibernoid, so the rumormill suspects).

We can notice that EP2 doesn't quite have the same sort of Fighter-Wizard disparity that DnD does. I imagine Asyncs and their Infection tests might actually be the true mirror, but I don't have Async rules to look at yet. But my point is that if two people are fighting sporadic encounters with time to rest, -both- are working at top form. If two people in morphs that aren't wildly different pool values are fighting for extended engagements, then they are -both- running low on fuel, and hoping to survive on luck and clever play.

gleech wrote:
o11o1 wrote:

With your setup, players are basically coming in to every encounter with a pretty-much full pool.

Yes. I don't have a problem with that, as a GM or a player.

I was going to talk about how there is value to being able to, in a horror game, grind people down to the bottom of their resources from time to time, but after writing out the above, I notice two things: A, that it looks like your preferred setup of "usually start basically full" is in fact what the current playtest rules generate, and B) that when I -need- to grind people down, I would only need to declare that the scene change is not one that allows a restful recharge. here it seems like we're both getting more or less what we want.

A slight smell of ions....

Decivre Decivre's picture
o11o1 wrote:I was going to

o11o1 wrote:
I was going to talk about how there is value to being able to, in a horror game, grind people down to the bottom of their resources from time to time, but after writing out the above, I notice two things: A, that it looks like your preferred setup of "usually start basically full" is in fact what the current playtest rules generate, and B) that when I -need- to grind people down, I would only need to declare that the scene change is not one that allows a restful recharge. here it seems like we're both getting more or less what we want.

This actually does sound like it should be the case. During our game, the two-per-day limit only served to slow the group and encourage them to take their time rather than keep pushing. Low-pool characters usually regained everything back easily so they were more willing to take risks, but high-pool characters in Remades or even Furies often slowed down on pool use when they rolled low on a short recharge. More importantly, it slowed the game down to three major scenes per day... which just feels like an artificial limit to have.

Another thing that is quirky was Flex. One character started using it for narrativist purposes... and basically knew at least one person every major scene. At first it felt a bit hokey, but after a while he got bored of goofy backgrounds and the NPCs became mesh room acquaintances, game rivals or even XP fans... and it started to feel pretty natural. It makes a lot of sense for a world where everyone is connected to reputation networks that keep them integrated into society around them.

What if there was another disincentive to pushing on? Perhaps short rests could regenerate all of your pools but cost 1 stress? That way you could theoretically push and push but eventually your mind will snap from the exhaustion.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

Archon79 Archon79's picture
Why pools?

I still don't see why the pools mechanics where put in, I have never encountered a system that was not harmed by them, and this looks to be no exception, the 30 seconds of not sucking problem, that haunts all pool based systems appears to be if anything worse than usual in EP2, so why do it?

gleech gleech's picture
o11o1 wrote:Quote:It's not

o11o1 wrote:
Quote:
It's not necessarily sleep, just rest. Non-strenuous leisurely activity.

Which is why Synthmorphs can do it, despite not sleeping. (There does seem to be a defrag and cleanup process they go through though).

Synthmorphs might actually be a better example of how rests make no sense - or at the very least, tie to nothing in-world - than infomorphs were.

o11o1 wrote:
gleech wrote:
This problem happens all the time in Pathfinder: part of the thing that's supposed to balance Wizards is that they run out of spells over the course of a day, but to make that work out right, GMs have to make sure that people get exactly four significant encounters in a day - not more, or you'll short-change the Wizard (they'll run out of spells by no fault of their own); and not less, or you'll short-change the Fighter (the Wizard will be able to go all-out and leave the Fighter in the dust). Even knowing I'm supposed to do that, I frequently find it difficult or impossible to arrange for that to happen. Even worse, it creates absurd incentives for players - I've had players use Rope Trick to sleep for 8 hours in the middle of a dungeon, for example.

Now that you bring up pathfinder, theres actually an interesting case of the scale of the problem there. Say you have a 5th level wizard, he's got 4+3+2+1 spell slots of various levels (not counting bonus slots, which tends to be be one for each level or so. Call it 14 spells a day.). He can recharge those slots exactly once per day. His buddy, the 5th level Fighter, has no particular powers with either slots or daily recharges, all his powers are as much as he likes. If the wizard is throwing 4 spells per encouter, he's at risk of running dry in the middle of the fourth encounter of the day, while the fighter doesn't run dry like that.

Now let's look at EP, we have an Olympian gunbunny and a Menton drone jammer (both cost 4 CP). gunbunny has 3 Vigor and 1 flex to work with for ensuring their attacks land or to take extra attack actions. Our drone jammer on the other hand has.... 3 insight and 1 flex to work with for ensuring their hacking checks pay off and to take extra attacks with their drones. If they get a ten minute rest, they can roll a d6, and at least half the time get what's close to a full restore of their abilities. They can do this twice, before needing to take a proper 4 hour sleep. (2 if Hibernoid, so the rumormill suspects).

We can notice that EP2 doesn't quite have the same sort of Fighter-Wizard disparity that DnD does. I imagine Asyncs and their Infection tests might actually be the true mirror, but I don't have Async rules to look at yet. But my point is that if two people are fighting sporadic encounters with time to rest, -both- are working at top form. If two people in morphs that aren't wildly different pool values are fighting for extended engagements, then they are -both- running low on fuel, and hoping to survive on luck and clever play.

You make a fair point: since all morphs have pools, the "creating a disparity between classes" aspect of my example doesn't apply.

I feel like the second point still stands. A player in a synth-morph who's out of Pool Points has to refuse to enter the metaphorical dungeon until they've spent four hours in the corner, for no reason they can articulate in-character (since their morph isn't exhausted or hungry or sleepy); and because they get a finite number of beneficial corner-staring sessions a day, I have to make sure that I confront the with a fixed number of encounters per day. Well, except for...

o11o1 wrote:
gleech wrote:
o11o1 wrote:

With your setup, players are basically coming in to every encounter with a pretty-much full pool.

Yes. I don't have a problem with that, as a GM or a player.

I was going to talk about how there is value to being able to, in a horror game, grind people down to the bottom of their resources from time to time, but after writing out the above, I notice two things: A, that it looks like your preferred setup of "usually start basically full" is in fact what the current playtest rules generate, and B) that when I -need- to grind people down, I would only need to declare that the scene change is not one that allows a restful recharge. here it seems like we're both getting more or less what we want.

Actually, something like that would work. You could differentiate between "minor" and "major" scene-breaks; the former could regain 1d6, and the latter would fully replenish. I could live with that; my major objection was to getting a fixed number of breaks per day, even for morphs that don't eat or sleep.

Decivre wrote:
What if there was another disincentive to pushing on? Perhaps short rests could regenerate all of your pools but cost 1 stress? That way you could theoretically push and push but eventually your mind will snap from the exhaustion.

Something like that would also work. At least it would make more sense: it would make it clear that the limiting factor is psychological, and not your morph getting exhausted (since many of the morphs theoretically don't get exhausted). Although I think I'd prefer the scene-breaks Stress is harder to get rid of.



Decivre Decivre's picture
gleech wrote:Something like

gleech wrote:
Something like that would also work. At least it would make more sense: it would make it clear that the limiting factor is psychological, and not your morph getting exhausted (since many of the morphs theoretically don't get exhausted). Although I think I'd prefer the scene-breaks Stress is harder to get rid of.

Stress was hard to get rid of before, but not necessarily now. To that end this is only a single point of damage per recharge. There's no risk of trauma, so the only issue to heal is stress. We'll have to see when the mental health rules release.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

eaton eaton's picture
gleech wrote:Seconded with

gleech wrote:
Seconded with some edits. Remove the 24-hour restriction, I don't see a need for it.
I make the following suggestion: this potentially brings us to a situation where you enter a rest, your pool points and bonuses get reset, you loose +5 WIL thereby, and immediately go insane. Possible solution: add the special rule that you can elect to not 'regenerate' that point of pool to correspondingly not interrupt that bonus. It's a special case, but it's not a complicated one, and it prevents a bunch of other problems. And it allows me to maintain my Apt boosts all the time, which makes me happier, without costing anyone else anything as far as I can tell. =)

"You go insane because time passes" was already possible when certain drugs wear off, so I'd be fine with that being one of the dangers of juicing up your aptitudes with points. ;-) I was thinking that the 24 hour limit made sense in the edge case where an extended slog has burnt through a team's short refreshes, hasn't had time for a full refresh, and the rolling bonus would turn into an "infinite boost," which seems to contradict the intent of the point pools.

I can see it being overkill (since that's a fairly edge edge case), but a persistent +5 to every aptitude linked skill is a pretty significant bonus for the new point system, and it feels like it needs some hard limits to avoid being the unbalanced "obvious pick" for point spends.

gleech wrote:

eaton wrote: Eliminate "rushing," make full movement a quick action.

Opposed. I liked how Basic / Full / Sprinting worked in EP1, and this is just that as far as I can tell. The ability to push your morph/shell to move faster is a nice way to reward investing in movement skills, and is important for making chase scenes work out right. I'd rather have Full movement stay a Free-action-with-a-penalty than become a quick action.

That's fair. It's something I've been squinting at for a while, and I really like the new clarified action economy in EP2 — I'd like to see that free/quick/complex tradeoff be made more explicit in different kinds of actions, because IME it tends to help players consider the tradeoffs more quickly, but I'm definitely open to the idea that my take on it is... nonstandard. ;-)

Also, I spent some time re-reading the "Rushing" mechanic and realized that I'd misread it. I was under the impression that you could spend a complex action to rush instead of doing a full move, and the only benefit was adding your standard move to your full move. That struck me as really weird, over-costed, and not really worth even including (thus my idea of just making full move a quick action and nuking rushed movement).

But... after carefully re-reading it seems clear that full move + rushing would result in 44-52m of movement (40 on a failure), not 24-32m for a normal walker. If that's the case, I think the problem is the fuzziness of the explanations for standard/full/rush, rather than the actual mechanics.

gleech wrote:

eaton wrote: Make all types of movement follow the same free/quick action standards regardless of linked skill (Flight, swimming, walking, etc), as long as there's no difficult terrain/task actions involved.

Isn't that how it's written now? What am I missing?

On careful inspection, this looks like a writing clarity issue rather than a rules issue. In the section on Non-standard movement, it says: "To climb, swim, belly-crawl, or otherwise move in a way that isn’t your morph’s typical method for getting around, take a complex action and move a distance equal to your base move."

So, a morph whose native movement type is 'swim' wouldn't have to use a complex action to swim, but a morph with 'walker' would have to. A flyer would get flying as a free movement action, but (say) a walker with a jetpack would have to use a complex action. I'd love to see clarification on how this affects morphs with multiple movement types and/or mods that add additional movement types.

gleech wrote:

eaton wrote: In combat, make the second shot for semi-auto and burst fire weapons a quick action rather than "two-per-complex-action."

Opposed: I'm not sure why you want to make taking multiple attacks with ranged weapons worse. That also interacts really badly with the "make full movement a Quick Action" rule above.

Agreed that this interacts badly with the 'full move is a quick action' thing — after the closer read of the rules I mentioned above, I agree that rushing just needs clearer descriptive text to clarify why it exists as a separate action.

For semi-auto and burst fire, though, I think the change makes sense. Multiple shots with a burst weapon in a single action have always been overpowered compared to plain ol' full auto weapons, IMO, and AFAICT it's the only mechanic in the game where a single complex action contains two of what players tend to think of as "An action." There are no situations other than running out of ammo where you would NOT shoot twice.

Making the second shot a quick action means trade-offs between: taking a second shot or carefully aiming your first shot, taking a second shot or going prone after

gleech wrote:

eaton wrote: DUR: Wound threshold, death threshold, collision damage; SOM/STR: Melee damage bonus dice, brute force tests

Mostly seconded. I support adding an STR score, since it helps clean up a bunch of corner-cases (see the arm-wrestling scurrier) while being a relatively simple and compact change.
I think we should either keep SOM or identically-swap it with COO, mainly because we need some kind of "use your body" APT so that it can be the base APT for skills like Athletics. Someone almost certainly said that, sorry that I haven't tracked this conversation.


Yeah, I agree that COO still feels good as the physically-linked brain-related aptitude that helps you get the most out of your morph, while the raw strength aspects of SOM just turn into a morph's brute strength. That said, this is one of the suggestions I'm most on the fence about, because it actually adds a completely new number into the mix as far as EP2 is concerned, and that seems to be the opposite of how things are moving.

That said, it's (IMO) the best way to resolve the zany "high-SOM character in a scurrier can outlift a low-SOM character in a Remade" situations that both EP1 and EP2 currently encounter. It's not so much about the science of it as the weirdly counter-intuitive "That feels... WRONG" quality.

Thanks for the feedback on these, it's definitely helped me go back and check my assumptions on some of the movement/action rules.

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:Synthmorphs might

Quote:
Synthmorphs might actually be a better example of how rests make no sense - or at the very least, tie to nothing in-world - than infomorphs were.

So far, I've been looking at point pools as a loose representation of a morph's "pushability" — how far it can be pushed in particular areas beyond even what the character's aptitudes allow. Most of the Vigor effects map really cleanly to that model, though you have to squint a bit to justify treating the the Insight and Moxie pools that way.

That said, if point pools are a representation of how far a morph can be "pushed", it makes sense to me that pushing the morph hard would require downtime to rebuild resources in the form of stored energy (either caloric or nuclear battery-based), hormones and other stimulants, etc. Infomorphs remain a weird fit, but they were a pretty weird fit for most aptitude and stat bonuses in EP1 anyways. ;-)

Decivre Decivre's picture
eaton wrote:That said, if

eaton wrote:
That said, if point pools are a representation of how far a morph can be "pushed", it makes sense to me that pushing the morph hard would require downtime to rebuild resources in the form of stored energy (either caloric or nuclear battery-based), hormones and other stimulants, etc. Infomorphs remain a weird fit, but they were a pretty weird fit for most aptitude and stat bonuses in EP1 anyways. ;-)

I figured that for synths it would be regular maintenance and recharge, myself. Pools represent your ability to make your servos push to transhuman limits. Rest is for letting temperatures drop and (if you have medichines) worn components repair.

That said, I am a bit bothered that transhumans in this game tend to have to manage their resources more than simpler morphs. Flats and Splicers have so few points that they're guaranteed to regain most if not all of the ones expended every encounter. Others have much bigger pools, and have to actually manage their exertion during play. I'd actually think that the opposite would be true; that regular and slightly-tweaked humans would have to make a bigger effort to manage their physical resources in order to keep up with relentless transhumans.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

UnitOmega UnitOmega's picture
I believe it was earlier

I believe it was earlier specifically said when asking about if synths need recharges that they and infomorphs do need to like, rest, recharge, do some defragging etc. You also don't want to run your hardware all-out all the time, you'll cause unnecessary fatigue and wear and tear. This would probably be brought up when there's actually some expanded details on synthmorphs - there were some inherent qualities to them in 1E I don't see discussed in the playtest but at least some of them should still logically apply.

Decivre wrote:

That said, I am a bit bothered that transhumans in this game tend to have to manage their resources more than simpler morphs. Flats and Splicers have so few points that they're guaranteed to regain most if not all of the ones expended every encounter. Others have much bigger pools, and have to actually manage their exertion during play. I'd actually think that the opposite would be true; that regular and slightly-tweaked humans would have to make a bigger effort to manage their physical resources in order to keep up with relentless transhumans.

Higher output requires higher energy? Enhanced morphs can hit higher peaks but that nasty issue of physics gets in the way, you need to fuel that whole thing - though some ware will obviously help cut into that. I wonder what Personal Power Plant would look like in 2E's rules?

Some of this though depends on what your session structure is like. With the right morph, ware and gear a high level morph might easily be able to still have points to burn after a couple hard "encounters" and keep going where smaller pooled morphs have burned them out. And in the case of the Splicer/Flat, and lots of other "low tier" morphs all they have is Flex which means they have one pool to draw on for everything, while other morphs are more measured. At the very least, a morph with big pools and Biomods is always more efficient than something like a Flat - who takes 8 whole hours to get 1 point of Flex back.

H-Rep: An EP Homebrew Blog
http://ephrep.blogspot.com/

Dilf_Pickle Dilf_Pickle's picture
Innate Transhumanity

Decivre wrote:
My point is that what makes a transhuman amazing is more than just those pools. It's a bit disingenuous to state that the new system doesn't still take that into account to some degree.

I'm not saying the new system doesn't take it into account; I'm saying that seems to be backsliding from 1sted. I'll admit it's a matter of degrees and bound by personal opinion though.

Decivre wrote:

Dilf_Pickle wrote:
Triple-mind would already be pretty goddamned impressive, but I can put the above in the 'maybe' camp. The idea of a 20-base-SOM Neotenic beating a 10-base-SOM Neo-Gorilla in an armwrestling match tickles me, though.

I like to believe that Eclipse Phase is a setting where transhuman minds make the seemingly-heroic possible.

Certainly. I still think it's a funny image; akin to clueless guys on talk shows getting armbarred by Rhonda Rousey.

Decivre wrote:
I like to think that the basic education we get as children is the thing we don't consider a skill. And I actually am starting to agree with the "every skill should be defaultable" camp, because we are truly underestimating the amount of things that transhuman children will be exposed to in 10 AF.
Unless you were born an old-fashioned human, note that you were probably born with mesh inserts.

While the "hacking/intrusion" aspect of InfoSec is less likely to be taught in schools than the "self-defense" aspect, I can see the logic of just making all skills defaultable.

Devicre wrote:

That said, I am a bit bothered that transhumans in this game tend to have to manage their resources more than simpler morphs. Flats and Splicers have so few points that they're guaranteed to regain most if not all of the ones expended every encounter. Others have much bigger pools, and have to actually manage their exertion during play. I'd actually think that the opposite would be true; that regular and slightly-tweaked humans would have to make a bigger effort to manage their physical resources in order to keep up with relentless transhumans.

Yeeessssssss... come to the dark side... ;)

Dilf_Pickle Dilf_Pickle's picture
Explosion of Ideas

I have one busy week-end and you guys come up with a bunch of interesting new pool and bonus ideas. Good to see! Even if it doesn't have a direct impact on EP2 game mechanics (and I trust PHS to not blindly take in every idea, but to give the situation as a whole its due consideration), it's nice to see these thoughts begin to hybridise and feed off each other. Hopefully I haven't ruffled too many feathers with my tendency for vigourous discussion of ideas.

Trappedinwikipedia Trappedinwikipedia's picture
I'm in the "all skills should

I'm in the "all skills should be defaultable" camp myself, but just because with the skill list reduced in size it doesn't feel like special specialist only skills really make sense with the direction the game is going in. And with Defaulting being a lot less punishing it seems strange that there are a few skills which are hugely punishing to not know compared to the others mechanically.

Regarding pools one thing which I had thought would be the case is that some implants would give pools back outside of the normal recharge system. I had originally thought that Neurachem would be +1 Vigor when something exciting happens (the same activation rules as current neurachem), which means that morphs with neurachem always have at least a single point of Vigor around when a fight starts (and maybe 2 for neurachem 2), while something like a Reflex Booster would grant extra vigor for speed related tasks and allow infinite short recharges for that pool or something. That might make enhanced morphs pools feel better if they also had more options for recovering their pools than low end/stock morphs, without adding extra stats or weird floating bonuses (like the spend pool for +5 on checks for a... while). I imagine that mods could work similar for Insight and Moxie pools as well, endocrine control sounds like a good Moxie-Neurachem, while Parallel Processor or similar (one of the COG boosting mods) would be a good Insight-Neurachem.

I still like the idea of some kind of mechanical measure for raw strength, the DUR as a proxy for strength would be nice to have back as at least a mentioned optional rule or something.

eaton eaton's picture
Trappedinwikipedia wrote

Trappedinwikipedia wrote:
Regarding pools one thing which I had thought would be the case is that some implants would give pools back outside of the normal recharge system. I had originally thought that Neurachem would be +1 Vigor when something exciting happens (the same activation rules as current neurachem), which means that morphs with neurachem always have at least a single point of Vigor around when a fight starts (and maybe 2 for neurachem 2), while something like a Reflex Booster would grant extra vigor for speed related tasks and allow infinite short recharges for that pool or something. That might make enhanced morphs pools feel better if they also had more options for recovering their pools than low end/stock morphs, without adding extra stats or weird floating bonuses (like the spend pool for +5 on checks for a... while). I imagine that mods could work similar for Insight and Moxie pools as well, endocrine control sounds like a good Moxie-Neurachem, while Parallel Processor or similar (one of the COG boosting mods) would be a good Insight-Neurachem.

In the overview thread, Rob mentioned that the gear and mods currently listed are (somewhat) likely to change, because the gear portion of the book hasn't been written for 2ed. I, too, am hoping that gear in general (and mods in particular) take advantage of the new mechanics.

That was one of my frustrations with EP1's extensive gear, mod, and trait lists — there was a LOT of stuff out there with very niche application and no mechanical impact on gameplay even when it was used. The result was gear that felt like The Key To The Next Area in Doom: mcguffins required to survive in certain types of settings, flavor/fluff possessions for certain kinds of characters, but nothing more.

There are a number of metabolic implants, for example, that feel like good candidates for pool-refresh tweaking mods. Now that the action economy has been tightened up, things like the Arm Slide mod could provide concrete bonuses (first shot in combat can be a quick shot rather than a complex one, say) rather than just flavor or the ever-popular "penalties against detection." Certain less-powerful weapons could be used with a Quick Action rather than a Complex one, giving users interesting options in combat.

The difference between standard drug applicator patches (say) and having drug glands feels like a great match for this kind of stuff — standard drug use is a quick action, glands knock it down to a free/automatic action. Having high-end climbing gear with assistive bots, for example, could turn climbing into a complex action rather than a task action. (Rather than simply improving your odds on the skill check).

Anyways. I'm definitely intrigued by the possibilities of the new mechanisms, too.

Decivre Decivre's picture
I sort of just had a

I sort of just had a realization; with total access to the mesh being the assumed position for everyone, shouldn't it be generalized that defaulting could just be the equivalent of quickly looking it up on the mesh and trying what you find?

In effect, even simple defaulting on hacking is the equivalent of looking on some anarchist forum and finding a script for your problem. Defaulting on piloting could be the equivalent of looking up "how to safely navigate the Jovian trojans for dummies" at Locus before leaving.

Or as they say; defaulting is the future version of "just YouTube it".

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:I sort of just had a

Quote:
I sort of just had a realization; with total access to the mesh being the assumed position for everyone, shouldn't it be generalized that defaulting could just be the equivalent of quickly looking it up on the mesh and trying what you find?

Ehhhh… "falling back on your basic abilities in a particular area" is definitely different than "looking up instructions in realtime," I think. Like, defaulting to your basic Reflexes aptitude to dodge someone's punch is different than looking up a YouTube video on Krav Maga while they swing their fist.

If I were GMing, I'd say that "look it up on YouTube" is the equivalent of Defaulting + Taking Your Time. Not something you can do in realtime combat, but something you could do with task actions.

This brings us back to the two "un-defaultable" skills, Infosec and Programming. The more I think about it, the more I'm okay with them becoming defaultable — essentially, nuking the "no defaulting" concept and allowing the inherent penalties for defaulting to carry the day. With morph APT bonuses going away, the odds that someone will be rolling around with COG 40/INT 40 is way, way down; and a COG 30 default for Infosec is exactly what you'd get delegating the work to your muse.

Since Sense/Control etc have been collapsed to a single Psi skill, and Psi skills already require a trait to use, it seems like there's really a decent case for killing no-default entirely.

o11o1 o11o1's picture
eaton wrote:Quote:I sort of

eaton wrote:
Quote:
I sort of just had a realization; with total access to the mesh being the assumed position for everyone, shouldn't it be generalized that defaulting could just be the equivalent of quickly looking it up on the mesh and trying what you find?

Ehhhh… "falling back on your basic abilities in a particular area" is definitely different than "looking up instructions in realtime," I think. Like, defaulting to your basic Reflexes aptitude to dodge someone's punch is different than looking up a YouTube video on Krav Maga while they swing their fist.

If I were GMing, I'd say that "look it up on YouTube" is the equivalent of Defaulting + Taking Your Time. Not something you can do in realtime combat, but something you could do with task actions.

This brings us back to the two "un-defaultable" skills, Infosec and Programming. The more I think about it, the more I'm okay with them becoming defaultable — essentially, nuking the "no defaulting" concept and allowing the inherent penalties for defaulting to carry the day. With morph APT bonuses going away, the odds that someone will be rolling around with COG 40/INT 40 is way, way down; and a COG 30 default for Infosec is exactly what you'd get delegating the work to your muse.

Since Sense/Control etc have been collapsed to a single Psi skill, and Psi skills already require a trait to use, it seems like there's really a decent case for killing no-default entirely.

Broadly agreed, with the caveat that it may be useful modifer to note: the case of defaulting on a task action without mesh access for whatever reason. You're way out in the wilds or whatever and your buggy breaks down. The process of making a satellite dish to connect to the mesh to call for help is very possibly the task you're needing to default on.

A slight smell of ions....

eaton eaton's picture
Quote:Broadly agreed, with

Quote:
Broadly agreed, with the caveat that it may be useful modifer to note: the case of defaulting on a task action without mesh access for whatever reason. You're way out in the wilds or whatever and your buggy breaks down. The process of making a satellite dish to connect to the mesh to call for help is very possibly the task you're needing to default on.

A special-case mention that COG-linked task actions can't be defaulted if you lack mesh access? Hmmmm. I'd consider house-ruling that, at the very least.
Decivre Decivre's picture
eaton wrote:Ehhhh… "falling

eaton wrote:
Ehhhh… "falling back on your basic abilities in a particular area" is definitely different than "looking up instructions in realtime," I think. Like, defaulting to your basic Reflexes aptitude to dodge someone's punch is different than looking up a YouTube video on Krav Maga while they swing their fist.

To be fair, melee was a skill we saw fit to allow defaulting before this theory was pitched, so we could argue it's a mix of the two. That said, I wouldn't say necessarily it's to watch in realtime. Are we restricted to watching XP in realtime, because I thought accelerated viewing was a thing?

eaton wrote:
If I were GMing, I'd say that "look it up on YouTube" is the equivalent of Defaulting + Taking Your Time. Not something you can do in realtime combat, but something you could do with task actions.

At best, we could argue that it's something you'd do before a mission, not during. I personally think it should be possible to have that classic scene in the Matrix where Trinity closes her eyes and learns the basics. You close your eyes and you watch what seems to be a three minute XP recording, take it all in, then return to the real world where a single round has passed.

eaton wrote:
This brings us back to the two "un-defaultable" skills, Infosec and Programming. The more I think about it, the more I'm okay with them becoming defaultable — essentially, nuking the "no defaulting" concept and allowing the inherent penalties for defaulting to carry the day. With morph APT bonuses going away, the odds that someone will be rolling around with COG 40/INT 40 is way, way down; and a COG 30 default for Infosec is exactly what you'd get delegating the work to your muse.

Since Sense/Control etc have been collapsed to a single Psi skill, and Psi skills already require a trait to use, it seems like there's really a decent case for killing no-default entirely.


Agreed. Defaulting restrictions hurt play more than they foster anything, and most of the situations where I feel a restriction against defaulting is warranted I think are fringe enough to leave to GM adjudication.

Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.

Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.

RobBoyle RobBoyle's picture
Thanks for all of the

Thanks for all of the excellent feedback so far, folks.

Just a quick note on the defaulting issue -- we have been swayed. The limitation on defaulting will be cut in the next version.

Rob Boyle :: Posthuman Studios

TheGrue TheGrue's picture
RobBoyle wrote:Thanks for all

RobBoyle wrote:
Thanks for all of the excellent feedback so far, folks.

Just a quick note on the defaulting issue -- we have been swayed. The limitation on defaulting will be cut in the next version.

Hey, glad you guys are finding our insane ramblings useful. :)

Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.

eaton eaton's picture
So, one question that came up

So, one question that came up in the playtest was the "Negate a social gaffe" Moxie Point ability. IT feels like an odd ability, as it's the only one of ALL the point actions that is basically about reversing a bad out-of-character decision using an in-character stat/ability.

A couple of the players suggested it would be more interesting if the ability allowed a player to spend Moxie negating a different character's social gaffe, rather than just their own. Haven't thought too much about it, but agreed that that ability seemed not to fit as well as the others.

Pages

Topic locked