[Powers] Fixed ST Dmg: How to do it?

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by cmdicely

It shouldn't be more than +10%, which is the cost of Selectivity (which lets you turn any enhancement on the power on and off.)

Its probably worth about the same as Variable (fewer options offset by greater certainty when the fixed option is chosen), or +5%.

Maybe, but is 0% an enhancement? It could just as easily be written as -0% as +0%. Maybe treating 0% modifiers that are the features of the modifier world as enhancements might have adverse effects?

I mean, by RAW with feature traits it's illegal to go and switch them without Alternate Form and illegal to afflict others with a +0% to represent a feature so instead you afflict them with an Alternate Form that forces a feature on someone with that meta-trait, because suddenly applying the feature that one's natural atmosphere (a feature) is chlorine-based rather than oxygen-based seems like it should be worth mildly more than a +0% enhancement.

You might be right when it comes to modifiers, but I'm just arguing to think more cautiously about it. Things like Selectivity specifically work on enhancements and not limitations. 0% value mods occupy a sort of limbo in between (0 being neither inherently a positive nor negative number).

An official ruling would be nice about whether 0% is an enhancement, limitation, or some modifier cousin of features. Maybe for the RAW ones we could say "did they print it with a '+' or a '-'?" (does that actually vary??), but sometimes it's unclear.

[vierasmarius]

Something I've considered is, for the use of Selectivity, treat all modifiers less than +5% as +5%. This means you could have an attack that can switch on and off any of the Damage Limitations (No Wounding, No Knockback, etc) for 5% each, or switch between Melee and Jet, etc. There are some cases where it'll be more expensive than using Alternate Abilities, but it's far simpler and potentially more versatile.

[cmdicely]

Originally Posted by JCurwen3

Maybe, but is 0% an enhancement?

Being to switch this feature on and off when using an ability isn't worth more than being able to switch off every conceivable combination of enhancements the ability might have, so -- whether or not the feature is an enhancement, strictly speaking -- it shouldn't cost more than Selectivity. (If it is an enhancement, this is strictly a weaker form of Selectivity, but even if it isn't its not worth more than Selectivity.)

And the comparison with Variable is completely independent of the comparison with Selectivity.

[cmdicely]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

Something I've considered is, for the use of Selectivity, treat all modifiers less than +5% as +5%. This means you could have an attack that can switch on and off any of the Damage Limitations (No Wounding, No Knockback, etc) for 5% each, or switch between Melee and Jet, etc. There are some cases where it'll be more expensive than using Alternate Abilities, but it's far simpler and potentially more versatile.

Being able to switch off a -10% limitation like No Knockback for the cost of a +5% enhancements is badly broken.

[vierasmarius]

Originally Posted by cmdicely

Being able to switch off a -10% limitation like No Knockback for the cost of a +5% enhancements is badly broken.

You don't get the -10% limitation. It's replaced by +5% per switchable trait. In other words, No Knockback (Switchable) is a net enhancement, though it requires Selectivity to be useful.

[Magpie]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Setting aside what you're trying to represent: The partial dice rules under Innate Attack cover this well enough, in my opinion: 1 die translates to 3 points of damage (in fact, the conversion is probably more complicated than that, but I think it's a solid rule of thumb. You're sacrificing a little damage for extra certainty).

Even at 3.5 damage per die, you are already making a sacrifice. While expectation vs DR 0 is indifferent between 1d and 3.5, expectation vs DR4 is 0 for 3.5 and 0.5 for 1d, and expectation vs DR5 is 0 for 3.5 and 1/6 for 1d. At all other levels, they perform the same. So 3.5 damage per die is already slightly worse than rolling without any points invested. With more dice (such as is frequent in a HT/UT setting), this problem goes away since rolling converges more strongly to the average anyway.

In any event, I would view 3 pts/die as being comparably bad overall to a full -1 damage modifier- it's 1/2 a point off my expectation and a serious detriment to armor penetration.

(Note: If fixed damage is Switchable, this problem goes away)

[Bruno]

Any fixed damage value is going to have a DR value against which it is always useless that the random dice would have penetrated. But conversely, any fixed damage value is going ot have a DR value against which it always penetrates, but the random dice might have bounced off.

For instance, DR 1 you can bounce off with 1d but 3.5 (rounded to 4) goes through every time. DR 2 you can bounce off with 2d, but 7 fixed PLOUGHS through.

Zero sum.

[Magpie]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Any fixed damage value is going to have a DR value against which it is always useless that the random dice would have penetrated. But conversely, any fixed damage value is going ot have a DR value against which it always penetrates, but the random dice might have bounced off.

For instance, DR 1 you can bounce off with 1d but 3.5 (rounded to 4) goes through every time. DR 2 you can bounce off with 2d, but 7 fixed PLOUGHS through.

Zero sum.

It's actually not zero sum- the negative modifiers can't reduce damage below 0, so while penalties to damage (in this case, bad rolls) can be capped, bonuses (good rolls) are open ended. It's true that 3 damage per die always penetrates DR2 and 1d will fail to 1/3 of the time, but 1/2 the time 1d does more damage than the fixed rate bringing the long term balance up to even. Meanwhile, in cases where DR exceeds fixed rate, the greater variance allows 1d to still maintain non-zero expectation. As for the 2d case, 1/36 of the time variable-rate looks embarassing vs. DR2 (no damage), 1/36 of the time it does double damage.
In each case, we have either a tie (same expectation) or a victory for variable damage.

What might give us symmetry is if all damage levels ended up equal (if we are fighting 1 HP foes, can only expect to do 1 HP injury, or are using poison, for instance), but as long as 2 damage is about twice as good as 1 damage, the variable rate is better.

That said, if we are always to be rounding up the 1/2 point (I've just been keeping it in the fixed damage case, which is probably not realistic), things even out for the 1 die case (although the proposed 3/die is still weaker).

[Bruno]

The adds-> dice conversion rules are one die is 4, two dice is 7. Because that handles the 3.5 thing tidily.

Any rule has to take into account that there are more than 1d strength ratings. It may jsut be "sub optimal" for someone with 1d-1 or less to take fixed ST. That's fine - either forbid it outright, or note that it's just a bad idea and move on.