Post originally by Ezekiel Black at 2005-02-18 10:15:43
Converted from Phorums BB System

Roy Morgan wrote:
-------------------------------
"PI's Attribute arguement"

Which means that nothing's changed since the original. 3 was exceptional even then. The scale of attributes and skills hasn't changed. Why the perception of it has changed is a mystery to me. And by the way, it's Steven HAWKING.
------------------------------

Bull. Standard distribution for abilities BEFORE freebies was 7/5/3. In that system, a vamp MUST have a 4 in at least one stat, and if at this bare minimum then the other two under the same category are at 3. Having 5 in a stat costed one more point than having 4 in a stat, unlike VtR.

In VtR, the distribution is 5/4/3, then one +1 due to Clan. I've shown how this can be munchkined to get one 5, but the other two stats under the same category (P/M/S) were 2. It actually costs more to get one 5 unless you cheat as I did in my example on another thread, which was technically just like a VtM cheat. It is impossible to have two 5s without having four 1s in VtR. If you min-max, you will have six 1s, two 5s, and one 4. When we talk freebies, I'll get another laugh out of this, as freebies created "5-palooza"

Point: Not a good idea to Min-Max the Attributes of VtR.

------------------------------
"PA's Scale Arguement"

We've been here already. The scale IS the same.
------------------------------

Technically, as written, it is the same. But not in practice. The above attribute distribution REQUIRED that you be exceedingly above average at Physical, Mental, or Social stats, the new game doesn't. In the new game, you can play a guy with four 3s and five 2s in stats, suitably more average. It is mathematically impossible to have no 4s in VtM unless you take a flaw to do so. And 4 is supposed to be Exceptional. Hell, Mortals in that game were 6/4/3, which meant that they were at least Good at an entire category (P/M/S). They didn't stat the creatures to scale in the game, IMO.

Also, since the success ratio per die went from (technically) 50% to 30%, the scale also went down as a result, mathematically.

------------------------------
"Also remember that giving XP is what your suposed to do unless you want to run a campain with avarage joe player."

And where was it said that this was not the case? Besides, the 'standard' starting characters in nWoD wouldn't be Joe Average, they'd be Mister Meat Snack. oWoD had a similar problem, but not to this degree.
------------------------------

I'm sorry, this seems like a personal problem, not one of the system. What, were you fighting Werewolves every encounter?

I remember that I usually had one to three 5s, four to six 4s, a multitude of 3s, and at least 5 points in Disciplines on my VtM CS. That's what I would call a badass if I took the scale of the system into account.

You do realize that in VtM characters were supposed to start as Neonates!

Seriously, scale it down if the adversaries seemed to powerful, it's because they were scaled too high. Or the Storyteller wanted to go home.

------------------------------
"That is the strength of the new system. It starts its scale with avarage people and if you want to move above that you can just scale up."

It could be viewed as a strength, but it's very messy in practice. It also encourages min-maxing, which the freebie points didn't do.
------------------------------

I'm stopping you right there. So you're saying that a flat rate for all abilities vs a progressively more expensive rate for higher abilities "encourages min-maxing"?

Ok, lets do some math. If the higher you buy something, the more it costs to buy it higher, you will have lower abilities. Your arguement is that the characters will min-max with the starting flat points, and use the exp to buy low skills.

At CC in VtR, you have a scant amount of attribute points. I've shown this. You get 11/7/4 to spend on Skills, which are set in 3 categories of 8 each. That means that no matter what, in two of those categories, you will be untrained in something. If you min max, you probably won't be able to do squat because using Mental Skills forces a -3 to die rolls with that skill, Using Physical and Social skills without any ranks forces a -1. So if you min-max, you'll be SOL about 90% of the time after CC. You will have a grand total of 3 skills in the 11 category (one at 5, one 4, one 1, 5th dot costs 2), 2 skills in the 7 Category (One at 5, one at 1), and 1 skill at 4 in the 4 Category. This combined with high-low Attributes means you will be doing JACK!

Or, to be more technical, you will have 2 Master skills (in different categories), 2 Expert skills (in different categories), and 2 Novice skills (yes, in different categories). That's 6 out of 24 skills learned. The rest will be at die penalties and you'll get a chance roll (10% chance of success) to use most of them. On that chance roll, you will also have 10% chance of utter failure (worse than the regular kind).

Point: Not a good idea to Min-Max in the skills system.

I recommend NOT starting anyone with any XP, because it makes for a level playing field, and sticks to the same story as the previous game (VtM) that the characters just got let out of their sire's care. I have been told that the book recommends 35 XP, but I have yet to read this therein or be cited a page number for said recommendation. An example of this possibility follows.

------------------------------
Since you have to pay for each level individually, and the cost goes up with each level, it encourages players to use the 'free dots' they get from the standard skill pool to buy their higher-level skills, then use experience to buy the one-dot skills that are too useful to do without (a major issue, since there are much harsher skilled vs. unskilled mechanics in nWoD).
------------------------------

Actually, with the method discussed and 35 XP to spend, someone who min-maxed originally and looking to round out their character would be able to buy 11 skills at level 1 and have 2 XP left over. They would still not be skilled in 7 skills, nearly 1/3 of the list. The remainder would be GREATNESS at 4 skills and relatively pathetic at the remaining 13.

Not a good idea to do this at all. The game really doesn't work with min-maxers. It's one of the reasons I like it, and don't think I haven't had this arguement with myself before.

------------------------------
This is exacerbated by the fact that the experience point amounts given don't go very far at all.
------------------------------

Nope sorry, if you were looking for Vampire Superheroes, you will have to play something else (I actually recommend Angel over VtM, it was written much better and you don't have to be a Vamp if you don't want to)

------------------------------
The same mechanic also applies to attributes. The freebie point system avoided this, as every dot in the same category had the same cost.
------------------------------

Which didn't avoid it, it facilitated it. High stats in this game cost too much to buy effectively at CC in VtR, while in VtM I was lucky not to see four 5s on my character sheet. Is the problem that you want to roll 10 dice for every action? I really don't understand this arguement. The 2nd dot in an attribute costs 10 XP, the fifth costs 25. Wouldn't you rather buy the fifth if it only costs 2.5 times as much? If you use the above example and buy your low stats with a 35 XP starting splat, you'll only get three of the six 1's you min'ed back to 2. Then your skills will REALLY suck.

Moral of the story: Not a good idea to Min-Max in VtR.

It's funny that you say that VtR's exp system facilitates Min-Maxing, then say that it doesn't give enough XP to be good at facilitating the Min-Maxing of the system.

But what do I know? It's just my logic and math skills on my side, nothing more.

Have a nice day.