NEWS

Striking Calluses Clarification

  • 59 Replies
  • 19843 Views

Kiirnodel

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1471
« Reply #30 on: <08-19-16/0057:29> »
<Reads>
<Stares>
<Blinks>
<goes and gets dictonary, chair, and cooler filled with Beer>

<reads more>
<reads more after drinking most of the beer>


Can I get that in "non-uber-math-geek" speak please? Some of us are too drunk to put on our "smrtz hatz:...

Which part has you lost, Reaver?

Basically JoeNapalm is analyzing the probabilities of getting a certain number of hits based on a given dice pool, and is showing how increasing your dice pool doesn't necessarily increase your chances of getting that number of hits by the same amount.
For example: Tripling your dice pool doesn't mean you triple your chances of getting 2 (or more) hits.

The other argument is talking about average results of those given dice pools and completely bypassing the probability involved.
For example: you could say that the average result of 9 dice is 3 hits (I think I pointed that out pretty clearly in my last post). And if you add three dice to that (for a total of 12 dice), you have increased the average result by 1 hit, to 4 hits total.

Kincaid

  • *
  • Freelancer
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 2623
« Reply #31 on: <08-19-16/0831:25> »
I really cannot stress enough the extent to which understanding the probabilities beyond the napkin math of "3 dice=1 hit" matters if you're interested in efficient character (or encounter, for GMs) design.  You need to weigh risk tolerance (mitigated by Edge) against wasted hits (hits beyond your Limit) and understand the requirements of the various types of tests in the game.

Back on topic, are multiple pairs of callouses really that common?  Do GMs allow 3 pairs (say, elbow, hands, and feet) to add +3 DV? 
Killing so many sacred cows, I'm banned from India.

JoeNapalm

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
  • Ifriti Sophist
« Reply #32 on: <08-19-16/0938:07> »
<Reads>
<Stares>
<Blinks>
<goes and gets dictonary, chair, and cooler filled with Beer>

<reads more>
<reads more after drinking most of the beer>


Can I get that in "non-uber-math-geek" speak please? Some of us are too drunk to put on our "smrtz hatz:...

Which part has you lost, Reaver?

Basically JoeNapalm is analyzing the probabilities of getting a certain number of hits based on a given dice pool, and is showing how increasing your dice pool doesn't necessarily increase your chances of getting that number of hits by the same amount.
For example: Tripling your dice pool doesn't mean you triple your chances of getting 2 (or more) hits.

The other argument is talking about average results of those given dice pools and completely bypassing the probability involved.
For example: you could say that the average result of 9 dice is 3 hits (I think I pointed that out pretty clearly in my last post). And if you add three dice to that (for a total of 12 dice), you have increased the average result by 1 hit, to 4 hits total.

Write yourself a note:

"Joe owes me a beer."

You can roll one die over an over and over and have a 1/3rd chance of scoring a hit. So if you have Rank 4 in Penetrating Strikes, all four dice have a 1/3rd chance of a hit...or, in this case, of having been a hit if you hadn't removed them.

But it's important to realize that 4 dice does not equal a 99.9% (and definitely not 133.2%) chance of one hit. It's really more like 80%. You've still got around a 1/5 chance of not scoring any hits.

There are diminishing returns on your investment into the pool.

This only matters if you're looking at the probabilistic efficiency. A bigger dice pool will perform better than a smaller dice pool. It's just not a 1-to-1 trade off on your investment. You're not cranking it past 100%...ever...and yeah, you could get up to four hits, but the chance of that fourth hit is very very small.

-Jn-
« Last Edit: <08-19-16/1016:17> by JoeNapalm »

Reaver

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6422
  • 60% alcohol 40% asshole...
« Reply #33 on: <08-19-16/1003:21> »
ok....

And does all this extra math take into account the hundreds of rolls a character could make, over the lifespan of the character???


<Remember, some of us have hangovers..... Until we can get to the liquor store>
Where am I going? And why am I in a hand basket ???

Remember: You can't fix Stupid. But you can beat on it with a 2x4 until it smartens up! Or dies.

JoeNapalm

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
  • Ifriti Sophist
« Reply #34 on: <08-19-16/1013:30> »
ok....

And does all this extra math take into account the hundreds of rolls a character could make, over the lifespan of the character???

ou
<Remember, some of us have hangovers..... Until we can get to the liquor store>

The more times you roll, the more true both of these things will be.

If you just rolled the dice once, it might not look anything like what we're talking about. If you took all the rolls you made in a session, you'd probably start to see it.

You take the rolls over the lifespan of a character, they're going to look pretty much exactly like the probability tables.


-Jn-

Adamo1618

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #35 on: <08-19-16/1022:56> »
This is about as close to Mortalspeak as mathematics can be. You need to understand maths in order to actually grasp it. Unfortunately.

Kincaid

  • *
  • Freelancer
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 2623
« Reply #36 on: <08-19-16/1119:51> »
Also note that with something like AP, we're talking about more than one column on last page's chart.  So while the diminishing returns for a single hit is pretty apparent (2->3 is +14.81; 3->4 is +9.88), as long as the total armor is equal to or greater than the AP value, your variance/standard deviation is going to increase with each additional point of AP.  -1 AP has a 33.33% chance of taking one hit off the table.  -2 AP has a 44.4% chance (not 66.66%) of taking exactly one hit off the table, but it also has an 11.11% chance of taking two hits away.  So you have a 55.56% chance of doing something, but your ceiling is higher.  Looking strictly at game mechanics, I think there's an argument to made for increasing your variance since damage has certain meaningful thresholds (wound penalties, death, etc.), so not every box in your condition monitor has an equal value.  Now it's probably worth your time to cost the different forms of advancement in the game to maximize your ROI.

More specific example:

You want to be able to reliably drop an average opponent with your Predator with two shots, so each shot needs to do 5 boxes of damage.  Finger waving the attack and defense rolls, we'll say you can reliably get 2 net hits, bringing your DV to 10P/-1.

Vs. a Body 3, Armor Jacket opponent, this will get you 5+ boxes of damage 47.55% of the time.  Not as reliable as you'd like.

Now, let's imagine APDS is available in different grades.

Grade 1 (10P/-2) gets you to 55.2% (+7.65).
Grade 2 (10P/-3) gets you to 63.15% (+7.95)
Grade 3 (10P/-4) gets you to 71.1% (+7.95)
Grade 4--actual APDS--gets to 78.69% (+7.59)
Grade 5 +5.69
Grade 6 +4.26
Grade 7 +2.75

The overall process does involve diminishing returns--Grade 7 APDS turns out to be a bad investment--and you can get a mental picture of the curve based on these values.  However, adding to the armor value--let's give him a helmet and forearm guards and some PPP kits--moves these numbers as well, essentially shifting the drop off point to the right.  Not surprisingly, higher levels of AP are more valuable against more heavily-armored opposition.
Killing so many sacred cows, I'm banned from India.

JoeNapalm

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
  • Ifriti Sophist
« Reply #37 on: <08-19-16/1701:00> »
And just to make it more complicated, with my build (which is just a build for building's sake, unless my current character bites it), the best (well, only) place I can really pull the Magic for Penetrating Strikes from would be Combat Sense.

So I'm effectively trading my Defense dice for theirs, but at 2-for-1 because Combat Sense is twice as expensive.

2-for-1 sounds like a good deal, but generally your better off increasing your Defense vs your damage, because a PC generally fights more numerous but weaker foes, or you and your teammates are teaming up on fewer stronger foes that you really really don't want to get hit by, but are dealing damage to as a group.

That said, Combat Sense still operates pretty much the same (well, inverse, but you know what I mean) of Pen Strikes, and I have more Defense dice than I do Damage dice, meaning that more levels of Combat Sense are less likely to produce net hits than Pen Strikes.

This is the @#$% that keeps me up at night.  :P

-Jn-
« Last Edit: <08-19-16/1706:48> by JoeNapalm »

Jack_Spade

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6516
« Reply #38 on: <08-19-16/1711:28> »
Nope. Combat sense is essential.

Not for the one defense die, but for the surprise immunity. That is the difference between having defense and having no defense & -10 ini.

If you want AP just get a weapon focus and elemental strike (Fire) for -6 AP
talk think matrix

To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield
Revenant Kynos Isaint Rex

Kiirnodel

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1471
« Reply #39 on: <08-19-16/1804:59> »
Combat Sense isn't "surprise immunity" it only allows you to make a Perception Check to notice the surprise beforehand. Assuming you succeed at the given Perception check (which can still be ungodly difficult, just because you're allowed a Perception check doesn't make it easy), all this does is give you a +3 on the Surprise test.

Also, Elemental Strike doesn't say it gives any AP, open flames and fire weapons (flamethrowers) have a listed AP, but magically induced fire doesn't follow those trends. Since it is a magical ability, it wouldn't have AP unless the power says it does. Elemental Strike gives the ability for your hits to light people on fire.

Jack_Spade

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6516
« Reply #40 on: <08-20-16/0219:06> »
I should have been clearer: You are immune against GM fiat surprise situations by always getting a perception check - and those aren't really that hard if you keep your perception up and use audio and visual enhancement.
The Reaction+Intuition (3) test - well, every good combat adept should have enough dice to just buy those hits. 

Also p.171 clearly states the AP Value for fire weapons - which elemental weapon and strike undoubtedly are.


 
talk think matrix

To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield
Revenant Kynos Isaint Rex

Kiirnodel

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1471
« Reply #41 on: <08-20-16/0613:08> »
Well, no. Elemental Weapon and Elemental Strike are both Adept Powers. They each add elemental effects to a pre-existing weapon or the adept's unarmed attack. The weapons themselves aren't "fire weapons" which from the Core Rulebook is undoubtedly referring to weapons like flamethrowers. The elemental effect of Fire is that it can ignite targets. That would be what the adept power adds.

And just to be sure, I went back and read pg 171, Fire Damage. It specifically says "flame-based weapon" on that chart, which as I mentioned before the "base" of the weapons wouldn't be fire, but the unarmed attack or weapon focus. Not only that, but it is referencing that chart in relation to the use of the term "Fire AP" which could also be taken as an implication that this listing of AP doesn't actually aid the actual damage of the weapon. Those AP values are used when you check for if something is catching fire. Granted, they also match the AP values for damage purposes of flamethrowers and fire spells, but still.

My point is that those adept powers never mention an AP value being added to the attack, so it doesn't. Elemental Body specifically mentions that it functions as Elemental Strike, but it lists an AP value, further pointing out that Elemental Strike doesn't have one.

Jack_Spade

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6516
« Reply #42 on: <08-20-16/0744:00> »
So, in your opinion, you get all elemental effects, except the associated AP?  ???
Is radiation damage affected by normal armor then? How about Pollution or Acid?
 
The text doesn't have to mention the AP because it gives (for once correctly) the pages where the rules for elemental effects are spelled out - including AP. Elemental body deviates from the normal rules and therefore gives specific instructions.

talk think matrix

To strive, to seek, to find and not to yield
Revenant Kynos Isaint Rex

Kiirnodel

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Ace Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 1471
« Reply #43 on: <08-20-16/0821:31> »
Additional weapon AP is not one of the listed effects for Fire Damage.

Elemental Strike/Weapon is not a "flame-based weapon"

I don't see why choosing Fire for those powers should mean an additional -6 AP in addition to the extra effect of potentially igniting targets. None of the other elements provide additional AP either, and Pollution is handled separately via Toxic Strike.

JoeNapalm

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
  • Ifriti Sophist
« Reply #44 on: <08-22-16/1553:48> »

I gotta agree with Jack_Spade on this one.

The "fire elemental strikes are not fire-based weapons" relies entirely on a nuanced interpretation wherein you apply some but not all of the rules for fire weapons, without any explicit statement that this is the case. The splatbook just says the elemental effect now applies to the attack without any elaboration.

Whether or not that is RAI or balanced or whatnot is up for your GM to decide at your table, but just a straight reading of those sections indicates to me that the AP effect would apply. 

-Jn-