SuturedDefenseValue/SuccessConsistency - Revision history

Conversion script: link fix

2010-04-06T01:17:32Z

link fix

Conversion script: link fix

2010-04-05T08:07:55Z

link fix

Conversion script: link fix

2010-04-03T09:04:54Z

link fix

Wordman: 2nd Excellency as an exception.

2007-03-27T03:17:57Z

2nd Excellency as an exception.

New page

Given the conception of DV as a value representing the average number of successes from a defense pool, anything that adds to or subtracts directly from DV acts mathematically equivalently to adding successes. It seems inconsistent, therefore, that while successes added to an actual roll does ''not'' count against dice limits, "adding successes" to DV does. To make them consistent, treat "success adder" charms (see DissectingDefenseValue) as external adders, outside of the dice caps. This has the advantage of making DV calculation much faster. It also will result in defensive charms being much stronger than canon rules. The First Excellency becomes even stronger than other defensive charms become (though not consistently so). Exalts with low dice caps (terrestrials, sidereals, et. al.) gain a disproportionate benefit from this variation.

One fly in the ointment of this variant is that the most generic of success adders, the Second Excellency, actually does run afoul of pool limits as written. This variant takes the position that this is intended to be an ''exception'', not the rule. It would, in fact, be in keeping with this variation to ignore this limit for the 2nd Excellency as well.

* Back to SuturedDefenseValue

Wordman: A stitch in DV

2007-03-20T03:40:10Z

A stitch in DV

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:07, 5 April 2010
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Given the conception of DV as a value representing the average number of successes from a defense pool, anything that adds to or subtracts directly from DV acts mathematically equivalently to adding successes. It seems inconsistent, therefore, that while successes added to an actual roll ~~(via the Second Melee Excellency, for example)~~ does ''not'' count against dice limits, "adding successes" to DV does. To make them consistent, treat "success adder" charms (see DissectingDefenseValue) as external adders, outside of the dice caps. This has the advantage of making DV calculation much faster. It also will result in defensive charms being much stronger than canon rules. The First Excellency becomes even stronger than other defensive charms become (though not consistently so). Exalts with low dice caps (terrestrials, sidereals, et. al.) gain a disproportionate benefit from this variation.	+	Given the conception of DV as a value representing the average number of successes from a defense pool, anything that adds to or subtracts directly from DV acts mathematically equivalently to adding successes. It seems inconsistent, therefore, that while successes added to an actual roll does ''not'' count against dice limits, "adding successes" to DV does. To make them consistent, treat "success adder" charms (see [[DissectingDefenseValue]]) as external adders, outside of the dice caps. This has the advantage of making DV calculation much faster. It also will result in defensive charms being much stronger than canon rules. The First Excellency becomes even stronger than other defensive charms become (though not consistently so). Exalts with low dice caps (terrestrials, sidereals, et. al.) gain a disproportionate benefit from this variation.

−	* Back to SuturedDefenseValue	+	One fly in the ointment of this variant is that the most generic of success adders, the Second Excellency, actually does run afoul of pool limits as written. This variant takes the position that this is intended to be an ''exception'', not the rule. It would, in fact, be in keeping with this variation to ignore this limit for the 2nd Excellency as well.
		+
		+	* Back to [[SuturedDefenseValue]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:40, 20 March 2007
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Given the conception of DV as a value representing the average number of successes from a defense pool, anything that adds to or subtracts directly from DV acts mathematically equivalently to adding successes. It seems inconsistent, therefore, that while successes added to an actual roll does ''not'' count against dice limits, "adding successes" to DV does. To make them consistent, treat "success adder" charms (see [[DissectingDefenseValue]]) as external adders, outside of the dice caps. This has the advantage of making DV calculation much faster. It also will result in defensive charms being much stronger than canon rules. The First Excellency becomes even stronger than other defensive charms become (though not consistently so). Exalts with low dice caps (terrestrials, sidereals, et. al.) gain a disproportionate benefit from this variation.	+	Given the conception of DV as a value representing the average number of successes from a defense pool, anything that adds to or subtracts directly from DV acts mathematically equivalently to adding successes. It seems inconsistent, therefore, that while successes added to an actual roll (via the Second Melee Excellency, for example) does ''not'' count against dice limits, "adding successes" to DV does. To make them consistent, treat "success adder" charms (see DissectingDefenseValue) as external adders, outside of the dice caps. This has the advantage of making DV calculation much faster. It also will result in defensive charms being much stronger than canon rules. The First Excellency becomes even stronger than other defensive charms become (though not consistently so). Exalts with low dice caps (terrestrials, sidereals, et. al.) gain a disproportionate benefit from this variation.

−	One fly in the ointment of this variant is that the most generic of success adders, the Second Excellency, actually does run afoul of pool limits as written. This variant takes the position that this is intended to be an ''exception'', not the rule. It would, in fact, be in keeping with this variation to ignore this limit for the 2nd Excellency as well.	+	* Back to SuturedDefenseValue
−
−	* Back to [[SuturedDefenseValue]]

← Older revision	Revision as of 01:17, 6 April 2010
(No difference)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-Given the conception of DV as a value representing the average number of successes from a defense pool, anything that adds to or subtracts directly from DV acts mathematically equivalently to adding successes. It seems inconsistent, therefore, that while successes added to an actual roll does ''not'' count against dice limits, "adding successes" to DV does. To make them consistent, treat "success adder" charms (see DissectingDefenseValue) as external adders, outside of the dice caps. This has the advantage of making DV calculation much faster. It also will result in defensive charms being much stronger than canon rules. The First Excellency becomes even stronger than other defensive charms become (though not consistently so). Exalts with low dice caps (terrestrials, sidereals, et. al.) gain a disproportionate benefit from this variation.
+Given the conception of DV as a value representing the average number of successes from a defense pool, anything that adds to or subtracts directly from DV acts mathematically equivalently to adding successes. It seems inconsistent, therefore, that while successes added to an actual roll does ''not'' count against dice limits, "adding successes" to DV does. To make them consistent, treat "success adder" charms (see [[DissectingDefenseValue]]) as external adders, outside of the dice caps. This has the advantage of making DV calculation much faster. It also will result in defensive charms being much stronger than canon rules. The First Excellency becomes even stronger than other defensive charms become (though not consistently so). Exalts with low dice caps (terrestrials, sidereals, et. al.) gain a disproportionate benefit from this variation.
 One fly in the ointment of this variant is that the most generic of success adders, the Second Excellency, actually does run afoul of pool limits as written. This variant takes the position that this is intended to be an ''exception'', not the rule. It would, in fact, be in keeping with this variation to ignore this limit for the 2nd Excellency as well.
-* Back to SuturedDefenseValue
+* Back to [[SuturedDefenseValue]]