Difference between revisions of "SuturedDefenseValue/NoPool"
(This may be how DV was really supposed to work) |
m (link fix) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The rule on defense value read very much like the DV system started with a strong mathematical rationale (i.e. static defense based on the average number of successes from a defense pool) but, as Second Edition was developed, later revisions of the rules forgot this rationale and choices were made based on some other criteria that was never explained. Thus, some of the rules mention pools and some do not. Much of the confusion in DissectingDefenseValue stems around trying to match these pool-based rules with the others. This variation eliminates this confusion by saying "screw the mathematical underpinnings", and goes with the assumption that the intent of Second Edition was actually to completely eliminate references to pools for defense, but that they didn't quite get them all. | + | The rule on defense value read very much like the DV system started with a strong mathematical rationale (i.e. static defense based on the average number of successes from a defense pool) but, as Second Edition was developed, later revisions of the rules forgot this rationale and choices were made based on some other criteria that was never explained. Thus, some of the rules mention pools and some do not. Much of the confusion in [[DissectingDefenseValue]] stems around trying to match these pool-based rules with the others. This variation eliminates this confusion by saying "screw the mathematical underpinnings", and goes with the assumption that the intent of Second Edition was actually to completely eliminate references to pools for defense, but that they didn't quite get them all. |
== Calculation Order == | == Calculation Order == | ||
| − | This variant ignores any tie between successes and DV and treats any mention of pools related to defense as mistakes. No longer based on dice pools, this variant ''completely ignores'' the Order of Modifiers chart that is mentioned so often in DissectingDefenseValue. Instead, it uses the following order: | + | This variant ignores any tie between successes and DV and treats any mention of pools related to defense as mistakes. No longer based on dice pools, this variant ''completely ignores'' the Order of Modifiers chart that is mentioned so often in [[DissectingDefenseValue]]. Instead, it uses the following order: |
=== Step A: Determine your base DV === | === Step A: Determine your base DV === | ||
| − | This step uses the same basic equations to calculate DV, but these are just considered equations, not dice pools per se. This step includes specialties and what would, in the land of dice pools, be called "internal modifiers" such as Hearthstone Bracers (ex2e.381) and weapon Defense. Unless using /PenaltyConsistency, this would not include wounds or mobility. | + | This step uses the same basic equations to calculate DV, but these are just considered equations, not dice pools per se. This step includes specialties and what would, in the land of dice pools, be called "internal modifiers" such as Hearthstone Bracers (ex2e.381) and weapon Defense. Unless using [[/PenaltyConsistency]], this would not include wounds or mobility. |
Do not round at this point. | Do not round at this point. | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
=== Step B: Apply Non-Magical, Non-Environmental DV modifiers === | === Step B: Apply Non-Magical, Non-Environmental DV modifiers === | ||
| − | Apply any DV bonuses or penalties that come neither from magic nor environment. This would include wounds and mobility (if not using /PenaltyConsistency), onslaught, stunts, virtue channeling, penalties from previous actions, equipment (such as shields) and so on. Keep fractions, if any. | + | Apply any DV bonuses or penalties that come neither from magic nor environment. This would include wounds and mobility (if not using [[/PenaltyConsistency]]), onslaught, stunts, virtue channeling, penalties from previous actions, equipment (such as shields) and so on. Keep fractions, if any. |
Note that certain charms may allow you to ignore certain penalties that apply here. | Note that certain charms may allow you to ignore certain penalties that apply here. | ||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
== Pros and Cons == | == Pros and Cons == | ||
| − | This method should be both more consistent and faster than the odd hybrid suggested by the rules, and can be made more so using /SuccessConsistency. Unless modified by some of the other variations, some penalties (wounds, mobility) are mathematically twice as bad as similar penalties when used for attacking. Also, unlike attacking, you cannot transcend dice pool limits by buying successes. | + | This method should be both more consistent and faster than the odd hybrid suggested by the rules, and can be made more so using [[/SuccessConsistency]]. Unless modified by some of the other variations, some penalties (wounds, mobility) are mathematically twice as bad as similar penalties when used for attacking. Also, unlike attacking, you cannot transcend dice pool limits by buying successes. |
| − | * Back to SuturedDefenseValue | + | * Back to [[SuturedDefenseValue]] |
== Comments == | == Comments == | ||
Revision as of 09:04, 3 April 2010
The rule on defense value read very much like the DV system started with a strong mathematical rationale (i.e. static defense based on the average number of successes from a defense pool) but, as Second Edition was developed, later revisions of the rules forgot this rationale and choices were made based on some other criteria that was never explained. Thus, some of the rules mention pools and some do not. Much of the confusion in DissectingDefenseValue stems around trying to match these pool-based rules with the others. This variation eliminates this confusion by saying "screw the mathematical underpinnings", and goes with the assumption that the intent of Second Edition was actually to completely eliminate references to pools for defense, but that they didn't quite get them all.
Contents
Calculation Order
This variant ignores any tie between successes and DV and treats any mention of pools related to defense as mistakes. No longer based on dice pools, this variant completely ignores the Order of Modifiers chart that is mentioned so often in DissectingDefenseValue. Instead, it uses the following order:
Step A: Determine your base DV
This step uses the same basic equations to calculate DV, but these are just considered equations, not dice pools per se. This step includes specialties and what would, in the land of dice pools, be called "internal modifiers" such as Hearthstone Bracers (ex2e.381) and weapon Defense. Unless using /PenaltyConsistency, this would not include wounds or mobility.
Do not round at this point.
Step B: Apply Non-Magical, Non-Environmental DV modifiers
Apply any DV bonuses or penalties that come neither from magic nor environment. This would include wounds and mobility (if not using /PenaltyConsistency), onslaught, stunts, virtue channeling, penalties from previous actions, equipment (such as shields) and so on. Keep fractions, if any.
Note that certain charms may allow you to ignore certain penalties that apply here.
Step C: Apply Magical DV modifiers
Add up all modifications from any charms that add or subtract set numbers from DV to get C, the total modification from charms. Keep fractions, if any. Do not apply "special" charm modifications of DV (see step E) or charms that eliminate penalties (see steps B and F).
Any charms claiming to add X to a defense pool instead add half of X to C.
Step D: Check Against DV Cap
Even though DV is no longer based on a dice pool, it is limited using half the typical formula for calculating dice limits. Call this value L and maintain fractions. If C is greater than L, set C to L. Apply C to the running DV total.
Step E: Apply Special Effects
Special effects are those that "cut DV in half", "reduce DV to zero", make certain defenses inapplicable or otherwise alter DV in some way other than simple addition or subtraction. Again, maintain fractions.
Step F: Apply Environmental Effects
Apply environmental effects like cover, terrain or high or low ground modifiers to DV. Note that certain charms may allow you to ignore certain penalties that apply here.
Step G: Round and Use
If the result is less than zero, make the DV zero. Finally, round DV as normal. Reduce the incoming attack by that many successes.
Pros and Cons
This method should be both more consistent and faster than the odd hybrid suggested by the rules, and can be made more so using /SuccessConsistency. Unless modified by some of the other variations, some penalties (wounds, mobility) are mathematically twice as bad as similar penalties when used for attacking. Also, unlike attacking, you cannot transcend dice pool limits by buying successes.
- Back to SuturedDefenseValue
