Heroic Limits On Entangles?

[Wilfred_Death]

In all the time I've played Fantasy Hero as a PC or GM, I've never used an entangle, nor did the other GMs...
Now I'm running a Campaign, where one of the players has bought an entangle as a spell.

In this campaign almost all the opponents are Humans, with a STR 20 being the absolute maximum, ( Over that they become 'Non Human' - transgenic / semi mystical creatures )
Most 'Warriors' have a STR between 12 and 15
Most Normals have STR 8 - 10

I Just assumed no-one would use an Entangle that only affected one target, so when I designed example entangles for the NPC's ( Like 'Spider Web' Spells ) it seemed alright, - "Ah yeh that'll trap them but then they can get out sooner or later"
OR "It only entangles part of them, so they can cut out of it with their swords......


Now I've realized ( :help: ) how an entangle is going to actually work.
I.E. The trapped NPC, PC can not draw a dagger or whatever to cut out of the entangle, and so must 'Grunt' out with STR.

This being so, then the 'Conans' of this world ( not many of them ) with STR 20 can Exert up to 30 ? STR ( +5 for pushing with +1 per point they make their Ego Roll By ) and Roll a max of 12 Body (If they get a lucky roll ) to snap out of an entangle.
However Most PCs could probably only 'Exert' to 20 STR and do a max of 8 Body
And most Normals 6Body

So I have a 45 / 60 AP limit on Spells, ( 45 being a starting limit and 60 AP being the maximum 'ever' )
SO its easy to have a 4D6 4DEF Entangle ( 40 AP ) or better, and then the PC's / NPCs will be stuck permanent like.............
As All spells require Gestures to cast ( and Incant etc ) even the Mages are stuck............

What sort of limits do you people put on your 'Entangle' Spells?
Because it looks like It's too easy to get an 'Absolute Effect' vs Humans Entangle....
And In this game, it is a 'One shot Death Spell' . -
( The PC Mage's Entangle is lower than this as they just started ) -
as once that 'enemy' is entangled, they can just kill them later

Monsters and such will have higher STR.....

Any advice will be much appreciated.

[Curufea]

Heroic pushing of strength only goes up to +5 and requires an Ego roll - so it isn't as gross as superhero.

I haven't come across entangle yet, so I'll have to have a serious think about it first :)

[Alibear]

If you want you might want to think about making the entangle vulnerable to fire so that the PC's can burn their way out.

Or make it high body low defence that they'll eventually be able to chop their way out.

If the average is 15 Str then don't give the entangle more than 2 def if you expect the PC's to escape.

[Markdoc]

you're right - entangle is a killer spell in FH games. It's one reason mages designed with a little thought often are much more powerful in combat than their active points might suggest

I didn't want to mess with the rules too much, so the way I handle it is I treat it as a STOP! sign power (together with Flash, most movement powers and defence powers). That means I check any entangle spell fairly thoroughly and normally require them to have a weakness, such as a susceptibility to fire (spider webs) or the ability to only entangle some limbs (a plant-based entangle spell, which causes vegetation to grab, for example: a -1/2 limit "only to reach of the plants"), etc.

Otherwise, it's all to easy to entangle a whole mess o' foes (not just humans, but orcs, goblins, etc, etc) and then finish them off at leisure (remember, though, that entangles usually provide some DEF against attacks, unless bought with the transparent advantage).

cheers, Mark

[Alibear]

I've found flash is not too unbalancing because the relatively lower speeds in my campaign mean that only 1 or 2 phases are lost. Speeds range from 2-3 at the start of the campaign and 3-4 later on.

Also more characters have a lower dcv anyway so a reduced CV is not such a hinderance.

YMMV.

[Hugh Neilson]

Otherwise, it's all to easy to entangle a whole mess o' foes (not just humans, but orcs, goblins, etc, etc) and then finish them off at leisure (remember, though, that entangles usually provide some DEF against attacks, unless bought with the transparent advantage).

Takes a bit longer, but if your Wizard has a mental attack, or a STR drain, the victim sits helpless in the Entangle while you accumulate enough effect that they can't fight back. Then the sword guys can merrily hack away at both entangle and its contents.

[Wilfred_Death]

you're right - entangle is a killer spell in FH games. It's one reason mages designed with a little thought often are much more powerful in combat than their active points might suggest

I thought through most things but didn't catch this one...


I didn't want to mess with the rules too much, so the way I handle it is I treat it as a STOP! sign power (together with Flash, most movement powers and defence powers). That means I check any entangle spell fairly thoroughly and normally require them to have a weakness, such as a susceptibility to fire (spider webs) or the ability to only entangle some limbs (a plant-based entangle spell, which causes vegetation to grab, for example: a -1/2 limit "only to reach of the plants"), etc.

Yeh, that's sorta the way I made up the NPC Entangle spells, but I glitched and didn't think through properly how advantageous a non limited Entangle can be.

Otherwise, it's all to easy to entangle a whole mess o' foes (not just humans, but orcs, goblins, etc, etc) and then finish them off at leisure (remember, though, that entangles usually provide some DEF against attacks, unless bought with the transparent advantage).

Yes, I figured about the DEF, but you can then gang up on the entangled foes one at a time. And The Players expect ( so they tell me ) : "What we do to the villains, should be done back to us", But if I do that they're dead
:eg: Muahahahah! end of 'continuity'

With the succeptibility thing, that's O.K. cos I can demand that, as part of the "spell" makeup. It's just that if the 'Entangle' is succeptible (?) to Fire, how does that help an entangled character unless they already have a 'Torch' burning?
Just goes to show me that I should check things over a lot more....

So far the PC Mage only used the entangle once, and it was versus another mage, who had the "setting" - Limited Suppression Field versus Magic - ( CounterSpell ? going ) which cut down the entangle enough, that it only took him a full Phase to cut out of it with his Dagger. At which point the PC Mage cut off the guys head with his Axe. The PCs were happy because the NPC Mage could not cast any more 'Lightning Bolts' whilst escaping from the entangle
Further:
If the PC Mage does entangle someone, is there anything to say that the PCs can't go "Allright On 3 we Hit Him for all we've got" and all Haymaker their swords / axes so as to strike the Entangle and victim together ?
I figure if My character was in such a party, he would organise that.. ( But I won't run an ongoing NPC Character, I don't like that style of GM'ing )
I'd tend to allow a coordinated attack there, because the NPC is more or less not moving.......

And:
If you were a player, and I was the GM, and I said "You know that Entangle you wanted and were hoping to build up later?, Well.. it now has 'Set Effect' Legs only, and it's really flammable..." Would you spit the dummy?

[Flames]

Certainly a major concern here, and maybe the limitation "No DEF" (-1 1/2) should be mandatory. Of course, that would mean a smart player will want to find that sweet spot between buying the basic Entangle and buying the extra BODY dice on it.

Man, if you know any Hero System players who are trying to pick a major in college, tell them to go for corporate tax law!

[Killer Shrike]

Entangles are manageable. The problem I see is that you are limiting your characters to an average of around 15 AP of attack when forced to rely on STR alone but hitting them with a 45 to 60 AP obstacle.

Quite correctly it is going to be correspondingly difficult to overcome. However, there are still options. You can Haymaker vs an Entangle in addition to pushing for starters, and teammates can assist an entangled ally as well.

You can also approach it from the design side and make entangles with mixed DEF and BODY, like DEF 4 2d6 or 4d6 DEF 2. You could even require that all Entangles must be Opaque to at least one sense, which cuts into the effect if you have an AP cap.

[Wilfred_Death]

Thanks: this is good advice
Entangles are manageable. The problem I see is that you are limiting your characters to an average of around 15 AP of attack when forced to rely on STR alone but hitting them with a 45 to 60 AP obstacle.
Yes I hadn't thought that through properly, 'whoever' is the victim, they might not have their 'sword' / dagger already drawn, so that cuts way down on the Attack AP


Quite correctly it is going to be correspondingly difficult to overcome. However, there are still options. You can Haymaker vs an Entangle in addition to pushing for starters, and teammates can assist an entangled ally as well.
So the PCs can Haymaker a 'Exert STR' ? I hadn't thought of that, that should help loads...
That should give the players or NPCs more of a chance to escape a 'moderate' Entangle.

You can also approach it from the design side and make entangles with mixed DEF and BODY, like DEF 4 2d6 or 4d6 DEF 2. You could even require that all Entangles must be Opaque to at least one sense, which cuts into the effect if you have an AP cap.
-yeh-

[Killer Shrike]

Thanks: this is good advice

Yes I hadn't thought that through properly, 'whoever' is the victim, they might not have their 'sword' / dagger already drawn, so that cuts way down on the Attack AP
Even if they have a weapon (or other Foci) readied, many Entangles prevent their use. There's a reason why Entangles are expensive for their effect.

Personally I find Entangles easier to balance in lower end games because characters all tend to have STR's in the same general range; in more super genres where character's STR's can range all over the place its much more difficult to construct an Entangle that is strong enough to at least slow a brick down without being inescapable to non bricks.


So the PCs can Haymaker a 'Exert STR' ? I hadn't thought of that, that should help loads...
That should give the players or NPCs more of a chance to escape a 'moderate' Entangle.

You can Haymaker just about any Attack.

[Shadowpup]

If the PC Mage does entangle someone, is there anything to say that the PCs can't go "Allright On 3 we Hit Him for all we've got" and all Haymaker their swords / axes so as to strike the Entangle and victim together ?

It is the fate of all gamers that try such a thing to be fooled by fate. The first time they do it, it will work astoudingly well. The next time they try such a trick, fate will throw them a few 3's making them Haymaker each other. I have seen it.

I don't see Entangles as being that bad. Keep in mind that until the Entangle is destroyed, the victim takes NO damage (unless the Entangle is transparent - unusual in a fantasy setting).

[Killer Shrike]

It is the fate of all gamers that try such a thing to be fooled by fate. The first time they do it, it will work astoudingly well. The next time they try such a trick, fate will throw them a few 3's making them Haymaker each other. I have seen it.

I don't see Entangles as being that bad. Keep in mind that until the Entangle is destroyed, the victim takes NO damage (unless the Entangle is transparent - unusual in a fantasy setting).
Yah. Ive had players carve out pockets in AoE Entangles and use it as hard cover.

[Killer Shrike]

You can Haymaker just about any Attack.
Which reminds me, you can even Haymaker an Entangle. Check the sidebar on page 389 of 5ER for "Unusual Haymakers".

[Markdoc]

Entangles are manageable. The problem I see is that you are limiting your characters to an average of around 15 AP of attack when forced to rely on STR alone but hitting them with a 45 to 60 AP obstacle.

This is the problem - if someone is throwing 60AP of entangle, haymakering your STR is probably going to be utterly pointless. Also - as you noted, but I don't think everyone gets it - you can't necessarily use a focus when entangled. So even IF you have your sword out, it may not do you much good. A 10d6 EB will rock a tough fighter character, but it won't necessarily drop him - especially if he's armoured. 50 points of entangle may not kill him but it will certainly remove him from combat - probably for the duration.

I've been careful with entangle in my game, so it has not caused problems, apart from one time, early on. My wife was playing an Earth Mage and she could cause the ground to suck someone into the earth: an area effect entangle with a linked NND (suffocation). By herself, she consistently accounted for 90+% of casualties inflicted by the party in combat. It was only when they were inside, she had to revert to other spells. Thank god that was a short "one-off" series of adventures, designed to test character concepts, so the character was retired after.

But in games where I've been a player, entangle has consistently been a problem. I well remember the GM's disgust when we were attacked by two prirate ships bursting with pirates. A couple of well placed area effect entangles and both boats were filled with helpless targets to be sent to the bottom with their ships. In one amusing game (I offended the player of another character, and the game degenerated into "Hunt and kill Mark's character!"). I wiped out two whole parties of experienced players - on my own - with entangle.

Don't get me wrong: I *like* entangle. So I don't want to remove it from the game, or significantly weaken it. I just advise caution.

As for flash, it sounds innocuous enough. But wait til you see it in action. I had a paladin-type with relatively low pointage "holy light" spells. There's nothing like springing into a mass of foes, popping an area effect or explosive flash and then either head-shotting or sweeping your disadvantaged foes. Sure, it's only a couple of phases, but it gives a huge short term advantage, for relatively few points - and few foes in a fantasy setting have flash defence.

cheers, Mark

[Nevenall]

"Ah yeh that'll trap them but then they can get out sooner or later"


For this you can build an Entangle with no DEF. Anyone who can do STR damage can break out if given enough time.

To get the feel you want why not work with the special effects? If the effect of an Entangle spell is to wrap a character in rope, then why can't he find something sharp to cut the ropes with and escape? Or even attempt a Contortionist roll to escape? No reason to let the Power description tyrannize your campaign. Of course getting your players to agree with you might be a different story. :)

[Alibear]

That is a good point. What is the special effect of the entangle?

[Killer Shrike]

For this you can build an Entangle with no DEF. Anyone who can do STR damage can break out if given enough time.

To get the feel you want why not work with the special effects? If the effect of an Entangle spell is to wrap a character in rope, then why can't he find something sharp to cut the ropes with and escape? Or even attempt a Contortionist roll to escape? No reason to let the Power description tyrannize your campaign. Of course getting your players to agree with you might be a different story. :)
Actually, the rules already provide options for Entangles that are vulnerable to specific things.

As far as a 0 DEF Entangle; such an Entangle could only have 1d6 BODY. The disparity of extra DEF or extra BODY is constrained by the number of dice of base effect bought, down to 1.

[Hugh Neilson]

Actually, the rules already provide options for Entangles that are vulnerable to specific things.

As far as a 0 DEF Entangle; such an Entangle could only have 1d6 BODY. The disparity of extra DEF or extra BODY is constrained by the number of dice of base effect bought, down to 1.

You could place the "Entangle has 0 DEF" limitation on your Entangle instead. [Or you could buy multiple 1d6 0 DEF entangles and fire them as a MPA, I suppose :eek: except in FH, you may be using the "Spell" limitation which prevents MPA's]

[Killer Shrike]

You could place the "Entangle has 0 DEF" limitation on your Entangle instead. [Or you could buy multiple 1d6 0 DEF entangles and fire them as a MPA, I suppose :eek: except in FH, you may be using the "Spell" limitation which prevents MPA's]You could also go around your elbow to get to your ear, but its hardly necessary or efficient.

[prestidigitator]

I gave the mage in my newly started campaign a 2d6 mental paralysis (Entangle BOECV), and I am regretting it just a little now. He walks around the battlefield paralyzing orcs left and right (though one at a time) while the fighters hack and hack and hack to kill theirs. I'm hoping the PCs learn to coordinate a little more, but still it feels a little ridiculous. Of course, if I reduce it to 1d6 the NPCs will get out instantly. If I let them Haymaker they will get out instantly. I'm starting to seriously consider the suggestion someone made a while back on the Rules Discussion Forum of using Str (Ego in this case) Rolls rather than Normal Damage Rolls.

One of the balances is that I have the spell consuming an expensive component and only gave the PCs 12, "expensive components," to distribute among their spells/powers to start with, so it won't last too long. Man, I'm glad I did that now!!

[Killer Shrike]

Back in the day, one of the players in one of my GreyHERO campaigns played a priest of Wee Jas. One of his best/favorite Spells was Hold Person, which was designed as a BOECV vs EGO Entangle.

The Gesture was brandishing his Holy Symbol (a silver skull pendant with garnet eyes) and the Incantation was a boldly stated "May the Gaze of Wee Jas fall upon thee, and await thy judgement!".

This quickly became a favored catch phrase (I require players to do everything in character, including spell incantations).


The game effect was creditable, but in line with equivalent abilities of other PC's and NPC's. It was a good ability, and I never had a problem with it throughout the life of a game that lasted longer than a year with frequent play. I've also allowed other characters similar effects and again havent had an issue thus far.

One thing to keep in mind is that you can push your EGO to resist a vs EGO Entangle; rules are given for it.

[prestidigitator]

One thing to keep in mind is that you can push your EGO to resist a vs EGO Entangle; rules are given for it.
:sigh: I know. And I might have to resort to that if things impinge upon story. I just hate Pushing arbitrarily since it is supposed to be something done only in a heroic context (heroic meaning heroism, not as in a heroic vs. superheroic campaign).

Another thing that will help me put off the decision is that the PCs will soon be fighting monsters (Animal Class of Minds--I use the same rules for BOECV Powers as for Mental Powers when the SFX justify it) and NPC villains with decent Egos, so it won't be so much of an issue again for a bit.

[Killer Shrike]

I also prefer to avoid Pushing, but its because I dont use point caps.


Personally, I consider any circumstance where you HAVE to push to succeed to be sufficiently heightened to allow Pushing.


However, more to the point look at it from the perspective of Action Economy.

If you have an NPC that you dont consider to be important enough to allow pushing, then basically you have an NPC that a PC just expended an Action on to put on ice with an Entangle. Another PC or the same PC might then use another Action to strike the NPC while they are frozen up, maybe not.

Either way, that NPC took one or more Actions away from your PC's. Often that is a good trade for mooks. It all sort of works out in the wash, so to speak.

[DangerousDan]

Heroic pushing of strength only goes up to +5 and requires an Ego roll - so it isn't as gross as superhero.


Remember, Heroic pushing is 5 +1 for every point the EGO roll was made, so a decent EGO roll with a higher than normal EGO gets the same amount of push as a superhero.

[DangerousDan]

I gave the mage in my newly started campaign a 2d6 mental paralysis (Entangle BOECV), and I am regretting it just a little now. He walks around the battlefield paralyzing orcs left and right (though one at a time) while the fighters hack and hack and hack to kill theirs. I'm hoping the PCs learn to coordinate a little more, but still it feels a little ridiculous. Of course, if I reduce it to 1d6 the NPCs will get out instantly. If I let them Haymaker they will get out instantly. I'm starting to seriously consider the suggestion someone made a while back on the Rules Discussion Forum of using Str (Ego in this case) Rolls rather than Normal Damage Rolls.

One of the balances is that I have the spell consuming an expensive component and only gave the PCs 12, "expensive components," to distribute among their spells/powers to start with, so it won't last too long. Man, I'm glad I did that now!!

A 2d6 mental paralysis can often delay even a typical superhero for a phase or two, but as you say, a 1d6 is a minor barrier. Even many egoists will lose a phase or two to a 3d6 mental paralysis.