A New Use For Hardened

[The Main Man]

Killing Attacks can purchase the power advantage Increased STUN Multiplier (+1/4 per +1).
Hardened (+1/4) is used for defending against Armor Piercing (+1/2) and Penetrating (+1/2), as well as Indirect (+1/4-3/4), two of which are for increasing damage of an attack.
I was thinking that maybe Hardened can defend against up to 2 Levels of Increased STUN Multiplier per 1 Level.

[austenandrews]

Intriguing idea.

[Trained Chicken]

That's a great idea. Probably a little too weak too, since increased STUN multiplier is so uncommon. But in addition to it's other uses, a perfect addend to Hardened.

[Phil]

Nice idea. Repped!

[Dust Raven]

My gut reaction wants to make this a seperate Advantage, like what is done for Teleportation and Entangles and such. But it really depends on how often the Increased STUNx comes into play. And what about Decreased STUNx? The Modifier runds up and down a scale. What would the Hardened (or whatever) Advantage do exactly? Would decrease the STUNx of any Killing Attack, thereby affecting all KA, or would it simply negage the STUNx Advantage and leave the STUNx Limitation alone?

[prestidigitator]

I'm against Modifiers on defenses that change how the attacker does the actual damage calculation. Hardened doesn't normally do this because it merely affects the amount of defenses the defender can apply (AP) and whether or not there is a minimum limit on damage (Penetrating, where the attacker can calculate the Penetrating amount and the defender can determine whether or not to use it).

A defense changing the multiplier an attacker uses to calculate the amount of Stun being delivered is a whole different headache.

[The Main Man]

My gut reaction wants to make this a seperate Advantage, like what is done for Teleportation and Entangles and such. But it really depends on how often the Increased STUNx comes into play. And what about Decreased STUNx? The Modifier runds up and down a scale. What would the Hardened (or whatever) Advantage do exactly? Would decrease the STUNx of any Killing Attack, thereby affecting all KA, or would it simply negage the STUNx Advantage and leave the STUNx Limitation alone?

In the case of this use of Hardened, I figured that it could stop up to 2 Levels of Increased STUN Multiplier, because as the HERO System states: A defense to a power should generally be half the cost of the attack.
Hardened +1/4 = +2 STUN Multiplier

In the case of Decreased STUN Multiplier, I say that Hardened would have no effect, being that DSM is a Limitation, and no Advantage that I know of has any effect on Limitations, and besides, the Decreased STUN Multiplier is, so to speak, punishment enough, being a Limitation after all.

[prestidigitator]

In the case of this use of Hardened, I figured that it could stop up to 2 Levels of Increased STUN Multiplier, because as the HERO System states: A defense to a power should generally be half the cost of the attack.
Hardened +1/4 = +2 STUN Multiplier

In the case of Decreased STUN Multiplier, I say that Hardened would have no effect, being that DSM is a Limitation, and no Advantage that I know of has any effect on Limitations, and besides, the Decreased STUN Multiplier is, so to speak, punishment enough, being a Limitation after all.
So people can read your post. You may want to stay away from white text color in the future. :)

[The Main Man]

It's my forum style (Dark Background). Sorry.

[austenandrews]

It's best if people stick with forum defalt colors, guaranteed to work with all styles. IMHO.

[PhilFleischmann]

It seems way too powerful to me, to add that on to the existing effects of Hardened. Your way a +1/4 advantage negates up to +1 1/2 of Advantages, Armor Piercing, Penetrating, and +2 STUNx. That's a six-to-one advantage, not two-to-one!

[Dust Raven]

Which is why I think it should be a seperate Advantage, if allowed at all.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Which is why I think it should be a seperate Advantage, if allowed at all.
I totally concur.

I've been thinking about this, and think I may play around with a +1/4 advantage ... call it "Toughened" that can be bought at multiple levels for resistant defences and reduces Stun Mods on KA's by 1 per level.

Still have you work though a few models to see how to make it work on partially toughened defences, but I think the idea may have merit

[The Main Man]

It seems way too powerful to me, to add that on to the existing effects of Hardened. Your way a +1/4 advantage negates up to +1 1/2 of Advantages, Armor Piercing, Penetrating, and +2 STUNx. That's a six-to-one advantage, not two-to-one!

Either you read me wrong, or one of us doesn't understand Hardened.
To my understanding, if you are faced with an attack that has Armor Piercing and Penetrating, you have to pick one; you can't negate both of them with only one level of Hardened.
That's why you buy multiple levels of Hardened, and conversely buy multiple levels of Armor Piercing or Penetrating; the effects to not stack.
In the case of Hardened vs. Increased STUN Multiplier, if it were level for level, then it somewhat contradicts the Defense vs. Attack cost principles of the HERO system.
So, if you buy 1 level of Hardened (+1/4), you can negate up to 2 levels of Increased STUN Multiplier (+1/2).
If your opponent bought 3 Levels of Increased STUN Multiplier (+3/4), +1 STUN Multiplier would still get through because you could only negate 2 levels of it.
This brings the uses of Hardened to the following:
1 Level Hardened = 1 Level Armor Piercing
1 Level Hardened = 1 Level Penetrating
1 Level Hardened = Indirect (any Level)
1 Level Hardened = 2 Levels Increased STUN Multiplier
Now am I clear?

[Ockham's Spoon]

I have to kind of agree with Phil that Hardened already covers a lot of ground and I don't see a real need for this added effect. Of course it hasn't come up in my games where obviously it occured in yours so maybe I am missing something.

Personally I think this is once again addressing the STN lotto issue and I would rather fix the problem than treat the effects. If you like the STN lotto as is, I would just have people buy extra defense, only vs STN of killing attacks to cover this effect. Just my two cents.

__________________________________________________ ____
Fortune favors the well-prepared - Edna

[The Main Man]

Actually, it has never been an issue in my games.
In fact, Killing Attacks are circumstantially rare in my Superhero campaign.
Not quite so obvious, eh?
No, this began as just a thought.
So what if Hardened covers so much ground?
It doesn't actually do anything by itself anyway, so why not slap this on to it?
Just because Hardened can defend against Indirect doesn't mean that I'll always get to use it any more than against Killing Attacks with Increased STUN Multiplier.

[ghost-angel]

Either you read me wrong, or one of us doesn't understand Hardened.
To my understanding, if you are faced with an attack that has Armor Piercing and Penetrating, you have to pick one; you can't negate both of them with only one level of Hardened.
That's why you buy multiple levels of Hardened, and conversely buy multiple levels of Armor Piercing or Penetrating; the effects to not stack.
In the case of Hardened vs. Increased STUN Multiplier, if it were level for level, then it somewhat contradicts the Defense vs. Attack cost principles of the HERO system.
So, if you buy 1 level of Hardened (+1/4), you can negate up to 2 levels of Increased STUN Multiplier (+1/2).
If your opponent bought 3 Levels of Increased STUN Multiplier (+3/4), +1 STUN Multiplier would still get through because you could only negate 2 levels of it.
This brings the uses of Hardened to the following:
1 Level Hardened = 1 Level Armor Piercing
1 Level Hardened = 1 Level Penetrating
1 Level Hardened = Indirect (any Level)
1 Level Hardened = 2 Levels Increased STUN Multiplier
Now am I clear?
Yes but 1 Level of Hardened can block any one of those advantages as long as that's the only incoming advantage being tossed at it. Making it very effective an Advantage for defenders.

[BNakagawa]

How does this work if you have defenses that are only partially hardened?

IMO, this variant actively encourages people to purchases things like:

1/1 armor, x4 hardened.

which does not sit well with me.

[The Main Man]

You can't buy partially Hardened defenses (check the main book), and the build you just mentioned is condemned in the same text.

[DangerousDan]

Killing Attacks can purchase the power advantage Increased STUN Multiplier (+1/4 per +1).
Hardened (+1/4) is used for defending against Armor Piercing (+1/2) and Penetrating (+1/2), as well as Indirect (+1/4-3/4), two of which are for increasing damage of an attack.
I was thinking that maybe Hardened can defend against up to 2 Levels of Increased STUN Multiplier per 1 Level.

I don't like the idea, won't use it, won't allow it in my game.:thumbdown Don't let me stop you, though.:cool:

[ghost-angel]

You can't buy partially Hardened defenses (check the main book), and the build you just mentioned is condemned in the same text.
The reference is 5ER p115 for those who are curious.

You can, however, purchase one DEF that is Hardened and another that is not.
Flak Vest: 3PD/3ED Hardened
Personal Force Field: 15PD/15ED

is perfectly legal.

[Frenchman]

Which means that your 3 points of hardened defense can stop up to 2 stun per body rolled on the KA. If its a big one, thats a lot of stun. I don't like it because it doesn't scale at all.
Hardened vs. Penetrating doesn't stop all the penetrating damage, only as much as you have hardened defense.
One level of hardened does stop all of the defense reduction of an AP attack, but if theres only a little bit of harded defense, it still doesn't matter much.
For this to work well, I think you would need to do something like have each level of hardened double the value of the hardened defense vs. stun, up to the additional stun gained from the +StunX - so 4 PD hardened would could stop up to 8 stun from a 1d6 KA +1 StunX which rolled 4 Body, 12 Stun (Rolls of 4, 3). 4 Stun from it being 4 defense, and another 4 for it being hardened against +StunX

[Sean Waters]

How does this work if you have defenses that are only partially hardened?

IMO, this variant actively encourages people to purchases things like:

1/1 armor, x4 hardened.

which does not sit well with me.


I don't see the problem:

20 pd, 1 of which is 4xhardened.

v 28 stun AP attack

28-1=27 points to get through the (halved) 20 pd = 17 points through.

v 8dice penetrating attack (doing 28 stun, no 1s or 6s)

28-10=18, it let at least 8 stun through so the hardened did not help at all. If the attack had been (say) 4d6 doing 14 stun it should let 4 stun through but the 1 hardened catches that and it lets 3 through.

Against indirect, well, unless it is non-personal then it does not help anyway. If it is a force wall then the rest of the attack is getting through anyway - having one hardened DEF won't help much.

Now against the increased stun multiple I do see the problem, but:

1. I've never seen a convincing argument yet to allow increased stun mutliple.

2. Presumably you could scale it: each DC it applies to is stpped by 1 hardened DEF, so if you had a 4d6 RKA that did 14 BODY, the 1 hardened def applies to 1DC (or 1 point), so you do (assuming you rolled a 3 stun multiple) (4x13)+(3x1)= 55 stun, rather than the 56 you'd have managed otherwise. Small investment in defence = small benefit.

[The Main Man]

I don't see the problem:

20 pd, 1 of which is 4xhardened.

v 28 stun AP attack

28-1=27 points to get through the (halved) 20 pd = 17 points through.

v 8dice penetrating attack (doing 28 stun, no 1s or 6s)

28-10=18, it let at least 8 stun through so the hardened did not help at all. If the attack had been (say) 4d6 doing 14 stun it should let 4 stun through but the 1 hardened catches that and it lets 3 through.

Against indirect, well, unless it is non-personal then it does not help anyway. If it is a force wall then the rest of the attack is getting through anyway - having one hardened DEF won't help much.

Now against the increased stun multiple I do see the problem, but:

1. I've never seen a convincing argument yet to allow increased stun mutliple.

2. Presumably you could scale it: each DC it applies to is stpped by 1 hardened DEF, so if you had a 4d6 RKA that did 14 BODY, the 1 hardened def applies to 1DC (or 1 point), so you do (assuming you rolled a 3 stun multiple) (4x13)+(3x1)= 55 stun, rather than the 56 you'd have managed otherwise. Small investment in defence = small benefit.

Nice analysis. I think I will rep you. Yeah, I will.
Yet again, I am amazed at my relatively fledgling status (and I am a god to my friends) at the HERO system.

[Sean Waters]

Nice analysis. I think I will rep you. Yeah, I will.
Yet again, I am amazed at my relatively fledgling status (and I am a god to my friends) at the HERO system.

Much obliged but we're all fledglings really.

Well, apart from OddHat. And ghost-angel. And zornwil. And...

OK, you and I, mate: fledglings.

[prestidigitator]

I actually do not like the rule about not being able to buy partially Hardened defenses. Since you can buy multiple Defense powers (even based upon the same Defense Power, such as Armor) that stack, and only some of which are Hardened, the rule becomes rather difficult to enforce. Also, if you don't allow a 1 rPD defense to be purchased solely for the purpose of having a Hardened defense, the question quickly arises: well, what is the minimum then? It seems awfully arbitrary, and I am not convinced it is an easy one for the GM to make a judement call on.

For Armor Piercing it is a totally unnecessary rule. For Penetrating and Indirect, partially Hardened defenses become a problem. I think we could fix this in ways other than simply disallowing partially Hardened defenses, however. We could instead do something like compare the Standard Effect of the attack and the amount of Hardened defense (either total or in the biggest defense available), and apply the attack's Advantage if the attack is bigger. Such a rule would be a heck of a lot easier to arbitrate IMO. (I'm not suggesting exactly that mechanic, but something like it would be nice.)

[DinoMan18]

man you are a god when it comes to this stuff we deal with girls and stuff you just dont seem to care much for so you have WAY more time then use to study on this stuff besides im getting better and so is q-tip man lol but all in all you are the best at this i will atmit this

[ThatDarnCat]

In my games agents tend to use a lot of guns (RKAs) with one or purrhaps two advantages to decrease the effectiveness of armor. Sure they don't do a lot to most PCs, but a good roll or two can take out the min/maxer who buys just enough r defense to stop the average body/stun on a 3d6KA. Allowing this in my game would make Hardened even more desirable, since it could be applied against the ISM instead of the AP or Pen Adv.

Sure most Heroes are immune to the lowly .22, but the normals in the area aren't and that's often the targets of the agents if the Heroes try to stop them, after all do you chase the bad guys and let the civilians die or help the civilians and let the agents escape?

[The Main Man]

I got to thinking about how +1/4 of Hardened cancels out +1/2 of Armor Piercing and Penetrating, but it entirely cancels out Indirect.

What if it required 2 levels of Hardened to cancel the +3/4 Indirect.

Building on that idea, power advantages like Semi-Armor Piercing and Increased Stun Multiplier could be real ace-in-the-holes when facing Hardened foes.

[Frenchman]

I got to thinking about how +1/4 of Hardened cancels out +1/2 of Armor Piercing and Penetrating, but it entirely cancels out Indirect.

What if it required 2 levels of Hardened to cancel the +3/4 Indirect.

Building on that idea, power advantages like Semi-Armor Piercing and Increased Stun Multiplier could be real ace-in-the-holes when facing Hardened foes.

I'd have to say no, just for simplicities sake, but it brings back up another point I'd like to vociferate upon:

The idea that defenses should be 1/2 the cost of attacks - based, I presume, on the idea that characters have to buy twice as many defenses (energy and physical) while they only need to buy one attack.
Hardened at +1/4 is, to me, a bit underpriced as it is - it functions a little like a variable power, in that it can be changed to apply to whatever it need to, and it cancels out around 4x the character points spent on it.
Don't believe me?

Take a 40 point attack (8d6 EB vs. ed) and the 'equivalent' amount of defense should be 20 points (0/20 FF). I'm not saying that they are equal, that one will cancel out the other, or anything like that, I'm just using these as examples for the sake of my argument. Defenses should cost 1/2 what attacks do, so we have a 40 point attack and a 20 point defense.

Now apply AP to the attack and Hardened to the defense. 60 points for 8d6 EB AP, but only 25 points for the 0/20 FF Hardx1.
If we go to double AP and double Hardened, then the difference is 80 points vs 30, and hardened becomes increasingly more cost effective. No-one would seriously consider buying a 20 or 30 point attack with APx4 in any gaming group I've played with, but buying 10 or 15 points of Hardenedx4 has not only been discussed, it has happened.

What the heck is going on?

The problem is that we are applying 1/2 the advantage to 1/2 the cost, which means that hardened costs only 1/4 the amount of AP or PEN, and as little as 1/6 the amount of Indirect.

Do I think this is a problem? Only occasionally, when theres an escalation of AP vs. Hardened - because the cost differences grow exponentially with each stacking of the advantages.

[/rant]

[Hyper-Man]

There seems to be a lot of discussion about Hardened vs. Indirect. You guys do know that about the only defensive powers that Indirect will bypass is Force Wall* and possibly a vehicles defenses? Armor, Force Field and normal PD + ED are all personal defenses and are normally immune to the effects of Indirect by default.

*Has anyone ever seen a Hardened Entangle on a character sheet?

As already pointed out, Hardened is one of those Advantages that requires some forethought when purchased.

It only stops one Flanking* Advantage (*my term, to see explanation see this old rules forum post: re: multiple layers of hardened and Multiple AP/Pen Attacks http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19047&highlight=flanking)
If the number of Flanking Advantages outnumber the levels of Hardened then which Flanking Advantage that is stopped first is a "set" effect (I believe my thread above helped to convince Steve Long to change his previous ruling on this).
Applying Armor Piercing to Teleportation allows it to bypass barriers with the Advantage Cannot Be Escaped With Teleportation (which is a similar but seperate Advantage to Hardened).
If we're going to allow Hardened to stop 1 or 2 levels of Increased Stun Multiplier we might as well allow it to also stop AP Teleporation imho.

[Frenchman]

Armor, Force Field and normal PD + ED are all personal defenses and are normally immune to the effects of Indirect by default.
I disagree. A FF defined as a bubble of force around a character would do nothing to protect them from THIS:

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=499#comic

poor traumatized animals...

[Hugh Neilson]

I disagree. A FF defined as a bubble of force around a character would do nothing to protect them from THIS:

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=499#comic

poor traumatized animals...

That's an NND - it bypasses personal defenses.

[ghost-angel]

I disagree. A FF defined as a bubble of force around a character would do nothing to protect them from THIS:

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=499#comic

poor traumatized animals...

FF is a personal defense. Indirect has no effect on it. As Hugh pointed out the link is a good display of NND; possibly NND;Does Body

[Frenchman]

Knew the NND response was coming (actually expected AVLD), but I thought I'd throw it out there anyways - it seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate, if potentially abusive, use of Indirect at +3/4. Indirect can bypass a force wall, so why not a FF that is defined as an extension of a characters allready existing FW power (Invisible Woman). It can bypass a shield bought as DCV levels - so therefore it makes sense that it can bypass a shield bought as Armor. Really it, as always, boils down to sFX vs sFX. While I agree the comic I referenced would be AVLD or NND (I just got a chuckle out of it) I think it's reasonable for Indirect at the maximum level to bypass a lot of 'personal' defenses, depending on the relative sFX involved. I wouldn't make a character buy an alternate version of their Indirect EB just because FW-Villain has learned how to make a FF-bubble around himself.

[Hyper-Man]

Knew the NND response was coming (actually expected AVLD), but I thought I'd throw it out there anyways - it seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate, if potentially abusive, use of Indirect at +3/4. Indirect can bypass a force wall, so why not a FF that is defined as an extension of a characters allready existing FW power (Invisible Woman). It can bypass a shield bought as DCV levels - so therefore it makes sense that it can bypass a shield bought as Armor. Really it, as always, boils down to sFX vs sFX. While I agree the comic I referenced would be AVLD or NND (I just got a chuckle out of it) I think it's reasonable for Indirect at the maximum level to bypass a lot of 'personal' defenses, depending on the relative sFX involved. I wouldn't make a character buy an alternate version of their Indirect EB just because FW-Villain has learned how to make a FF-bubble around himself.

I have to disagree.

When modeling a shield like that of Captain America it is usually bought through a Accessible Focus with facing and/or skill roll limitations built in regardless of what defensive power is being used (especially personal defenses like Armor).

Making a sfx based argument against this about a character without providing the sfx of the Indirect attack is weak. If you don't want to take the time to properly model a sfx with the rules as is don't then complain that the rules as written are flawed when it appears you are essentially house-ruling without taking into consideration the consequences.

[ghost-angel]

Knew the NND response was coming (actually expected AVLD), but I thought I'd throw it out there anyways - it seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate, if potentially abusive, use of Indirect at +3/4. Indirect can bypass a force wall, so why not a FF that is defined as an extension of a characters allready existing FW power (Invisible Woman). It can bypass a shield bought as DCV levels - so therefore it makes sense that it can bypass a shield bought as Armor. Really it, as always, boils down to sFX vs sFX. While I agree the comic I referenced would be AVLD or NND (I just got a chuckle out of it) I think it's reasonable for Indirect at the maximum level to bypass a lot of 'personal' defenses, depending on the relative sFX involved. I wouldn't make a character buy an alternate version of their Indirect EB just because FW-Villain has learned how to make a FF-bubble around himself.

While it sounds good on screen, and your thoughts are solid.

You have to pick the Powers whose Mechanics model what you are trying to achieve. SFX aside the underlying mechanics are what drives the game - otherwise we would simply move everything to an SFX vs SFX situation and abjucate from there. But we don't, we allow great leeway when SFX interact, but they are not the driving force of How It All Works Together.

The Mechanics allow for a common ground of expectations to work from. If you as the GM decides the SFX chosen for a FF Power due to wording or what have you are enough to allow Indirect to suddenly bypass them you have broken expectations. Now the Group, as a whole, must remember a series of SFX vs SFX situations (Liddium Beams worked this way on Metal Armor, but differently on Tough Skin Armor...) and it becomes basically unplayable.

[Hugh Neilson]

Knew the NND response was coming (actually expected AVLD), but I thought I'd throw it out there anyways - it seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate, if potentially abusive, use of Indirect at +3/4. Indirect can bypass a force wall, so why not a FF that is defined as an extension of a characters allready existing FW power (Invisible Woman).

An alternative interpretation is that IW does not have the Force Field power, but merely surrounds herself with a tight Force Wall. She is always affected by Indirect because her "Invisible force field" power is, mechanically, a Force Wall. In my view, this is the more accurate interpretation.


It can bypass a shield bought as DCV levels - so therefore it makes sense that it can bypass a shield bought as Armor. Really it, as always, boils down to sFX vs sFX.

Both Shields are foci, which I would consider to no longer be "personal defenses".


I think it's reasonable for Indirect at the maximum level to bypass a lot of 'personal' defenses, depending on the relative sFX involved.

I don't. Why should a character paying +3/4 for Indirect, which has its own benefits, get to tack on an AVLD-like effect (only defenses intrinsic to the character's physical body count)? Even assuming this is considered the lesser level of AVLD, and carries a cost of +3/4 rather than the +1 1/2 to apply against an exotic defense, the character is getting two +3/4 advantages for the price of one.

[The Main Man]

While I am fully aware of what Indirect effects, I am now intrigued about Hugh Nielson's comment regarding Foci. The same could probably be said about Independant powers as well.

[Balabanto]

I actually think this is reasonable, if you make the rate one for one. You have to choose between a bunch of things for every level.

Now follow through with me, here. It's unlikely that anyone will harden their defenses more than twice.

1d6 RKA, Autofire, +4 Stun Multiplier. Sure, it becomes +3.

But now let's look at this power. 1d6 RKA, Autofire, Armor Piercing, Penetrating, +2 Stun Multiplier. You have to stop the Penetrating. So that leaves you with AP and +2 Stun Multiplier. You're still screwed.

This is a "Doesn't matter." ruling.

[DinoMan18]

i see your point but who in there right mind would do that thats just an attack for hardened it sucks vrs normal resestanet pd or ed sorry but its just to out there :thumbdown

[ghost-angel]

i see your point but who in there right mind would do that thats just an attack for hardened it sucks vrs normal resestanet pd or ed sorry but its just to out there :thumbdown

Actually its even nastier against nor PD/ED Resistant Defenses, as at least Hardened will mitigate one of the effects.

[The Main Man]

This is a "Doesn't matter." ruling.
That's mostly what I think, too.