Why the dislike for Find Weakness?

[Ragdoll]

I've noticed a general trend to disallow Find Weakness in some of the games I've played in. Is it a popular trend or have I just had like bad luck? =?

*curious*

[Greywind]

I use it. I've never had a problem with it. Armor Piercing on a skill roll. Gets ugly if the attack it is used with already has the AP advantage.

[The Hawk God]

Never had a problem with it myself.

[Ragdoll]

I thought the problem was specifically that you could use it over and over again, with each successful roll it allowed you to half the defenses again, and such. That's one argument I've heard about.

[ghost-angel]

It's effectively a Cumulative Armor Piercing without requiring the Advantage on the Attack.

Even one use of Find Weakness can turn a 12D6 Energy Blast into a 12D6 Armor Piercing Energy Blast.

It's abusable, but not inherently abusive. In campaigns with Active Point and/or Damage Class Caps it could be argued that Find Weakness is a 'bypass' to those.

[Killer Shrike]

I've never had a problem with it per se, and allow it.

[The Main Man]

Don't forget that it takes an Attack action to use, and each successive use upon a single target, whether successful or not, incurs a -2 penalty within the same encounter.

Considering that each level of Find Weakness costs 5 CP apiece while Lack of Weakness is a mere 1 CP per point, I don't see what's wrong with it.

Granted, Overall levels apply to Find Weakness as well, but they cost 10 CP apiece in turn.

[Vulcan]

It's one of those things that a GM has to monitor closely. It can be very abusive if left uncontrolled.

Of course, it's also pretty expensive.... that helps balance it out considerably.

[Starlight]

I've noticed a general trend to disallow Find Weakness in some of the games I've played in. Is it a popular trend or have I just had like bad luck? =?

*curious*

The pragmatic answer, I would suspect, is that Find Weakness makes the GM's job somewhat harder. There's always a certain amount of luck involved in the resolution of any combat. But in general dice luck plays an even handed game and experienced GMs can usually predict how much of a challenge any given opposition will present.

Throwing Find Weakness into the equation can make the luck factor considerably more significant. The tough villain that's designed to give the hero term a good workout can go down in a single hit after player X gets a unlikely two or three successes with Find Weakness. Conversely, player Y fails to make even one successful Find Weakness roll and is then reduced to virtual ineffectiveness during the engagement. Neither of these outcomes is desirable from the GM's viewpoint.

[Hyper-Man]

After about 3 or 4 successful rolls the cumulative AP effect approaches ever closer to becoming a NND effect that is difficult at best to incorporate into established damage class caps.

A more subtle reason that I personally dislike Find Weakness is that it introduces yet another type of defense that players wanting to play 'tough' characters have to consider.

Also, the RAW (rules as written) definition of what is considered 'Resistant Defense' and 'Non-Resistant Defense' with respect to Find Weakness is counter-intuitive and not the same as what stops killing damage.

'Normal' defenses that have been made 'resistant' by the Damage Resistance Power are actually considered to still be 'normal defenses' with respect to Find Weakness!

[lemming]

It's one of those things that can be devastating, or pretty useless in higher powered games. But yes, needs monitoring, like most powers.

[The Main Man]

After about 3 or 4 successful rolls the cumulative AP effect approaches ever closer to becoming a NND effect that is difficult at best to incorporate into established damage class caps.

A more subtle reason that I personally dislike Find Weakness is that it introduces yet another type of defense that players wanting to play 'tough' characters have to consider.

Also, the RAW (rules as written) definition of what is considered 'Resistant Defense' and 'Non-Resistant Defense' with respect to Find Weakness is counter-intuitive and not the same as what stops killing damage.

'Normal' defenses that have been made 'resistant' by the Damage Resistance Power are actually considered to still be 'normal defenses' with respect to Find Weakness!

Not to get too OT, but I think that that's an indirect reason that Resistant Defenses should just be a Power Advantage: because then there do not need to be inherently Resistant Defenses.

[Balabanto]

I dislike Find Weakness because if you want this power, it should be armor piercing with an activation roll, not a separate power.

Sniping and Find Weakness is absolutely disgusting.

THe problem with Find Weakness is that if you take one minute to study your target, in most games, the character's average defenses will be 2-3 points. That's right. 2-3 points. The base time for Find Weakness is a half phase, so the rules for the time chart now apply.

So, on pre phase 12, I find weakness. Keep in mind, this doesn't trigger Danger Sense, because I am not attacking him.

Phase 12, I find weakness twice more. He now has 1/8 of his base defense. That means if he started at 32, he's got 4 now.

Phase 2 or 3. BANG.

Target is down.

Next action. BANG.

Target is dead. Make a new character.

No other ability in the game, that's right, in the entire game, is so valuble for so little point cost.

[ghost-angel]

I would have someone using Find Weakness trigger Danger Sense personally.

Also, you will need a pretty high roll for 3 successful attempts. That's not an insignificant number of Character Points used. Though, granted, it can be devastating when used.

[The Main Man]

I dislike Find Weakness because if you want this power, it should be armor piercing with an activation roll, not a separate power.

Sniping and Find Weakness is absolutely disgusting.

THe problem with Find Weakness is that if you take one minute to study your target, in most games, the character's average defenses will be 2-3 points. That's right. 2-3 points. The base time for Find Weakness is a half phase, so the rules for the time chart now apply.

So, on pre phase 12, I find weakness. Keep in mind, this doesn't trigger Danger Sense, because I am not attacking him.

Phase 12, I find weakness twice more. He now has 1/8 of his base defense. That means if he started at 32, he's got 4 now.

Phase 2 or 3. BANG.

Target is down.

Next action. BANG.

Target is dead. Make a new character.

No other ability in the game, that's right, in the entire game, is so valuble for so little point cost.

This is assuming that you have PSL's versus the Range Modifier (since you are sniping) and that you are taking the same amount of time to prepare each usage so as to counteract the cumulate -2 penalty, right?

On a similar note, this is assuming that they do not have any levels of the far cheaper Lack of Weakness nor are you accounting for the fact that Find Weakness still costs a bundle, especially for characters with lower point costs.

It's interesting how you dismissed Danger Sense in your example, since the character is preparing to attack, which, speaking for myself here, would qualify as endangering a character but that judgment aside, you still did not bring up Danger Sense again as if to say that it never would matter in such a situation.

IOW, you should have left out Danger Sense entirely as an extenuating circumstance.

Methinks that we don't see eye to eye on Find Weakness.

[The Main Man]

I would have someone using Find Weakness trigger Danger Sense personally.

Also, you will need a pretty high roll for 3 successful attempts. That's not an insignificant number of Character Points used. Though, granted, it can be devastating when used.

Dang, beat me to it and in fewer words.

[ideasmith]

Don't forget that it takes an Attack action to use,

The rule book says "Half Phase Action". (5ER page 174)

[The Main Man]

The rule book says "Half Phase Action". (5ER page 174)
Yep, I checked it afterwards and had a slice of humble pie.

It was... okay.:straight:

[Ragdoll]

Okay. Wow. O.o What about this as an example. An energy blaster. He's got an 8d6 EB and purchased Find Weakness 11- with his EB for 10 points.

Would that be considered too powerful for say a 250 point game?

[ghost-angel]

Probably not.

Compare it to the following:

Energy Blast 8D6; plus Armor Piercing for Energy Blast; Linked: Energy Blast; Activation: 11-; Can Only Be Used When Character Takes Full Phase Action

For a Full Phase Action the character has an 11- chance of having an 8D6 Armor Piercing Attack.

If he pushes things for his luck, he could get a second Action in with Find Weakness at 9- to go against 1/4 of the Target's defenses. Chances are that second one won't work. So you've got a moderately similar build.

What you really have to ask yourself is; will the occasional ability to have an 8D6 Armor Piercing attack break your campaign?

If no - you're good to go.
If yes - you might want to talk to the Player about what else they can do with those 10 Points.

Also, ask the Player if they intend to increase their Find Weakness Roll or not, i.e. ask them for their future plans.

[The Main Man]

I might be jumping to conclusions here, but I'm guessing that a campaign with a Find Weakness sniper problem might also find itself at odds with Mentalist snipers as well.

That is to say that many things can be abused but the GM should exercise caution with such things in the game.

Besides, Find Weakness is a "!" power for a reason.

[Peregrine]

The main objection I'm hearing amounts to "it takes control away from the GM". And, quite frankly, it comes with a tone of "the GM should have more control over the outcome".

As a separate point, if you wanted to replace Find Weakness with a fully equivalent Advantage, what would you need to add to AP with an activation roll to handle the multiple attempts function. Cumulative?

[hfergus]

My main problem with find weakness is that it can be used again and again to further reduce defense. Yes, it is a "!" power. Yes, it gets harder and harder. Yes, it is not cheap. I allow it, but never allow sniping with it. If this is thrown out, the opponent can attack you while you are finding weakness. This balances it some. I normally say you have to be close to use it and that helps.

[Hyper-Man]

...

As a separate point, if you wanted to replace Find Weakness with a fully equivalent Advantage, what would you need to add to AP with an activation roll to handle the multiple attempts function. Cumulative?

It's probably easier to start at the other extreme with the following:

Naked Advantage: NND, Does Body
Limitations on the Naked Advantage: Requires Skill Roll, Gradual Effect.

[Peregrine]

<snip>I allow it, but never allow sniping with it. If this is thrown out, the opponent can attack you while you are finding weakness. This balances it some. I normally say you have to be close to use it and that helps.

Not picking on you, because others in this thread have expressed similar sentiments. But this is a downside to the cinematic tone of HERO in general (and I say this as a proponent of cinematic gaming). Realistic tactics calls for the use of "remote firepower" - snipers, indirect fire, etc. Removing the possibility of such tactics produces a more cinematic combat, which is sometimes more viscerally satisfying, but ignores the lessons of reality. Such firepower is used in reality because it is extraordinarily effective - which is why so many people want to disallow it in gaming!

[Snapdragon]

I've always looked at 'find weakness' in our games as kind of a martial artist's best friend vs. big nasty bricks and huge armored tanks. I can't think of a single character, however, that has been allowed to buy an energy blast with a find weakness, so possibly this is our GM's way of balancing the abuse possiblity out a little more.

[ghost-angel]

The main objection I'm hearing amounts to "it takes control away from the GM". And, quite frankly, it comes with a tone of "the GM should have more control over the outcome".

I agree with this sentiment.


On, sniping - in some games I don't mind it. In some games I completely expect it. In some games it's extremely out of character.

In a Fantasy Game, it's difficult to snipe in genre, but if you find a way I don't see an issue.
In a Modern Game, I fully expect at least one sniper, possibly two.
In a Superhero Game it breaks genre for me - and I don't think it's appropriate at all here.

I've never had a problem Mechanically with Find Weakness. Sometimes it's just a good Genre choice. Is about the only complaint I could possibly muster.

[Korren]

After about 3 or 4 successful rolls the cumulative AP effect approaches ever closer to becoming a NND effect that is difficult at best to incorporate into established damage class caps.

An NND that does BODY damage, if I remember the rules correctly. Find Weakness doesn't turn an attack into Stun Only, I believe.

Just my 2 cents,
Korren

[steamteck]

Its way too much bang for your buck in high defense games IMO. especially if you're willing to invest a few points in a higher roll. Aesthetically it just feels cheaty to me also. I know that's just me. I think the only time I've used it is for a sort of analyze flaw power vs static objects. My wife had a character with it but she bought it off because it felt wrong to her.

I don't like armor piercing much either and think instead of halving defense, you should buy how many defense points it ignores. I just haven't been able to settle on a cost.

[Lucius]

Its way too much bang for your buck in high defense games IMO. especially if you're willing to invest a few points in a higher roll. Aesthetically it just feels cheaty to me also. I know that's just me. I think the only time I've used it is for a sort of analyze flaw power vs static objects. My wife had a character with it but she bought it off because it felt wrong to her.

I don't like armor piercing much either and think instead of halving defense, you should buy how many defense points it ignores. I just haven't been able to settle on a cost.

Try it this way. Assuming, say, an Energy Blast:

Energy Blast +3d6 (standard effect: 9 STUN, 3 BODY) (15 Active Points); Limited Power Only for bypassing Defenses (-1/2) (10 Real Points)

Energy Blast +3d6 (standard effect: 9 STUN, 3 BODY) (15 Active Points); Limited Power Only count BODY, and only for bypassing Defenses (-1 1/2) (6 Real Points)

Doesn't add to actual damage, but bypasses a set amount of Defense, which is what you asked for.

Lucius Alexander

House of the Palindromedary

[The Main Man]

What about the Piercing Advantage (pg. 96) from Dark Champions?

It sounds right up your alley, steamteck.

[ghost-angel]

I know one of the things I've consistently used it for is a Demolitions Expert.

Find Weakness: rDefenses, Objects Only.

Spend some time and you can properly place charges to detonate a building without needing to kludge a stupidly high attack....

[The Main Man]

Ooh, I never thought of that one before.

I love it.

[Hyper-Man]

I know one of the things I've consistently used it for is a Demolitions Expert.

Find Weakness: rDefenses, Objects Only.

Spend some time and you can properly place charges to detonate a building without needing to kludge a stupidly high attack....

But the Demolitions Skill (5er page 58) already covers this:



where to plant explosives for maximum effect, how to estimate the amount of explosives necessary to destroy structures, and which types of explosives are best for which jobs.

I don't care how much of an expert a character is at demolitions, he is not going to be able to use just a firecracker to take down a bridge. But allowing Find Weakness to be used this way suggests that a character with it could.

[ghost-angel]

It does, you're right. But Demolitions is normally a Heroic Level Skill - and we've usually considered that portion part of Normal Demo and Normal Explosives.

Whole different ball game in a Champions Game and you want to take out a space station, have a limited amount of explosives, or are really Just That Good.

Call it Superskill Demolitions if you want. Since we're in the Champions Forum, that's the default assumption I'm working under. And quite frankly - once you introduce dudes with eyebeams I leave reality in the toybox.

[steamteck]

What about the Piercing Advantage (pg. 96) from Dark Champions?

It sounds right up your alley, steamteck.

I don't have Dark Champions but if it is what I was talking about pity didn't get included in the main ruleset.

[The Main Man]

I'm pretty sure that it was concocted after the main rulebook (but then again, before the revised 5th edition).

Reciting from memory here:

Piercing is an adder that directly reduces a targets defenses point by point.

It costs 2 CP for Normal attacks, 3 for everything else (Killing, Flash, Mental, Power) if my memory serves me correctly.

It was originally concocted for bullets with slightly higher penetration power, but it can easily be used for greater effect in other games.

It is a "Stop Sign" ability though, since it basically allows a character to slice through defenses like a hot knife through butter.

Lastly, it could be purchases separately from a power with an Activation Roll to simulate that whole "success ratio" effect.

[Southern Cross]

An idea I had about balancing Find Weakness was this:adding it's cost to the characters DC when determining damage maximums.
Example: Ironclad has a 60 STR and Find Weakness with Punch on 11-.
For Rule of DC purposes,he is considered to have 14DCs for his main attack (his Punch).

[The Main Man]

That's actually a pretty good idea: it's like the opposite of applying Damage Reduction to look at adjusted BODY/STUN scores.

[Greywind]

The GM can always limit the stacking use of Find Weakness. Sniping with Find Weakness can get ugly, yes, but consider what would happen to, say, Dr. Doom, if the Punisher managed to put a bullet through his eye hole. Doom doesn't run around constantly with his force field up.

[Vulcan]

I dislike Find Weakness because if you want this power, it should be armor piercing with an activation roll, not a separate power.

Sniping and Find Weakness is absolutely disgusting.

THe problem with Find Weakness is that if you take one minute to study your target, in most games, the character's average defenses will be 2-3 points. That's right. 2-3 points. The base time for Find Weakness is a half phase, so the rules for the time chart now apply.

So, on pre phase 12, I find weakness. Keep in mind, this doesn't trigger Danger Sense, because I am not attacking him.

Phase 12, I find weakness twice more. He now has 1/8 of his base defense. That means if he started at 32, he's got 4 now.

Phase 2 or 3. BANG.

Target is down.

Next action. BANG.

Target is dead. Make a new character.

No other ability in the game, that's right, in the entire game, is so valuble for so little point cost.

20 points for an 11- roll is hardly what I'd call a little point cost. And it wouldn't be particularly reliable either.

To be able to reliably be able to do what you describe, one would need a minimum of an 18- roll, for 55 points. That's getting to be a pretty hefty investment of points there, and I'd expect it to be pretty dangerous.

And thus need close monitoring.

[Trebuchet]

An idea I had about balancing Find Weakness was this:adding it's cost to the characters DC when determining damage maximums.
Example: Ironclad has a 60 STR and Find Weakness with Punch on 11-.
For Rule of DC purposes,he is considered to have 14DCs for his main attack (his Punch).If we still used damage caps in our Champions campaign I think we'd use a house rule like this. It's a common sense solution to avoid FW becoming potentially unbalancing.

Only one PC in our game has FW. Even though he has a fairly good OCV (DEX 33) we haven't found it to be a problem. For one thing, opponents tough enough he needs to use it on tend to have LoW and/or Damage Reduction; nor does he have it on his biggest attack. It takes very little LoW to render the theoretical 1/4 - 1/8 - etc defense progression moot.

[Matt the Bruins]

Personally, I only really have a problem with the stacking aspect. As a one-successful-roll-allowed power, it would be fine.

[Vulcan]

Personally, I only really have a problem with the stacking aspect. As a one-successful-roll-allowed power, it would be fine.

Then it wouldn't be Find Weakness, would it? It would just be Armor Piercing with an activation roll.

If that's what you want to use as Find Weakness in your games, that's fine. I'll just monitor the characters in my games for abuse, thank you!

[ideasmith]

Then it wouldn't be Find Weakness, would it? It would just be Armor Piercing with an activation roll.


It would actually be Armor Piercing with an Activation Roll and with a different counter (Lack of Weakness in place of Hardened).

[BNakagawa]

I don't like it because it's an ugly, orphan mechanic that can be replaced by something more elegant and integrated into the game system.

[Balabanto]

You guys aren't reading the time chart rules correctly. He doesn't have to study for another minute to bring it up to 12-. Once his roll is 14-, it's 14-. This assumes a base 11-, the minimum that you're allowed to buy with the power. He then rolls Find Weakness. Having studied the target for a minute, his roll is now 12-. He doesn't have to do it twice. That's a convenient misreading of the way the time chart governs skill rolls. It implies that it's a separate use of the skill against a different target, which it isn't. It's simply an acquired penalty against his new base roll of 14-, because that's what Find Weakness says.

The problem here is that a 14- is something like 90 percent of the time, and a 12- is something like 68 percent of the time. A 10-, which is the next number on the chart, is more or less about 52.5 percent of the time.

My real issue here, of course, is the cost of Armor Piercing relative to this power. If you buy Armor Piercing, you get the shaft, because it's more expensive to harden your defenses than it is to buy Lack of Weakness (A VERY difficult power to justify for most PC's). And, Armor Piercing only works once ever. Find Weakness works until you stop finding weakness.

The higher powered the game, the more mighty Find Weakness becomes. Steamteck is absolutely right. When your average defenses are 8, halving them to 4 is not that exciting.

When your average defenses are 50, halving them to 25 is REALLY exciting.

And in a game like that, Find Weakness is dirt cheap.

[jtelson]

Find Weakness isn't a skill; The time chart's irrelevant, PSL's don't apply only Overall Skill Levels or the 5 point per +1 buy up matter.

The power description is clear how extra time applies to the power, it does give the GM the leaway to make extra time very powerful but I've never seen one apply that option.

You can only apply Find Weakness to 1 type of Defense at a time (PD/ED or Armor/Force Field or Exotic <if allowed>)

I think people are tending to react to the Find Weakness from 1-2 editions ago rather than the current version which is considerably less formidable.

[fbdaury]

Well, they are all kinds of personal problems that different groups have with the Hero rles, you may have just played with a number of GMs that either do not like the FW power for personal reasonsor they have seen the power abused inplay before and did not want to see this repeated. The sad thing is that like all the powers and rules in the system, FW is only really abusive if the GM allows it to be, whether through misinformation as to how the power works or because they do not incorporate into their games the fact that the power is being used. But thats my 2 cents, YMMV.

[steamteck]

20 points for an 11- roll is hardly what I'd call a little point cost. And it wouldn't be particularly reliable either.

To be able to reliably be able to do what you describe, one would need a minimum of an 18- roll, for 55 points. That's getting to be a pretty hefty investment of points there, and I'd expect it to be pretty dangerous.

And thus need close monitoring.

Actually if he just wants it for his sniper rifle according to my book you're 10 points too high. For either its quite a bang for your buck. Anyway, I, as mentioned, have an issue with the whole halving mechanic.

Maybe it should decrease your defense by how much you make the roll by?

[pinecone]

I've noticed a general trend to disallow Find Weakness in some of the games I've played in. Is it a popular trend or have I just had like bad luck? =?

*curious*
Some people have the heebie jeebies about it....probibly just bad luck, though things like this run in cycles so it may be a local "freak out" going on....

[bubba smith]

maybe they think theonly character who should have find weakness is karnak the shatterer from marvels inhumans

[Vulcan]

My real issue here, of course, is the cost of Armor Piercing relative to this power. If you buy Armor Piercing, you get the shaft, because it's more expensive to harden your defenses than it is to buy Lack of Weakness (A VERY difficult power to justify for most PC's).

10 points LoW, OIF Trenchcoat is suggested in Dark Champions.

If a trenchcoat is not your style, then try a cape: 10 points LoW, OIF Cape, Does not work on shots from the front.

Darkness or Light Power characters can take it quite easily, as can anyone with a glowing FF: 10 points LoW (You can't see me clearly enough to Find Weakness), Nonpersistent.

It's a breeze for speedsters and martial artists, especially ones with Defense Maneuver 4: 5 points LoW (I don't hold still that long), Nonpersistent (for DM 4 or speedsters) or Linked to DM (for the rest).

Lack of Weakness isn't just about not having a weak spot, it can also be about making the weak spot hard to find!

[Lord Liaden]

I went back and reread the description of Find Weakness from the rulebook, as well as the FAQ for it.

First of all, the only Modifier listed for it which grants a bonus to the Find Weakness roll is "Preparing a Phase," which grants +1. There's nothing in the book or FAQ about any further benefit from taking longer time on the Time Chart. Find Weakness is a Power, not a Skill, so there's no compelling reason to apply rules for Skill use to Find Weakness.

Second, uses of Find Weakness cumulatively halving the Defenses of a particular target cease for that battle the first time the attacker fails his Find Weakness Roll against a target. Moreover, if someone fails any roll to Find Weakness for a target, including their first attempt, they may make NO further attempts against that target during that battle.

Third, regarding Find Weakness and sniping, the Range Modifier applies to make it more difficult to succeed at the roll as distance increases. According to the FAQ, Enhanced Senses or Penalty Skill Levels do NOT improve your chances with Find Weakness. If you want to offset the Range Modifier you have to buy 5-point levels specifically for each +1 with Find Weakness as per normal, but can take a -1 Limitation if they're only vs. the Range Modifier; or else buy No Range Modifier as an Advantage on Find Weakness. (Combat Skill Levels in general don't affect Find Weakness rolls, but 10-point Overall Levels can be used.)

[lemming]

I wanted to post that, but didn't feel like doing the research that would of confirmed my thoughts. :D

Find Weakness has changed a bit since it's first publication.

It's still one of the powers that is very useful, or not very, depending on campaign.

[lapsedgamer]

Not picking on you, because others in this thread have expressed similar sentiments. But this is a downside to the cinematic tone of HERO in general (and I say this as a proponent of cinematic gaming). Realistic tactics calls for the use of "remote firepower" - snipers, indirect fire, etc. Removing the possibility of such tactics produces a more cinematic combat, which is sometimes more viscerally satisfying, but ignores the lessons of reality. Such firepower is used in reality because it is extraordinarily effective - which is why so many people want to disallow it in gaming!


I agree with this sentiment.


On, sniping - in some games I don't mind it. In some games I completely expect it. In some games it's extremely out of character.

In a Fantasy Game, it's difficult to snipe in genre, but if you find a way I don't see an issue.
In a Modern Game, I fully expect at least one sniper, possibly two.
In a Superhero Game it breaks genre for me - and I don't think it's appropriate at all here.

I've never had a problem Mechanically with Find Weakness. Sometimes it's just a good Genre choice. Is about the only complaint I could possibly muster.

Yes. Exactly. It is a genre by genre thing. In comics, a sniper is usually a plot mechanic. No one wants to see the hero drilled in the head with a Barrett .50 cal with no opportunity to avoid it. Sure, it would be the smart thing for the average mook to do, but it isn't in genre. How many times would Batman be dead already of any one of his foes had adopted this mentality?


I know one of the things I've consistently used it for is a Demolitions Expert.

Find Weakness: rDefenses, Objects Only.

Spend some time and you can properly place charges to detonate a building without needing to kludge a stupidly high attack....

I like this. Repped.


The GM can always limit the stacking use of Find Weakness. Sniping with Find Weakness can get ugly, yes, but consider what would happen to, say, Dr. Doom, if the Punisher managed to put a bullet through his eye hole. Doom doesn't run around constantly with his force field up.

See my comments above. This is not possible in a comic book world. Any writer who turned that script in to me if I were a Marvel editor would be very disappointed in my reply. If I were a GM and someone made a character who was essentially a highly trained normal armed with a "real weapon" who could kill Dr. Destroyer with a punk move like that, I would disallow it. Even in a rubber science laden, quasi-mystical setting like the CU, there has to be an established pecking order. Unless you are going for high comedy, Squirrel Girl does not beat Dr. Doom. The Punisher Kills the Marvel Universe was a joke, and I hope everyone took it that way, as entertaining as it was.


Find Weakness isn't a skill; The time chart's irrelevant, PSL's don't apply only Overall Skill Levels or the 5 point per +1 buy up matter.

The power description is clear how extra time applies to the power, it does give the GM the leaway to make extra time very powerful but I've never seen one apply that option.

You can only apply Find Weakness to 1 type of Defense at a time (PD/ED or Armor/Force Field or Exotic <if allowed>)

I think people are tending to react to the Find Weakness from 1-2 editions ago rather than the current version which is considerably less formidable.


I went back and reread the description of Find Weakness from the rulebook, as well as the FAQ for it.

First of all, the only Modifier listed for it which grants a bonus to the Find Weakness roll is "Preparing a Phase," which grants +1. There's nothing in the book or FAQ about any further benefit from taking longer time on the Time Chart. Find Weakness is a Power, not a Skill, so there's no compelling reason to apply rules for Skill use to Find Weakness.

Second, uses of Find Weakness cumulatively halving the Defenses of a particular target cease for that battle the first time the attacker fails his Find Weakness Roll against a target. Moreover, if someone fails any roll to Find Weakness for a target, including their first attempt, they may make NO further attempts against that target during that battle.

Third, regarding Find Weakness and sniping, the Range Modifier applies to make it more difficult to succeed at the roll as distance increases. According to the FAQ, Enhanced Senses or Penalty Skill Levels do NOT improve your chances with Find Weakness. If you want to offset the Range Modifier you have to buy 5-point levels specifically for each +1 with Find Weakness as per normal, but can take a -1 Limitation if they're only vs. the Range Modifier; or else buy No Range Modifier as an Advantage on Find Weakness. (Combat Skill Levels in general don't affect Find Weakness rolls, but 10-point Overall Levels can be used.)

You gentlemen are exactly right. The only major problem I see with FW is its potential to be used with an attack that is already Armor Piercing.

[korovan]

But the Demolitions Skill (5er page 58) already covers this:



I don't care how much of an expert a character is at demolitions, he is not going to be able to use just a firecracker to take down a bridge. But allowing Find Weakness to be used this way suggests that a character with it could.


Actually, no. All Find Weakness would do, at its very best, would be to eliminate all or nearly all of the bridge's Defense. Its entire BODY would remain to be destroyed, which would take rather more than a firecracker...

[Hyper-Man]

Actually, no. All Find Weakness would do, at its very best, would be to eliminate all or nearly all of the bridge's Defense. Its entire BODY would remain to be destroyed, which would take rather more than a firecracker...

Have you ever built a house of cards or played jenga? Removing a single key component can bring the whole thing down because gravity does most of the work. There is still a minimum amount of effect needed to exceed the 'base defense' of the weakest common material. A perfect example of this is the demolition expert from the movie "Force 10 From Navorone". He states that he simply does not have enough explosives left to take out the bridge no matter how expertly placed. His leap of brilliance was to take out the dam instead.

The point that I was attempting to make was that Find Weakness is already a simplified form of 'targeting a weak spot' which is what the Demolitions skill already does anyway. The optional Hit Location rules also do this on the character level. Neither actually reduce the defenses of the targets except to target the lowest amount of those defenses in cases of partial coverage/activate on X- 'armor'.

The key issue here is not all that different than the old Stun Lottery debate with Killing Attacks. Similar to rolling above average numbers on the killing attack Body and/or Stun Multiple dice, the successful use of Find Weakness can multiply the effectiveness of the attack it's used with far beyond the value of the points invested in Find Weakness alone. A character with the ability will almost always attempt to use it to make their chosen attack gain a NND + Does Body like advantage. The fact that this doesn't happen all the time doesn't discount the fact that it does sometimes happen AND that some level of success is fairly common.

[Lucius]

I'm pretty sure that it was concocted after the main rulebook (but then again, before the revised 5th edition).


On the contrary. Steve Long used his Resurrection, only on dead rules, power, to bring back a Power from Champions III.

Lucius Alexander

Dead Palindromedary

[steamteck]

I'm pretty sure that it was concocted after the main rulebook (but then again, before the revised 5th edition).

Reciting from memory here:

Piercing is an adder that directly reduces a targets defenses point by point.

It costs 2 CP for Normal attacks, 3 for everything else (Killing, Flash, Mental, Power) if my memory serves me correctly.

It was originally concocted for bullets with slightly higher penetration power, but it can easily be used for greater effect in other games.

It is a "Stop Sign" ability though, since it basically allows a character to slice through defenses like a hot knife through butter.

Lastly, it could be purchases separately from a power with an Activation Roll to simulate that whole "success ratio" effect.


Thanks , I do like that much much better. I just didn't think dark champions had much to offer me. It didn't occur to me there would be decent new/old mechanics like the above.

Checking my old books I can find 1st,2nd and 4th editions but no 3rd so I guess I missed piercing the 1st time around.

[Marcus Impudite]

Suprisingly, it hasn't come up much in my games. Nevertheless, I've read up on the rules regarding Find Weakness and am confident I can handle it if it does.

[Kenn]

Thanks , I do like that much much better. I just didn't think dark champions had much to offer me. It didn't occur to me there would be decent new/old mechanics like the above.

Checking my old books I can find 1st,2nd and 4th editions but no 3rd so I guess I missed piercing the 1st time around.

It was in Champions III when I first saw it.

[Greywind]

See my comments above. This is not possible in a comic book world. Any writer who turned that script in to me if I were a Marvel editor would be very disappointed in my reply. If I were a GM and someone made a character who was essentially a highly trained normal armed with a "real weapon" who could kill Dr. Destroyer with a punk move like that, I would disallow it. Even in a rubber science laden, quasi-mystical setting like the CU, there has to be an established pecking order. Unless you are going for high comedy, Squirrel Girl does not beat Dr. Doom. The Punisher Kills the Marvel Universe was a joke, and I hope everyone took it that way, as entertaining as it was. Yes it is possible and at the same time, easily explained away. How many versions of LMDs did Doom have fully programmed to believe they were Doom?

[Spence]

Well, they are all kinds of personal problems that different groups have with the Hero rles, you may have just played with a number of GMs that either do not like the FW power for personal reasonsor they have seen the power abused inplay before and did not want to see this repeated. The sad thing is that like all the powers and rules in the system, FW is only really abusive if the GM allows it to be, whether through misinformation as to how the power works or because they do not incorporate into their games the fact that the power is being used. But thats my 2 cents, YMMV.

And a shiny 2 cents it is.:thumbup: And well said.

In the end, it is like every other thing in Hero. A game mechanic designed to achieve a specific game effect. If the GM doesn’t allow or see the effect as being a fit for the campaign, the GM can disallow it. Depending on the style/genre/etc of a game many items can be disallowed or mandated as must haves. In the end it really doesn’t matter because pretty much any concept can be built via a different path. If a person gets locked into the mechanic because they think it has some big advantage rather than arriving at it from the effect, then there is something more going on.

and that is my 2 cents :D

[The Main Man]

In my defense, I first entered the world of HERO with the 5th edition.

But it's all good.

[pinecone]

I went back and reread the description of Find Weakness from the rulebook, as well as the FAQ for it.

First of all, the only Modifier listed for it which grants a bonus to the Find Weakness roll is "Preparing a Phase," which grants +1. There's nothing in the book or FAQ about any further benefit from taking longer time on the Time Chart. Find Weakness is a Power, not a Skill, so there's no compelling reason to apply rules for Skill use to Find Weakness.

Second, uses of Find Weakness cumulatively halving the Defenses of a particular target cease for that battle the first time the attacker fails his Find Weakness Roll against a target. Moreover, if someone fails any roll to Find Weakness for a target, including their first attempt, they may make NO further attempts against that target during that battle.

Third, regarding Find Weakness and sniping, the Range Modifier applies to make it more difficult to succeed at the roll as distance increases. According to the FAQ, Enhanced Senses or Penalty Skill Levels do NOT improve your chances with Find Weakness. If you want to offset the Range Modifier you have to buy 5-point levels specifically for each +1 with Find Weakness as per normal, but can take a -1 Limitation if they're only vs. the Range Modifier; or else buy No Range Modifier as an Advantage on Find Weakness. (Combat Skill Levels in general don't affect Find Weakness rolls, but 10-point Overall Levels can be used.)

Thanx...so often when a claim is made that a rule is "broken", it's because it's being put in use in a broken way....Personaly I use a "soft" damage cap to start and I add FW points to offence to check...

[lapsedgamer]

Yes it is possible and at the same time, easily explained away. How many versions of LMDs did Doom have fully programmed to believe they were Doom?

We're saying the same thing. An LMD is not Dr. Doom. A Destroyer-Bot is not Dr. Destroyer. So I am okay with the PC thinking he got a kill on DD with his cheap move only to tell him no later. That's a valid form of disallowing it. I am just more partial to just saying no at the outset so no one's panties get bunched after the fact.

[Greywind]

Nothing wrong with a player being yanked up short during play. It's usually referred to as "a learning experience." Part and parcel of playing.

[Peregrine]

Nothing wrong with a GM being yanked up short during play. It's usually referred to as "a learning experience." Part and parcel of game mastering.

Surely it goes both ways, eh?

[Greywind]

Surely it goes both ways, eh?Does it? Isn't a GM also a player?

Misdirection is a GM plot device. How that misdirection occurs falls under dramatic license.

[Vulcan]

And the people who dislike Find Weakness get the final laugh. Steve has officially pulled the power from 6E. :(

[steamteck]

And the people who dislike Find Weakness get the final laugh. Steve has officially pulled the power from 6E. :(


kind of a microcosm of laughing for all those who disliked this and that seems to me but I'm feeling pretty bummed about what was yanked out of 6th.

[Vulcan]

Right there with you, Steameteck.

[Trebuchet]

I guess I'm one of the strange ones. I never had a problem with it as a GM, have never played a PC who had it (although I once designed one; a MA "brick breaker" named Argent who had FW on a 25-), and don't particularly mourn its loss in 6E.

I can see where it could be a headache in some campaigns, but it never was in games I played in.

[incrdbil]

As a GM, FW was an extra complicating factor in balancing. Came up with various methods, such as a limitation only allowing one level, or the ability for an opponent to 'shake' the FW roll..but in the end, it was worries about how to balance the offensive effectiveness of the character that just made me happy when no player bothered taking it. In a game of doubling for effectiveness, the straight halving of effectiveness stood out as oddball.

I'm content that, in a future game, if someone really wanted that ability, they could by it in the form of extra damage classes, or an Aid to attack powers, based on a resisted skill roll and other limitation to simulate an ability to bypass defenses.

Or just buy dice of damage and say that their strength comes from the characters ability to see weaknesses, and that the actual energy or damage output of the attack is less than it seems. (Maybe this would indicate an FX of the attack doing less damage when the player misses, or hits the wrong target).

[Metaphysician]

I never liked it because it was headache to properly balance with DCs of damage. FW could be weak or strong, narrow or broad. . . but in a totally different manner than attacks are.

[Hyper-Man]

The relationship of Find Weakness to combat in HERO reminds me of the board game Axis & Allies when the German player spends all their money on Industrial Tech in the hopes of getting Heavy Bombers. If they succeed they are almost assured to win the game eventually. It has some of the same issues as the Killing Attack Stun Lotto.

[lemming]

I guess I'm one of the strange ones. I never had a problem with it as a GM, have never played a PC who had it (although I once designed one; a MA "brick breaker" named Argent who had FW on a 25-), and don't particularly mourn its loss in 6E.

I can see where it could be a headache in some campaigns, but it never was in games I played in.

It seemed to be less of an issue with our high powered games, than with the low powered games. Probably because all the bricks had lots of Lack and Damage Reduction, but the FW rolls were in a few cases in the 30s.

But with you, I'm not mourning the loss, but not going "Yay! It's gone!"

And it's not like games couldn't have it if the GM wants it.

[AmadanNaBriona]

I've always kinda liked the idea of Find Weakness, but honestly I mostly do Heroic level games with a full load of combat options and Find Weakness has always been kinda wonky for my tastes when you add in the options. It really only ever worked for me when using the vanilla set of 4 color basic combat rules, and I'm not gonna be too put out having to rebuild it as Deadly Blow RSR, Piercing RSR, or some other construct, so hearing that it's going away isn't a really big deal for me.
I'd have preferred that the orphan mechanic get adopted into the toolbox family, broken apart into components, and those components balanced to work with other things in the toolbox, but that's a pretty tall order and I don't mind leaving the orphan out to die instead as long as I can find another little toolbox resident to do the job.

Dickens HERO ;)

[Lord Liaden]

I always figured Find Weakness was inspired by the Marvel Comics character Karnak, of the Inhumans. Karnak is pretty much the pro from Dover in finding weak spots in anything and anyone, to the point of shattering tanks with a single precision blow.

The "feel" of Find Weakness (as separate from the straight mechanics of it) always seemed to me suited to characters who are extraordinarily skilled in combat, rather than simply wielding a lot of force; the Bullseyes and Karate Kids of your campaign world. You can construct something similar using Armor Piercing or Penetrating or Piercing, but IMHO the feel isn't the same.

[Hugh Neilson]

The problem with FW is that it augments attacks at a flat cost. It seems much more useful to halve defenses against a 12d6 attack than against a 2d6 attack, yet FW costs the same for both.

Sean Waters has suggested, with mathematical backup elsewhere, that simply allowing multiple levels of AP to halve defenses multiple times. This seems reasonable. You could then build some Naked Advantages to recreate FW if desired.

Without reprinting all the backup, consider that a character buying APx2 (quartering defenses under this model) could spend the same on an NND with the defense being hardened PD or hardened ED, and a character buying AP x4 (defenses now 1/16, so negligible) could have made that ND also do BOD, ignnoring defenses entirely.

[ghost-angel]

I'm a firm Meh.

I neither liked nor disliked the Mechanic. It felt weird in some games, worked in others, and was just a PITA in a rare few.

On some level, I lament the loss of a tool in the box though. Always hurts when that happens. But, I don't lament it enough to give it more than a few seconds thought.

[Zed-F]

We'll just have to see what new, better balanced tools Steve plans to add in the toolbox to replace it. :)

[jtelson]

I always figured Find Weakness was inspired by the Marvel Comics character Karnak, of the Inhumans. Karnak is pretty much the pro from Dover in finding weak spots in anything and anyone, to the point of shattering tanks with a single precision blow.

The "feel" of Find Weakness (as separate from the straight mechanics of it) always seemed to me suited to characters who are extraordinarily skilled in combat, rather than simply wielding a lot of force; the Bullseyes and Karate Kids of your campaign world. You can construct something similar using Armor Piercing or Penetrating or Piercing, but IMHO the feel isn't the same.

Find Weakness always puts me to thinking of Bullseye; Although I must admit of late I've tended to model "Precision" hits as damage adds, allowing even playing cards to be deadly - without all the Make a roll, maneuver, make another roll business.

[Matt the Bruins]

And the people who dislike Find Weakness get the final laugh. Steve has officially pulled the power from 6E.

I won't be sorry to see it go, but I'd have been glad to keep it if we also kept some of the other things that are changing. As a single power, it's easy enough to just not allow if you're not fond of it.

[Pattern Ghost]

To me, Find Weakness going kind of simplifies things in that it frees up five or so points on average for bricks who are only dumping the points on an off chance they may face an opponent with a rather exotic power. When a defense is way more common on builds than the attack it defends against, something is just a little out of whack.

I wouldn't have minded if it were left in, either, but ditching it does simplify things.

[Kenn]

I don't like it. I don't use it. I discourage my players from using it. And ditto with Lack of Weakness.

That said, I think removing it from the RAW is a mistake that unfairly penalises the people who do use it, like it, and are happy with it.

[Pattern Ghost]

I don't think removing it becomes unfair unless the base game mechanics change so much that they won't permit you to simply plug the prior version of the power back into the game.

In order for someone to like the power, they must already have the rules for the power either in print, or memorized. So, dropping it from the book does nothing to remove their ability to put it right back IN their games.

Unless the rules change so much that the power won't work. Which I doubt.