Heroic END, Weapon STR Minimums, Multiple Attack, Autofire and GUNS

[Hyper-Man]

Note that the END costs that are imposed by taking the Strength Minimum Limitation can be HIGHER than those imposed by taking the Costs Endurance Limitation.  Strength Minimums can also be worth more than the Costs Endurance Limitation (-1/2).  Example: A 9 STR Minimum applied to a "gun" where STR does not add damage is worth a total (-1) Limitation.

 

From 6e2 page 199:

STRENGTH MINIMUM
In Heroic campaigns, melee weapons built with HKA and HA have a Strength Minimum that defines the minimum STR required to use them properly. STR Min is an optional rule; the GM shouldn’t use it if he doesn’t want to, or can use it purely as a way of defining weapons in his campaign rather than a Limitation. It shouldn’t be used in Superheroic campaigns. The STR Minimum rules apply to both Normal Damage and Killing Damage weapons.

A weapon’s STR Minimum isn’t the minimum STR required to lift it or wield it — it’s the minimum STR needed to wield it effectively. A character with 5 STR is fully capable of picking up a broadsword, and can even swing it around in combat if he wants to. But it takes a 12 STR to wield a broadsword effectively — to use it in combat Phase after Phase; to make it go exactly where you want it to go; to control its motion, momentum, and aim with precision. Thus, it has a 12 STR Minimum.

When a character lacks the STR to use a weapon effectively, he suffers a -1 OCV and -1 DC penalty for every 5 points (or fraction thereof) his STR is below the STR Minimum. Conversely, a character can add +1 Damage Class to a melee weapon’s damage for every 5 full points by which his STR exceeds the STR Minimum. See Adding Damage, 6E2 99, for further information, including rules on adding damage to weapons bought with Advantages.

Typically when a character adds damage to a weapon with the STR Minimum rules, he can no more than double the base Damage Classes of the weapon used. However, at the GM’s option he can do more damage than that, but the weapon also takes the full amount of damage it does to the target (and thus probably breaks).

For some types of weapons, it’s not appropriate for a character to add damage from STR, even though he needs a certain level of STR to wield the weapon effectively. In that case, the STR Minimum Limitation is worth an additional ½ Limitation value. Characters still suffer OCV and DC penalties if they don’t meet the STR Minimum for such a weapon, but can never add DCs no matter how much STR they use.

Characters can also apply STR Minimum to Ranged weapons, such as bows, crossbows, and guns. However, those weapons are built with Blast or RKA, neither of which add damage from STR. Therefore characters can never add damage to these weapons by using extra STR; they can only suffer the OCV and DC penalties for having too little STR. Ranged weapons do not get an additional Limitation for this.

Wielding weapons costs Endurance, but the END cost depends on the STR used, not the Active Points the weapon is built on: 1 END for every 10 STR used (or 5 STR in some Heroic campaigns). Weapons themselves are built with Reduced Endurance (0 END; +½).

Example: Brak’s younger brother Drak the Barbarian has 18 STR. When wielding a dagger (1d6-1, or 2 DCs; STR Min 8), he takes no penalty for using the weapon. In fact, he can add up to 2 DCs to the dagger’s damage, raising its DC from 1d6-1 to 1d6+1. Unless the GM permits otherwise, he can’t raise the damage any higher (by doing a Haymaker, for example) because he’s already at twice the weapon’s Damage Classes.

 

Later Drak tries to use a huge trollish war axe (STR Min 28). Because his STR is 10 below the STR Minimum, he’s at -2 OCV and -2 DCs every time he attacks with the axe.

 

Modifiers To STR Minima
Using Two Hands: If a character uses two hands to wield a weapon that normally only requires one, reduce the weapon’s STR Minimum by 3.

Using One Hand: If a character uses a one-and-a-half-handed weapon with one hand, add +2 to the STR Minimum (or, in the case of guns and other weapons for which the STR Minimum doesn’t affect damage, impose a -1 OCV penalty for one-handed use). If he uses a two-handed weapon with one hand, add +3 to the STR Minimum (or impose a -2 OCV penalty for guns and the like).

Autofire: Autofire weapons have a +5 STR Minimum unless fired in single-shot mode (or thrown one at a time).

Bipod: A weapon fired from a bipod has a -10 STR Minimum. (A weapon which can only be fired from a weapons mount shouldn’t be built with STR Minimum at all.)

Braced: When a character Braces (see 6E2 60) while using a Ranged weapon, subtract 5 from the weapon’s STR Min.

Calculating STR Minima
STR Minimum is a Limitation. The STR required to wield the weapon effectively determines the Limitation’s value (see accompanying table).

To determine the proper STR Minimum for a weapon, consider its nature, size, mass, and unwieldiness (if any). A light, slim rapier has a lower STR Minimum than a big, heavy, awkward club. The weapons lists in this chapter provide guidelines for appropriate STR Minima for various types of weapons.

 

 

From 6e1 page 367:

A power that has Charges does not cost END to use. If the character wants a power with Charges to use END, he can apply the Costs Endurance (-½) Limitation. A character does not get any additional or separate Limitation value if he takes Charges for a power that ordinarily costs no END (such as Life Support).

 

From 6e1 page 374:

Costs Endurance
Value:
-¼ if power only costs END to activate;
-½ if power costs END every Phase the character uses it;
-½ if it costs END to maintain an Instant Power after use

 

HM

 

[Hyper-Man]

I don't think that Firearms should cost END to use (whether per shot or per phase). We've never played with that in over 15 years of Hero games, I never even knew that was a thing. If that means building them with Reduced END (0 END) like melee weapons are built, then so be it. In Heroic games you don't pay the points anyways. I don't see why Firearms should cost END to use accurately when a sword or battle axe doesn't. 

 

Now if a GM was going for gritty realism I could see an argument for all weapons (Guns & Melee) costing Long Term END that could slowly add up if a character was in enough prolonged combat situations during a day. 

 

Like Old Man mentioned above, blowing through 32 rounds of ammo on fully automatic in Uzi takes not even 5 seconds (their standard rate of fire is 600 rounds per minute). I'm not in great shape, I smoke a pack of cigarettes a day and rarely exercise, if I'd guess my END would hardly be above 20, yet I didn't pass out or collapse after emptying a clip from an uzi. I was sore from the recoil the next day though. 

 

I guess if a "rules" explanation is really needed, then maybe Casual STR could be used to counter (all/some of) the END cost from the STR Min for using firearms and melee weapons? 

 

I agree that this is essentially the way I've always played it in the past as well. But I am a firm believer that a House Rule is only as good as one's understanding of the Base Rule(s) that it's intended to modify.  Regardless of Steve's reply above I believe the proper interpretation of the rule with respect to 'guns' would be to apply the END cost for meeting STR Minimums exactly 1 time per Phase.  My John Wick build also includes a Naked 3-shot Autofire that he can apply to semi-automatic guns and it costs him 1 END to use it. It would cost END per use but that would only make a difference in cases where Multiple Attack and Autofire were combined in a single Phase.

 

Example:

John sees 3 armed guards ahead.  His player chooses to use Multiple Attack to "shoot" all 3 targets during this Phase.  He also chooses to use his Rapid Attack and Rapid Autofire Skills to combine his Quick Fire ability (Naked Autofire w/Semi-Auto of opportunity) with the Multiple Attack to fire 2 shots at each target guard.  His OCV modifier is -4 (for 2 targets after the 1st in the Multiple Attack) and if he makes his roll by +2 for each target they'll each get hit by 2 shots. And since the 2nd shot per target is using the Autofire rules, the Multiple Attack sequence would only be broken by a "miss" if both shots on a single target missed.

 

If no Naked Reduced END builds are applied, then the END cost for his actions during this Phase would be 6 END (or 5 if he used the Brace Maneuver).  3 For using 14 STR (9 Minimum for his 9mm HK P30L with +5 STR added for Autofire) plus 3 for using the Naked Advantage Autofire "Power" 3 times (1 END per use).

 

HM

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Strength Minimum and HTH weapons.

 

I think the movie Rob Roy makes a great case for their use costing END in the final fight between Rob using a heavy "Claymore" and Archibald using a much lighter Rapier.

 

https://gradingfightscenes.com/category/rob-roy/

http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?12078-Rob-Roy-fighting-scene-What-swords

 

HM

[Surrealone]

The recent Champions forum thread HELP! Is this power/maneuver combo OP (over powered) started me thinking about a similar setup I had created for John Wick for 6e. 

 

Specifically, I started thinking about the END costs in a Heroic level game where STR costs 1 END per 5 points of STR used.  So a weapon that has a STR Minimum of 10 means at least 2 END per attack made with it.  Now, if the question was involving swinging an HTH weapon like a sword or a staff that seems to make sense.  Add in the rules for Multiple Attack (the 6e version of Sweep) and a character making multiple attacks per Phase can very quickly spend more END than their RECovery in less than a TURN.  But what about when using Ranged weapons like guns where the STR Minimum doesn't do anything that actually affects damage but is primarily about 'controlling the weapon when fired'? 

 

AFAIK, the use of Multiple Attack with a gun still means paying END for all attack attempts. So given a typical 9mm handgun with a 9-10 STR minimum means 2 END per shot fired.  And what about Autofire as a Naked Advantage only with guns?  Does that still require the 2 END per shot fired?

 

Anyway, to address those concerns I added the following two upgrades to the John Wick build linked to above:

4 Shooting Stances: Reduced Endurance (0 END; Naked Advantage; +1/2) for up to 17 Active Points of STR (8 Active Points); Limited Power - Only for firearm STR Minimums (-1)

[Notes: STR normally costs 1 END per 5 STR used in Heroic games. Examples include: C.A.R. System (Center Axis Relock), Weaver Stance and Isosceles Stance.] - END=0

 

I also upgraded Reduced Endurance to 0 END on the following.

17 Quick Fire: Autofire (3 shots; Naked Advantage; +1/4) for up to 60 Active Points of Any Semi-Automatic Weapon of Opportunity, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1) (30 Active Points); OIF (Any Semi-Automatic Weapon of Opportunity; -1/2), Concentration (1/2 DCV; -1/4)

[Notes: Autofire imposes an additional +5 STR Minimum to any weapon used. This can be offset by using the Brace Maneuver.] - END=0

 

Do these seem like overkill?

 

Comments welcome.

 

HM

As a certified NRA Instructor & Range Safety Officer, I can tell you that the real-world application of shooting stances is to promote accuracy -- through either the addition of stability while shooting or through recoil mitigation (and often, through a combination of both).  Thus, shooting stances being used to reduce endurance makes zero sense to me...

 

In my mind, the logical application of shooting stances/positions in Hero would be to offset penalties (i.e. using PSL's).  For example, shooting prone with a rifle in the real world helps offsets range-based shooting penalties because you've got a hyper-stable platform to shoot from with minimal interference from your body.  Shooting with the same rifle in a seated position provides less of an offset for range-based shooting penalties since more of your body is involved in the platform from which you're shooting, meaning more potential for error than a prone position -- but less than a standing stance with the same rifle.  You get the idea.

 

The same sort of thing would apply for auto-fire, except the promotion of accuracy in this case occurs through the use of a stance to effectively transfer recoil energy through the body to the ground while resisting muzzle rise with the muscles.  Thus, I would think stance-based PSLs are again the right approach but, in this case, they'd apply not toward range penalties, but, instead, to auto-fire penalties.

 

I see absolutely no reason that stances would impact endurance costs...

[Hyper-Man]

FWIW I already included PSL's vs. Recoil.  I was only using stances as a description for the Naked Reduced END Power.

 

6 +2 with Handguns
10 +2 with Small Arms
20 +2 with All Attacks
24 +2 Overall Skill Levels
12 +4 to offset Hit Location modifiers with all attacks
[Notes: This could be replaced with the Deadly Blow or Weapon Master Talents if Hit Locations are not being used.]
10 +4 to offset Hit Location modifiers with all attacks (12 Active Points); Required Hands One-And-A-Half-Handed (-1/4)
[Notes: From 6e2 p200 - Characters normally use One-And-A-Half-Handed Weapons (“1½H”) with two hands; their listed STR Minima assumes two-handed use. However, if necessary characters can use them one-handed without too much difficulty. If a character uses the weapon with only one hand, increase its STR Minimum by +2 (or impose a -1 OCV penalty for weapons for which the STR Minimum Cannot Add Damage). 1 Handed use with guns means only +3 vs. Hit Locations. 1 Handed use with Martial Arts means 15 base STR or +3 vs. Hit Locations.]
4 +2 to offset Recoil modifiers vs. a single target when using autofire or multiple attacks with a gun
[Notes: HSEG6e p103 & DC5e p194 - The Recoil Rules impose an additional cumulative -1 OCV penalty for each shot after the first fired with Autofire or a Multiple Attack when made against a single target.]
6 +3 to offset the DCV penalty for being prone

 

 

Any opinion on the END costs according to RAW?

 

HM

[Surrealone]

Any opinion on the END costs according to RAW?

 

 

Yes.  You should pay the END for the STR minimum once per phase, as Cantriped pointed out.  After all, shooting a firearm is NOT a STR-based attack (for which you can increase damage by adding your strength to the attack), so you should not be paying END for STR use on a per-shot basis like you would if you were putting that STR behind a multiple-attack with a knife and sword to increase the damage of each.

 

 

I personally believe Steve's answer is a little overboard considering the text I quoted as well as the description of the weapon categories themselves. He also gave an answer regarding the combination of Passing Strike (a kind of martial Move By) and an Autofire HA stating that Rapid Autofire would be required and I cannot find anything to support that in the text. I'm going to chalk up both answers to Steve not having full access to his books as he notes in both threads.

You and I agree on this and, frankly, I think Steve probably needs to take a closer look at (and revise) his answer.  I can tell you from personal experience shooting a (fully automatic) Glock 18 with a loaded-out 33 round magazine ... that it didn't sap me of END to do it.  Assuming a STR-minimum of 8 on that pistol and 2-handed use reducing it to a STR-minimum of 5, in a Heroic 1 END per 5 STR game, Steve's ruling of END payment per shot would have cost me 33 END.  As a competent normal with average physical stats, I likely only have 25 END, max. 

 

I certainly didn't run my body out of END when I unloaded a 33 round magazine all at once, and I absolutely did NOT go to 0 END and burn STUN in lieu of END while shooting that firearm.  But that's what Steve's ruling on this say should have happened to me...

 

Plainly put, STR minimums on firearms should NOT be considered STR-based attacks, IMHO.  It just doesn't make sense...

[Hyper-Man]

Thanks for this topic.  I now realize that in my game I need to increase my character`s STR before I upgrade their weapon to have Autofire, otherwise they won`t have the STR needed to control their machine pistol.

 

Note that using the Brace Maneuver reduces the STR Minimum by 5 points.

 

*I've updated my version of John Wick based on the the useful comments in this thread.

 

HM

[bigdamnhero]

I certainly didn't run my body out of END when I unloaded a 33 round magazine all at once, and I absolutely did NOT go to 0 END and burn STUN in lieu of END while shooting that firearm.  But that's what Steve's ruling on this say should have happened to me...

Amen. I don't shoot much anymore, but used to do it all the time for fun and on the job. (Military & law enforcement.) One of my standard drills was to empty a 15-round pistol clip, fast-reload, and empty the second clip. I could do it in well under 12 seconds (ie 1 Turn), and while doing it accurately took some learning, getting tired was never a concern. I was in decent shape then, but 60 END should've burned through my END, most of my STUN, and probably knocked me out. But I wasn't even winded afterwards. And to be clear, I was no John Wick. (At my best I was maybe Agent-level in Hero terms, and that's being generous.)

 

Frankly for anyone who's actually been trained to shoot (ie - Weapon Familiarity) and in halfway decent shape (ie - meets STR Min), even charging END once per Phase seems high; I can see charging it for game balance purposes, but anything beyond that makes the opposite of sense. Movement is way more tiring than pulling triggers; the idea that when doing a half-move-and-shoot the shooting costs more END than the movement is frankly absurd.

 

Steve knows guns, but I don't think he thought this one through.

[Surrealone]

Movement is way more tiring than pulling triggers; the idea that when doing a half-move-and-shoot the shooting costs more END than the movement is frankly absurd.

 

Steve knows guns, but I don't think he thought this one through.

And an 'Amen'  to you, too.  The scoot portion of a shoot-and-scoot activity is FAR more taxing than the shoot portion.

[Hyper-Man]

So now that we appear to have a consensus on STR Minimums and guns what about another type of common weapon with a similar setup in RAW....

 

Bows are considered muscle powered weapons unlike guns, but they still do not allow strong characters to do extra damage when their STR is far above the STR Minimum needed to use the Bow.  Should they get additional value to the Limitation for this or does this balance out with the near silence of firing an arrow from a bow vs. the noise of firing a bullet from a gun?

 

HM

[mallet]

Well bows (and their strings) would have a maximum tension (STR) that could be used to use them, anything greater would/might cause them to break or snap, so I am fine with STR not adding to the damage as any extra STR above the STR Minimum to use could cause them to break. So in a sense the build already incorporates the "max damage" a bow could do when used to its maximum effect (ie, meeting the STR minimum).

 

But building a Bow with extra damage to simulate it being stronger and allowing the user to add STR to the damage done might work. Maybe something like:

 

Strong Bow: +1 damage (5pts); Only if user STR is +5 over the STR minimum for the weapon (-1/2) (real cost:3)

 

or something like that. 

 

Of course this question also opens another kettle of worms like, should Bows also be built with the Range Based On Strength or a variation of that. 

[womble]

Well bows (and their strings) would have a maximum tension (STR) that could be used to use them, anything greater would/might cause them to break or snap, so I am fine with STR not adding to the damage as any extra STR above the STR Minimum to use could cause them to break. So in a sense the build already incorporates the "max damage" a bow could do when used to its maximum effect (ie, meeting the STR minimum).

 

But building a Bow with extra damage to simulate it being stronger and allowing the user to add STR to the damage done might work. Maybe something like:

 

Strong Bow: +1 damage (5pts); Only if user STR is +5 over the STR minimum for the weapon (-1/2) (real cost:3)

 

or something like that. 

 

Of course this question also opens another kettle of worms like, should Bows also be built with the Range Based On Strength or a variation of that. 

If the bow is stronger, its STR Min is higher to go along with any extra damage. Bows are fixed input systems: you pull yea hard for such a distance and that force x distance energy is imparted (less inefficiencies) to the projectile when you loose.

 

To get more out of a bow, you either have to pull harder (and it's a spring, its resistance isn't variable) or pull further (which risks damaging the thing). Compound bows can have adjustable springs, but if it's set to "He-Man" draw weight "Shrimp kid" just isn't going to be able to pull it to full draw. My bow is a 30lb draw weight at 28". I can run a fair few arrows through that before I tire. I doubt I could even draw a 120lb longbow the full "cloth yard" to my ear once. The "strong" bow simply isn't usable by someone who doesn't get close to its STRMin.

[bigdamnhero]

I guess technically modern adjustable compound bows could be built with STR Adds Damage at least up to a point, and with the provision that the draw weight has to be pre-set. (Doesn't take more than a few seconds IIRC, but not something you'd want to do in combat.)

[Surrealone]

My bow is a 30lb draw weight at 28". I can run a fair few arrows through that before I tire. I doubt I could even draw a 120lb longbow the full "cloth yard" to my ear once.

I'm glad you gave a concrete example akin to my 33-round full auto 9mm magazine dump with a Glock 18.

 

Why?  Because what you just demonstrated is that with bows, the energy (a la END) is spent on the draw, not on the release.  Thus, I would expect a GM to have bow users pay END with each draw of the string, even if there's no release.  In fact, I would argue that a slow release of tension on the string (to deliberately avoid the release of an arrow) is STR use, too ... and should cost END again unless it occurs in the same Phase (given the rules on STR use during the same Phase) ... since you have to use the muscles again, but in reverse, to release that tension slowly.

 

Thoughts?

[womble]

I'm glad you gave a concrete example akin to my 33-round full auto 9mm magazine dump with a Glock 18.

 

Why?  Because what you just demonstrated is that with bows, the energy (a la END) is spent on the draw, not on the release.  Thus, I would expect a GM to have bow users pay END with each draw of the string, even if there's no release.  In fact, I would argue that a slow release of tension on the string (to deliberately avoid the release of an arrow) is STR use, too ... and should cost END again unless it occurs in the same Phase (given the rules on STR use during the same Phase) ... since you have to use the muscles again, but in reverse, to release that tension slowly.

 

Thoughts?

I'd agree completely. END cost should be proportionate to the damage the thing's doing (its AP), and paid for every shot the rules call for. I'm not sure what the rationale for using your STR multiple times in the same Phase only counting as using it once for END purposes is, but if it's a thing in the rules... Still and all, though, a stronger bow might do more damage, but if you're looking for "realistic", it should have a higher STRMin and also start to become impossible for someone who is well below that STRMin to use at all. 

[Hyper-Man]

I'd agree completely. END cost should be proportionate to the damage the thing's doing (its AP), and paid for every shot the rules call for. I'm not sure what the rationale for using your STR multiple times in the same Phase only counting as using it once for END purposes is, but if it's a thing in the rules... Still and all, though, a stronger bow might do more damage, but if you're looking for "realistic", it should have a higher STRMin and also start to become impossible for someone who is well below that STRMin to use at all. 

 

Your first statement would be correct if the Costs END Limitation were taken in addition to Charges (which make an ability 0 END by default).  However, the END cost being incurred here is a direct result of the STR Minimum Limitation and therefore is based on the specific STR value of that Limitation chosen.

 

I agree with everything else you said.

 

HM

[bigdamnhero]

Why?  Because what you just demonstrated is that with bows, the energy (a la END) is spent on the draw, not on the release.  Thus, I would expect a GM to have bow users pay END with each draw of the string, even if there's no release.  In fact, I would argue that a slow release of tension on the string (to deliberately avoid the release of an arrow) is STR use, too ... and should cost END again unless it occurs in the same Phase (given the rules on STR use during the same Phase) ... since you have to use the muscles again, but in reverse, to release that tension slowly.

That's a reasonable way of looking at it. But remember that unlike in movies & TV with historical bows archers rarely draw back and hold before firing, because you have to continue to exert STR the entire time and after awhile your hand is going to start to shake and throw your aim off. You don't actually draw until you're ready to release and then you release as soon as possible, which means whether the END is paid on the draw or the release is kindof moot. Modern compound bows are different and do allow you to hold the bow drawn with minimal (but not zero) effort, so there the distinction makes sense. But from a game mechanics standpoint, I'm not sure the distinction would come up often enough to be worth worrying about.

 

I'm not sure what the rationale for using your STR multiple times in the same Phase only counting as using it once for END purposes is, but if it's a thing in the rules...

One way to look at it is that while mechanically we abstract 1 Phase's worth of combat to a single Attack Roll, it doesn't necessarily mean only one punch/blow/blast/whatever is made. In melee combat, it doesn't make sense that a 3-SPD fighter only swings his sword once every 4 seconds, let alone that a 4-DEX martial artist can only throw one punch every 3 seconds. So we bundle together X-seconds worth of fighting, call it one Attack Roll and pay END accordingly. Charging more END for things like Multiple Attack represents the fact that the attacker is pushing themselves harder than normal.

 

While that reasoning can translate well to ranged energy blasts that use END (ie you're paying END for a Phase's worth of blasts that we abstract into a single roll), the abstraction starts to break down a bit when Charges are thrown into the mix. The idea that a trained gunman can only fire one bullet accurately every 3-4 seconds is nonsense, and even doubling or tripling that with Multiple Attack or Naked Autofire, etc still doesn't approach reality. This problem isn't unique to Hero of course; I don't know of any RPG that handles this well.

 

I have long thought one solution would be to break the assumption that 1 bullet = 1 Charge and instead abstract ammunition a bit so that a Charge represents the number of bullets typically fired in a Phase, all of which are abstracted into single Attack & Damage Rolls. So a pistol with a 12-round magazine might only have 3 or 4 Charges in game terms. But of course agreeing on exactly how many bullets equal a Charge could get tricky.

[dsatow]

Personally, I think Steve is wrong on this point mainly because his books are packed.  If a standard soldier had to pay end for each shot of an autofire burst then a standard 20 end/4 recovery soldier with a 10 strength (2 end) would fire a M16 twice (10 total shots - 20 end) before having to rest.  Worse for the machine gunner in two phases (10 shots per burst, 40 END or 20 end and 10d6 NND).

 

WWII US soldier: "Hey sarge should we rush the bunker".

WWII US Sgt.: "Wait soldier."

<hears two bursts from the machine gun>

WWII US Sgt.:"OK, move out, the guy's unconscious by now!"