Jump to content

Feedback on a House Rule idea - Luck


dsatow

Recommended Posts

Well, you're paying for variable effect for a LOT of things in HERO. Damage, Flash effect, Transformation, even skill rolls are no guarantee of success. I don't see the variable nature of Luck or Unluck as a big issue.

 

As far as the OP proposal to change them to rerolls - I'm quite fine with that, though it tones down the intention of the power from "unreliable but potentially very powerful" to "a bit more reliable but mundane". Nothing wrong with that - it's a matter of taste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You're paying for a possibility.

More like one is OVERpaying for a possibility.  Why buy 1d6 of Luck at 5CP when you can just buy an additional 1d6 that's reliable (yielding at least 1 point of improvement) ... or 5 more in a characteristic that makes an improved skill roll reliable?  "Oh, because it can apply to more than one thing," you say? Well how about a 5 point level that's reliable?

 

Therein lies the problem.  If you're going to pay for the possibility ... and that possibility has the potential to yield a null effect (i.e. no improvement) ... then it should be MUCH cheaper than things that are reliable in the effects that they generate.  Anything else and you're not getting what you paid for ... when you pay book/RAW costs for luck in older versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More like one is OVERpaying for a possibility.  Why buy 1d6 of Luck at 5CP when you can just buy an additional 1d6 that's reliable (yielding at least 1 point of improvement) ... or 5 more in a characteristic that makes an improved skill roll reliable?  "Oh, because it can apply to more than one thing," you say? Well how about a 5 point level that's reliable?

 

Therein lies the problem.  If you're going to pay for the possibility ... and that possibility has the potential to yield a null effect (i.e. no improvement) ... then it should be MUCH cheaper than things that are reliable in the effects that they generate.  Anything else and you're not getting what you paid for ... when you pay book/RAW costs for luck in older versions.

 

The potential Luck payoff increases as you add dice, just like damage powers. 1d6 Luck has a 16.66% chance of doing SOMETHING useful when you're in trouble. How much use is a 1d6 Blast? Or even a 3d6 one? Luck is also Persistent, which counts for something points wise, and covers situations that no other power can touch. And while there's always the chance of a null result, there's also no actual defence against its effects. The GM decides on what happens, but something appropriate to the Luck roll DOES have to happen.

 

It USED to be that there was a 3d6 cap on Luck, but that changed with 4e. So if I'm reading things right, you could have a 10d6 Luck power that would quite reliably haul your butt out of trouble. You can also now build it like any other Special power, with limitations and advantages, unlike previous editions where it was either a Skill (3e) or a Talent (4e). (I can't speak for 5e since I skipped it)

 

i.e. The Gambler rubs his Lucky Rabbit's Foot:

 

10d6 Luck, Extra Time Full Phase (-1/2), Time Limit 1 Minute (-2), IAF Rabbit Foot (-1/2) (it's not obvious that he's activated it or that it's working, but it hangs on a chain around his neck). 12 points.

 

I'd call that good value for points.

 

Possibly the main issue for some people is that the power is totally in the hands of the GM. You can never demand a Luck roll; the GM decides if one is to be made, and what the result is. If this is not your bag, it's not the power for you. Build it with a power pool triggered by "Being In Trouble" or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The potential Luck payoff increases as you add dice, just like damage powers. 

​.....

I'd call that good value for points.

 

i.e. The two main issues I see are:

  • If you spend points for Luck, your character should have -some- guaranteed improvement (relative to the amount spent) due to it -- no matter the size of the luck pool -- since that's what you paid points for.  However, RAW Luck and even this House Rule Luck doesn't do that and, instead, hitches the character's wagon to the player's at-the-table luckiness in die roll, rather than leaving the improvement hitched to the CP spent, like it should be.
  • If people are absolutely OK with the wagon being hitched to the player's at-the-table luckiness in die rolls (which I am not), then cost should at a minimum be based on the reliability/probability of improvement, rather than a flat cost per die.  Failure to do this means that a small (i.e. 1d6, 2d6) Luck dice pool is grossly expensive per die for the result (or rather, lack thereof) it is likely to bring ... while a large Luck dice pool (i.e. 10d6, 12d6) is very cheap per die for the result it is likely to bring.  That's clearly broken ... in a game where you supposedly get what you pay for

 

In this game, if you paid points for it, it should be able to be counted upon to do something for the character -- but per RAW and even in this House Rule version, it can do absolutely nothing (even when brought into play by the GM).

 

If you're going to assert that one is paying for a chance that Luck will do something (which I don't particularly care for ... and have never liked), then I'm absolutely going to assert that the cost should be based on the chance/probability/reliability of the character getting an improvement.  That's just not the case with RAW Luck ... and it's not the case with this House Rule Luck, either ... which is something that I feel should be addressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i.e. The two main issues I see are:

  • If you spend points for Luck, your character should have -some- guaranteed improvement (relative to the amount spent) due to it -- no matter the size of the luck pool -- since that's what you paid points for.  However, RAW Luck and even this House Rule Luck doesn't do that and, instead, hitches the character's wagon to the player's at-the-table luckiness in die roll, rather than leaving the improvement hitched to the CP spent, like it should be.

If you spend points for an Attack power, should the character be guaranteed to hit his opponent every time he uses it? Because if it misses, he gets NO benefit from the use of the power.

 

If you spend points for Invisibility, should the character be guaranteed that his opponent won't be able to detect him? Because if the opponent has another Targeting sense that the character is not Invisible to, then the power is giving him NO benefit.

 

If you spend points for a Defensive power, should the character be guaranteed to get at least some protection from any attack? Because if the opponent uses an NND or AVAD against a defense that the character doesn't have, he gets NO benefit from the defense he paid for.

 

  • If people are absolutely OK with the wagon being hitched to the player's at-the-table luckiness in die rolls (which I am not), then cost should at a minimum be based on the reliability/probability of improvement, rather than a flat cost per die.  Failure to do this means that a small (i.e. 1d6, 2d6) Luck dice pool is grossly expensive per die for the result (or rather, lack thereof) it is likely to bring ... while a large Luck dice pool (i.e. 10d6, 12d6) is very cheap per die for the result it is likely to bring.  That's clearly broken ... in a game where you supposedly get what you pay for

 

It has nothing to do with the player's at-the-table luck, any more than any other power that requires him to roll dice - which is most of them, this is HERO after all.

 

A character with 1d6 of luck has a 1 in 6 chance of something lucky happening in certain circumstances - regardless of how lucky the player is. About one-sixth of the time, when it matters, the character will get a benefit.  What do you want for only 5 points?

 

If five points gives a benefit 1/6 of the time, that's like buying a 30-point power and only getting 1/6 of the benefit.  That's fair for 5 points, isn't it?  So the benefit of one pip of luck should be about the value of a 30-point power.  If a character has more than one die of luck, and rolls multiple 6's, then the benefit gained should be about the value of a 60-point power for two 6's, a 90-point power for three 6's, etc.

 

Luck most definitely gives a benefit.  It just doesn't give a benefit all the time.  And the same is true of every power in this game.

 

Nothing is guaranteed in this game.  This isn't chess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, Hero System does have a power that does something similar to what you want: Probability Alteration.  The power is on page 34 of the Advanced Player's Guide 2.  The power allows re-rolls at a rate of 1 re-roll per day for 5 points.  There are various Advantages based on whether you have to keep the re-roll or not or whether you get to keep rolling until you get a better result.  There are also Advantages that allow the number of re-rolls to refresh more frequently than once per day.

 

However, if you really want to keep the Luck Power, Advanced Player's Guide 1 (pg. 105) gives you multiple alternate applications of Luck that are more concrete and mechanical, which, if I am reading your post correctly, is what you are looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you spend points for a Defensive power, should the character be guaranteed to get at least some protection from any attack? Because if the opponent uses an NND or AVAD against a defense that the character doesn't have, he gets NO benefit from the defense he paid for.

 

To be honest, if I spent points on a defense power, I expect the defense to apply appropriately.  If I pay for rPD, on an attack which uses PD as a defense, I expect some value for the points I paid for it.

 

If the opponent uses an NND or AVAD against a defense the character doesn't have, he gets every point's worth of defense he paid for against that attack which is zero.  

 

If I need to be lucky and roll the luck and get nothing, am I truly lucky?  Also Luck is the only power in the game which when bought for a character is never controlled by the character.  Luck's use is always at the GM's discretion.  While you can use a blast as long as you have end and you can use PD whenever you like, the GM has discretion on when luck comes into play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, Hero System does have a power that does something similar to what you want: Probability Alteration.  The power is on page 34 of the Advanced Player's Guide 2.  The power allows re-rolls at a rate of 1 re-roll per day for 5 points.  There are various Advantages based on whether you have to keep the re-roll or not or whether you get to keep rolling until you get a better result.  There are also Advantages that allow the number of re-rolls to refresh more frequently than once per day.

 

However, if you really want to keep the Luck Power, Advanced Player's Guide 1 (pg. 105) gives you multiple alternate applications of Luck that are more concrete and mechanical, which, if I am reading your post correctly, is what you are looking for.

I'll take a look at the APG.  I might not have the APG2.  Thanks for the reference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you spend points for an Attack power, should the character be guaranteed to hit his opponent every time he uses it? Because if it misses, he gets NO benefit from the use of the power.

Contextually your retort makes no sense.  Why?  Because if I spent points for an attack power I -am- guaranteed that the attack power will have the intended effect.  Let's use Blast, for example.  Even if I miss my target, my Blast still hits -something- and does what it's designed to do (blast that something).  Just as blast has a very specific effect (blasting whatever is hit ... even if the intended target is missed), so does Luck ... and that specific effect is improvement of the situation.  So, for your analogy to make sense, even if I roll badly (as with the Blast), a poor Luck roll should still generate some improvement of some kind, even if it's not what I intended.  But that's not how Luck works in RAW or this House Rule, is it?  Hence your retort

 

 

If you spend points for Invisibility, should the character be guaranteed that his opponent won't be able to detect him? Because if the opponent has another Targeting sense that the character is not Invisible to, then the power is giving him NO benefit.

Since you're comparing unlike things, let's at lease be thorough about it: If you spend points for Invisibility to a given sense group, you ARE guaranteed that someone won't detect you with that sense group.  So, if you spend points on Luck, you should be guaranteed some sort of improvement unless, like Invisibility, someone's got something that counters it.

 

 

It has nothing to do with the player's at-the-table luck, any more than any other power that requires him to roll dice - which is most of them, this is HERO after all.

...

 

A character with 1d6 of luck has a 1 in 6 chance of something lucky happening in certain circumstances - regardless of how lucky the player is.

Umm, you do realize these two sentences conflict with one another, right?  If not, I'll show you how/why.  It is the player (not the character) who rolls that 1d6 die ... and thus, it is the player's luck of the die roll that influences the outcome for the character.  Thus, it absolutely has everything to do with the player's at-the-table luck.  And because you can get no result, it has more bearing than, say, a blast ... since even if you roll a 1 on 1d6 of blast you will do 0 body and 1 STUN of output applied to any existing defenses.  (Whereas if you roll a 1 on that 1d6 of Luck ... you get ... no output/improvement, at all.)

 

 

 

Nothing is guaranteed in this game.  This isn't chess.

Agreed this isn't chess, however, there are absolutely guaranteed things in this game.  For example, if you spend 1 CP on a favour, you are guaranteed to have a favor you can call in.  I only need to point out one veriable example (as I just did) to debunk your assertion that 'nothing is guaranteed in this game', but there are plenty more.  If you spend 1 CP on END you are guaranteed to increase your base END by 5 prior to any adjustments being applied to it.  I think you get the idea, but I've got more if you really want to debate it.  Yet, with Luck, you spend 5 CP and can get nothing for it ... and, in fact, most likely (83% of the time) will get nothing for it if you only have 1d6 of it.  

 

 

 

What do you want for only 5 points?

​For 5 CP, I expect more than nothing 83.3333% of the time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, if I spent points on a defense power, I expect the defense to apply appropriately.

But if you spend points on Luck, you expect it to apply all the time?  Applying appropriately doesn't mean applying all the time - for any power.  For Luck it only applies - appropriately enough - when you're lucky.  That's why it's called "Luck".

 

If I pay for rPD, on an attack which uses PD as a defense, I expect some value for the points I paid for it.

And if you pay for Luck, you'll get some value for the points you paid.

 

If I need to be lucky and roll the luck and get nothing, am I truly lucky?

If you your defense doesn't apply to the attack directed at you, are you truly defended?

 

Also Luck is the only power in the game which when bought for a character is never controlled by the character.  Luck's use is always at the GM's discretion.  While you can use a blast as long as you have end and you can use PD whenever you like, the GM has discretion on when luck comes into play.

 Right.  That's what makes it Luck.  If you want a power that has nothing to do with Luck, then don't buy Luck.

 

Contextually your retort makes no sense.  Why?  Because if I spent points for an attack power I -am- guaranteed that the attack power will have the intended effect.  Let's use Blast, for example.  Even if I miss my target, my Blast still hits -something- and does what it's designed to do (blast that something).

Retort, eh?

 

Well, I must say this I've never had a character use a Blast on an opponent with the "intended effect" being hitting the wall behind him.  Let's say the power was Mind Control, and you miss your attack roll.  Or maybe you make the attack roll but your effect dice roll is insufficient to achieve the effect.  Now what does it hit?  Is it still doing its "intended effect"?  Powers fail sometimes.  All of them.  Why should Luck be an exception?

 

Just as blast has a very specific effect (blasting whatever is hit ... even if the intended target is missed), so does Luck ... and that specific effect is improvement of the situation.  So, for your analogy to make sense, even if I roll badly (as with the Blast), a poor Luck roll should still generate some improvement of some kind, even if it's not what I intended.  But that's not how Luck works in RAW or this House Rule, is it?  Hence your retort

So if you miss your target with your Blast and knock down a tree instead, that's an "improvement of some kind'?

 

Yet, with Luck, you spend 5 CP and can get nothing for it ... and, in fact, most likely (83% of the time) will get nothing for it if you only have 1d6 of it.

You do realize that 17% is not 0%, right? It's significantly more.

 

For 5 CP, I expect more than nothing 83.3333% of the time...

Then don't buy 1d6 of Luck. You get what you pay for, and you pay for what you get.  If you spend 60 points, like you would for a normal power that you rely on, you'll get 12d6 of Luck, which will have a positive effect almost 89% of the time, and very likely, you'll roll more than one 6, so it'll be a quite significant positive effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if you spend points on Luck, you expect it to apply all the time?  Applying appropriately doesn't mean applying all the time - for any power.  For Luck it only applies - appropriately enough - when you're lucky.  That's why it's called "Luck".

I am paying for my character to be lucky.  I am not.  For instance, last night I was playing pathfinder and rolled 3 1s in the span of 10 dice rolls with all but one roll under 10 (and that was a 16).  I never rolled a 20 that night.

 

And if you pay for Luck, you'll get some value for the points you paid.

That's not true.  I've never found a GM who applies luck consistently to a character to make them lucky.  The luck is generally used to make an unlucky situation an ok situation.  While that has benefit, its not what I think of when I think of a really lucky character.

 

If you your defense doesn't apply to the attack directed at you, are you truly defended?

Yes, I may be hit by an energy blast but the physical defense is still there and still protecting me from physical attacks.  This line of argument is facetious.  Its like saying, if you have health insurance and your house catches fire, then your health insurance isn't protecting your health.

 

Right.  That's what makes it Luck.  If you want a power that has nothing to do with Luck, then don't buy Luck.

Again, I want my character to be lucky.  I am not.

 

Retort, eh?

 

Well, I must say this I've never had a character use a Blast on an opponent with the "intended effect" being hitting the wall behind him.  Let's say the power was Mind Control, and you miss your attack roll.  Or maybe you make the attack roll but your effect dice roll is insufficient to achieve the effect.  Now what does it hit?  Is it still doing its "intended effect"?  Powers fail sometimes.  All of them.  Why should Luck be an exception?

But the effect goes off right?  You are not using a blast, paying the end and not having anything happen.  You still see the blast,  You still get an effect.  Your character did use the blast.  The comic did draw the blast in the panel.  With mind control, you did execute the mind control.  It may not have gone the way you wanted but you still got to use the mind control.  Even if you fail with the mind control you still have information you did not have.  If you miss, you now know their DMCV is higher than that.  If you failed to achieve an effect, you now know a general idea of what their defense against mind control is.

 

Luck has no effect if it does not activate.  So I am trying to make a luck character based on my bad luck, to which the character will almost never activate their luck because I am unlucky.

 

So if you miss your target with your Blast and knock down a tree instead, that's an "improvement of some kind'?

Yes, the brick now has a club. :)

 

You do realize that 17% is not 0%, right? It's significantly more.

Yes.  You do understand that is an 83% fail rate.  You have better luck playing blackjack or craps.

 

snapback.png

Then don't buy 1d6 of Luck. You get what you pay for, and you pay for what you get.  If you spend 60 points, like you would for a normal power that you rely on, you'll get 12d6 of Luck, which will have a positive effect almost 89% of the time, and very likely, you'll roll more than one 6, so it'll be a quite significant positive effect.

I usually don't.  Why?  Because its a poor option which I don't get much benefit.  I want to have a lucky character, but luck is a poor option that isn't worth buying.  This is why I am thinking about fiddling with it and I am trying to get feedback on the idea.  Why are you so dead set against even exploring the concept?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A role-playing game is also cooperative. So why shouldn't some things about YOUR character be in the hands of the GM, like how your Luck affects you?

This is a good question.  Its because I can have one character in Hero which may be GM'd by 4 different GMs.  Each GM will use the luck differently because the power is so subjective.  One GM will have you roll it whenever you want to be lucky.  Another will only use it in role playing situations only.  A third will only use it in life or death situations.  Another won't use it at all.  I'd rather have a mechanic which always gets used, that players will want to use even if someone else GMs the game for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dsatow, your responses seem to be all non-sequiturs.

 

Luck does not make *you* lucky, it makes your character lucky.  If you roll all 6's all the time with your Luck, your *character* will have lucky things happen.  *You* will not gain any benefit yourself.

 

Your character receives value for the points spent on luck.  If particular GM's don't apply it consistently, that's not the Luck power's fault.  Talk to your GM about what you expect from Luck, and how he intends to adjudicate it.

 

1d6 of Luck does not make "a really lucky character".  It only makes a very slightly lucky character.  You can't expect something particularly earth-shaking for 5 points.

 

When you roll your Luck dice, you did roll them, even if you didn't get any 6's.  Just like you did use your power even when your attack roll misses, or your Activation roll misses.  Or you hit, but your opponent bounced all the damage, or was Desolid, or otherwise immune to your power.  Or you hit, but you rolled really low (unlucky) on your effect dice.

 

If *you* are unlucky and make bad dice rolls all through the role-playing session, that isn't the fault of any power you bought or could have bought.

 

1 in 6 chance of something good happening is in fact a positive benefit.  It is not not nothing.  Granted, it isn't much, but then again, it really shouldn't be much for only 5 points.  YGWYPFAYPFWYG.

 

I think we need some concrete examples to discuss this:

 

Our Hero Rockman is in battle with his arch-nemesis Paperman.  Paper is Rock's only weakness, so it'll be tough for Our Hero.  Fortunately, Rockman has 3d6 of Luck.  The GM has him rollhis Luck dice, and he rolls three 6's!  Now what does the GM decide happens?

 

  1. "Despite the grueling battle, Rockman's hair remains perfectly coiffed.  How lucky for you!"  This is no benefit, and you'd have every right to complain.
  2. "One of the civilian bystanders in the crowd is a particularly attractive woman, and is very much impressed with Rockman (particularly his well-coiffed hair), and intends to approach him after the battle (assuming he survives) and will offer herself to him.  What a lucky guy!"  This is maybe a benefit, but in a completely different context, and certainly not three 6's worth.  And I would complain to the GM right along with you.
  3. "Paperman's entangling attack engulfs Rockman, but with one fewer point of BODY and DEF.  There's a bit of lick for you!"  Well,that's a benefit, but I'd say that's not even one 6 worth.
  4. "A sudden gust of wind deflects Paperman's attack that would have entrapped our hero, but instead, it misses completely.  Lucky!"  This is maybe one 6 worth of luck, not three, since Paperman can just fire the same attack again on his next phase.
  5. "Just as all hope seems lost for Our Hero, and Paperman is about to deliver the killing blow, out of nowhere, Scissorsman shows up and takes Paperman out of the fight."  This is probably about the right level of benefit for three 6's.

I could come up with more examples, but this should at least give a starting point to work from.

 

I'm not against exploring other ways to have Luck work in the game.  I tweak rules all the time.  But if it works 100% of the time, then it really doesn't feel like "luck" to me,

 

As I mentioned above, I find a good guideline is that the lucky effect should be the equivalent of about 30 points of power for each 6 rolled on the Luck dice.  One possible way to change this and make it more "reliable" is for the Luck to activate more often, say on a 5 or 6 on each die - then the effect should only be about 15 points of power for each 5-6 rolled.  Twice as likely to happen, half as big an effect.  That's fair, isn't it?  Or you could go even farther and say that luck happens on a 4, 5, or 6.  And then you'd have roughly a 10-point effect for each 4-6 rolled.

 

And I'm sure there are other ways to do Luck that will keep it "lucky".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kind of agree with PhilFleischmann as far as the concept of Luck being out of the control of the player. 

I can see Luck being implemented similar to how the Disadvantage: Arch Nemesis works.

This disadvantage is basically giving the GM direct avenues of influencing the game that directly affects the Player's character and the characters around him (in a negative manner).

Luck could be seen as the opposite of this in that you are spending points to allow the GM to have direct influence on the game in that it affects the Player's character and those around him (in a positive manner).

 

Nothing wrong with the mechanic. Just the concept of Luck doesn't seem to mesh with what it actually does. Just from my perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a good question.  Its because I can have one character in Hero which may be GM'd by 4 different GMs.  Each GM will use the luck differently because the power is so subjective.  One GM will have you roll it whenever you want to be lucky.  Another will only use it in role playing situations only.  A third will only use it in life or death situations.  Another won't use it at all.  I'd rather have a mechanic which always gets used, that players will want to use even if someone else GMs the game for a while.

 

Then there is a need to sit and discuss with the GMs how they interpret Luck and your expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then there is a need to sit and discuss with the GMs how they interpret Luck and your expectations.

That's one way, but to be honest, IMHO I don't think it implements well.  Mainly because different GMs have different GM styles, just like different players have different play styles.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dsatow, your responses seem to be all non-sequiturs.

 

Luck does not make *you* lucky, it makes your character lucky.  If you roll all 6's all the time with your Luck, your *character* will have lucky things happen.  *You* will not gain any benefit yourself.

I agree Luck the power should make the character lucky.  If I roll all 6's all the time with my luck, I will gain benefit because lucky things will happen to the character.  That's the reason you get luck right?  I mean I buy strength for my characters not because I am strong, but I want to play a strong character.  Likewise, I buy Luck for my character because I want a lucky character.  But the situation is such that I have to buy a ludicrous amount of luck as it is to make a lucky character for 90% of the time.  Worse, say its once in a blue moon I do get lucky.  Does that mean getting 10 6s, the combat over because I got so lucky all the villains are taken out?

 

Your character receives value for the points spent on luck.  If particular GM's don't apply it consistently, that's not the Luck power's fault.  Talk to your GM about what you expect from Luck, and how he intends to adjudicate it.

You are assuming a single GM.  Multiple GMs can interpret it in different ways.  As an example, we both seem to view luck differently, so we'll end up treating it differently.  Whereas we would treat Blast the same.

 

 

1d6 of Luck does not make "a really lucky character".  It only makes a very slightly lucky character.  You can't expect something particularly earth-shaking for 5 points.

 

When you roll your Luck dice, you did roll them, even if you didn't get any 6's.  Just like you did use your power even when your attack roll misses, or your Activation roll misses.  Or you hit, but your opponent bounced all the damage, or was Desolid, or otherwise immune to your power.  Or you hit, but you rolled really low (unlucky) on your effect dice.

 

If *you* are unlucky and make bad dice rolls all through the role-playing session, that isn't the fault of any power you bought or could have bought.

 

1 in 6 chance of something good happening is in fact a positive benefit.  It is not not nothing.  Granted, it isn't much, but then again, it really shouldn't be much for only 5 points.  YGWYPFAYPFWYG.

 

I think we need some concrete examples to discuss this:

 

Our Hero Rockman is in battle with his arch-nemesis Paperman.  Paper is Rock's only weakness, so it'll be tough for Our Hero.  Fortunately, Rockman has 3d6 of Luck.  The GM has him rollhis Luck dice, and he rolls three 6's!  Now what does the GM decide happens?

 

  1. "Despite the grueling battle, Rockman's hair remains perfectly coiffed.  How lucky for you!"  This is no benefit, and you'd have every right to complain.
  2. "One of the civilian bystanders in the crowd is a particularly attractive woman, and is very much impressed with Rockman (particularly his well-coiffed hair), and intends to approach him after the battle (assuming he survives) and will offer herself to him.  What a lucky guy!"  This is maybe a benefit, but in a completely different context, and certainly not three 6's worth.  And I would complain to the GM right along with you.
  3. "Paperman's entangling attack engulfs Rockman, but with one fewer point of BODY and DEF.  There's a bit of lick for you!"  Well,that's a benefit, but I'd say that's not even one 6 worth.
  4. "A sudden gust of wind deflects Paperman's attack that would have entrapped our hero, but instead, it misses completely.  Lucky!"  This is maybe one 6 worth of luck, not three, since Paperman can just fire the same attack again on his next phase.
  5. "Just as all hope seems lost for Our Hero, and Paperman is about to deliver the killing blow, out of nowhere, Scissorsman shows up and takes Paperman out of the fight."  This is probably about the right level of benefit for three 6's.

I could come up with more examples, but this should at least give a starting point to work from.

Lets correct something here.  I am not talking only about characters who buy 1,2,3 or even 5 dice of luck.  I am talking about luck as a superpower in a standard superhero game.  Not lucky Rockman, but Rabbit's Foot, the super lucky guy.  Given your 5 examples, are you willing to say, if Rabbits Foot is with a hero team of six members and they are fighting 6 supervillains, when his luck "activates" and he gets <gasp> 9 sixes.  Does that mean 3 supervillains are instantly toast?

 

Also,  another question I have, if you are willing to agree that there are people in real life who are lucky and who are unlucky, if two players play the exact same character, the player who is unlucky in real life should get a point break because the two characters same powers are not giving the same effect? 

 

Another question, can my character consider himself lucky if his luck never activates.  In your explanation, if Rabbits Foot never hit a single villain, in the game he would think that he'd need to work out more in the danger room, even if his OCV is 3 higher than most villains DCV.  Why?  Because, he'd feel he wasn't pulling his weight and not practicing his marksmanship under fire.  If he didn't do enough damage with his rabbit punch, he'd probably start lifting weights and try to channel his chi.  If his luck never activates, is he really lucky?

 

 

I'm not against exploring other ways to have Luck work in the game.  I tweak rules all the time.  But if it works 100% of the time, then it really doesn't feel like "luck" to me,

 

As I mentioned above, I find a good guideline is that the lucky effect should be the equivalent of about 30 points of power for each 6 rolled on the Luck dice.  One possible way to change this and make it more "reliable" is for the Luck to activate more often, say on a 5 or 6 on each die - then the effect should only be about 15 points of power for each 5-6 rolled.  Twice as likely to happen, half as big an effect.  That's fair, isn't it?  Or you could go even farther and say that luck happens on a 4, 5, or 6.  And then you'd have roughly a 10-point effect for each 4-6 rolled.

 

And I'm sure there are other ways to do Luck that will keep it "lucky".

 

The system suggested does not work a hundred percent of the time, but does work the majority of the time.  It reverses the probability to 1 in 6 of it not working.  Its not a guarantee.  And the more you use it, the less effective it becomes as you use less dice.

 

From what I am getting from your last comments is that you want luck to be a gamble rather a defined power.  And that's fine.  Its an opinion I'll keep in mind when I meet with my players in 1.5 weeks and see if they feel the same way after some game play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that mean getting 10 6s, the combat over because I got so lucky all the villains are taken out?

Yeah, maybe. Ten 6's is a hell of a lot of luck.

 

You are assuming a single GM.

I'm not assuming any such thing. Are you assuming that when I said to talk to the GM about how Luck will work, that I was forbidding you from talking to more than one GM?

 

Given your 5 examples, are you willing to say, if Rabbits Foot is with a hero team of six members and they are fighting 6 supervillains, when his luck "activates" and he gets <gasp> 9 sixes.  Does that mean 3 supervillains are instantly toast?

Sure, why not? Nine 6's is a lot of Luck. The exact thing that happens is up to the GM. My guideline would be the rough equivalent of a 270-point power. Would a 270-point power take out three villains?

 

Also,  another question I have, if you are willing to agree that there are people in real life who are lucky and who are unlucky, if two players play the exact same character, the player who is unlucky in real life should get a point break because the two characters same powers are not giving the same effect?

I'm not willing to agree to that, and it's irrelevant anyway.

 

Another question, can my character consider himself lucky if his luck never activates.

Also irrelevant. You don't pay for what your character "considers himself".

 

Based on your proposed Luck house rule...

 

Luckman and Skillman are fighting their respective enemies. Both have the same OCV and the enemies have the same DCV.

Luckman needs a 9 or less to hit his foe.

So does Skillman, but because Skillman spent points on some Combat levels, he can effectively bump that up to 12 or less. So he does.

Luckman has some dice of luck, so when he rolls too high to hit, he uses his luck dice to improve his roll. So he does.

 

This doesn't really feel like luck to me at all, just an alternate way of doing Combat Skill Levels.

 

The second part of your house rule is sort of like "Hero Points" - used in many game systems, where a character can spend one or more points to have some miscellaneous positive effect happen.  This isn't necessarily defined as luck, but it could be.  And I guess it's a valid way of handling luck:  Pay X points per "Luck Point", and spend them whenever you want to have something lucky happen.  The allotment of points would then refill each game day, or perhaps each game session.  They can't simply refresh each combat, because they might be spent outside of combat and have nothing to do with combat.

 

Remember that Luck is not just about being more likely to hit a hard-to-hit opponent in combat, or the opponent's BFG missing you in combat.  It's also about your Aunt Kay being out shopping when you come home in your Squirrelman outfit with the face mask shredded, which would have revealed your secret identity to her - lucky!  It's also about the runaway bus full of innocent civilians sliding off the road into some soft bushes instead of into a fuel tanker truck with a full load of jet fuel - lucky!  It's also about when you're almost ready to give up the case, so you go to your favorite bard for a drink and the TV is on, and it shows a news story that is directly related to the case your working on, and gives you that one extra piece of information you needed - lucky!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Based on your proposed Luck house rule...

Luckman and Skillman are fighting their respective enemies. Both have the same OCV and the enemies have the same DCV.

Luckman needs a 9 or less to hit his foe.

So does Skillman, but because Skillman spent points on some Combat levels, he can effectively bump that up to 12 or less. So he does.

Luckman has some dice of luck, so when he rolls too high to hit, he uses his luck dice to improve his roll. So he does.

 

This doesn't really feel like luck to me at all, just an alternate way of doing Combat Skill Levels.

Ahh, but you miss the point that this is a luck special effect.  Sure skill levels can be defined as luck and luck dice can be defined as skill.  but its the designer who decides that.  In your example, Skillman with his years of training hits his target.  Luckman, with his luck ability, hits his target because his target slips on a banana peel.  Its like what the difference between a physical blast no range and a PKA?  Both do damage to the target.  One does damage based more on body while the other more on stun, but both physically affect the target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember that Luck is not just about being more likely to hit a hard-to-hit opponent in combat, or the opponent's BFG missing you in combat.  It's also about your Aunt Kay being out shopping when you come home in your Squirrelman outfit with the face mask shredded, which would have revealed your secret identity to her - lucky!  It's also about the runaway bus full of innocent civilians sliding off the road into some soft bushes instead of into a fuel tanker truck with a full load of jet fuel - lucky!  It's also about when you're almost ready to give up the case, so you go to your favorite bard for a drink and the TV is on, and it shows a news story that is directly related to the case your working on, and gives you that one extra piece of information you needed - lucky!

 

The house rules does not prevent any of that.  In fact, it makes it more probable that it will happen for the benefit of the character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last game I ran, the villain had 2d6 of luck.  In the end, it made a little difference but not much, mainly due to the fact that the role playing session went far longer and was more interesting to the players (a lot happened - Primus being replaced with Viper by our current president).  A follow up game is schedule for this weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would really like a well-thought through luck power. I would like to know how this works but luck should not be able to be relied upon. It will let you down in odd moments. I would like something that accommodated the concepts of pushing your luck, riding your luck, being on a lucky streak.

 

I have an odd tingle of something like a pool that can grow and shrink depending on how it is used and for there to be points when luck deserts you. I would like a mechanical way for a GM to rule when it is appropriate for luck to be successful and by how much. In a well-defined system like HERO, the current rules eyeball too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would really like a well-thought through luck power. I would like to know how this works but luck should not be able to be relied upon. It will let you down in odd moments. I would like something that accommodated the concepts of pushing your luck, riding your luck, being on a lucky streak.

So start with a perfectly reliable Luck power ... and add Requires A Roll (either Activation or Skill).  Ta-da!  Now you have a Luck power that will 'let you down in odd moments'.  The problem is that the present power implementation isn't as a reliable as any other power for which one pays 5CP per die -- which makes turning it into something that will 'let you down in odd moments' via the Requires A Roll limitation ... impossible.

 

But that's mechanically the way you'd do it using RAW -- if the Luck power were as reliable as all other powers for which one pays 5 CP per die.  You could use an Activation Roll to let raw chance decide ... or a Skill Roll to represent a given hero's ability to ride his/her luck, push his/her luck, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's mechanically the way you'd do it using RAW -- if the Luck power were as reliable as all other powers for which one pays 5 CP per die.  You could use an Activation Roll to let raw chance decide ... or a Skill Roll to represent a given hero's ability to ride his/her luck, push his/her luck, etc.

Well, this is where we are butting up against a mechanic and a special effect. Luck as a special effect is a different beast and it probably belongs, in most builds, in a decent VPP with lucky as the binding special effect.

 

I think I need to sit down and really think what I mean when talking about a luck power. What is it that defines it against everything else in the toolbox and, crucially, would it be a useful tool to define other things with different SFX? If not it kind of fails the test of belonging in the toolbox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...