Jump to content
megaplayboy

"Falling Star" combat maneuver

Recommended Posts

This is essentially the martial version of a Diving Move Through:

OCV -2, DCV -2, STR+4DC+v/10; FMove, 1/2 DMG, Must Dive

 

Question, what's the price? 5 points?  3-4 points?  I'm kinda leaning towards 5, since even though it has a lot of required elements, and CV penalties, it's the most damaging possible martial maneuver.  A 60 STR brick with 60m of Flight could conceivably do 28d6!  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we look at it, the ultimate martial artists book page 119 says for each DC you add 1 point, and for each OCV/DCV you stubtract, you remove one point, making this cost 0 points to purchase. However as it's likely NND so if we double the cost of the damage dice, the maneuver ultimately would cost 4pts. If you take 1/2 damage as a disadvantage, remove 1 pt to 3 pts.

 

But that's from a quick glance at the rules and tables, I can't be sure I did that estimation right.

 

Regardless if you think it's worth 5, charge 5 :P

 

 

edit: page 116, take half damage -1 point

page 117 add v/5 +1 point...

 

 So you're looking at probably a 4pt maneuver.

 

 

edit2: Hmm found another table of 'useful elements' on page 109. So...

 

Let's rebuild it from scratch.

 

+4DC: +4 (NND max is +2, so can't go that route, although you can do 4DC killing damage for +3 per DC)

FMOV: +3

v/5: +1

 

OCV -2 : -2

DCV -2: -2

take 1/2 DMG: -1

 

Total Maneuver: 8

Total Disadv: -5

New Total: 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC, it's 2 points for the first 2 DC, then 4 points for the next 2.  6 points.  Then 3 points for the v/6.  3 points for the FMove.  12 points.  CV penalties, -4 points.  8 points.  Then take half damage, -1 points.  7 points.  Must dive, arguably a specific condition, -2 points.  5 points.  If you want to make it take longer or give the target a chance to get out of the way, add a +1 segment, which would drop the cost to 4 points.  

I guess the total damage with the aforementioned flying brick would be a bit astronomical for this version, because of the v/6--36d6!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC, it's 2 points for the first 2 DC, then 4 points for the next 2.  6 points. <snip>

I know 5E didn't have the table/explanations of how to build maneuvers, and I don't see them in 6E... (thus I refer to the ultimate martial artist book), So I didn't see anywhere the 3-4th DC would cost double...

 

Although you can do a TON of damage as you show, probably anyone can with a high enough speed on a move-by/through, the dive kinda means you have to be up high first, so you'd probably... can only use it (at best) every other round.

 

 

Edit: I've included page 109 which I hope Steve doesn't mind...

post-7181-0-37017000-1506237281_thumb.jpg

Edited by Era Scarecrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know 5E didn't have the table/explanations of how to build maneuvers, and I don't see them in 6E... (thus I refer to the ultimate martial artist book), So I didn't see anywhere the 3-4th DC would cost double...

 

Although you can do a TON of damage as you show, probably anyone can with a high enough speed on a move-by/through, the dive kinda means you have to be up high first, so you'd probably... can only use it (at best) every other round.

 

 

Edit: I've included page 109 which I hope Steve doesn't mind...

Hero System Martial Arts for 6th edition includes the rules(largely repeated from 5th Ed UMA) for building maneuvers.  Having to dive, and facing the prospect of taking significant damage is likely to make it a maneuver of last resort.  But, if you absolutely must take out the target, that's what it's there for.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although perhaps not as effective as a custom built maneuver, I don't see any reason you couldn't also perform a "Falling-Star" style maneuver using the standard rules for Move-Through/Collision (which don't even require the movement be controlled, so you could literally use your Falling velocity to perform the attack if you hold your action for the appropriate segment and initiative count). Alternatively there are also martial maneuvers, such as Charge, Passing Strike, and Sacrifice Lunge which could be performed during a controlled dive for massive damage (without the risk of reciprocal damage).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although perhaps not as effective as a custom built maneuver, I don't see any reason you couldn't also perform a "Falling-Star" style maneuver using the standard rules for Move-Through/Collision (which don't even require the movement be controlled, so you could literally use your Falling velocity to perform the attack if you hold your action for the appropriate segment and initiative count). Alternatively there are also martial maneuvers, such as Charge, Passing Strike, and Sacrifice Lunge which could be performed during a controlled dive for massive damage (without the risk of reciprocal damage).

Unless one is attacking a very large target,or said target has been reduced to DCV 0, the OCV penalties for a diving velocity will be pretty steep.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 60 STR brick with 60m of Flight could conceivably do 28d6!  

 

Yeah, that's why most of the smart GMs I've played with over the years simply prohibited Bricks from buying martial maneuvers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's why most of the smart GMs I've played with over the years simply prohibited Bricks from buying martial maneuvers.

Well seeing as maneuvers are based on if you had a max of 20 in movement or STR, mostly so they can up to double the damage you can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless one is attacking a very large target,or said target has been reduced to DCV 0, the OCV penalties for a diving velocity will be pretty steep.  

Move-Through PSLs are cheap enough (especially compared to the cost of buying all those Extra DCs flat), and the martial maneuvers I suggested all have flat CV modifiers.

 

 

Yeah, that's why most of the smart GMs I've played with over the years simply prohibited Bricks from buying martial maneuvers.

I can't claim to be a "smart GM", but I've never had a problem with Bricks purchasing Martial Maneuvers in my campaigns. "Brick" and "Martial Artist" are nothing more or less than Special Effects for how your character meets the campaign's guidelines. I don't believe a character should ever be punished for choosing one special effect over another, except to the degree which they have chosen to be punished by placing appropriate limitations and complications on their character. 

 

The issue stems from inconsistent enforcement (or a complete lack) of campaign guidelines; not with Strength, Martial Arts, or any other source of Added Damage specifically. According to the Character Ability Guidelines Table, a Standard Superheroic Character is supposed to be dealing between 6 and 14 DCs, using no more than 80 APs. It doesn't matter how the character meets those standards, so long as they do, they'll be relatively balanced (even if they happen to be a Brick who learned Boxing). Balance issues only start to arise when one or more characters significantly exceed whatever Guidelines that other players (including the GM) expected/trusted them to follow, or when one or more of them significantly falls short of said guidelines I suppose. Any character concept can be broken if the GM doesn't properly audit them to ensure that their abilities fall within an acceptable range for the campaign being played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a brick who had a full custom-built Martial Arts package. Not one of the maneuvers increased the base STR damage. They were all CV and Movement oriented. It worked well for my character and wasn't unbalancing for the group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The issue stems from inconsistent enforcement (or a complete lack) of campaign guidelines; not with Strength, Martial Arts, or any other source of Added Damage specifically. According to the Character Ability Guidelines Table, a Standard Superheroic Character is supposed to be dealing between 6 and 14 DCs, using no more than 80 APs. It doesn't matter how the character meets those standards, so long as they do, they'll be relatively balanced (even if they happen to be a Brick who learned Boxing). 

 

Exactly this.  If I say I want 12 DC for a cap I mean 12 DC from all sources. Maybe it's a 12d6 str 60 punch, maybe it's a 20 strength with four hth martial damage classes and a 24 m running Passing Strike (4+4+4) - how you get there isn't as important as respecting the intention to have the damage stop there.  An ally throwing a 30 point strength aid on the str 20 character in that example for 18d6 violates the intention, as does running 60 instead.

 

(Though I always allow haymaker to 'break' the DC cap - that's its special power)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An ally throwing a 30 point strength aid on the str 20 character in that example for 18d6 violates the intention, as does running 60 instead.

Then I wonder... of most of the team got close to the max planned in their builds would that mean another character would be urged not to take aid for strength? Or if he took it would all the other characters have to lower their builds so they could take the extra 6d6 from a strength aid? Or would the damage max out at 12d6 and any leftover would be reserved for offsetting drains? Or would the full 18D6 be rolled and the lowest 6 dice be discarded increasing the odds of damage?

 

How is this resolved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aids aren't popular in my games for this reason (and I'm ok with that) but historically I will artificially cap the damage to 12d6 and the excess is wasted - regularly using Aid to 'go super saiyan' is just how you get to that 12d6.

 

It's cludgy and due to a bad experience with Aid in the past under another GM*  my group in general shies away from 'pre-battle buff' builds.

 

Instead of pushing something beyond the limits in my games they tend to be used defensively (though not so much for the standard defenses, which are also usually run near cap by most characters)  - a mentalist might have Aid Ego in their multipower to throw on the brick if they come across a powerful enemy psychic, etc.  Dexterity is another popular Aid target, as since it's decoupled from OCV/DCV/Speed in CC/6E there are a lot of people in my group, if they aren't taking many/any dex skills, who leave it at 10.  Con as well because nobody likes getting stunned but nobody likes spending a ton of points on it either 'just in case'.

 

 

* Someone created a small Aid that aided ALL characteristics for 24 hours, area of effect - and then created an *absolutely huge* Aid that Aided that Aid (OAF, single charge, extra time, the works) that they would use before using the All Characteristics Aid (the effects of which lasted a day - the decay rate didn't affect the buff itself because Aid is an instant: If you have a 4d6 aid str that you use to give an ally 14 strength and then your aid gets drained to 2d6 by an enemy the person currently with +14 str doesn't automatically lose half of it. It works in reverse as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cantriped said:

 

"I can't claim to be a "smart GM", but I've never had a problem with Bricks purchasing Martial Maneuvers in my campaigns. "Brick" and "Martial Artist" are nothing more or less than Special Effects for how your character meets the campaign's guidelines. I don't believe a character should ever be punished for choosing one special effect over another, except to the degree which they have chosen to be punished by placing appropriate limitations and complications on their character. 

 

The issue stems from inconsistent enforcement (or a complete lack) of campaign guidelines; not with Strength, Martial Arts, or any other source of Added Damage specifically. According to the Character Ability Guidelines Table, a Standard Superheroic Character is supposed to be dealing between 6 and 14 DCs, using no more than 80 APs. It doesn't matter how the character meets those standards, so long as they do, they'll be relatively balanced (even if they happen to be a Brick who learned Boxing). Balance issues only start to arise when one or more characters significantly exceed whatever Guidelines that other players (including the GM) expected/trusted them to follow, or when one or more of them significantly falls short of said guidelines I suppose. Any character concept can be broken if the GM doesn't properly audit them to ensure that their abilities fall within an acceptable range for the campaign being played."

 

I agree. No character should be penalized for trying to create their character in whatever manner it needs. It's an entirely different matter if the player is deliberately trying to monty haul their powers, causing problems. With the justification used prior, bricks shouldn't get Blast attacks because that's a workaround for them having to be in HTH combat to wallop a villain with their Str, which of course is ridiculous. It is up to the GM to help the player create the character concept wanted by the player, yet to make sure the character is not overly powerful in some manner. This is why, in the campaign I'm in, all characters created are checked by the GMs and when a new skill or power is wanted, a round-the-table agreement by all players and the GM is given. This way, the GM and the players are all aware of what was gotten by a character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, sometimes, game balance and "comfort zone" result in multiple campaigns taking on a somewhat "cookie cutter" feel: Every PC has an 8-14 DC attack, a CV between 6 and 12, Defenses between 15 and 35, SPD between 4 and 7 (with 8 being uncommon), etc.

All I'll say is that a bit more variance is not a terrible thing, that more power does not equal less fun, and there are more ways to balance a game than setting narrow numerical ranges. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm... I'd not consider any of the ranges you just quoted as "narrow".

 

But I agree that it's possible to come up with a powerful, but heavily limited power that won't derail the game. You can sink as many points as you like into Precognition if it also has "No Conscious Control" and thus falls totally within the GMs control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gad we have general guidelines for characters and not hard parameters for power levels in the campaign. I was in two campaigns briefly where there were hard, unbending guidelines, and I didn't like it. I'm not for powergaming or overly powerful characters mind you, I just like to create character concepts. If a GM is unwilling to bend in the very least, well, au revoir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's good.  IME, if I wanted to have a high-powered game for cosmic heroes or veteran elite heroes, I pretty much had to run it myself.  I loved Galactic Champions and a handful of other products which were targeted to groups operating above those "standard" guidelines.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×