High Powered Hero Campaign

[Tywyll]

I've been toying with running a 'Justice League' style campaign for awhile, where the PCs are among the strongest Heroes in the setting. Thinking powers in the 75-100 AP range.

 

Oh, this would be in 5th edition.

 

Anyway, what sort of issues and pitfalls should I be aware of at high powered levels like that? A big part of the campaign will be more about "what do you do with that sort of power" rather than "stop the bank heist" play. It will definitly have a bit of an 'Authority' vibe (with governements being hesitant if not downright antagonistic to supers at that level of power).

 

One issue that seems to pop up in official character builds, often of high powered characters or npcs, is that when people are slinging 18-20d6 EBs around, most of them also cannot 'take' such an attack without being stunned. Like they might have 30 def and 20ish con, so an attack of equivalent power to their own will stun them just about everytime. Damage Reduction seems like a must have power (which I'm not that bothered with if that is the case, just want to make sure I'm reading it right). 

 

I was even toying with allowing players to build whatever the wanted with no point contraints (initially) though after the characters are turned in, I would make adjustments. I was considering breaking down certain aspects of builds (strength, spd, movement powers, ranged attacks, defenses, etc) and allow each player to pick one that only their character could have up to 100 points in and everyone else could at most take 75 points in (their secondary focus) and every other catagory would cap around 60. This would allow characters to shine no matter how many points they built their character with. This would allow 'Superman' to take 100 str and maybe 75 in defense, while you could still have 'Cyborg' with 60 str. Obviously extremely limited or edgecase power builds would still be considered (stuff with like 2 or more points of limitations) that could break the caps, albeit in rare circumstances. 

 

Anyway, these are my initial thoughts. Any suggestions or advice? Is this a terrible idea?

[Christopher R Taylor]

I believe Hero starts to break down above 400 pts /75AP because of how the world and powers are built but if you focus on story, character, role playing, and interaction rather than combat you should do okay.  Just keep in mind that players are a lot more clever and direct wit their powers than comic book superheroes are.  They'll do the stuff that makes sense and uses their powers consistently rather than what fits the story, so its going to be a bit difficult to give them consistent challenges.

 

That said, I agree with your assessment on high end builds in official publication, its like the writers hit a wall on defenses but are unlimited on attacks.  You would not find that the case with player-built characters using that many points.

[Tywyll]

5 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I believe Hero starts to break down above 400 pts /75AP because of how the world and powers are built

 

This is one of my concerns. Especially with killing attacks and the Stun lotto.

 

A few things I want to do is to make the world and normals more fragile. So materials and mundanes and non-super vehicles and such will all take x2 damage. This way even a 60 strength super could still take out a normal tank (the kind of stuff you see in comics and cartoons but doesn't really work in HERO because vehicles and material defenses are so high). But I don't want heroes and villains to have to distort the mechanics any further. 

 

Do you think things break down at that point because official writers never put defenses very high?

 

5 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

but if you focus on story, character, role playing, and interaction rather than combat you should do okay.  Just keep in mind that players are a lot more clever and direct wit their powers than comic book superheroes are.  They'll do the stuff that makes sense and uses their powers consistently rather than what fits the story, so its going to be a bit difficult to give them consistent challenges.

 

That said, I agree with your assessment on high end builds in official publication, its like the writers hit a wall on defenses but are unlimited on attacks.  You would not find that the case with player-built characters using that many points.

 

Agreed! Players are sneaky and if they have looked at official builds, they tend to build their characters towards those levels rather than ignoring that they are a thing. 

[Lord Liaden]

Well, I have seen a number of official characters with attacks in the 20+d6 range with cumulative Defenses of 50, 60, even 70, and/or large amounts of Damage Reduction, so I don't think the issues can be wholly laid at the feet of published examples.

 

I've used the "increased Body damage for mundane objects/materials" vs "super" attacks for a long time. I've also made use of the Real Armor and Real Weapon Limitations, which all published real-world combat gear is built with. Real Armor halved vs super attacks, e.g. attacks not built with Real Weapon, and vice versa. This makes supers tougher versus mundane opponents, and also helps explain why supervillainous agencies arm their troops with supertech gear rather than normal weapons.

 

I also instituted an "instant death" house rule to make normal people more fragile, so high-powered heroes have to give more thought to recklessly throwing attacks around. Any person who takes more than their starting Body damage past Defenses, from a single attack, may die immediately from the shock. Hence a 10d6 attack will often kill a normal human with one hit. This is automatic for most innocent bystanders, but important NPCs, and PCs in my non-super games, can get a CON roll to avoid it. I don't use the rule for super PCs, though.

 

You should consider the social implications of your PCs being Justice League level. That will make them among the strongest, and highest-profile, superheroes in the world. They will carry a lot of responsibility to respond to major threats, so you'll want to build in time between crises for character interactions and other role-playing, and more low-key activities. But that high profile will also draw a lot of attention from the world, not all desirable. Think of the Avengers in Marvel's Civil War movie. Legal and political repercussions can be the logical outcome from some of their actions.

[Opal]

You can just set campaign guidelines were you like.  So if you want to allow attacks up to 20d and CONs well into the 30s and defenses in to the low 40s, there won't be a lot of stunning the toughest characters.   You also don't have to inflate /everything/, like you can leave DEX/SPD at the 'normal' superheroic ranges, for instance.

 

STN lotto's always a problem, if someone's tossing around a 6d KA, I suppose it's even bigger.  What I did was apply the multiplier only to the BOD that got through resistant defense, making bouncing bullets - and, at this level, anti-tank weapons and very small nukes - a lot more practical.  

 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

I also instituted an "instant death" house rule to make normal people more fragile, so high-powered heroes have to give more thought to recklessly throwing attacks around. Any person who takes more than their starting Body damage past Defenses, from a single attack, may die immediately from the shock. Hence a 10d6 attack will often kill a normal human with one hit. This is automatic for most innocent bystanders, but important NPCs, and PCs in my non-super games, can get a CON roll to avoid it. I don't use the rule for super PCs, though.

 

If I ever got to run another Champions campaign I would go the opposite route: I would treat every superhero attack as "pulled" by default and require the penalties for a pulled attack on any that is all-out.  That is, superheroes by nature automatically use less than their maximum effort on targets unless they put an effort into it and take a reduction to OCV and DCV.

[Lord Liaden]

I would have a tough time selling that to my players.

 

[Tywyll]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

I also instituted an "instant death" house rule to make normal people more fragile, so high-powered heroes have to give more thought to recklessly throwing attacks around. Any person who takes more than their starting Body damage past Defenses, from a single attack, may die immediately from the shock. Hence a 10d6 attack will often kill a normal human with one hit. This is automatic for most innocent bystanders, but important NPCs, and PCs in my non-super games, can get a CON roll to avoid it. I don't use the rule for super PCs, though.

 

You should consider the social implications of your PCs being Justice League level. That will make them among the strongest, and highest-profile, superheroes in the world. They will carry a lot of responsibility to respond to major threats, so you'll want to build in time between crises for character interactions and other role-playing, and more low-key activities. But that high profile will also draw a lot of attention from the world, not all desirable. Think of the Avengers in Marvel's Civil War movie. Legal and political repercussions can be the logical outcome from some of their actions.

 

The instant death rule is a good one. I'm definitely up for that. 

 

As for the social implications, that's exactly what I'm interested in exploring. In a world where you are some of the most powerful beings out there, what do you do when wars break out, when politicians attempt to exert authority over you. When you can stop a tin pot dictator before they invade their neighbor or commit an atrocity, do you? That kind of thing. To misquote Cap, if you see something go south, do you sit and wait for someone to give you permission to get involved or do you let it happen? 

52 minutes ago, Opal said:

STN lotto's always a problem, if someone's tossing around a 6d KA, I suppose it's even bigger.  What I did was apply the multiplier only to the BOD that got through resistant defense, making bouncing bullets - and, at this level, anti-tank weapons and very small nukes - a lot more practical.  

 

Doesn't that pretty much make killing attacks not do any stun at all unless they are super high? Wouldn't normal def negate any of that Stun? I do like, in general, the idea but I'm trying to figure out how to use it in play.

 

I was thinking of reducing weapon damage so small weapons do 1d6k, medium do 2d6k, large/military weapons do 3d6, and really big weapons (like anti0tank weapons) do 4d6. I think the scales in standard HERO are too high, and vehicles and buildings possess too much def compared to comics and films. 

[Opal]

4 hours ago, Tywyll said:

Doesn't that pretty much make killing attacks not do any stun at all unless they are super high? Wouldn't normal def negate any of that Stun? I do like, in general, the idea but I'm trying to figure out how to use it in play.

 

I was thinking of reducing weapon damage so small weapons do 1d6k, medium do 2d6k, large/military weapons do 3d6, and really big weapons (like anti0tank weapons) do 4d6. I think the scales in standard HERO are too high, and vehicles and buildings possess too much def compared to comics and films. 

Yes, against targets with reasonably high resistant defenses, killing attacks like bullets just bounce off, which is about right for a high-power champions game, anyway, if you're 'invulnerable' you should be invulnerable.

 

No, the point of KAs is that normal defenses don't stop them.  

 

I did also do a lot of variations on it.  When I was running that variant, it was 4e (BBB) and Penetrating was a thing, that's a 1/2 advantage that let the body count of a damage roll get through defense that would otherwise bounce it.  Put that on a KA and each die would, on average, put 1 BOD through the target's defense to take the stun multiplier, of course, Hardened stopped it.  I also had a similar limitation for armor, 'flawed' that let most attacks go against the armor as if they were penetrating.  

 

I agree that KA dice were often a little high and that your idea is a workable one.

 

If the whole penetrating/flawed thing is too complicated, another similar way to eliminate the stun lotto that still potentially lets some STN through, is to use the stun multiplier for the BOD that gets through, and when no BOD is inflicted to use a fixed STN multiplier of 2. 

 

You can also vary things by using the STNx from the hit location table for normals (because, perhaps ironically, the STN lotto is actually on the realistic side), and then a fixed or restricted STN mod for supers, like 1/2d6 or d4-1 

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

Or you could just utilize the Stun Multiplier mechanic from Sixth Edition, i.e. instead of rolling 1d6-1, you roll 1/2d6. 1 or 2 = 1x Body, 3 or 4 = 2x Body, 5 or 6 = 3x Body. Makes the "Stun lottery" much more manageable.

[Mr. R]

6 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

 

I've used the "increased Body damage for mundane objects/materials" vs "super" attacks for a long time. I've also made use of the Real Armor and Real Weapon Limitations, which all published real-world combat gear is built with. Real Armor halved vs super attacks, e.g. attacks not built with Real Weapon, and vice versa. This makes supers tougher versus mundane opponents, and also helps explain why supervillainous agencies arm their troops with supertech gear rather than normal weapons.

 

I

 

 

I will so totally use these in my next game where I GM.  CIIAW but for weapons you use a Reduced Penetration limitation, correct?

[assault]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

Or you could just utilize the Stun Multiplier mechanic from Sixth Edition, i.e. instead of rolling 1d6-1, you roll 1/2d6. 1 or 2 = 1x Body, 3 or 4 = 2x Body, 5 or 6 = 3x Body. Makes the "Stun lottery" much more manageable.

 

Modified Stun multipliers were written up as an optional rule in 5e.

 

6 hours ago, Tywyll said:

I think the scales in standard HERO are too high, and vehicles and buildings possess too much def compared to comics and films. 

 

Take a look at earlier editions if you can. This tended to be lower than in 5e and 6e.

[assault]

6 hours ago, Tywyll said:

As for the social implications, that's exactly what I'm interested in exploring. In a world where you are some of the most powerful beings out there, what do you do when wars break out, when politicians attempt to exert authority over you. When you can stop a tin pot dictator before they invade their neighbor or commit an atrocity, do you? That kind of thing. To misquote Cap, if you see something go south, do you sit and wait for someone to give you permission to get involved or do you let it happen? 

 

I'd pass on that on that, personally, both as GM and player.

 

In fact any character I would be likely to play would be likely to fight any "heroes" who tried to intervene in such a situation. And not with a code versus killing.

[Tywyll]

11 hours ago, Opal said:

Yes, against targets with reasonably high resistant defenses, killing attacks like bullets just bounce off, which is about right for a high-power champions game, anyway, if you're 'invulnerable' you should be invulnerable.

 

No, the point of KAs is that normal defenses don't stop them.  

 

So if you had 10rdef and an extra 20 n def, and were shot for 12body and 36 stun by a killing attack, you would take 2 Body (as normal) and then..6 Stun? That would be ignored because of the 20 n def, right? I mean, I know that normal defenses don't stop a ka but if you have resistant def, you add it to your normal def for stun damage. 

 

11 hours ago, Opal said:

 

I agree that KA dice were often a little high and that your idea is a workable one.

 

Thank you!

 

11 hours ago, Opal said:

 

If the whole penetrating/flawed thing is too complicated, another similar way to eliminate the stun lotto that still potentially lets some STN through, is to use the stun multiplier for the BOD that gets through, and when no BOD is inflicted to use a fixed STN multiplier of 2. 

 

You can also vary things by using the STNx from the hit location table for normals (because, perhaps ironically, the STN lotto is actually on the realistic side), and then a fixed or restricted STN mod for supers, like 1/2d6 or d4-1 

 

I was thinking of using a slightly reduced lotto, 1d3: 1=x2, 2=x3, 3=x4. 

9 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

Or you could just utilize the Stun Multiplier mechanic from Sixth Edition, i.e. instead of rolling 1d6-1, you roll 1/2d6. 1 or 2 = 1x Body, 3 or 4 = 2x Body, 5 or 6 = 3x Body. Makes the "Stun lottery" much more manageable.

I did use that in a 6e game, but I felt like it made stun almost negligible. It worked all right for FH, but I don't know I would want to use it in Champions.

9 hours ago, Mr. R said:

 

 

I will so totally use these in my next game where I GM.  CIIAW but for weapons you use a Reduced Penetration limitation, correct?

 

I'm not using Reduced Pen, as that still leaves the Thing 'stunnable' by a handgun. I'm just reducing the high end of the stun lotto and the base damage dice of weapons. It does mean that some stun could get through, though I am considering looking at the absolute defense rule that exists in...some book? I don't remember which one. 

[Tywyll]

8 hours ago, assault said:

 

I'd pass on that on that, personally, both as GM and player.

 

In fact any character I would be likely to play would be likely to fight any "heroes" who tried to intervene in such a situation. And not with a code versus killing.

 

That's what Session 0's are for, to discuss what sort of characters would figure into such a campaign, whether pvp will be allowed, etc. I'm happy for players to create anti-involvement characters, but I would want them to have some level of wiggle-room, rather than absolutely no under any circumstances. And not every player has to play in every game, and that's okay.

[Opal]

3 hours ago, Tywyll said:

 

So if you had 10rdef and an extra 20 n def, and were shot for 12body and 36 stun by a killing attack, you would take 2 Body (as normal) and then..6 Stun? That would be ignored because of the 20 n def, right? I mean, I know that normal defenses don't stop a ka but if you have resistant def, you add it to your normal def for stun damage. 

 

I mean, that's an amusing example because 12 BOD 36 STUN is a 3x stun multiplier, and the defenses are 10r 20n, for a total of 30.  So, standard rules, you'd take 2 BOD (12-10) and 6 STN (36-30); but, under the variant I was talking about, where the STN mod is applied only to the BOD that gets through, you'd take 2 BOD (12-10) and 6 STN (2 * 3).   So, wow.     

 

Let's say the stun multiplier die was a 6, for x5.  Now the example would be 10-2 = 2 BOD and (12 * 5 = 60)  60 - 30 = 30 STN,

vs 10-2 = 2 BOD and 2*5 = 10 STN.

 

3 hours ago, Tywyll said:

 

I was thinking of using a slightly reduced lotto, 1d3: 1=x2, 2=x3, 3=x4. 

I did use that in a 6e game, but I felt like it made stun almost negligible. It worked all right for FH, but I don't know I would want to use it in Champions.

Hm.   I find a high STNx, especially the one based on hit locations, very reasonable for FH or DI or any lower-power game, since it makes it pretty easy to toss around KAs, but KO characters instead of kill them, at least some of the time, which can be good drama.  The consolation of being dropped by a high STNx when you have no rDEF, is that you weren't shot three more times and killed outright. 

 

1d3+1 isn't really reduced, it's an average 3, which is higher than 1d6-1 (average 2.33) and can still give a x4 

 

 

[Tywyll]

36 minutes ago, Opal said:

 

I mean, that's an amusing example because 12 BOD 36 STUN is a 3x stun multiplier, and the defenses are 10r 20n, for a total of 30.  So, standard rules, you'd take 2 BOD (12-10) and 6 STN (36-30); but, under the variant I was talking about, where the STN mod is applied only to the BOD that gets through, you'd take 2 BOD (12-10) and 6 STN (2 * 3).   So, wow.     

 

Let's say the stun multiplier die was a 6, for x5.  Now the example would be 10-2 = 2 BOD and (12 * 5 = 60)  60 - 30 = 30 STN,

vs 10-2 = 2 BOD and 2*5 = 10 STN.

 

But that would still get stopped by most normal defense right? I mean, if you changed it to 10 r def and 20 n def, that 20 still blocks the 10 stun. Even if you only had 10ndef/10rdef (like making 10 rd resistant) that still stops all that stn.

 

Is that the goal?

 

36 minutes ago, Opal said:

 

Hm.   I find a high STNx, especially the one based on hit locations, very reasonable for FH or DI or any lower-power game, since it makes it pretty easy to toss around KAs, but KO characters instead of kill them, at least some of the time, which can be good drama.  The consolation of being dropped by a high STNx when you have no rDEF, is that you weren't shot three more times and killed outright. 

 

1d3+1 isn't really reduced, it's an average 3, which is higher than 1d6-1 (average 2.33) and can still give a x4 

 

 

 

That's a good point. I guess I just don't like the high spike of x5 honestly, that's the problem. 

[Lord Liaden]

5 hours ago, Tywyll said:

I did use that in a 6e game, but I felt like it made stun almost negligible. It worked all right for FH, but I don't know I would want to use it in Champions.

 

I get what you're saying, but the point (pardon the pun) of Killing attacks is to kill, to do Body damage, that someone has to buy extra Resistant Defense to counter. The intent is to balance them against Normal Damage attacks, which do more Stun but less Body on average, without the added expense of rDEF.

 

If the Stun damage for Killing Attacks using the 1/2d6  bothers you, I suggest making an additional +1 Stun Multiplier the default for all KA in your game. Your chance of doing more Stun goes up, but not to a degree that's too unbalancing.

[Opal]

1 hour ago, Tywyll said:

 

But that would still get stopped by most normal defense right? I mean, if you changed it to 10 r def and 20 n def, that 20 still blocks the 10 stun. Even if you only had 10ndef/10rdef (like making 10 rd resistant) that still stops all that stn.

Nope, the idea is that a KA that doesn't do BOD just bounced off with no effect, and that one that doesn't bounce simply does STN in proportion to the BOD that gets through.  Non-resistant defense just isn't relevant to killing damage in the variant.   

 

For me, the STN lotto nicely captures some classic bits, like the character who is fatally wounded but not unconscious, who still gets to make a dying declaration or set off the self destruct device or whatever, or the character who's shot and drops, but it turns out the bullet 'creased their skull' or some such and though out of the fight, they recover later.  But those bits shouldn't apply when machine-gun bullets are rattling off the ironman or superman type character like raindrops.   

 

To put it another way, the point of a Killing Attack is to kill, and if it sometimes rolls a high STNx and KOs someone you were trying to kill, well, that's it not working so well for you, but not that bad for them, really, since KO'd isn't as bad as dead, and it could have killed them.  When the target had enough resistant defense that the KA can't kill them, nor even do 1 BOD to them on a max roll, though, the STNx becomes a bug, not a feature.  ie if a KA can't even potentially kill a target, it shouldn't do anything to that target. 

 

 

(For 'realistic' armor, like bullet resistant kevlar and the like, I used the 'flawed' limitation, so some body gets through, every time.  I've considered much more detailed variations, like 'Damage Resistance' converting killing to normal damage instead of technically making your defenses resistant - an odd distinction and it made you roll the same damage twice if someone had it, which felt off; Stun mod being fixed at two if the resistant defense stopped all BOD, but wouldn't have stopped double the BOD;  etc)  

 

[unclevlad]

The math of 1d6-1 as a stun multiplier is downright terrifying.  If we go with 12 DCs, that's 4d killing.  

 

1.  The probability of major BODY is very high.  16 BODY on 12 dice normal is a reasonable upper estimate;  you won't see even 16 all that often.  16+ will happen 1/3 of the time on 4d6.  18+ will happen almost 1 time in 6.

 

2.  1/3 of the time, the stun multiplier will be a 5 or 6, so x4 or x5.  12 dice normal will give 48+ STUN about 13% of the time...roughly 2 in 15 rolls.  It'll be 52+, tho, less than 4% of the time.  An average BODY roll of 14, with a stun mult of 5, gives 56 STUN.  With a 6..it's 70 STUN.  If your defenses are tuned to 12 dice normal...42 STUN average...you have, what, 30-35?  So you take 35-60 about 1 time in 10.  That's VERY likely to mean Stunned.  That 18 BODY with a 6 stun die is unlikely...but roughly 1 time in 36 isn't THAT unlikely, and now you're talking Stunned and Knocked Out with one shot.  It's 90 STUN.  

I've got some code hanging around somewhere that runs these probabilities, especially for the killing attacks.  The probabilities for insanely high STUN are just too high to ignore.  The raw potential damage of higher-DC killing attacks demands serious rDef if you don't want to be bleeding out;  the STUN mult means you have to go insane with defenses, OR buy Damage Reduction...the cost of Damage Reduction was, I think, deliberately set pretty high to be the defense against this kind of roll.  

 

There's various solutions.  As was pointed out, dropping the STUN multiplier to 1/2 d6 is huge.  OK, heroes need good rDef...but they don't also need insane additional Def to bounce the STUN.  Another option...when Ron was publishing the early editions of Champions Now, we exchanged posts about the killing dice issues.  He dropped killing dice.  Instead, he defined an Advantage called Piercing...+1/2 advantage.  The BODY of the attack only goes against resistant defenses.  You might consider that too high for Champions...that's cool, but perhaps +1/4 would work better.  Or something else.  The massively swingy nature of 5E's killing damage just leads to too many undesirable effects if left untouched.

[Tywyll]

2 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

I get what you're saying, but the point (pardon the pun) of Killing attacks is to kill, to do Body damage, that someone has to buy extra Resistant Defense to counter. The intent is to balance them against Normal Damage attacks, which do more Stun but less Body on average, without the added expense of rDEF.

 

If the Stun damage for Killing Attacks using the 1/2d6  bothers you, I suggest making an additional +1 Stun Multiplier the default for all KA in your game. Your chance of doing more Stun goes up, but not to a degree that's too unbalancing.

No, I get that. I just think after 5 editions with it working the one way, it feels super weird to suddenly work so differently I guess. Like, ka lotto has always been problematic but when you limit stun to x3 it just feels like there is almost no way for Stun to get through most defenses. 

 

I think d3+1 will be reasonable without the danger of the x5 spike. 

[Tywyll]

2 hours ago, Opal said:

Nope, the idea is that a KA that doesn't do BOD just bounced off with no effect, and that one that doesn't bounce simply does STN in proportion to the BOD that gets through.  Non-resistant defense just isn't relevant to killing damage in the variant.   

 

Ah, got it! That makes sense. 

 

2 hours ago, Opal said:

 

For me, the STN lotto nicely captures some classic bits, like the character who is fatally wounded but not unconscious, who still gets to make a dying declaration or set off the self destruct device or whatever, or the character who's shot and drops, but it turns out the bullet 'creased their skull' or some such and though out of the fight, they recover later.  But those bits shouldn't apply when machine-gun bullets are rattling off the ironman or superman type character like raindrops.   

 

I will admit, I do like the possibility of being dying while still conscious. Though in all fairness, I can't remember when it happened last. 

 

2 hours ago, Opal said:

 

To put it another way, the point of a Killing Attack is to kill, and if it sometimes rolls a high STNx and KOs someone you were trying to kill, well, that's it not working so well for you, but not that bad for them, really, since KO'd isn't as bad as dead, and it could have killed them.  When the target had enough resistant defense that the KA can't kill them, nor even do 1 BOD to them on a max roll, though, the STNx becomes a bug, not a feature.  ie if a KA can't even potentially kill a target, it shouldn't do anything to that target. 

 

I like the way you think! 

 

 

[Spence]

Late to the party, but I didn't see it mentioned.

 

5th Ed Galactic Champions discusses high powered characters, both building them and GMing high powered campaigns. 

While I have not really read all the way though it myself, it may be of use.

[Tywyll]

38 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

There's various solutions.  As was pointed out, dropping the STUN multiplier to 1/2 d6 is huge.  OK, heroes need good rDef...but they don't also need insane additional Def to bounce the STUN.  Another option...when Ron was publishing the early editions of Champions Now, we exchanged posts about the killing dice issues.  He dropped killing dice.  Instead, he defined an Advantage called Piercing...+1/2 advantage.  The BODY of the attack only goes against resistant defenses.  You might consider that too high for Champions...that's cool, but perhaps +1/4 would work better.  Or something else.  The massively swingy nature of 5E's killing damage just leads to too many undesirable effects if left untouched.

 

No arguement here! That's my concern, especially at high AP attacks. It is one of my concerns and mitigating it is definitely something I want to do. Damage Reduction is one options. Opal's idea of stun only pinging on the Body that gets through defenses is another idea. 

 

I had noticed Champions Now's solution and I was wondering how well that works. It does seem like the stun values would be super high. Like even 10d6 attack vs your typical rDef (say 12-15) would end up with 20 stun. And it would just get worse the higher you go, wouldn't it? I'll admit I haven't played Champions Now so I don't know how well that variant works. 

[Tywyll]

21 minutes ago, Spence said:

Late to the party, but I didn't see it mentioned.

 

5th Ed Galactic Champions discusses high powered characters, both building them and GMing high powered campaigns. 

While I have not really read all the way though it myself, it may be of use.

 

They do, but honestly they never talk hard numbers really. And while the character attack values are typically super high, their defenses don't seem to match. 

Like Defender 3K can shoot 20d6 eb but only has 30rdef/36ndef. 

Thalya can fire off a 12d6 ap EB but only has 32rdef/44ndef

Rampart's main attack seems to be a Haymaker, which will do 28d6 vs his 50 def, meaning 48 on average gets through.

 

Basically most people are stunned by their own attacks. ;( Maybe I am missing something though?