Why can't you move after you attack?

[tesuji]

Comparison to DND is iffy, because in DND it is difficult to withdraw from a fight. Swing-then-move will earn you a free shot by the enemy unless you bought your way out of it with tumble and such.

 

I used to be on the side of "attack ends action is right" and my argument was primarily that making it so meant that each attack also meant exposing to counter attack and that keeps a sort of back-n-forth cimicy feel to the combat. I really mean supers here, which is what I consider when i talk hero.

 

I have played for a while with MnM and it has neither AoO nor attack-ends-turn rules so attack-n-move is fine. Having seen it in play, i don't see a problem with it.

 

So my personal feeling is that if your players or you find it troublesome, change that rulke for your game. I don't think you will see problems from the change, and if you like it better, thats just great for you. if you don't like it, change back.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by tesuji

Comparison to DND is iffy, because in DND it is difficult to withdraw from a fight. Swing-then-move will earn you a free shot by the enemy unless you bought your way out of it with tumble and such.

 

Hmm, been a while for D&D for me, but can't you attack, then move back from your opponent (as long as you aren't running past enemies) and not trigger an attack of opportunity?

 

-=-=-

 

The D&D/d20 feats seem like a good comparison to a point raised above regarding 0 phase actions and CSL allocations. In D&D/d20, you could use feats which reduce your defense and increase your offense, but there doesn't seem to be a problem with people doing this, attacking, and then switching them back. Same goes for Hero, simply say once allocated in the phase, then they stay allocated, so you don't have issues like setting all CSLs on OCV, attacking, moving them to DCV, then moving from your opponent, all in 1 phase.

[The Souljourner]

I guess I just don't like it when the rules say "you can't do X". In D&D you can do it, even though there is a penalty... or you can use tumbling to get by the penalty, or you can get a feat to get by the penalty....

 

But in Hero, the self procalimed "Do whatever you want" game, you can't do it at all. Feh.

 

I say, changing stuff like CSLs, multipowers, etc should only be doable before you attack, but if you want to move after an attack, that shouldn't be a problem (maybe instituting Attacks of Opportunity wouldn't be a bad idea either).

 

As for "it'll screw up how you work with other players and GMs". Seriously, how often do you switch GMs/groups? Even in the rare case that you do, if you're used to attack and move, your new GM will correct you the first time you try it (like what happened with me in my first game). Changing this is not like moving two at a time in checkers, that's a radical, far reaching change. It's more like saying "red goes first" instead of "black goes first" (not that I really know which is supposed to go first). Sure, it changes the game somewhat, but not in a way that isn't easily adapted to.

 

-Nate

[Vondy]

Originally posted by The Souljourner

 

But in Hero, the self procalimed "Do whatever you want" game, you can't do it at all. Feh.

 

-Nate

 

Several methods of doing it have been mentioned in this very thread. It is possible within the existing mechanics without changing a thing.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by D-Man

Several methods of doing it have been mentioned in this very thread. It is possible within the existing mechanics without changing a thing.

 

Yeah, but they are not nearly as flexible as simply moving, nor is there a compelling reason not to allow movement afterward but for the fact that the system arbitrarily set up the "attack action" as a phase ender, rather than simply say "once you've activated/deactivated a power, set CSLs, etc. for a phase, you can't change them". Not allowing movement after attack is a very outdated construct with no real usefulness, just a mechanical rules simplification.

[Vondy]

Originally posted by slaughterj

Yeah, but they are not nearly as flexible as simply moving, nor is there a compelling reason not to allow movement afterward but for the fact that the system arbitrarily set up the "attack action" as a phase ender, rather than simply say "once you've activated/deactivated a power, set CSLs, etc. for a phase, you can't change them". Not allowing movement after attack is a very outdated construct with no real usefulness, just a mechanical rules simplification.

 

How is a move by less flexible?

 

If you don't like it, change it.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by D-Man

How is a move by less flexible?

 

If you don't like it, change it.

 

I guess you haven't been paying attention, I stated in this thread that I changed it many years ago, without adverse effect

 

A move-by is a lot less flexible because of the -2 OCV and -2 DCV (damage may be down slightly on average, but maybe not). Those are some significant penalties, changing your chance to hit or avoid being hit by 25% when dealing with equivalent range CV opponents. Move-by is better when you need to move up, attack, and keep moving, of course, or to attack more than 1 target.

[Talon]

Originally posted by slaughterj

Hmm, been a while for D&D for me, but can't you attack, then move back from your opponent (as long as you aren't running past enemies) and not trigger an attack of opportunity?

 

Nope, if you attack and then leave a threatened square you trigger an attack of opportunity. The only to "get away clean" is to just move, or to only move 5' after attacking.

[Vondy]

Originally posted by slaughterj

I guess you haven't been paying attention, I stated in this thread that I changed it many years ago, with adverse effect

 

A move-by is a lot less flexible because of the -2 OCV and -2 DCV (damage may be down slightly on average, but maybe not). Those are some significant penalties, changing your chance to hit or avoid being hit by 25% when dealing with equivalent range CV opponents. Move-by is better when you need to move up, attack, and keep moving, of course, or to attack more than 1 target.

 

I would say disengaging from combat, which is what an attack and then move is (unless you have suprise or your target isn't using their combat DCVs) merits those penalties.

[coach]

All I can say is, of course you can attack and then move. Say you have a SPD 4 character, on phase 3 you run up and punch somebody, on phase 6 you run away. There you go, you moved *right* after you attacked.

 

Remember that even though the system makes it seem like it, the actions are not static, it's all fluid and continuous, like in the movies or "real life". Did some people manage to get in some actions between the time you started your swing and the time you ended 50 feet away? I would guess that they likely did, unless you have some really slow adversaries. But how is that unrealistic? Lots of other stuff will be going on while you attack then run. Simulated by the fact that others get phases in there somewhere.

 

Try an experiment. Punch your punching bag and then run the other way 50 feet. How long did that take you? Could other people be doing stuff during that time period? Now, take a swing at your big brother and then try to run away before he tags you right back. Unless you knocked him over or knocked his breath out, you know he's gonna be able to pop you before you can get away. *Especially* if you missed. Think about that for a second. You swing, you miss, and then you think you are going to be able to run 20' (an average half-move) before your opponent can hit you back? That's just totally unrealistic. Unless, of course, you are WAY faster than your opponent.

 

If you want your character to be able to pop somebody and then run away before they can return fire, then you need to buy an exceptionally high SPD. But, you *never* see the "tag" type of fighting that the hit-then-move type of combat tends towards in the movies. Or even in real life. In the middle of a combat, it is usually very hard to get away from your opponent. You have to do something significant to give yourself an extra second to get away.

 

So, if you want to move away immediately after attacking, do it your next phase because that IS immediately.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by coach

All I can say is, of course you can attack and then move. Say you have a SPD 4 character, on phase 3 you run up and punch somebody, on phase 6 you run away. There you go, you moved *right* after you attacked.

 

Remember that even though the system makes it seem like it, the actions are not static, it's all fluid and continuous, like in the movies or "real life". Did some people manage to get in some actions between the time you started your swing and the time you ended 50 feet away? I would guess that they likely did, unless you have some really slow adversaries. But how is that unrealistic? Lots of other stuff will be going on while you attack then run. Simulated by the fact that others get phases in there somewhere.

 

Try an experiment. Punch your punching bag and then run the other way 50 feet. How long did that take you? Could other people be doing stuff during that time period? Now, take a swing at your big brother and then try to run away before he tags you right back. Unless you knocked him over or knocked his breath out, you know he's gonna be able to pop you before you can get away. *Especially* if you missed. Think about that for a second. You swing, you miss, and then you think you are going to be able to run 20' (an average half-move) before your opponent can hit you back? That's just totally unrealistic. Unless, of course, you are WAY faster than your opponent.

 

If you want your character to be able to pop somebody and then run away before they can return fire, then you need to buy an exceptionally high SPD. But, you *never* see the "tag" type of fighting that the hit-then-move type of combat tends towards in the movies. Or even in real life. In the middle of a combat, it is usually very hard to get away from your opponent. You have to do something significant to give yourself an extra second to get away.

 

So, if you want to move away immediately after attacking, do it your next phase because that IS immediately.

 

Haha, whatever. The point is, the system allows you to move then attack IN THE SAME PHASE, but doesn't allow for attack then move IN THE SAME PHASE. You tell me why one takes any different amount of time, and then you might get somewhere.

 

I understand what you mean about the tag and run off situation, but I don't see it as an issue for a myriad of reasons:

1. What else is move-by but a run by and tag the target en route, without a return strike except with a held action? Under your line of thinking, this shouldn't be allowed.

2. Attack then move means you would have had to have started out adjacent to your target, so there likely would have been a window for the target to attack you somewhere in there. E.g., SPD 4 character runs up on Phase 3 to attack SPD 3 villain. After movement, then attack on Phase 3, SPD 4 character is next to SPD 3 villain. SPD 3 villain then attacks SPD 4 character on Phase 4. On Phase 6, SPD 4 character attacks SPD 4 villain again, and moves away. Villain still got an attack in, and likely on Phase 8 can half-move and still attack SPD 4 character wherever they ran off to.

3. There are a ton of Heroic situations where attack then move makes sense, e.g., my hero is holding onto the vine with one hand, swings his sword at the adjacent cannibal, then swings across the ravine to escape his fellows. Why should that not be allowed in 1 phase, when alternatively my hero could swing on the vine to the other side of the ravine and attack a cannibal there? IT MAKES NO SENSE. It's merely a game mechanic simplifier that is outdated and unnecessary.

[tesuji]

Originally posted by D-Man

I would say disengaging from combat, which is what an attack and then move is (unless you have suprise or your target isn't using their combat DCVs) merits those penalties.

 

OK, i copuld even buy that excuse...

 

So, since you are of similar mind, do you also, IN YOUR GAMES, impose those penalties on characters who, as an example in the following cases...

 

In each case, assume I start my action within range of someone who is meleeing me. So, in adjacent sqaures to Obsidian for example.

 

Example 1: I take half move back off and then fire an energy bolt at someone else? By the rules i take NO PENALTIES even though i left a melee combat.

 

Example:2: I spend a half action to shapechange and grow wings (half phase due to linked) and back a half move. By the book, i take no disengaing from combat penalties. What about in your game?

 

net result.. sure you can try and pretend the move by penalties are "for disengaging" but in truth in HERo there are no penalties for disengaging from combat. if you want to add such, thats cool, but its not really an issue with whether or not attack ends your phase or not, which is really whats at issue here.

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by coach

All I can say is, of course you can attack and then move. Say you have a SPD 4 character, on phase 3 you run up and punch somebody, on phase 6 you run away. There you go, you moved *right* after you attacked.

Ok so if its all one homogenous mash, why do we need to make sure and break it up after an attack, as opposed to after a move or after a shapeshift?

Originally posted by coach

Try an experiment. Punch your punching bag and then run the other way 50 feet. How long did that take you? Could other people be doing stuff during that time period? Now, take a swing at your big brother and then try to run away before he tags you right back. Unless you knocked him over or knocked his breath out, you know he's gonna be able to pop you before you can get away. *Especially* if you missed. Think about that for a second. You swing, you miss, and then you think you are going to be able to run 20' (an average half-move) before your opponent can hit you back? That's just totally unrealistic. Unless, of course, you are WAY faster than your opponent.

try running past your brother when he wants to punch you. unless he is knocked down or stunned or surprised, he will punch you when you run past. So WHY is it right to allow you to run past your brother or away from him and not give him an immediate reaction but it is wrong to allow you to swing at him and move away?

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by tesuji

try running past your brother when he wants to punch you. unless he is knocked down or stunned or surprised, he will punch you when you run past. So WHY is it right to allow you to run past your brother or away from him and not give him an immediate reaction but it is wrong to allow you to swing at him and move away?

 

Exactly. The Hero system does not have a setup akin to Attacks of Opportunity, and you have to play it with that understanding. The move-by and the attack then move away are basically the same thing in the sense that both allow movement after the attack, but the move-by doesn't trigger an attack by an opponent, so attack then move shouldn't either. Instead, I tend to have certain mooks hold actions based on character s approaching them, and react accordingly, unless they are already in an appropriate position for combat - then the held action can wait to hit the character if they try to run by the mook, but if not, then the mook will take his action (e.g., move up and attack).

[lemming]

The attack then move *may* increase some cases of people delaying. Which in my experience slows down combat. So in my view, I'm sticking with attack ends the phase.

 

And yes, move-bys can cause the same, but at least there's a penalty already involved.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by lemming

The attack then move *may* increase some cases of people delaying. Which in my experience slows down combat. So in my view, I'm sticking with attack ends the phase.

 

In my experience, the extent to which there is holding actions seems to depend more on the particular gaming group than any change in the rules on allowing attack-then-move - some groups just play on and are loose, others are more "tactical". I haven't found some delaying to be particularly problematic, and even when I've played under move-then attack (the regular hero rule), I've seen plenty of phases delayed to the segment before their next, then attack (unless they needed to dodge, which is why the held actions often), then move away, then attack elsewhere. In fact, I've seen when I've run attack-then move, that people will elect to do that, rather than hold their phase in case they needed to dodge because they wouldn't be able to move away if they attacked.

 

Originally posted by lemming

And yes, move-bys can cause the same, but at least there's a penalty already involved.

 

Side Rant: I think the penalties for maneuvers are excessive (nothing to do with the present issue), with simple -2 penalties causing a 25% shift in success chances when dealing with equivalent CVs. When I was younger, I didn't really pay attention, but in more recent times, I find myself extremely loathe to subject myself to a 25% penalty to hitting and 25% bonus to my opponents hitting when doing a move-by (why should ALL my opponents be able to hit me better when I'm doing this and am on the run?? and why is it harder to hit somebody as you are running by, doesn't seem so in real life??).

[Farkling]

Think about the DnD attack system mechanically...as opposed to HERO...

HERO is broken down much further than DnD (granularity!), so has a strange feel to the "combat round" player.

Think about the much touted "Attack of Oppurtunity" that is being quoted from DnD and the critique of "I can't attack and move" stems completely[/i} from the DnD system.

 

The phase is not a combat round. The TURN is a combat round. (Actually, in the old DnD, that would be FIVE turns). In a turn there are plenty of times to move and then attack, or attack and then move. It's all in the phase actions.

Fighting retreats can even be a half move followed by holding action anticipating pursuit. If there is no pursuit, you can block or move the remainder of you movement. Rarely does a fighting retreat (in my experience with combat) involve ATTACKING and moving away. If you had a successful attack, WHY are you moving away? I think some of the logic breakdown amy also come from the AC system in DnD, after all, your DEF+Armor+DCV = DnD AC.

 

[sIDERANT]

Attacks of oppurtunity in the DnD system are designed to keep most characters slugging it out until someone drops. Notice that Attacks of Oppurtunity simply grant a person seperate and FREE actions in addition to their normal actions. Really...think about. Thug moves. You get to stab him for free. Some feats will allow muiltiple stabbings. Then during your next action you get to attack AGAIN. Free DEX and SPD granted by your opponent moving in the wrong manner.

[/sIDERANT]

 

I also think the penalties associated with move bys and move throughs reflects comic book / action movie physics. They feel like they are designed to penalize you for splitting your concentration/actions. If the penalties are a problem, buy some skill levels. If the Hulk is waiting with a delayed phase, I think he should have a better chance to THUMP you as you charge him, or to step out of your way.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Farkling

I also think the penalties associated with move bys and move throughs reflects comic book / action movie physics. They feel like they are designed to penalize you for splitting your concentration/actions. If the penalties are a problem, buy some skill levels. If the Hulk is waiting with a delayed phase, I think he should have a better chance to THUMP you as you charge him, or to step out of your way.

 

The problem is, it's not just the Hulk who has a better chance to hit you as you move-by, or to avoid being hit (which I don't buy in and of itself), but it is EVERYONE HAS A BETTER CHANCE TO HIT YOU. I just don't see it.

[Farkling]

You're splitting your attention to half seconds, moving and focussing on hitting someone simultaneously..you shouldn't be in top form in any category, same as when you use multiple powers in a Multipower. I do see it that way. You want to do everything at once, then you cannot perform the actions as flawlessly as normal.

Of course, I have found recently that my gaming groups are apparently the only ones on the planet that used multipowers for anything other than a selector list of cheap attacks. Maybe that is from DnD-itis too ?

 

I don't understand how -2 to OCV is a 25% penalty as quoted...this is a bell curve. The value shift is relevant to the actual difference of the OCV's and DCV's. I had statistics, and I can do some of the math...but there are better people for it on these boards. Here's a fast and dirty look:

If you had an 11- to hit a target, then it drops to a 9-, which goes from 50% to about 37% => (~13%).

16- to hit your target (~98%), that drops to a 14-, which is about 90%. => (~ 8%).

14- (~90%) drops to 12- (~75%) => (~15%)

 

So mechanics dictate that you should not perform move-bys (or thrus!) on targets with close or better CV's than you, unless you have many levels (practice). That matches what I've seen in comic books. Don't charge someone whos is quicker or better prepared than you, or they will rip your arm off.

 

You want to overcome the penatlies? Buy a couple of skill levels, they're cheap. Or spend the points on an attack that will do what you are picturing in your head.

8d6 EB, AE-Any Line of Hexes, only along path travelled with movement.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Farkling

You're splitting your attention to half seconds, moving and focussing on hitting someone simultaneously..you shouldn't be in top form in any category, same as when you use multiple powers in a Multipower. I do see it that way. You want to do everything at once, then you cannot perform the actions as flawlessly as normal.

 

I see no difference between a person taking a half move to a target and hitting them, versus hitting them and then taking a half move in time, and negligible difference between hitting them when running by them.

 

Originally posted by Farkling

I don't understand how -2 to OCV is a 25% penalty as quoted...this is a bell curve. The value shift is relevant to the actual difference of the OCV's and DCV's. I had statistics, and I can do some of the math...but there are better people for it on these boards. Here's a fast and dirty look:

If you had an 11- to hit a target, then it drops to a 9-, which goes from 50% to about 37% => (~13%).

16- to hit your target (~98%), that drops to a 14-, which is about 90%. => (~ 8%).

14- (~90%) drops to 12- (~75%) => (~15%)

 

Sure, it is a bell curve, but I said it was a 25% shift when dealing with equivalent CVs. An 11- to hit is a 62.5% chance (10- is 50%, you're #s are off, typical mistake though ), so shifting that to 9- is 37.5%, thus 25% - and you can even say it's much worse, it's a raw 25%, but 37.5% is 40% worse than 62.5% in a comparative sense.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Farkling

You want to overcome the penatlies? Buy a couple of skill levels, they're cheap. Or spend the points on an attack that will do what you are picturing in your head.

8d6 EB, AE-Any Line of Hexes, only along path travelled with movement.

 

That's not particularly an option in Heroic level campaigns. The CV penalties from maneuvers make it so that you can get tagged HARD and a lot more easily in Heroic campaigns, for what I see are fairly negligible differences in attack actions.

 

And don't even think about trying to do something cool, like a grab-by, that might be heroic - with a -3 OCV, -4 DCV penalty, you're likely to fail and likely to take a beating!

[coach]

So, have you tried playing with a attack-then-move house rule and see how it works?

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by coach

So, have you tried playing with a attack-then-move house rule and see how it works?

 

Are you referring to me? If so, yes, I've run it that way since the late 80s without any problem whatsoever. I've played and run it "normally" as well, but don't like it as much.

[Farkling]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Farkling

You're splitting your attention to half seconds, moving and focussing on hitting someone simultaneously..you shouldn't be in top form in any category, same as when you use multiple powers in a Multipower. I do see it that way. You want to do everything at once, then you cannot perform the actions as flawlessly as normal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Originally posted by SlaughterJ

I see no difference between a person taking a half move to a target and hitting them, versus hitting them and then taking a half move in time, and negligible difference between hitting them when running by them.

 

You are taking me out of context...I was referring to move bys and move throughs. My apologies on the statistical error...its been a while.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Farkling

You are taking me out of context...I was referring to move bys and move throughs. My apologies on the statistical error...its been a while.

 

My last comment of the three was regarding move-bys, I was just pulling the whole thread together