Power Framework Question

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Then why ever take HA versus PD?  Why not just buy STR?

 

As a GM I would never allow someone to buy STR only for damage, just out of the box.  Because its cheesing the rules.  It should be a general prohibition in the rules, in fact, it basically is: there's a power in place already to increase melee damage in the rules.

 

In any case, what's the limitation on STR, only does damage?  Hint: it would be cheaper than buying HTA.  If you just buy flat out STR, then you get into concept damage.  I'm a regular guy that punches really hard... and can lift a bus.

[Hugh Neilson]

14 hours ago, unclevlad said:

 

The root problem is that, it's a direct consequence of the power assembly process, and the attempt to be everything for everyone.  There will be holes like that.  There are, IMO, also things that are horribly overpriced...floating fixed locations for Teleport is a big one for me.

 

I actually posted here, a couple years ago:  whatever your baseline point level is, add X%...but disallow virtually all limitations.  In some cases, this might mean restructuring a power...HA comes with an implicit limitation, for example.  Fine, how about dropping the cost to 4 points.  If you don't like that, well, that might be a limitation you need to keep, but generally...no, disallow limitations.  You can try to scrutinize all you want, but you have to toss out a fair bit of RAW, and trying this piecemeal is also guaranteed to have holes. 

 

Note:  I'm talking for supers.  This almost certainly falls apart for fantasy, at least not without even more extensive consideration.  

 

At one time, HA was 3 points per +1d6.  This was problematic for those using AP as a measure of power, and made it much easier to slap a big HA in a framework. A lot depends on whether one views HA as a Blast with No Range to which STR can be added, or STR that only does damage.  I subscribe to the latter view.  There is no rule to prevent applying Attack vs Alternative Defense to STR damage so it works against ED, a +0 advantage.

 

14 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Hand attack shouldn't get a limitation anyway, its the equivalent of HKA.

 

HKA is the true outlier. No other attack power is increased by another ability. If we ditched HKA and simply had Killing Attack (same price and model as current RKA), you could buy an RKA with no Range.  Want to do more damage because you are strong? Slap some extra No Range KA dice on with Unified Power to STR, or Locking out the use of the same AP of STR for damage.

 

**but but but** swords would be more complicated.  Maybe in build.  Not in play. You don't buy swords with points in fantasy games anyway.

 

13 hours ago, unclevlad said:

BTW:  what I did was to make HA 4 points per d6, with 1/2 d6 for 2...mostly for +1 AVADs and NNDs.  

 

HA has always been tough to reconcile with MA damage classes. 4 points for 1d6 that only does damage (no Grabs, Escapes, etc.) that costs END doesn't seem like a great bargain.  But at least some of that is underpricing MA DCs.

12 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

As a GM I would never allow someone to buy STR only for damage, just out of the box.  Because its cheesing the rules.  It should be a general prohibition in the rules, in fact, it basically is: there's a power in place already to increase melee damage in the rules.

 

In any case, what's the limitation on STR, only does damage?  Hint: it would be cheaper than buying HTA.  If you just buy flat out STR, then you get into concept damage.  I'm a regular guy that punches really hard... and can lift a bus.

 

So the player whose SFX are punching really hard, but not lifting a bus, should pay the same as a player whose SFX is being really strong and getting lifting, escape, grab & hold, etc.?  That's concept penalization. To me, "build any character you can imagine" comes with an implicit "who will be reasonably competitive with characters other players imagine".

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

So the player whose SFX are punching really hard, but not lifting a bus, should pay the same as a player whose SFX is being really strong and getting lifting, escape, grab & hold, etc.?

 

That gets into strength and whether it is costed properly (not) which is a separate issue entirely.  There's nothing whatsoever about HTA which should grant it a limitation, not the power in and of its self.  Its the same thing as Blast, but instead of range it stacks STR damage.  Conceptually its tight, as a power structure its tight, and in comparison with an existing power structure since the beginning of the game, its consistent and tight.

 

Again, this is where I say there should be a single killing attack power and a single normal attack power.  Then, you either get a range or "STR Adds" element as part of the killing or normal attack.  You can remove either one of those with a -½ limitation.

[Grailknight]

1 hour ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

HKA is the true outlier. No other attack power is increased by another ability. If we ditched HKA and simply had Killing Attack (same price and model as current RKA), you could buy an RKA with no Range.  Want to do more damage because you are strong? Slap some extra No Range KA dice on with Unified Power to STR, or Locking out the use of the same AP of STR for damage.

 

I both agree and disagree with this.  Yes, HKA was the only Power with a write-up that added to another Power. But no, since HA has been present since First Edition in the form of improvised and blunt weapons. It just wasn't codified in the rules until the BBB. 

 

That's more how HERO has traditionally worked. We're on the 6th Edition and I can only recall one thing that's been taken out over the years and that's COM. I do recall a tiny little crapstorm flamewar over that.🙂

 

1 hour ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

**but but but** swords would be more complicated.  Maybe in build.  Not in play. You don't buy swords with points in fantasy games anyway.

 

You don't buy clubs or staffs with points either. But the early builds used 5 points per DC.  HKA was the RAW at the time for Killing Damage so that's what was used.

 

1 hour ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

 

HA has always been tough to reconcile with MA damage classes. 4 points for 1d6 that only does damage (no Grabs, Escapes, etc.) that costs END doesn't seem like a great bargain.  But at least some of that is underpricing MA DCs.

 

So the player whose SFX are punching really hard, but not lifting a bus, should pay the same as a player whose SFX is being really strong and getting lifting, escape, grab & hold, etc.?  That's concept penalization. To me, "build any character you can imagine" comes with an implicit "who will be reasonably competitive with characters other players imagine".

 

HA is fine even at 5 points per DC. It's not a common Power and, in genre, it will almost always have Limitations that are not common to the user's STR. You could just as easily make that hard puncher as a martial artist with a unique style. 

 

The fixation on perfect points balance is admirable in some ways but ultimately pointless. Plain STR isn't even the cheapest way to buy STR, Density Increase is. HA at 5 points per DC will still see more use than Growth in the current ruleset and it's definitely not as iconic a power.

 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Grailknight

[unclevlad]

I agree that perfect balance is not only pointless, but probably impossible.  Far too many moving parts.

 

I disagree about the DI being cheaper.  Buying STR or an HA, you don't spend END every phase...even if you're doing nothing.  You do with DI, which has the occasional issue that you can't take a recovery with the DI active.  Unless you're going to 0 END, and now the cost is higher.  Plus, DI quickly applies what should be a significant Phys Lim...which may not be used against the player nearly often enough.  400 pounds...not much of an issue.  800?  Problem.  1600?  BIG problem.  

 

BTW, as I want to keep the SERIOUSLY high STR characters down, I use HAs, or martial arts DCs, a LOT more often.  Lifting STR doubles every 5 points, whereas damage increases linearly.  That screams mismatch.  For me...past a 20 STR, my feeling is +5 STR --> 2 DCs.  One's from the STR, the other from HA or MA DC.  Still have to pay for it, but this keeps damage dealt more in line with lifting STR, for a while anyway.

 

Hm.  A side point here is applications.  When you're building a weapon via HA, it actually makes more sense to start with 5 points per die, to keep DC costing as consistent as possible.  It's NOT adding to your STR in any way, there's no pretense that it does.  That mindset also argues for 5 points for MA DCs.  Why were they 4?  I'll argue, because they were 4 points in 5E and they failed to recognize that the costing NEEDED to change when they removed Figured Characteristics.  OTOH, if I want a power that says "my punches hit harder"...an HA with no extraneous limitations...then pricing it the same as STR just begs the question, why buy it at all, rather than just more STR?  

 

I can get behind CRT's idea to simplify things...but I'd go further.  ONE power to add damage.  One can either change the base cost per die based on applicability, or specify a fixed base cost  and use modifiers.  This isn't a trivial distinction, because the cost of OTHER advantages is tied to the base cost.  It might work out to split advantages into 2 groups...one that increases the level of the base (and thereby ties to things like range), as an adder does, and another that just increases the active cost.  Another aspect can be looking at CSLs...a 2 point CSL can't be used for adding damage.  So perhaps here, some of the levels *can't* be used with, say, AVADs...which is part of the reason why they're cheaper.

 

So I kinda like varying the base cost.  Maybe......cost suggestions are per d6...

3 points:  No range.  Can't add STR.  Limited to normal damage versus PD or ED.

4 points:  No range.  Can add STR.  Limited to normal or killing damage vs. PD or ED.  

5 points:  MA HTH DCs.

5 points:  Ranged.  Can't add STR.

6 points:  MA Ranged DCs.

7 points:  Ranged.  CAN add STR (at the usual rate, +5 STR --> 1 DC.)  Standard range.  

+1/4:  as suggested above, the BODY damage is resisted only by resistant defenses.  NOT allowed at the 3 point level.

TK:  I might roll that into this but keep the 3 points per level, and I might leave it as a standalone power.

 

That's just off the top of my head, so I'm not locked into those numbers, and hey, maybe it doesn't work.  But, I'd rather define a framework I can use that fits fairly well, over hopefully a fairly broad point range.  

[Cloppy Clip]

There'll probably be enough unforeseen knock-on effects with those changes alone, unclevlad, but if we're feeling cheeky could we go even further and add killing attacks to this single damage power? If we're pricing it as 5 points for 1d6 and using modifiers to give the damage properties like 'no range' or 'adds STR', then couldn't 'killing attack' work as a +0 modifier (would that be an advantage or a limitation?) that converts 1d6 normal damage to 1 DC of killing attack damage? That way you could take all the modifiers and pricing structures you've worked out for normal damage and replicate them for killing attacks to sort out RKA and HKA into one consolidated power.

 

It might be pushing things too far, and I'm not sure if it would be an improvement in play or if it'd just make things worse, but it does feel somewhat cleaner from an aesthetics viewpoint...

[Hugh Neilson]

Leaving aside "why should "adds STR" be an option instead of buying more dice, perhaps linked to STR...

 

Why can't other attacks also spend the same +1/2 advantage to add STR?  What, mechanically, makes this appropriate for HA and HKA but not for other attack powers?

 

Why can't the same addition be applied with other characteristics?  My mental fortitude (EGO) enhances my Mental Blast. My intelligence allows me to craft more skillful mental illusions.  My agility (DEX) allows me to strike more precisely, thereby causing more damage.

 

The reality is that a +1/2 advantage just means "buy this instead of more DCs if it's less expensive".

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Why can't other attacks also spend the same +1/2 advantage to add STR?  What, mechanically, makes this appropriate for HA and HKA but not for other attack powers?

 

Why not?  Its going to be really challenging to figure out how to justify adding dice to your mental illusions with STR, but its not impossible.

[unclevlad]

8 hours ago, Cloppy Clip said:

There'll probably be enough unforeseen knock-on effects with those changes alone, unclevlad, but if we're feeling cheeky could we go even further and add killing attacks to this single damage power? If we're pricing it as 5 points for 1d6 and using modifiers to give the damage properties like 'no range' or 'adds STR', then couldn't 'killing attack' work as a +0 modifier (would that be an advantage or a limitation?) that converts 1d6 normal damage to 1 DC of killing attack damage? That way you could take all the modifiers and pricing structures you've worked out for normal damage and replicate them for killing attacks to sort out RKA and HKA into one consolidated power.

 

It might be pushing things too far, and I'm not sure if it would be an improvement in play or if it'd just make things worse, but it does feel somewhat cleaner from an aesthetics viewpoint...

 

You could, but again, I'd rather eliminate killing dice altogether and use an advantage, as I noted, that keeps normal BODY determination.

 

1 hour ago, Hugh Neilson said:

Why can't other attacks also spend the same +1/2 advantage to add STR?  What, mechanically, makes this appropriate for HA and HKA but not for other attack powers?

 

Why can't the same addition be applied with other characteristics?  My mental fortitude (EGO) enhances my Mental Blast. My intelligence allows me to craft more skillful mental illusions.  My agility (DEX) allows me to strike more precisely, thereby causing more damage.

 

The reality is that a +1/2 advantage just means "buy this instead of more DCs if it's less expensive".

 

I might actually allow a +1/2 Advantage to STR to let it be applied to an appropriate attack power...but NOT as an underpinning for TK.  Note that you'd better take that as a Naked Advantage...or you're paying for the END on ALL applications of STR.  A naked advantage is a special power...so can't be put into a framework.  Note that I am NOT!!! considering it as an advantage on, say, Blast.  That's putting the scaling on the wrong side, when it's executed as an advantage.  

 

Note that my "attack power costs" are analogous to the following:

3 points:  blast, no range

4 points:  HA, but no AVADs

5 points:  MA DCs and HAs with AVADs 

5 points:  Blast

7 points gives the Blast where you're allowed to add STR...and if that one doesn't work out?  That's fine, it was tossed out there.  I might say 6 points per die, AND you need to buy "STR at range."  Yeah, I really don't have a problem making this very expensive, to try to cut down the abuse potential.  

 

While many SFX wouldn't fit...for your STR to be applied to the target, the attack has to be something that carries the STR along the way.  An ice blast would fit;  a fire blast wouldn't.  I also wouldn't apply it to TK because TK has aspects of both Indirect and AoE applicability that "STR at range" doesn't.

 

Also note that you can get "STR at range" cheap...with Stretching.  Your HA carries over.  Your martial maneuvers carry over.  You even get No Range Mods, within the limits of your Stretching.

 

Adding EGO to your mental powers...I could see that.  Same condition...+1/2 advantage to your EGO.  Mental Attack still needs 2 DCs to get +1 die.  I'd have to think about it.

 

INT...it wouldn't increase the dice.  A better crafted image has a better PER roll adjustment, but this is already built in.  DEX...a precise shot doesn't increase damage, it decreases targeting penalties to hit those spots.  If you're not using hit locations, which I loathe with a passion?  Welllll...I might allow it.  Again, +1/2...and on ALL your DEX, that's gonna be expensive.

 

But just because you use it in a sensible case, doesn't mean it should be forced onto ALL cases.  That's just Herbert.  

 

 

[Cloppy Clip]

I see I jumped the gun a bit, unclevlad, and missed what you were going for with the killing advantage. The normal/killing attack distinction can feel a bit arbitrary to me sometimes, so I agree that if we're changing things around this much we don't need to try and port it over as-is.

 

And I think I might be missing something again, because Hugh's idea about allowing any characteristic to add onto any attack... doesn't really bother me? I can see why it's not done that way in HERO as it is right now, or at least I think I do, but if we're tinkering with things to this level I don't see a mechanical reason why you can't add, say, DEX to a Mental Illusions power. There are lots of problems with what sort of fictional power that's supposed to represent, but I'm not sure it's HERO's place to judge the stories we work around the mechanics: if the players and GM are happy working something out together for their game, and there's nothing wrong with the mechanics behind it, why shouldn't we allow such things?

 

There is the consideration of whether buying the characteristic along with a +1/2 advantage is cheaper or more expensive than buying more of the power with an appropriate limitation, but I think there's enough examples of different ways to do the same concept that come down to points accounting in HERO that we could allow one more. Right?

[Christopher R Taylor]

I don't have the thread at hand but we spent several weeks here working out how to make killing attacks be rolled like normal attacks (to increase dice quantity, regulate STN damage, and streamline the system).  After much math and number crunching it ended up that any advantage at all reduced KA significantly below normal damage, especially at higher dice levels.  The compromise we came up with was this:

 

Killing attacks are rolled exactly like normal damage, but are defended against by resistant defenses (for the body).  To create a balance between stun and killing defenses required, we ruled that killing damage does 1 less stun per d6 than normal attacks.  So if you have a 12 DC killing attack you roll 12d6, count up the body like a normal attack, and drop the stun total by the dice number (12).  Minimum 1 stun damage, of course

Edited May 17, 2023 by Christopher R Taylor

[Hugh Neilson]

20 hours ago, unclevlad said:

I might actually allow a +1/2 Advantage to STR to let it be applied to an appropriate attack power...but NOT as an underpinning for TK.  Note that you'd better take that as a Naked Advantage...or you're paying for the END on ALL applications of STR.  A naked advantage is a special power...so can't be put into a framework.  Note that I am NOT!!! considering it as an advantage on, say, Blast.  That's putting the scaling on the wrong side, when it's executed as an advantage. 

 

Why would this be an advantage on STR?  You don't get a limitation on STR for "Does not increase HKA".  The argument many set out has always been that there is a base 10 point KA that has no range and is not enhanced  by STR, and it comes bundled with either Range (which we know is +1/2) or increased by STR (extrapolating +1/2 because the same cost applies).

 

Regardless of how we model this, it has a scaling issue.  Buy 60 STR and spend 30 on "adds to attacks". Now buy a Multipower of many different attacks, 1 DC each, all augmented by STR.  Or, if you are going back to pre-6e doubling rules, 30 STR and 15 for "adds to attacks" and the MP goes to 6 DCs.

 

When I can either have a 3d6 HKA and a 15 STR (so 4d6 HKA) or a 2d6 HKA and 30 STR (so the same 4d6 HKA and all the benefits of an extra 15 STR for half the cost), there is already a problem. Point balance is often very murky, but when you can have the same cost for all the same benefits, plus more, that is a clear imbalance.

 

20 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Note that my "attack power costs" are analogous to the following:

3 points:  blast, no range

4 points:  HA, but no AVADs

5 points:  MA DCs and HAs with AVADs 

5 points:  Blast

7 points gives the Blast where you're allowed to add STR...and if that one doesn't work out?  That's fine, it was tossed out there.  I might say 6 points per die, AND you need to buy "STR at range."  Yeah, I really don't have a problem making this very expensive, to try to cut down the abuse potential. 

 

If a HA needs to cost more for AVAD to apply, that just seems to indicate that AVAD is underpriced.

 

So I can either buy a 12d6 Blast (60 points) or a 1d6 Blast, STR adds (7 points) and 55 STR (45 points).  Which seems like the better deal?  "You have to buy STR at range" seems to fly in the face of the absolute prohibition of buying STR at range.

 

20 hours ago, unclevlad said:

INT...it wouldn't increase the dice.  A better crafted image has a better PER roll adjustment, but this is already built in.  DEX...a precise shot doesn't increase damage, it decreases targeting penalties to hit those spots.  If you're not using hit locations, which I loathe with a passion?  Welllll...I might allow it.  Again, +1/2...and on ALL your DEX, that's gonna be expensive.

 

Mental Illusions don't have PER rolls.  And all attacks have a built-in mechanic for adding damage.  You buy more dice.  Additions for STR (or any other characteristic) provides an alternative mechanic for adding more dice which will only be used if it is less expensive; same cost but you get more; or even a bit more expensive but the added benefits of the higher characteristic still offset, or more than offset, the extra cost.

 

Why should it be more expensive to add damage based on DEX, or CON, or whatever? Don't we get what we pay for in Hero?

 

12 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I don't have the thread at hand but we spent several weeks here working out how to make killing attacks be rolled like normal attacks (to increase dice quantity, regulate STN damage, and streamline the system).  After much math and number crunching it ended up that any advantage at all reduced KA significantly below normal damage, especially at higher dice levels.  The compromise we came up with was this:

 

Killing attacks are rolled exactly like normal damage, but are defended against by resistant defenses (for the body).  To create a balance between stun and killing defenses required, we ruled that killing damage does 1 less stun per d6 than normal attacks.  So if you have a 12 DC killing attack you roll 12d6, count up the body like a normal attack, and drop the stun total by the dice number (12).  Minimum 1 stun damage, of course

 

Most variants to move KA to 1d6 per 1DC increase the BOD damage by either counting 1s as 1 BOD or 5s as 2 BOD, so a 12 DC KA still averages 14 BOD.  Dropping STUN to an average of 2 2/3 puts average STUN of a 12 DC KA at 32 (versus 42 for a normal attack).  That's better than the 28 average of a 6e KA, but not as high as the pre-6e average a bit over 37. Eliminating the STUN lotto probably makes this reasonably comparable to a 6e KA.

[unclevlad]

Quote

Why would this be an advantage on STR?  You don't get a limitation on STR for "Does not increase HKA".  The argument many set out has always been that there is a base 10 point KA that has no range and is not enhanced  by STR, and it comes bundled with either Range (which we know is +1/2) or increased by STR (extrapolating +1/2 because the same cost applies).

 

Regardless of how we model this, it has a scaling issue.  Buy 60 STR and spend 30 on "adds to attacks". Now buy a Multipower of many different attacks, 1 DC each, all augmented by STR.  Or, if you are going back to pre-6e doubling rules, 30 STR and 15 for "adds to attacks" and the MP goes to 6 DCs.

 

When I can either have a 3d6 HKA and a 15 STR (so 4d6 HKA) or a 2d6 HKA and 30 STR (so the same 4d6 HKA and all the benefits of an extra 15 STR for half the cost), there is already a problem. Point balance is often very murky, but when you can have the same cost for all the same benefits, plus more, that is a clear imbalance.

 

 

Because STR cannot be applied at a distance.  You're giving it the increased functionality.  

 

Your example...you're getting a 12 DC attack for 90 points, and thus 9 END per.  That is expensive.  It's the cost of TK...and illustrates why the book includes the TK trick of buying a Blast using TK as the SFX, because the cost is just too high with straight TK.    

 

I'd rather keep it as an advantage on STR as that feels better to me.  If it's built into the Blast, with a +1/2 advantage for Can Apply STR...how does STR apply?  +1 DC per 5 STR?  Then you buy a 3d6 Blast with Can Apply STR, and a 45 STR.  67 points.  Same trick with the MP slots, if you like.  They're only 2 points, cuz the blast is only 22.  That's just too cheap.  Your argument about the HKAs holds even more directly.  OTOH, if the DCs from STR have to be counted as per a +1/2 advantage...the 9 DCs from 45 STR --> 6 DCs, and you've got a net 9 DC Blast...but it's costing 67.  I can just buy the Blast at 9d6.

 

A middle ground might be to borrow the 5E HA rule.

Can Apply STR is a +1/2 advantage on Blast.  It lets you add DCs from STR to the Blast, up to a maximum of the number of DCs in the Blast.  (So a 4d6 AVAD, an 8 DC attack, can incorporate up to 40 STR.)  This eliminates the abuse above...your 3d6 Can Apply STR maxes at 6d6.  If you want a 12 DC Blast in this approach, you need a 6d6 Blast, so that's now 45 points.  In this approach, the net effect is that 4 DCs...2 from Blast with Can Apply STR, and 2 from STR...costs 25 points.  The advantage for the player?  The STR becomes a separate power base.  The 6d6 Blast with Can Apply STR is only 45 points, so your MP or VPP is smaller.  

 

On first glance, this might be OK.  Get more complex, and I suspect it breaks down because of the core rules.  Advantage stacking is cheap if you can keep the base cost down.  3d6, AVAD vs. Power Def, Can Apply STR, is 6 DCs for 37 points.  I can now add 30 STR to take this to 12 DCs and 67 points of effect.

 

I'm just seeing more balance problems in allowing STR to be applied to ranged damage.  It also makes STR too versatile...the more ways you can combine things, the greater the chance that some of them will be abusive or broken.  That's already a major issue.

 

 

 

 

[Grailknight]

For curiosity, why isn't the added STR prorated to prevent Advantage abuse also?

 

If you use doubling and proration, almost all of the abuses are trivialized.

 

[unclevlad]

8 hours ago, Grailknight said:

For curiosity, why isn't the added STR prorated to prevent Advantage abuse also?

 

If you use doubling and proration, almost all of the abuses are trivialized.

 

 

For an HA/HKA?  It is prorated, per 6E2 100-101.

 

For STR being added to a Blast?  It'd be prorated for something like AP...no change there.  If we're talking Can Apply STR to a Blast...that's an advantage that doesn't change the underlying DCs, so by my understanding of the rules, additional damage doesn't get prorated.  If you both increase the underlying cost of the Blast, AND prorate STR as well...it gets too expensive, in most cases.  It's the same cost as TK:  7.5 points per DC.  

 

Limiting the amount of STR you can add, seems reasonably workable mechanically, but the net impact is unbalanced.  Extra damage in melee...yeah, it's to be expected.  It's very open-ended.  Extra damage for a ranged attack?  It's not more expensive...but the only route by RAW is through ranged martial maneuvers and ranged DCs.  They explicitly note...HSMA page 90...extra DCs are relatively rare.  Yeah, that and a five-spot will get you a latte.  It's much too passive a statement, but the point is...if you want power in your Blast, buy the dice in the Blast.  And that's what Can Allow STR breaks completely.  It's not *as bad* as Ranged MA DCs, but one thing it does do is likely allow you to *sharply* reduce your MP pool size or VPP control size...and make up for it with STR.    Especially if you combine Can Allow STR with a couple ranged DCs and maneuvers.  Basic Shot is +2 DCs and +2 Range;  Quick Shot is +2 DCs and +1 OCV.  You're looking at being able to buy a rather inexpensive Blast.

 

What it'd mean...a mild investment in STR, like 30, would let you build a ranged attacker for minimally more than a melee attacker.  

30 STR, 1/2 END;  +4d6 HA;  Martial Strike, Block, and Counterstrike...a nice simple trio.  12 points total.  Not saying it's the cheapest, it's just a straightforward combo.  37, 16, and 12...65 points.

25 STR;  5d6 Blast, Can Apply STR, Reduced END;  Quick Shot, Trip, and Ranged Disarm, so the package is effectively the same, 12 points and +2 DCs.  25, 44, and 12...81 points.  16 points isn't nothing, but if for some reason you *want* a 30 STR and 12d6 blasts...it's a lot cheaper than a 10d6 Blast, 1/2 END, and the extra damage from martial maneuvers.  And we can't ignore the difference between 44 and 62 points in terms of MP size or VPP allocation.  A core point:  the more you can split things up, the easier it is to abuse the rules...and the more draconian it becomes to try to prevent such abuses. 

[Hugh Neilson]

17 hours ago, unclevlad said:

Because STR cannot be applied at a distance.  You're giving it the increased functionality.  

 

Your example...you're getting a 12 DC attack for 90 points, and thus 9 END per.  That is expensive.  It's the cost of TK...and illustrates why the book includes the TK trick of buying a Blast using TK as the SFX, because the cost is just too high with straight TK.    

 

Buying STR at Range should basically give you TK.  Allowing STR to be applied to Blast only enhances ranged damage. It does not provide ranged grabs, trips, throws, moving objects, etc. etc. nor does it add any element of Indirect to the Blast.  Just like the current addition of STR to HKA only increases the damage of the HKA. 

 

17 hours ago, unclevlad said:

I'd rather keep it as an advantage on STR as that feels better to me.  If it's built into the Blast, with a +1/2 advantage for Can Apply STR...how does STR apply?  +1 DC per 5 STR?  Then you buy a 3d6 Blast with Can Apply STR, and a 45 STR.  67 points.  Same trick with the MP slots, if you like.  They're only 2 points, cuz the blast is only 22.  That's just too cheap.  Your argument about the HKAs holds even more directly.  OTOH, if the DCs from STR have to be counted as per a +1/2 advantage...the 9 DCs from 45 STR --> 6 DCs, and you've got a net 9 DC Blast...but it's costing 67.  I can just buy the Blast at 9d6.

 

But the advantage implicit to an HKA is not on STR, so you are leaving the orphan mechanic of the HKA. It would add 1DC per 5 STR just like it adds 1 DC per 5 STR to an HKA. You already buy a 1d6 HKA with Can Apply STR baked in, and a 45 STR.  60 points.  Why would I buy a 15 STR and 3d6 HKA for exactly the same price?  Does +30 STR have no value other than augmenting the HKA?

To be clear, I am primarily arguing that we should eliminate the "STR Adds" rule entirely - including HKA. Your analysis of why "STR adds" creates inappropriate bargain pricing is 100% consistent with removing "STR adds" from HKA to make the system consistent in this regard.  The "doubling rule" only created a breakpoint. Outside of the 1e villains who ended up with 1d6 + 1d6 KA attacks because they were not revised when 2e added the doubling rule, how many published characters did not have the right STR to double their HKA?

[unclevlad]

I agree that the doubling rule creates the obvious optimal points.  Not sure if it's worth worrying about, tho;  the whole system is nothing but optimal points that we use all the time.  For END, for skill rolls, sometimes for costs (the size of an AoE, the number of charges, etc.)  It's DARN sure not worth caring about anything that far back because 6E is too different from 1E and 2E.  Yeah, the notional mechanics are the same, but the devil's in the details, and they're completely separate in too many areas.  

 

Removing STR from an HKA simply violates logic.  The power behind the sword doesn't matter at all?  That makes no sense.  I'm not saying HKAs don't have problems;  I'm saying this is the wrong direction to fix them.

 

And if you're suggesting removing STR adds...does this apply to HAs?  Or just HKAs?  Because those are the only powers where it applies;  it sounds like we're largely in agreement that STR Adds is gonna be a bad idea for ranged attacks.  At the risk of attacking a straw man, not applying STR to HAs is awful, IMO, because I hate the exponential growth on lifting STR, and I darn sure don't want to compel melee types into martial arts builds if being able to lift a tank isn't in concept.

 

The problem with HKA is that killing damage is a bad fit to the rest of the system, IMO, in that a 12d6 Blast is in NO way comparable, as a threat, to 4d6 killing.  Get clobbered by a couple higher-damage Blasts, maybe you get knocked out.  Get hit by a couple higher-damage KAs, you're DYING if you don't have enough resistant defense.  A 4d6 KA will do 18+ BODY 1 time in 6.

 

If an underlying premise of the system is to embody comics principles, and if one of those principles is "characters don't die, they just get beat up heavily"...then something this lethal is a BAD idea.  Dropping the STUN multiplier so sharply, from 5E to 6E, shows that 5E KAs were clearly too effective;  there was too much BODY and too much chance of overwhelming STUN.  What 6E has is lesser, but still a problem:  too much BODY damage, because you can't treat the average.  There are too few dice, so the variance is simply far too high.

 

 

[Hugh Neilson]

On 5/18/2023 at 11:20 AM, unclevlad said:

Removing STR from an HKA simply violates logic.  The power behind the sword doesn't matter at all?  That makes no sense.

 

But being able to survive in the depths of space while still being damaged by a freon blast makes logical sense? The shift for "pay with money" weapons, to me, would be an extension of STR Min.  8 STR Min, +X DC only if STR exceeds STR Min by 5 per added DC. For a point-based Super, a similar limitation could be taken, but for virtually all point-based Super, it will be a pretty minor limitation as they tend to buy enough STR to maximize the added damage on their KA.  A simple -1/4 similar to Unified Power would do the trick.  Even if the HKA drain doesn't affect STR, how often do we see Drains that affect the typical use of Unified Power to simulate an EC?  STR drains are more common.

 

I am surprised how seldom someone realizes that you can do a 2d6 KA + 2d6 for 30 STR and just toss in a 6d6 Strike with your STR as a Combined Attack. Maybe that -1/4 limitation should be Lockout on the STR used to enhance the HKA.

 

On 5/18/2023 at 11:20 AM, unclevlad said:

And if you're suggesting removing STR adds...does this apply to HAs?  Or just HKAs?  Because those are the only powers where it applies;  it sounds like we're largely in agreement that STR Adds is gonna be a bad idea for ranged attacks.  At the risk of attacking a straw man, not applying STR to HAs is awful, IMO, because I hate the exponential growth on lifting STR, and I darn sure don't want to compel melee types into martial arts builds if being able to lift a tank isn't in concept.

 

First off, it's only a straw man if I am clear I am not proposing STR not add to HA.  I'm not, to be clear. [Well, perhaps I am but not in a manner that impacts the result.]

 

I'd like to see HA largely reworked, starting with a philosophical shift that it is not a Blast that STR enhances, but a form of limited STR.  STR that only enhances combat effects of any HTH maneuver (much like an MA DC) as a -1/4 limitation seems reasonable*.  At -1/2, it affects only one combat effect (most commonly normal damage, bringing us back to the classic Hand Attack). A further -1/4 limits it to only Martial maneuvers (only non-martial should be worth more to a martial artist and nothing to someone lacking martial arts). [So I guess I am proposing that HA enhance STR, and STR not enhance HA, if we're technical about it.]

 

* As I consider it, that's not far off slapping Beam onto a ranged attack and losing the ability to Spread or limit the damage.

 

As for STR Adds to Ranged Attacks, I think it is a bad idea to allow one ability to enhance a second ability. Just buy more of the enhanced ability, linking it to the first as you see fit.

 

On 5/18/2023 at 11:20 AM, unclevlad said:

The problem with HKA is that killing damage is a bad fit to the rest of the system, IMO, in that a 12d6 Blast is in NO way comparable, as a threat, to 4d6 killing.  Get clobbered by a couple higher-damage Blasts, maybe you get knocked out.  Get hit by a couple higher-damage KAs, you're DYING if you don't have enough resistant defense.  A 4d6 KA will do 18+ BODY 1 time in 6.

 

If an underlying premise of the system is to embody comics principles, and if one of those principles is "characters don't die, they just get beat up heavily"...then something this lethal is a BAD idea.  Dropping the STUN multiplier so sharply, from 5E to 6E, shows that 5E KAs were clearly too effective;  there was too much BODY and too much chance of overwhelming STUN.  What 6E has is lesser, but still a problem:  too much BODY damage, because you can't treat the average.  There are too few dice, so the variance is simply far too high.

 

Over six editions, we've evolved to the point where virtually every Super has resistant defenses, or some other means of neutralizing KA BOD damage.  The problem with the KA in Supers games was the STUN volatility.  An average 14 BOD was easy to deal with.  4d6 averaging 14 but doing 70 STUN one time in 6?  Not so much.  The defenses needed to mitigate high STUN multiples would render normal attacks of comparable DCs irrelevant.

 

This was even published a few times.  In the Deathstroke scenario, a couple of the villains were noted as not using their KAs against "soft targets", but using them if it was the only way to lay some serious STUN damage down on a target. The Ultimate Super Mage noted that, in a "no limits; make the most unbalanced 12 DC attack you can" game, it was the 4d6 KA that most often disrupted the game, by STUNning or One Shotting an otherwise powerful opponent with a high stun multiple.

 

Then we got 1d6 KAs with +3 Advantages in Increased STUN Multiple, to move the volatility to the initial damage roll.

 

Dealing with "non-bulletproof supers" seems like a challenge every Super game has to address.  The old MSH game just ignored differences between lethality of attacks (other than Ranged Attacks being capable of an instant kill!). The Mayfair DC game required a declaration that one was shifting to lethal combat. A designer's note indicated that it initially felt "wrong" that firearms defaulted to non-lethal damage. However, watching Batman reduced to Batstain by a couple of lucky rolls from a henchthug felt even more wrong.

Edited May 21, 2023 by Hugh Neilson

[unclevlad]

You don't freeze to death in space.  There's nothing to conduct the heat away from you, there is no medium to have convection steal heat away.  If you can ignore the vacuum, you'll radiate it away, but that's very slow.  Convection is the mechanism for the wind chill effect.  More notably:  65 degree air is pleasant; 65 degree water is COLD.  Even if you have a life jacket, and thus won't sink...in 50 degree water, you'll die from hypothermia in a couple hours.  

 

Surviving space means dealing with the vacuum.  There's no heat exchange.  The freon blast is all about massive heat exchange.  So...yes, it makes absolutely perfect sense, if you know anything about physics.

 

Quote

I am surprised how seldom someone realizes that you can do a 2d6 KA + 2d6 for 30 STR and just toss in a 6d6 Strike with your STR as a Combined Attack. Maybe that -1/4 limitation should be Lockout on the STR used to enhance the HKA.

 

Uhhhh...because you can't.  The extra +2d6 isn't coming from the ether;  it's coming from your STR.  6E1 242:

 

Quote

An HKA only works in HTH Combat, but the character may add +1d6 to his HKA for every 15 points of STR used with it

 

Bold mine.  So there is no STR left over to make the other Strike.  

 

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

You don't freeze to death in space.  There's nothing to conduct the heat away from you, there is no medium to have convection steal heat away.  If you can ignore the vacuum, you'll radiate it away, but that's very slow.  Convection is the mechanism for the wind chill effect.  More notably:  65 degree air is pleasant; 65 degree water is COLD.  Even if you have a life jacket, and thus won't sink...in 50 degree water, you'll die from hypothermia in a couple hours.  

 

Surviving space means dealing with the vacuum.  There's no heat exchange.  The freon blast is all about massive heat exchange.  So...yes, it makes absolutely perfect sense, if you know anything about physics.

 

So if my character were immune to the vacuum and need not breathe, in your game he can survive in the close to absolute zero temperature in space? Regardless, the point stands - it is not logical that a character immune to radiation takes damage from a radiation blast; one immune to high heat still takes the effect of a Heat Blast; and so on. That character has justification for purchasing defenses against such attacks but they must still be purchased.  Your HKA is enhanced by your high STR?  Then pay the points.

 

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

Uhhhh...because you can't.  The extra +2d6 isn't coming from the ether;  it's coming from your STR.  6E1 242:

 

An HKA only works in HTH Combat, but the character may add +1d6 to his HKA for every 15 points of STR used with it

 

Bold mine.  So there is no STR left over to make the other Strike. 

 

6e V2p74 lists an HKA and a HA as an example of a multiple power attack.  Seems like I am using my STR twice there.  Using two or more powers or similar abilities once against a single target is a combined attack.  STR Strike + HKA.

 

V2 p 100 goes to great length to note that, when adding STR to an HKA made with a maneuver that would also normally add STR damage, the STR does not add to the HKA twice.  If using the STR once locked it out from all other uses, that discussion would be unnecessary. V1 p 41 discusses multiple uses of STR in the same phase, including spending END for each attack when multiple STR-based attacks are made in the same phase.  Using it with the HKA does not mean that it can be used for nothing else in the same phase.

[unclevlad]

No, it's not logical to put NO limits on what a 2 point power grants.  Safe Environment NOT talking about effects intense enough to do immediate damage.

 

V2 100 discusses it to dismiss it...and to cover some other technical areas like Heroic weapons where you only get to apply the excess STR, over the weapon min.  The STR to use the min, is in use.

 

6E2 74, the Nighthawk example?  He's making a MULTIPLE attack.  2 separate attack rolls.  2 separate damage packets.  STR is used *once* for each.  So, sure, you can Multiple Attack with your HKA + STR, then punch with just your STR.  If you're talking about the Combined Attack, the STR is committed for the HKA.  You can't use the same points twice.  Maybe they don't explicitly say that, but my gosh, I would never have thought they should HAVE to.  I've never heard anyone else even offer this as possible.  IT MAKES ZERO SENSE within the structure of the rules.
 

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

No, it's not logical to put NO limits on what a 2 point power grants.  Safe Environment NOT talking about effects intense enough to do immediate damage.

 

That's game logic.  "You don't automatically get more effect from one ability because you bought a different ability" is solid game logic.  It would suggest more HKA costs more points.

 

The same logic that suggests a stronger swordsman would do more damage with his sword also suggests that a person immune to the effects of high heat would be more resistant to an attack relying on high heat to inflict damage.  Of course, those 2 points for resistance to heat would provide no defense against cold, electricity, etc. so it's not unlimited.

 

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

V2 100 discusses it to dismiss it...and to cover some other technical areas like Heroic weapons where you only get to apply the excess STR, over the weapon min.  The STR to use the min, is in use.

 

6E2 74, the Nighthawk example?  He's making a MULTIPLE attack.  2 separate attack rolls.  2 separate damage packets.  STR is used *once* for each.  So, sure, you can Multiple Attack with your HKA + STR, then punch with just your STR.  If you're talking about the Combined Attack, the STR is committed for the HKA.  You can't use the same points twice.  Maybe they don't explicitly say that, but my gosh, I would never have thought they should HAVE to.  I've never heard anyone else even offer this as possible.  IT MAKES ZERO SENSE within the structure of the rules.
 

 

V2 100 discusses the issue only in the context of a maneuver (like a Martial Strike) used with a killing attack to state that you add STR once to the overall result, not twice. It does not preclude using the STR for some other purpose at the same time. That might include a sword strike plus a STR strike, or a rapier and a dagger. Either one could be made as part of a combined attack, provided the rules for a combined attack are followed.

 

My reference to v2 p 74 is to "Combined Attack", not to Nighthawk. Nighthawk is forced to make multiple attacks - a combined attack can only have one target.  Multiple uses of STR to attack always costs END multiple times, so that's not in question. That's no different than using your Blast and your Drain as a combined attack - both still cost END.

 

That swordsman is already using his STR to haul his armour and other gear, as well as to meet the STR min for his shield, before he uses it to strike with his sword.

 

 

[Grailknight]

4 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

That's game logic.  "You don't automatically get more effect from one ability because you bought a different ability" is solid game logic.  It would suggest more HKA costs more points.

 

The same logic that suggests a stronger swordsman would do more damage with his sword also suggests that a person immune to the effects of high heat would be more resistant to an attack relying on high heat to inflict damage.  Of course, those 2 points for resistance to heat would provide no defense against cold, electricity, etc. so it's not unlimited.

 

Why would that suggest that HKA should cost more? In the case of both HKA and HA, you buy your dice and that's what you get. The variable is the amount of STR the character has. If you approach it as an issue with STR, then proration and the doubling rule make more sense, at least IMO and IME.

 

If it really bothers you that much, then start all PC's and NPC's with 0 STR. That creates different problems, but now no one gets any free DC's of damage of any kind. Take it a step further and start all Characteristics at 0. It's equality for everyone but it won't make the game simpler and good luck with your baselines.

 

On the subject of Life Support, I can't understand your position at all. There has to be a cost to LS and it shouldn't be large because it just doesn't get used as much in game. No, that 2-point Extreme Heat doesn't stop a Fire Blast, but it does offer 100% immunity to any AVLD vs Extreme Heat. That's true of any LS that counters a specific SFX built with all or nothing. Look at what the Power gives for the cost and determine if that's enough. LS is not PD/ED/DEF and shouldn't overlap with them. You can have 100 ED and still die of sunstroke or exposure. It's not ED's function in the RAW.

[Hugh Neilson]

10 hours ago, Grailknight said:

Why would that suggest that HKA should cost more? In the case of both HKA and HA, you buy your dice and that's what you get. The variable is the amount of STR the character has. If you approach it as an issue with STR, then proration and the doubling rule make more sense, at least IMO and IME.

 

I'm not suggesting HKA should cost more, I am suggesting that having a high STR should not grant a discount. If you buy a 60 STR and no HKA, you don't get any HKA dice.  If you leave STR at 10 and spend 50 on HKA, you get 4d6 HKA and a 10 STR.  If you instead spend 20 on STR and 30 on HKA, you get the same 4d6 HKA and the added benefits of a 30 STR instead of a 10 STR. How many characters from 2e to 5e did you see achieve a 4d6 HKA any other way?

 

10 hours ago, Grailknight said:

If it really bothers you that much, then start all PC's and NPC's with 0 STR. That creates different problems, but now no one gets any free DC's of damage of any kind. Take it a step further and start all Characteristics at 0. It's equality for everyone but it won't make the game simpler and good luck with your baselines.

 

If they want 0, they can sell back any or all characteristics. It's not free - you chose to keep 10 STR rather than sell it back. There's the gamer mindset that a +1 bonus is meh but a -1 penalty is the end of the world, but that's the only impediment to a Blaster with 5 STR and +1d6 Blast.

 

10 hours ago, Grailknight said:

On the subject of Life Support, I can't understand your position at all. There has to be a cost to LS and it shouldn't be large because it just doesn't get used as much in game. No, that 2-point Extreme Heat doesn't stop a Fire Blast, but it does offer 100% immunity to any AVLD vs Extreme Heat. That's true of any LS that counters a specific SFX built with all or nothing. Look at what the Power gives for the cost and determine if that's enough. LS is not PD/ED/DEF and shouldn't overlap with them. You can have 100 ED and still die of sunstroke or exposure. It's not ED's function in the RAW.

 

STR is not HKA either. That's the point. The argument for STR adding to HKA has always been "but logically higher STR should make the sword strike/claws/radioactive fingernails hit harder".  True.  And logically being super-stretchy should protect you from blunt attacks, being resistant to radiation should defend against radiation attacks and being immune to extreme heat and cold should protect you from attacks based on extremes of heat or cold.

 

But only in the case of STR adding to HKA do we acquiesce and say "OK, you can have extra HKA for free since you bought STR just like the Brick with no HKA did". For all the other "but logically" arguments, we answer that "logically, your chartacter should pay the character points and buy those defenses".

[Grailknight]

32 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

I'm not suggesting HKA should cost more, I am suggesting that having a high STR should not grant a discount. If you buy a 60 STR and no HKA, you don't get any HKA dice.  If you leave STR at 10 and spend 50 on HKA, you get 4d6 HKA and a 10 STR.  If you instead spend 20 on STR and 30 on HKA, you get the same 4d6 HKA and the added benefits of a 30 STR instead of a 10 STR. How many characters from 2e to 5e did you see achieve a 4d6 HKA any other way?

 

 

If they want 0, they can sell back any or all characteristics. It's not free - you chose to keep 1Str0 STR rather than sell it back. There's the gamer mindset that a +1 bonus is meh but a -1 penalty is the end of the world, but that's the only impediment to a Blaster with 5 STR and +1d6 Blast.

 

 

STR is not HKA either. That's the point. The argument for STR adding to HKA has always been "but logically higher STR should make the sword strike/claws/radioactive fingernails hit harder".  True.  And logically being super-stretchy should protect you from blunt attacks, being resistant to radiation should defend against radiation attacks and being immune to extreme heat and cold should protect you from attacks based on extremes of heat or cold.

 

But only in the case of STR adding to HKA do we acquiesce and say "OK, you can have extra HKA for free since you bought STR just like the Brick with no HKA did". For all the other "but logically" arguments, we answer that "logically, your chartacter should pay the character points and buy those defenses".

 

 

STR does add to HKA and HA. That's a legacy thing from 1st through 6th Edition. I haven't seen anything better and since I use doubling and proration for both, I don't encounter any real issues in my mostly Supers games. They're three different powers but even though STR adds to HA and HKA just buying extra HA Or HKA will not let you lift more.

 

And it needs to be that way not for the sake of Supers but all the other genres Hero is good at.  Can you imagine if HKA and HA were separated from STR in a Fantasy setting? Kilmore the 25 STR  barbarian should do more damage than Meeka the 8 STR mage with a sword neither has any skill with.

 

You have to bow to logic here and implement it into your system in a way that doesn't kill game balance.  Hero does that pretty well by keeping the cost of a DC consistent across STR, HA and HKA. The only unfairness is that the free 10 STR benefits some concepts better than others. It could just as easily be fixed by giving the first 2 DC equivalents to any other power but that really makes Character Generation bookkeeping complicated.

 

 

Edited May 22, 2023 by Grailknight