Rapid Fire

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

As noted previously, he's not goint to attack a mentalist - he'll mind control others into dealing with mentalists. With a 20 EGO, he's not optimized for dealing with a mentalist - pretty much any Mental Defense would make him ineffectual.

 

[Allegations that MindMan has telepathically stolen defense secrets and sold them to terrorist organizations shocked the nation today. The President today ordered the Joint Chiefs to bring in MindMan dead or alive, under charges of high treason.]

 

Mind you, the option is tempting - how much would his enemies pay to have MindMan waste a phase and go to 1/2 DCV...So I'm knocked out in the process - my bed's pretty comfy anyway!

 

Or I could spend all those leftover points on a swack of Mental Defense, I suppose. Sticking, of course, to the campaign maximum.

 

And cumulative doesn't cap out IIRC (don't have the book in front of me, but I seem to recall the example being a 2d6 mind control or some such).

 

One further thought: No, I wouldn't approve this character in my campaign. He's not four colour enough, even getting over his ability to ruin your life anonymously from half a world away.

 

Cumulative caps out at the maximum you can roll on the dice. 24 pts in this case. You can purchase further advantages to increase the maximum. Also according to the FAQ, invisible power effects cost double for cumulative attacks since you have to hide the power, and the effects of the power. So it's +1 advantage to have invisible power effects for your sample character.

 

However, the point is that Rapid Fire turns a simple 6d6 Ego blast or 5d6 1/2 end Ego Blast into a terror without having to stack a bunch of expensive advantages on it. I'm pretty sure that Psimon, a 418 pt normally nonabusive character, can one shot more than 1/2 (probably closer to 3/4) of the opponents in CKC using his 29 ego, 3 levels, and 6d6 ego blast.

[Gary]

Originally posted by tesuji

"Again, you're modifying every villain in the world rather than one single maneuver. "

 

Again, not every villain in the world. We just choose the one's who will be apprppriately challenging to highlight on stage in the scenes we run.

 

But is it more fun to have villains that the player can hit with their NND using single shot, or do you think it's more fun to have every villain that the PC meets "on screen" have the defense to the NND?

 

Should every villain that a mentallist PC meets "on screen" have 10+ pts of mental defense just to defend against one maneuver, or is it simply better and more fun to ban that maneuver and send "normal" villains?

[tesuji]

Originally posted by Gary

But is it more fun to have villains that the player can hit with their NND using single shot, or do you think it's more fun to have every villain that the PC meets "on screen" have the defense to the NND?

 

Should every villain that a mentallist PC meets "on screen" have 10+ pts of mental defense just to defend against one maneuver, or is it simply better and more fun to ban that maneuver and send "normal" villains?

 

Gary, when you deide to step off the hyperbole ladder, or just come down a few rungs, you might be ale to understand me a little better.

 

Drop "EVERY" from the vocabulary for a moment. Look back at my posts.

 

The villains who are on screen who can be (and presumably some will be) one shot kills for the PC abilities (whether that be due to low resistant defenses, low enough cons that constunning occurs, no flash defense, or even vulnerability to a NND or transform power that can be triple tapped using rapid fire) are going to be there. In some cases/character, they will be obviously open to this one shot issue. In other cases/characters, they will not be obviously open to this one shot thingy. As a general rule, villains who can be one shotted by the PCs will not be a major player role villain. They may be mooks, or even recurring bigger mooks, but i wont be reasonably setting major plot elements on their shoulders... because they are not up to the task. One of the roles they will serve is the role of "guy their to be one shotted to show off the PC's power.and show them as supoer!" (Most every PC should get a few "i am really good" moments now and again, IMO.

 

Tha campaign will probably not crumple to dust if the GM includes some one shotable bad guys now and again. The world wont end in a chicken-little-was-right armageddon if the one shot KOs come from rapid fire NNDs as opposed to other features.

 

The villains that are there to take on more lasting or serious roles, carry more and bigger plots, and highlight OTHER issues than the PC's one shot capability, will be designed appropriately and will not be one shot KOs. Whatever little bits of counter need to be there will be included in the design, just as is done with all the other PC's abilities now and again.

 

A "challenging adversary" for a PC in a game a rich and robust as HERO is not designed by a Gm locked in a funk-n-wagnals sound proofed booth divorced from nowledge of the PC. Sure, it could be, but if so the odds of it being a "challenging adversary" instead of being a gross mismatch scenario killer is pretty low.

 

So, in spite of your dive-for-hyperbole fetish, its not EVERY villain or EVERy anything. Its some this, some that, some the other things and occasionally something entirely different... so you create a rich and varied set of events that keep one trick pony from being game breaker boy.

 

Thats, however, not something that comes up to the surface when in "mathematical model analysis furor" mode.

 

Its something that comes out in actual play under a real live GM.

 

Thats why, perhaps in part, so many of us follow up wiuth "is this in play?" type questions.

 

Thats why, perhaps in part, the utter lack of in play examples of this breakdown are being seen.

 

As i said way earlier, rapid fire changes flat out the old balance notions from hero4 to hero 5. Gms need to make that adjustment in NPC design and players need to make that adjustment for PC design when they convert over. Having seen rapid fire, entangle rf combos, KB followup etc in my game... it did not create a problem, just a different set of tactics than we saw in HERO 4.

 

YMMV, whenever you actually get actual mileage out of this in play, as opposed to theoretical simulator mileage in the number crunching, that is.

 

enjoy.

[zornwil]

Gary and Hugh, I'd just like to say that while you guys do spray the horse with machine-gun fire after pummeling it, I really enjoy your debates on these matters. I know you typically get yourselves worked up into a fit of pique by the end, but your mutual rigor is useful for those of us less inclined to analyze so deeply. Thanks very much.

 

And not to ignore Tesuji of course, your contributions are appreciated, as are others. I just wanted to give a special shout-out to Gary and Hugh as they do this sort of thing on a regular basis and since they usually get each other upset by the end I thought they'd appreciate knowing it's worthwhile to me as a bystander at least.

[TaxiMan]

What Zornwil said! I've lurked this entire thread as it developed, and it spurred much thought. Thanks guys!

[Gary]

Originally posted by tesuji

Gary, when you deide to step off the hyperbole ladder, or just come down a few rungs, you might be ale to understand me a little better.

 

Drop "EVERY" from the vocabulary for a moment. Look back at my posts.

 

The villains who are on screen who can be (and presumably some will be) one shot kills for the PC abilities (whether that be due to low resistant defenses, low enough cons that constunning occurs, no flash defense, or even vulnerability to a NND or transform power that can be triple tapped using rapid fire) are going to be there. In some cases/character, they will be obviously open to this one shot issue. In other cases/characters, they will not be obviously open to this one shot thingy. As a general rule, villains who can be one shotted by the PCs will not be a major player role villain. They may be mooks, or even recurring bigger mooks, but i wont be reasonably setting major plot elements on their shoulders... because they are not up to the task. One of the roles they will serve is the role of "guy their to be one shotted to show off the PC's power.and show them as supoer!" (Most every PC should get a few "i am really good" moments now and again, IMO.

 

Could you give me an example? For instance, would you send a group like Eurostar (who are vulnerable to one shots by the rapid fire ego blasts or nnds) as is? Or would you make them the "mooks" with a shadowy figure behind them as the real power? I'm not trying to be offensive, but I'd like to see how your philosophy plays out when a PC can rapid fire his 4d6 area effect NND.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

Tha campaign will probably not crumple to dust if the GM includes some one shotable bad guys now and again. The world wont end in a chicken-little-was-right armageddon if the one shot KOs come from rapid fire NNDs as opposed to other features.

 

It probably won't crumble into dust if killing attacks were 5 pts per d6 either. It will be heavily changed though.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

The villains that are there to take on more lasting or serious roles, carry more and bigger plots, and highlight OTHER issues than the PC's one shot capability, will be designed appropriately and will not be one shot KOs. Whatever little bits of counter need to be there will be included in the design, just as is done with all the other PC's abilities now and again.

 

A "challenging adversary" for a PC in a game a rich and robust as HERO is not designed by a Gm locked in a funk-n-wagnals sound proofed booth divorced from nowledge of the PC. Sure, it could be, but if so the odds of it being a "challenging adversary" instead of being a gross mismatch scenario killer is pretty low.

 

So, in spite of your dive-for-hyperbole fetish, its not EVERY villain or EVERy anything. Its some this, some that, some the other things and occasionally something entirely different... so you create a rich and varied set of events that keep one trick pony from being game breaker boy.

 

Thats, however, not something that comes up to the surface when in "mathematical model analysis furor" mode.

 

Its something that comes out in actual play under a real live GM.

 

Thats why, perhaps in part, so many of us follow up wiuth "is this in play?" type questions.

 

Thats why, perhaps in part, the utter lack of in play examples of this breakdown are being seen.

 

As i said way earlier, rapid fire changes flat out the old balance notions from hero4 to hero 5. Gms need to make that adjustment in NPC design and players need to make that adjustment for PC design when they convert over. Having seen rapid fire, entangle rf combos, KB followup etc in my game... it did not create a problem, just a different set of tactics than we saw in HERO 4.

 

YMMV, whenever you actually get actual mileage out of this in play, as opposed to theoretical simulator mileage in the number crunching, that is.

 

enjoy.

 

Again, I'd like an example. Suppose you take a villain team you've actually run against the PCs, and one of them uncorked the 4d6 area effect NND rapid fired 4 times. What would your reaction be? Not being offensive, just being curious.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by tesuji

Gary, when you deide to step off the hyperbole ladder, or just come down a few rungs, you might be ale to understand me a little better.

 

Drop "EVERY" from the vocabulary for a moment. Look back at my posts.

 

SNIP SNIP SNIP

 

enjoy.

 

I won't reprint the entire post, as I don't really have anything to add. Well said!

 

And thanks to Zornwil and Taximan for their kind words as well.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

Again, I'd like an example. Suppose you take a villain team you've actually run against the PCs, and one of them uncorked the 4d6 area effect NND rapid fired 4 times. What would your reaction be? Not being offensive, just being curious.

 

A lot depends on the nature of the NND. I might be inclined to look at it and ask myself "Self, using common sense, would this attack actually do more damage if more of them were dropped?"

 

If the special effect of the NND is (as two from my campaign have been) a wide cloud of knockout gas, I am inclined to think the added volume would fill more hexes, not enhance damage. He still only breathes so fast! Alternatively, perhaps it would simply mean that cloud stays around longer (one of the ones in my campaign had continuing charges).

 

If it is filing the area full of Meson Beams firing in all directions, perhaps it is not possible for the area to be "fuller" of Meson Beams, for the same effect.

 

Or perhaps I just say "I knew this possibility existed when I allowed the power. Live with it." or "WOW! Maybe future villains shouldn't leave themselves so open to such an easy tactic."

 

Again, it comes back to seeing it in a game before I start losing sleep over it.

 

Finally, perhaps I am just lucky in this, but my players are role playing, not min/.maxing combat abilities. They are pretty quick to spot something in even their own abilities which may be, or appears to have become, excessive, and we discuss ways to fix that. They also are very quick to change their characters, or develop them in different directions, if one is steping on another's toes. As a result, problems like this have not been a hallmark of my games, and I don't worry about them until or unless they happen.

[Fenixcrest]

Taking a look at the whole thing... I think it should just be limited by SFX, based on what the attack is doing and how potentially taxing it is on the user. For example, NND poison darts I would allow to be rapid fired, but not NND "accelerating time to cause rapid aging."

 

Likewise, I don't tink a rapid fire Ego Attack makes much sense if it's raw psionics, because that implies some concentration. Though I might allow it if the character had mind scanned all the targets beforehand. However, if it's magical or technological, like a "sleep wave" gun or spell, I might allow it to be rapid-fired raw, because it would have a focus (probably) or some kind of potential jamming frequency, or interruptable gestures.

 

Of course, I'm the guy who made an evil robot with just that, only it was Area Effect, No Range, affects human and animal minds, visual effect (loud humming noise, glowy yellow waves coming out of his eyes, visible on mental spectrum as static interference). He was called the Sandman. So I might be kind of prejudiced.

[Hugh Neilson]

Just for completeness, since I now have my books:

 

20 Ego - 20 points

 

Mind Scan: 1d6, Cumulative (+1/2), x16 maximum [96 points of effect] (+1), 0 END (+1/2), Continuous (+1), Penetrating twice (+1), Invisible source and effects (+1) - 30 points

 

Mind Control, Telepathy and Mental Illusions just like the Mind Scan - 90 more points

 

+20 OCV Mind Scan - 40 points

 

That leaves 170 points on a 350 point character. Hmmm...

 

Boost speed's an obvious one.

 

Maybe some Teleportation in case he ever has to make a run for it.

 

Perhaps some Followers.

 

Some Mental Defense for certain (or maybe a mental damage aura)

 

Lots of possibilities...Maybe he's only a 200 point character.

 

Anyway, at the base, he can readily lock on to virtually any mind (EOCV 7 to mind scan the whole planet), and then attack with any or all of his three other powers [no framework - costs more points, but he can use his three mental attacks as a Multiple Power Attack]. 96 points of effect will ultimately claw up to Ego +56 on a 30 EGO. And how many people double harden their Mental Defense?

 

And only 30 AP attacks (50 Mind Scan if you add the levels) well within anyone's campaign limits, right?

[Fenixcrest]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Anyway, at the base, he can readily lock on to virtually any mind (EOCV 7 to mind scan the whole planet), and then attack with any or all of his three other powers [no framework - costs more points, but he can use his three mental attacks as a Multiple Power Attack]. 96 points of effect will ultimately claw up to Ego +56 on a 30 EGO. And how many people double harden their Mental Defense?

 

Right, but depending on the nature of the campaign, would most GM's out there allow a combination like that? I doubt I would unless there was an ongoing ubervillain who could counteract stuff like that. And while I may not allow PCs to do that, I certainly might make an ongoing ubervillain who does.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

A lot depends on the nature of the NND. I might be inclined to look at it and ask myself "Self, using common sense, would this attack actually do more damage if more of them were dropped?"

 

If the special effect of the NND is (as two from my campaign have been) a wide cloud of knockout gas, I am inclined to think the added volume would fill more hexes, not enhance damage. He still only breathes so fast! Alternatively, perhaps it would simply mean that cloud stays around longer (one of the ones in my campaign had continuing charges).

 

If it is filing the area full of Meson Beams firing in all directions, perhaps it is not possible for the area to be "fuller" of Meson Beams, for the same effect.

 

Or perhaps I just say "I knew this possibility existed when I allowed the power. Live with it." or "WOW! Maybe future villains shouldn't leave themselves so open to such an easy tactic."

 

Again, it comes back to seeing it in a game before I start losing sleep over it.

 

Finally, perhaps I am just lucky in this, but my players are role playing, not min/.maxing combat abilities. They are pretty quick to spot something in even their own abilities which may be, or appears to have become, excessive, and we discuss ways to fix that. They also are very quick to change their characters, or develop them in different directions, if one is steping on another's toes. As a result, problems like this have not been a hallmark of my games, and I don't worry about them until or unless they happen.

 

It sounds like you would find some reason to not allow the player to have the ability. That you wouldn't actually allow the player to rapid fire his area effect NND 4 times.

 

Ok, I'm satisfied.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Just for completeness, since I now have my books:

 

20 Ego - 20 points

 

Mind Scan: 1d6, Cumulative (+1/2), x16 maximum [96 points of effect] (+1), 0 END (+1/2), Continuous (+1), Penetrating twice (+1), Invisible source and effects (+1) - 30 points

 

Mind Control, Telepathy and Mental Illusions just like the Mind Scan - 90 more points

 

+20 OCV Mind Scan - 40 points

 

That leaves 170 points on a 350 point character. Hmmm...

 

Boost speed's an obvious one.

 

Maybe some Teleportation in case he ever has to make a run for it.

 

Perhaps some Followers.

 

Some Mental Defense for certain (or maybe a mental damage aura)

 

Lots of possibilities...Maybe he's only a 200 point character.

 

Anyway, at the base, he can readily lock on to virtually any mind (EOCV 7 to mind scan the whole planet), and then attack with any or all of his three other powers [no framework - costs more points, but he can use his three mental attacks as a Multiple Power Attack]. 96 points of effect will ultimately claw up to Ego +56 on a 30 EGO. And how many people double harden their Mental Defense?

 

And only 30 AP attacks (50 Mind Scan if you add the levels) well within anyone's campaign limits, right?

 

Of course you're comparing 2 powers with +5 worth of advantages each to a simple Ego Blast with no advantages whatsoever.

 

Most people wouldn't allow that attack, or Rocket Punch, 1" Superleap Usable as attack (+1) Area effect Hex (+1/2) megascale (+1) 1" = 1000 km, total active cost 3 pts, either.

[tesuji]

[/b]

 

Originally posted by Gary

Could you give me an example?

Auew... we had one player running a mentalist with significant strength mentalist powers. So, as i used the reforming VIPER as a significant story element, several things emerged. First, some VIPER groups had agents who had no mental training whatsoever. When they encountered those guys, it was common for them to be one shot kills for the mentalist. heck, he soon realize that his ego blast Ko was actually INEFFICIENT, since he could use mind control and turn the mook not into a body but into an ally with reasonable instructions. Those scenarios served to highlight his superness quite well. This was also highlighted by post combat psychic interrogations, which lead to lots of clues and follow ups.

 

However, some groups of VIPERs had some form of mental defense. They did not have enough to stop him cold, but certainly enough to take him out of the MC angle or at least force him to go for "flee" orders.instead of "attavk your teammates." Also, instead of one shot kills, they were taking 2-3 (depending on luck) shots to drop from his ego blast. Similarly, the post combat mind screens were turning up little and even in some cases turning up FALSE MEMORIES which led the team to go after the wrong guys, doing the villains work for them. Anyway against these guys the mentalist was typically less effective than his teammates.

 

The PCs deduced after a time that the second group was operating with or working under a mentalist of sorts and so forth... it was taken as clues and info to work with.

 

This entire series of plots and characters was devised BECAUSE the party had a mentalist and I wanted to not only challenge him but to make his powers at times highlighted and even when at a disadvantage still pertinent. The atory and characters and traits were built and put in play with their relevence to the PCs as PARAMOUNT importance.

Originally posted by Gary

For instance, would you send a group like Eurostar (who are vulnerable to one shots by the rapid fire ego blasts or nnds) as is?

EUROSTAR was not designed for the book to highlight my specific PCs. Long and crew did not contact me, though perhaps they should have, and ask me for the specs i need. They produced villains designed for their NPCs universe... not mine.

 

So i would NEVER send Eurostar "as is" against my PCs. I rewrite every character's stats, usually keeping most or all of the background and such but the game stats are always revised to make it the best fit and most useful for HIGLIGHTING my PCs and THEIR story.

 

Now, as said before, IF i send a team by any name which is routinely one shot fodder for my PC(s) I do so knowingly and for cause. Those are not typically the NPCs i would hang major plot elements on. If i want a character to be someone i hang major plot element son, I design him to not be routinely one shot kills.

 

That doesn't seem to be too hard to get.

Originally posted by Gary

 

It probably won't crumble into dust if killing attacks were 5 pts per d6 either. It will be heavily changed though.

and if such a change were part of the HERO5 rules, and not a typo or such, then one would expect NPC designs to take this into account.

 

As i stated early, rapid fire (like MPA) was one of the most significant changes in HERo5 that affects the "balance" of previous PC designs. Being able to pump out three 12d6 EB shots against a targate in a single phase radically, let me repeat, RADICALLY changes the builds you need to get characters with legs similar to those from HERO4. In HERO4, i could REASONABLY expect to build a brick with no mental def, no power def and not be all that worried about mental attacks or even transforms being able to drop me quicky. NOW that same build fails to stand up and produce the same result. In HERo4 i could build energy prohectors with typical Defs and expect to hang around even with stun totals in the 25-35 range. Now, in HERO5, that design no longer holds up. I now need stun into the 45 range or higher than average defenses.

 

What rapid fire does PURE AND SIMPLE is alter the old HERO4 balance between OCV and damage in a drastic way. In the old days, i could trade +2 CV for +1 DC. Now, i can trade +2 OCV for two shots increasing my average yeidl by a lot more. (Insert my previous comments about the tactical downsides of rapid fire here.) The value of KB resistance is now a lot more, as the half-dcv doesn't mean "hit more likely" but "hit by multiple shots at once taking me out."

 

Its a different game. Many different elements changed which produce very noticeanly different balances than we saw in HERo4. As part of the transition to HERO5, your character designs need to change. This is just one of those elements.

 

had you had frequent opportunities to play since HERO5 came out, my bet is you would have seen the effects of rapid fire and the various other elements well before now.

 

One aspect it does add thats "better" (matter of opinion) was that in HERo4 "what you built" was more or less the major determining factor. With a few exceptions, the outcomes were more determined before the battle started. maneuvers and tactical choices frankly played enough role to add flavor but the lion's share of the decisions were made in chargen.

 

In HERO5, from the get go, there was much more emphasis on tactics and combinations in PLAY TIME. Tandem approaches such as soft entangles followed by rapid fire stun only Ebs, a high Kb attack followed by rapid fire regular EB, the throw followed by... and with so many maneuvers producing meaningful results, tactics were more in vogue. The feel moves from HERO4 where two mobs hit and everybody pairs off and does their duel (say classic comics superteams) to a more teamwork, tandem offense whole greater than sum of parts Xmen or XFoirce "we are stronger when we work as a team" combat flavor.

 

It is a change... seems like a decision to make "maneuvers" more of an element than they were before.

 

Some wont like the change of course

 

here;s hoping you get more opportunities to play and see how your theories turn out in live play and maybe see the new "game" in action to see if you like it. Whether they prove true or not, my bet is that you will find playing more fun than arguing.

 

enjoy.

[Bengal]

Steve intentionally pulled two specific, important battles forth for his examples of this maneuver in use. Although you're technically allowed to use this attack every time, I think it is outside the spirit of the game to make it your PC's default maneuver. It's more of a dramatically appropriate plot contrivance the way I read it. In any case, if your campaign has a bunch of murderous Image heroes in it, by all means- go for it. I'll be disallowing this attack I think except in very specific circumstances. I mean, why buy Autofire now when you can get a similarly strong "advantage" for a much smaller penalty?

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Fenixcrest

Right, but depending on the nature of the campaign, would most GM's out there allow a combination like that?

 

Lord, I hope not! The character is designed as an example of how "Active Point Limits" are no substitute for actually looking at the character and considering whether the combinations come up to a rational result.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Gary

It sounds like you would find some reason to not allow the player to have the ability. That you wouldn't actually allow the player to rapid fire his area effect NND 4 times.

 

Ok, I'm satisfied.

 

Or allow it and factor it into my campaign plans. Let's flesh out Tesuji's approach a bit - some villains are there to show how tough the heroes are, others are there for other reasons.

 

OUr Heroes, Meson Man (with his area effect NND and Rapid Firer tactics) and Mistress Mind, with her Rapid Fire tuned Ego Attack are tracking down recent thefts of high tech equipment.

 

Staking out a likely target, they are rewarded in encoutering a group of mercenary supervillains who have targetted this facility for robber. Meson Man's rapid fire area effect NND makes short work of four of them, and the remaining two are quickly taken down by rapid fire ego attacks. Our Heroes overcome 3 to 1 odds.

 

Reading the adoring article in the press the next day, Our Heroes discover that there were three similar robberies at other facilities last night, however. Interrogating their prisoners, however, they obtain a lead - the location of an abandoned warehouse where they were to make the drop (gathered telepathically). Next stop - warehouse - where further clues lead them to another location.

 

Stealthily entering this new location, all is going well until the CLANG of steel walls falling over the entrances. A spotlight fopcuses in on Our Heroes, and they hear menacing laughter. "Ahhh...you finally followed the bread crumbs I left. I though you would be faster. No matter - you'll be just as dead." The lights in the building come up, revealing the use to which the stolen technology has been put - two dozen combat robots (as well as the speakers broadcasting our Master Villain's words from his hidden location, and the cameras letting him see thw show). Rapid Fire NND and Ego Attack does little against automotons who Take no Stun.

 

Now Our Heroes can showcase their versatility and prudent tactics against adversaries who really ARE a threat to their min/max abilities against those lacking defenses against the NND and Ego Attack.

[Hugh Neilson]

BTW, for those that haven't figured it out yet, I side with Temuji's logic and aproach. Villains may have equal points, but they aren't equally suited for combat with specific opponents. Two live comic examples:

 

Batman vs the Riddler: A battle of minds - reasonably balanced and a decent read. Ever see "Riddler vs Impulse"?. Riddler tells him about the bomb hidden somewhere in the town and challenges him to solve his riddle in time to find it. During that speech, Impulse searches the town at super speed, finds and dismantles the bomb and brings back the parts.

 

Superman vs Parasite: Supes has always been at a major disadvantage - his powers get stolen by his opponent. But what about the "energy Superman"? After the big build-up to Parasite, Energy Supes reverses his process and leaves a withered husk to be collected by the authorities. No challenge at all. Other, far weaker, opponents are a challenge, however, because their abilities are better suited to challenge Supe's specific new powers.

 

Will I disallow Rapid Atack? Maybe, if it becomes abusive and reduces the fun of the game in play. But not before that's demonstrated in actual play. Pre-banning it removes an element which might just add to, rather than detract from, the game.

 

As for area effect NND's, perhaps the real problem here is the advantage combination, and not the maneuver. Maybe attacks to which normal defenses do not apply should pay extra to circumvent the targetting rules as well. Ego Attacks? Well, I've always wondered why 1d6 Ego Attack costs 10 points per die when an EB vs Ego Defense (+1.5) costs 12.5, 15 if you want a LOS (+1/2) range and 18.75 if it's also invisible to all but mental senses (+3/4). Make them both Zero END and Ego Attack is 15 to EB's 21.25. But again, it seems to work (although no one buys AVLD vs Mental Defense). Even if you use the "swap exotic defenses for +1/2 rule, the comparable is still 13.75 vs 10, 18.75 vs 15 at zero END.

 

Funny...my example which requires +5 in advantages is dismissed out of hand. Your 4d6 0 END area effect NND requires 2 1/2, Gary, and more than twice as many AP.

[Gary]

Originally posted by tesuji

Now, as said before, IF i send a team by any name which is routinely one shot fodder for my PC(s) I do so knowingly and for cause. Those are not typically the NPCs i would hang major plot elements on. If i want a character to be someone i hang major plot element son, I design him to not be routinely one shot kills.

 

Given a "typical" party, you may have a mentallist, 2 EB guys with NND in a multipower (with different defenses vs their NNDs), a drainer, and 1-2 hand to hand fighter (brick or MA). How hard or easy is it in practice to develop an entire villain team with power, mental, flash defense, force field, and life support? It seems that with a "major" villain team and a diverse PC group, that each villain would have to have each exotic defense to protect against being one shot fodder. And it's difficult to protect against a PC rapid fire entangle specialist that sets up the entire villain team for the rest of the PCs.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

and if such a change were part of the HERO5 rules, and not a typo or such, then one would expect NPC designs to take this into account.

 

As i stated early, rapid fire (like MPA) was one of the most significant changes in HERo5 that affects the "balance" of previous PC designs. Being able to pump out three 12d6 EB shots against a targate in a single phase radically, let me repeat, RADICALLY changes the builds you need to get characters with legs similar to those from HERO4. In HERO4, i could REASONABLY expect to build a brick with no mental def, no power def and not be all that worried about mental attacks or even transforms being able to drop me quicky. NOW that same build fails to stand up and produce the same result. In HERo4 i could build energy prohectors with typical Defs and expect to hang around even with stun totals in the 25-35 range. Now, in HERO5, that design no longer holds up. I now need stun into the 45 range or higher than average defenses.

 

Agreed.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

What rapid fire does PURE AND SIMPLE is alter the old HERO4 balance between OCV and damage in a drastic way. In the old days, i could trade +2 CV for +1 DC. Now, i can trade +2 OCV for two shots increasing my average yeidl by a lot more. (Insert my previous comments about the tactical downsides of rapid fire here.) The value of KB resistance is now a lot more, as the half-dcv doesn't mean "hit more likely" but "hit by multiple shots at once taking me out."

 

And this situation is magnified with rapid fire of nonstandard attacks. Hero recognizes that multiple attacks with nonstandard attacks is inherently unbalancing, so they added a +1 efficiency surcharge to it. They didn't add any sort of penalty to rapid fire such attacks, which IMO unbalances them greatly.

 

Originally posted by tesuji

In HERO5, from the get go, there was much more emphasis on tactics and combinations in PLAY TIME. Tandem approaches such as soft entangles followed by rapid fire stun only Ebs, a high Kb attack followed by rapid fire regular EB, the throw followed by... and with so many maneuvers producing meaningful results, tactics were more in vogue. The feel moves from HERO4 where two mobs hit and everybody pairs off and does their duel (say classic comics superteams) to a more teamwork, tandem offense whole greater than sum of parts Xmen or XFoirce "we are stronger when we work as a team" combat flavor.

 

 

That may be true, but the dynamics of one on one combat has changed to the point where it's ridiculous. As I pointed out before, Psimon, a simple mentallist built on 418 points, will easily take out 3/4 or so of the other villains in CKC, and most of the published heroes in one shot. A bunch of characters in CKC have regular or area effect NNDs and can do the same thing. Drainers become much more powerful.

 

This reminds me of the Old West with gunfighters where the fastest draw is pretty much guaranteed to win. It turns most characters into eggshells armed with sledgehammers.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

Or allow it and factor it into my campaign plans. Let's flesh out Tesuji's approach a bit - some villains are there to show how tough the heroes are, others are there for other reasons.

 

OUr Heroes, Meson Man (with his area effect NND and Rapid Firer tactics) and Mistress Mind, with her Rapid Fire tuned Ego Attack are tracking down recent thefts of high tech equipment.

 

Staking out a likely target, they are rewarded in encoutering a group of mercenary supervillains who have targetted this facility for robber. Meson Man's rapid fire area effect NND makes short work of four of them, and the remaining two are quickly taken down by rapid fire ego attacks. Our Heroes overcome 3 to 1 odds.

 

Reading the adoring article in the press the next day, Our Heroes discover that there were three similar robberies at other facilities last night, however. Interrogating their prisoners, however, they obtain a lead - the location of an abandoned warehouse where they were to make the drop (gathered telepathically). Next stop - warehouse - where further clues lead them to another location.

 

Stealthily entering this new location, all is going well until the CLANG of steel walls falling over the entrances. A spotlight fopcuses in on Our Heroes, and they hear menacing laughter. "Ahhh...you finally followed the bread crumbs I left. I though you would be faster. No matter - you'll be just as dead." The lights in the building come up, revealing the use to which the stolen technology has been put - two dozen combat robots (as well as the speakers broadcasting our Master Villain's words from his hidden location, and the cameras letting him see thw show). Rapid Fire NND and Ego Attack does little against automotons who Take no Stun.

 

Now Our Heroes can showcase their versatility and prudent tactics against adversaries who really ARE a threat to their min/max abilities against those lacking defenses against the NND and Ego Attack.

 

How about if the party is diverse, with 4 or so members having one shot knockout capability? Or if they have a defensive specialist who's sole job is to protect the DCV 1/2 people after they rapid fired? If they meet regular opponents, the opponents are SOL in general. If they meet foes such as your robots, they're no worse off than if Rapid Fire wasn't available. Basically, you're lowering the range of possible credible encounters for a PC group by allowing rapid fire for nonstandard attacks.

[Gary]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

As for area effect NND's, perhaps the real problem here is the advantage combination, and not the maneuver. Maybe attacks to which normal defenses do not apply should pay extra to circumvent the targetting rules as well. Ego Attacks? Well, I've always wondered why 1d6 Ego Attack costs 10 points per die when an EB vs Ego Defense (+1.5) costs 12.5, 15 if you want a LOS (+1/2) range and 18.75 if it's also invisible to all but mental senses (+3/4). Make them both Zero END and Ego Attack is 15 to EB's 21.25. But again, it seems to work (although no one buys AVLD vs Mental Defense). Even if you use the "swap exotic defenses for +1/2 rule, the comparable is still 13.75 vs 10, 18.75 vs 15 at zero END.

 

Funny...my example which requires +5 in advantages is dismissed out of hand. Your 4d6 0 END area effect NND requires 2 1/2, Gary, and more than twice as many AP.

 

Area effect NNDs by themselves aren't that big of a problem. Normally, it'll take 3 hits to knock out a super powered opponent with one. If the other guy gets 3 actions to stop you, the power is balanced. However, if you're allowed to rapid fire 4 times, that will take out most people in one shot. That is unbalancing. It's the synergy of area effect NND and rapid fire that's causing the problem. It's funny that Hero recognized the inherent abuse with Autofire NNDs, but seems to not notice the dangers of Rapid Fire NNDs.

 

And your sample power was dismissed not just because of the magnitude of the advantages, but because it is abusive. Just like the 3 active point megascale leap usable as attack is abusive. These powers are not likely to be allowed in an actual game, whereas a simple ego blast or NND is very likely to be allowed.

[badger3k]

I was just curious to find out - how many rolls will it take to get average results? Will this happen everytime the character rolls? I've skimmed the math mainly because I'm not interested in it, but if I try it myself, how long will I have to use the power to see that 4d6 NND rapid fire hit on all four times and score damage that way. I can see every once in a while scoring on all four hits, but I can also see missing the first one, or the second, or the third.

 

So far, the argument seems to be that based on a particular construct, and used in a certain way, the combination can be unbalancing, mainly from the maximum damage potential.

 

Well, as Gary said, the results for my FH campaign may indicate no problems (or few) since its not a special attack like the nnd. I'd still like to know how many rolls I need to figure out a statistically valid average (or is it mean? Its been 15 years...). I might get bored and try rolling a few times (or getting my players involved as an email project).

[zornwil]

Originally posted by badger3k

I was just curious to find out - how many rolls will it take to get average results? Will this happen everytime the character rolls? I've skimmed the math mainly because I'm not interested in it, but if I try it myself, how long will I have to use the power to see that 4d6 NND rapid fire hit on all four times and score damage that way. I can see every once in a while scoring on all four hits, but I can also see missing the first one, or the second, or the third.

 

So far, the argument seems to be that based on a particular construct, and used in a certain way, the combination can be unbalancing, mainly from the maximum damage potential.

 

Well, as Gary said, the results for my FH campaign may indicate no problems (or few) since its not a special attack like the nnd. I'd still like to know how many rolls I need to figure out a statistically valid average (or is it mean? Its been 15 years...). I might get bored and try rolling a few times (or getting my players involved as an email project).

 

Good point. You'd have to check standard deviations and such to get really correct about it, but I think Gary's identified it's a potential issue, which is enough for our purposes as GMs and players, ultimately, IMHO.

[tesuji]

Originally posted by Gary

That may be true, but the dynamics of one on one combat has changed to the point where it's ridiculous.

 

1. The judgement of "ridiculous" is a sunjective determination, not an empirical one/ So I hope you can realize others may reach different jedgements and that you have passed beyond the range of "but the math..." which I get the sense you find as an empirical truth.

 

2. Again in the arena of theoretical problem vs actual in play problem differences... every champions game i have ever ran was a team game with very few one-on-one combats. While many solo-hero comics abound, solo-hero rpg campaigns are fewer and farther between. I can understand that one-on-one combat issues might well be a theoretical concern for overzealous analysis, but from all of my experience, its the team on team combats that the system needs to make work well for RPG campaigns in honest to goodness play. (This might be **yet another factor** as to why this issue, which you see as so inherently obvious and drastic in your analysis, hasnt actually been seen occuring in play, even among groups who did use rapid fire.)

[Gary]

Originally posted by badger3k

I was just curious to find out - how many rolls will it take to get average results? Will this happen everytime the character rolls? I've skimmed the math mainly because I'm not interested in it, but if I try it myself, how long will I have to use the power to see that 4d6 NND rapid fire hit on all four times and score damage that way. I can see every once in a while scoring on all four hits, but I can also see missing the first one, or the second, or the third.

 

So far, the argument seems to be that based on a particular construct, and used in a certain way, the combination can be unbalancing, mainly from the maximum damage potential.

 

Well, as Gary said, the results for my FH campaign may indicate no problems (or few) since its not a special attack like the nnd. I'd still like to know how many rolls I need to figure out a statistically valid average (or is it mean? Its been 15 years...). I might get bored and try rolling a few times (or getting my players involved as an email project).

 

Here's the average results for a 26 dex 3 skill level dude with a 4d6 area effect NND in his multipower, rapid firing 4 times:

 

16d6 area effect NND 68% of the time.

12d6 area effect NND 7% of the time.

8d6 area effect NND 8% of the time.

4d6 area effect NND 8% of the time.

0d6 9% of the time.

 

If you want numbers run for other scenarios, let me know.