Attack that only affects evil. Suggestions?

[Rick]

Oh we don't make any such limits in our L5R campaign. It's all based on appropriateness and over all effect. We also divide all spell real costs by 5 and all quasi magical abilities (Chi powers, Tattooes, special abilities, Diasho awakening ect ect ect) by 2.

 

So a straight RKA 1d6 NND, Does body, spell would cost 9 points or a special power would be 22 points. That's not incl,uding any other advantages or Limitations.

[Markdoc]

>>>Thirdly, NND in an fantasy hero campaign I find unrealistic, that is a Medieval Fantasy Hero campaign. Medieval campaigns that use NNDs instead of killing attacks, I find too comic booky. A hallmark of fantasy, is that your opponents DIE when defeated, not get knocked unconscious so you can arrest them.<<<

 

Actually NNDs - in the form of sleep spells, mystic poisons and so on have been a staple of Fantasy for a good long time. Briar Rose's whole castle is NND'ed. Conan is forever "falling into blackness" only to wake up later in some dungeon or other. Morgan le Fay knocks both Lancelot and Arthur out in the classical romances. Orlando Furioso is magically rendered inconscious in the Castle of Bronze, etc, etc.

 

So the limitation is "in genre" - depending of course on what sort of campaign you are running.

 

cheers, Mark

[Nuke]

Originally posted by Galadorn

The power levels for magic spells in my campaign are:

• 
  Wizards/Priests: 30 pt.s
  Bards/Divine Magic Layperson: 15-20 pt.s
  Ranger/Paladin: 10-15 pt.s

[/b]

 

But here's a comparison of the two types of "affect evil" spells of equal active points, though:

 

30 AP

- 2d6 RKA, "-1 only against evil"

- 2d6 EB, "+1 NND (don't be evil)", "+1 Does BOD"

 

The first attack averages 7 BOD, 21 STUN. Let's say you hit your typical Joe in the chest wearing leather armor (DEF 3?) who has a 5 PD/ED. Joe will take 2 BOD and 13 STUN.

 

The second attack averages 2 BOD and 7 STUN. Joe is evil and therefore takes 2 BOD and 7 STUN.

 

Since dealing BOD is more the typical way of defeating baddies in FH campaigns (at least what I've played in often), then both attacks are roughly equal in power. What that tells me is that both powers are roughly equal, but you are correct, the first will take less real points (perhaps 1 for a 30 AP spell depending upon your required limitations) because of the added limitation.

 

I believe the second version of the attack gains in power when you are fighting evil monsters and not evil people. It seems like monsters, especially those of the evil type (undead, demons, devils, etc...) like to have high DEF and often take no stun.

 

After all that spiel, I think overall the two methods are fairly compatible with each other balance-wise, which is a tribute to the Hero system. If I left any holes, I apologize, not enough sleep last night!

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Markdoc

>>>Thirdly, NND in an fantasy hero campaign I find unrealistic, that is a Medieval Fantasy Hero campaign. Medieval campaigns that use NNDs instead of killing attacks, I find too comic booky. A hallmark of fantasy, is that your opponents DIE when defeated, not get knocked unconscious so you can arrest them.<<<

 

Actually NNDs - in the form of sleep spells, mystic poisons and so on have been a staple of Fantasy for a good long time.

 

Mystic poisons depend on the special effect. Mystic poisons can still be RKAs. Secondly, isn't the target a mystic poison often "weak" after the poison wears off? This could simply be that the character lost some BODY.

 

Briar Rose's whole castle is NND'ed.

 

I have no idea who this is.

 

Conan is forever "falling into blackness" only to wake up later in some dungeon or other.

 

While still being physically "weak" and unable to fight effectively. Sounds more like a STR drain, and possibly NND in combination. Or more an STUN drain, since Conans recovery didn't seem to help much.

 

Of course NNDs don't kill their targets, unless they're NNDs that do body. And I don't mind NNDs that do body.

 

Morgan le Fay knocks both Lancelot and Arthur out in the classical romances.

 

You sure that was an NND and not an physical EB?

 

Orlando Furioso is magically rendered inconscious in the Castle of Bronze, etc, etc.

 

I think you meant unconcious. And was he physically "weak" afterwards?

 

So the limitation is "in genre" - depending of course on what sort of campaign you are running.

 

cheers, Mark

 

Depends on what campaign you are running. For a 30 point active point limit, NNDs are toooo expensive.

• 
  Comparison:
  A. Paladin Attack: +1d6HKA + 1 1/2d6 HKA (sword) + 1 pip KA (str) + 1/2d6 KA (extra DCs) = 3 1/2d6HKA =
  Average body: 6 (for 6 Def)
  Average Stun: 28 (for 10 total PD, 6 rPD).
  Cost: 5 (KA) + 4 (DC) = 9 total.
  B. NND: 5 1/2 d6 NND.
  Average Stun: 17
  Average Body: 0
  Cost: 10 total (for average limit.s)
  

 

You do the math... The HKA does:

• 1. 6 body more, on the average.
  2. 11 stun more.

 

Hmmmmmmm, which is more effective, realistic, and genre appropriate?

[Rick]

I think you missed the whole spiel Nuke just wrote I think. NND can Do body W/the correct Advantages.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Rick

I think you missed the whole spiel Nuke just wrote I think. NND can Do body W/the correct Advantages.

 

No I didn't, my way is more cost effective and more damaging.

[Rick]

Ummmm...Ok man. Do we need to bring up the difference between a Wizards/Priests spell and your Paladin's sword.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Rick

Ummmm...Ok man. Do we need to bring up the difference between a Wizards/Priests spell and your Paladin's sword.

 

Lets. Wizards and priests stink when it comes to cost efficiency. I'll take a "Priest" who will have a holy mace as well. This is HERO GAMES, I'm not limited by classes here. LOL

[badger3k]

Originally posted by Galadorn

 

Mystic poisons depend on the special effect. Mystic poisons can still be RKAs. Secondly, isn't the target a mystic poison often "weak" after the poison wears off? This could simply be that the character lost some BODY.

 

[/b]

 

That could also be the effects of being knocked down to 0 Stun and Endurance. Could also be a Str drain/etc.

 

I have no idea who this is.

 

I think Briar Rose is the castle in sleeping beauty, since that's what it sounds like to me. Just a guess.

 

While still being physically "weak" and unable to fight effectively. Sounds more like a STR drain, and possibly NND in combination. Or more an STUN drain, since Conans recovery didn't seem to help much.

 

Of course NNDs don't kill their targets, unless they're NNDs that do body. And I don't mind NNDs that do body.

 

[/b]

 

You sure that was an NND and not an physical EB?

 

[/b]

 

I think you meant unconcious. And was he physically "weak" afterwards?

 

All of the above examples are all personal taste, so they can pretty much be whatever you want them to be. I think trying to categorize the effects of fiction is only good to see the various ways they can be built. Depending on what you want to do, there really is no "right way" (as I think we all agree on).

 

Depends on what campaign you are running. For a 30 point active point limit, NNDs are toooo expensive.

• 
  Comparison:
  A. Paladin Attack: +1d6HKA + 1 1/2d6 HKA (sword) + 1 pip KA (str) + 1/2d6 KA (extra DCs) = 3 1/2d6HKA =
  Average body: 6 (for 6 Def)
  Average Stun: 28 (for 10 total PD, 6 rPD).
  Cost: 5 (KA) + 4 (DC) = 9 total.
  B. NND: 5 1/2 d6 NND.
  Average Stun: 17
  Average Body: 0
  Cost: 10 total (for average limit.s)
  

 

You do the math... The HKA does:

• 1. 6 body more, on the average.
  2. 11 stun more.

 

Hmmmmmmm, which is more effective, realistic, and genre appropriate? [/b]

 

Well, what is the NND body supposed to represent? Just giving the numbers (and the few that you do give) tells nothing.

 

How about a sleep spell (3d6 EB, NND (+1), 30 active points; OAF, gestures, incantations, RSR (-1, 1/4, 1/4, 1/2 = -2), 10 real points.

 

Average Stun: 9 stun, no defense at all if they lack the required defenses. Not totally powerful, enough to stagger a normal person. For a 30 point cap, I wouldn't expect much for a power like that, though.

 

Jump it up higher than the attacks will get more powerful.

 

What about the NND (does Body)? 2d6 EB, NND (+1), Does Body (+1) = 30 active points, same limits, 10 real points.

 

Average Body: 2 , with no defenses if they lack the main one

Average Stun: 6, again with no defenses.

 

Once again, pretty low powered, but again, what do you expect with 30 active point caps? Up the limits, and they too become more effective. Although I can't see how the Paladins attack falls under a 30 point cap - even the NND given I figure (roughly) at 56 points or so.

 

As to what fits the genre and realism better? A knights sword or a wizards sleep spell? Sounds like they both do, assuming that magic is allowed in the campaign. If the real world is the base, the NND might be a garotte, or even an alchemical compound like Ether or something similar.

[Outsider]

The caster shouldnt be buying straight damage, IMO. Thats what (and about all) the meaty boys up front are good for. Also, if your warriors are doing 3.5 d6 HKAs, 30 active points might be a bit underpowered for your casters.

 

With only 30 active points available, really effective attack spells are going to be hard to come by. I'd pretty much never buy straight EB or KA, as those effects are already done so well by the warriors. Any EBs or KAs I bought would have advantages not available to the warriors, and preferably would have AoE as well.

 

A few offensive spell examples with 30 active points :

 

Sleep Spell :

2d6 EB - NND, AoE(Radius, 2") (7 stun to everyone in a 7 hex area.

 

Fatigue Spell :

3D6 Drain - END (target loses 21 END, on average)

 

Web Spell :

1D6 Entangle - Entangle Takes No Damage, AoE(Cone, 16" side) (All targets in the cone are covered in 3 DEF, 1 Body webs, which take no damage from piercing or bludgeoning attacks (unless specifically targetted. 3 Def should be pretty useful against hordes of weaker opponents who will not get to use their foci (weapons) to help them break out)

 

Englobement :

12/0 Forcewall - (A bit mana intensive, but very useful for temporarily containing more powerful foes. (a foe doing 3D6 HKA has only about a 25% chance per blow of breaking the englobement. If they have only 2d6 HKA, or even very large Reduced Pen attacks (such as Animals often have) they can likely be contained until the mage runs out of mana. Unless they get the bright idea to try lighting a torch up....)

 

Seeking Arrow Spell

1D6 RKA (P) No range mod, Increased Max Range (to 2250 hexes (4.5 km))

 

 

 

 

[Snarf]

This may have already been mentioned at some point in this thread, but the official value for "Only Affect Evil Beings" is -1/2. I just noticed it on page 48 of Fantasy Hero.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Snarf

This may have already been mentioned at some point in this thread, but the official value for "Only Affect Evil Beings" is -1/2. I just noticed it on page 48 of Fantasy Hero.

 

Yes Snarf, thank you. I mentioned that 4 ed. has the same limitation value, but they aren't adhering to the rules in this regard, which is there choice...

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by Outsider

The caster shouldnt be buying straight damage, IMO. Thats what (and about all) the meaty boys up front are good for. Also, if your warriors are doing 3.5 d6 HKAs, 30 active points might be a bit underpowered for your casters.

 

I don't think anyone counts longswords as active points. It doesn't cost anything. I'm talking about character points that players spend, not "reality points" that are inherant in an item.

 

Second of all, this attack is limited, with a -1/2 limitation. It's not as versatile as you would think, given that it is only usable versus evi creatures.

 

Third of all, with a the morality disadvantage I mentioned above, a GM can limit the power, usable only on characters that have this disadvantage.

 

Fourth of all, if a GM has a balanced campaign, with the use of several "neutral" monsters, the vs. evil only limitation won't be useful all of the time, or even most of the time. This limitation will be useful some of the time.

 

With only 30 active points available, really effective attack spells are going to be hard to come by. I'd pretty much never buy straight EB or KA, as those effects are already done so well by the warriors. Any EBs or KAs I bought would have advantages not available to the warriors, and preferably would have AoE as well.

 

I disagree, modifying existing killing attacks is the most effective power for any character in my campaign. Even a cleric benefits from a +1d6HKA vs. evil only, since his attack is a 2d6+1HKA is he has STR Min. for a medium mace. He can also buy OCV levels with this power.

 

A few offensive spell examples with 30 active points :

 

Sleep Spell :

2d6 EB - NND, AoE(Radius, 2") (7 stun to everyone in a 7 hex area.

 

Nice try, but I think that's Wimpy. Doesn't do enough stun. Why not buy:

 

2d6RKA (only vs. evil -1/2) Average body: 7 Average stun: 15.

 

The advantage to this killing attack is that it kills the opponent. Not only does the opponent have to worry about about the same stun level as your NND: But he has to worry about dying - That'll make him think twice about fighting you.

 

Fatigue Spell :

3D6 Drain - END (target loses 21 END, on average)

 

Not bad.

 

Web Spell :

1D6 Entangle - Entangle Takes No Damage, AoE(Cone, 16" side) (All targets in the cone are covered in 3 DEF, 1 Body webs, which take no damage from piercing or bludgeoning attacks (unless specifically targetted. 3 Def should be pretty useful against hordes of weaker opponents who will not get to use their foci (weapons) to help them break out)

 

This one's a winner, thanks. But with an only verus evil limitation? I find that unsubtle and unplausible.

 

Englobement :

12/0 Forcewall - (A bit mana intensive, but very useful for temporarily containing more powerful foes. (a foe doing 3D6 HKA has only about a 25% chance per blow of breaking the englobement. If they have only 2d6 HKA, or even very large Reduced Pen attacks (such as Animals often have) they can likely be contained until the mage runs out of mana. Unless they get the bright idea to try lighting a torch up....)

 

Actually the torch idea I thought up, before I read the last sentence in this paragraph, LOL. And the special effect on this power would be extremely important, in my book.

 

What power, rationalized by a mythological construct, would justify such a power? Yes, this is ten cent term, but this kind of thinking goes into my campaign.

 

In short, when have you seen a power like this happen in mythology?

 

Seeking Arrow Spell

1D6 RKA (P) No range mod, Increased Max Range (to 2250 hexes (4.5 km))

 

Not bad, good ideas, generally. But two of them would take some major modifications to be truley useful in my book. Thanks.

 

BTW, the active point limitation is not on what characters can modify or add damage too: The DC limit is a whole different ball of wax. And I allow a higher total active point limitation, as long as the higher DC is limited like (only vs. evil -1/2) and (only versus dark races, -1/2).

[Outsider]

Ah, my mistake. I thought you said you had a hard 30 active point limit on spells.

 

I also usually put a great big magnifying glass next to spells that extend the abilities of existing equipment items rather than replacing those abilities from scratch.

 

 

As for the spells : I had moved on to talking about 30 active point spells in general, rather than just "cleric vs evil" ones. I also didnt bother with limitations at all, since I was just putting forth 30 active point ideas.

 

 

The sleep spell I probably wouldnt buy either. It isnt really enough dice, and it really doesnt cover enough area. But the advantage it has over the killing spell you proposed in its stead is that it is AoE. No difficult to hit roll, and it can, if well placed, hit more than one target. Also, even when the killing spell does hit, it does only -1- body & 15 stun to a single target (after the presumed 6 rDef) meaning it is only marginally better than the sleep spell hitting 2 opponents. Or a bit worse than the sleep spell hitting 3 or more.

 

The web spell wasnt thought of as specifically vs evil, but it could be modified to such by playing with the special effects, I would think. You could, for example, rename it "The Call of the Restful Grave" and define it as a clerical spell that causes the undead to stagger/fall, at which point they begin sinking into the earth (where the dead belong!) Whatever is touching the ground after then fall is grasped firmly by the earth.

 

The englobement spell is just an effect, and much more of a wizardly one than a clerical one. I dont know mythology well enough to justify it by citation of source. If you want a special effect, though, it could be defined as a wall of magical ice that springs up at the casters direction, that is very tough against physical blows, but is destroyed by the merest touch of its opposite, fire (or related effects (energy)

[Galadorn]

Thanks Outsider.

[M-3]

Hi and thanks for your input, everybody.

 

I've decided to go with the NND and "not being evil" as it's the easiest and most elegant solution (IMO) and fits my concept best.

 

I'll just clarify what the original question was about (or was meant to be about), though:

I'm converting a specific campaign world to the HERO system, one in which Good, Evil and Chaos are actual forces as real as light or gravity and there exists such a thing as "objective" evil. Every character must be aligned to one of these three and they get no points for it (just like you have to describe what your character looks like in any game but except in extreme cases you don't get points for that either). Players are, of course, wlecome to choose Psych. Lims to reinforce this "alignment" and are forbidden from choosing Psych Lims that flatly contradict it (ie. "Enjoys ripping the heads off babies" for Good characters).

 

While the PCs will probably often find themselves fighting opponents who aren't evil but chaotic (or even good - animals in this world are considered good unless they've been corrupted by some supernatural evil), having a power that will enable them to inflict damage on evil creatures only in an area is definitely a huge advantage, since I'm not permitting PCs to be evil.

[Galadorn]

Originally posted by M-3

Hi and thanks for your input, everybody.

 

I've decided to go with the NND and "not being evil" as it's the easiest and most elegant solution (IMO) and fits my concept best.

 

While the PCs will probably often find themselves fighting opponents who aren't evil but chaotic (or even good - animals in this world are considered good unless they've been corrupted by some supernatural evil), having a power that will enable them to inflict damage on evil creatures only in an area is definitely a huge advantage, since I'm not permitting PCs to be evil.

 

O.K. As I said, campaign specific.

[dstarfire]

stopping the evil-detector

 

My opinion: only vs. good would be a limitation. Just because you don't want to do something that you can't do, doesn't make it any less of a limitation. To neutralize this power, all an evil person has to do is use mind control, or good ol' fashioned deception and manipulation to make a bunch of "good" people attack you.

 

Given that, here's how to get around the evil detector problem. instead of "only vs. evil" change it to "only vs. known evil". Of course, if this a "divine" spell, you could require the caster to have sense evil active when casting this spell. No matter who casts this spell, it effectively draws it's sense of what's evil from the casters awareness, not his consciousness (that would be the advantage selective).

 

I know this probably doesn't match real well with how you were envisioning the spell, but it accurately describes the spells effect, and that's what matters for hero mechanics.

[badger3k]

Re: stopping the evil-detector

 

Originally posted by dstarfire

My opinion: only vs. good would be a limitation. Just because you don't want to do something that you can't do, doesn't make it any less of a limitation. To neutralize this power, all an evil person has to do is use mind control, or good ol' fashioned deception and manipulation to make a bunch of "good" people attack you.

 

Given that, here's how to get around the evil detector problem. instead of "only vs. evil" change it to "only vs. known evil". Of course, if this a "divine" spell, you could require the caster to have sense evil active when casting this spell. No matter who casts this spell, it effectively draws it's sense of what's evil from the casters awareness, not his consciousness (that would be the advantage selective).

 

I know this probably doesn't match real well with how you were envisioning the spell, but it accurately describes the spells effect, and that's what matters for hero mechanics.

 

Two posts? Well, if nobody said it yet, welcome. If someone has, it still applies. For some reason I never thought of the mind-control bit to counter the spell. I think the "known evil" could be hard, especially if "evil" is some kind of disadvantage (distinctive features in my world), but I suppose it could be reworded to affect those the caster knows to be evil (only vs targets that detect as evil?). It might be a little rougher to play then the divine/all-knowing evil detecting spell, but can limit it even more.

 

Can't remember the earlier posts, but a similar spell (maybe 1 point damage) could be used to identify evil people in a group (AOE). Simiar to a "spell" used by Jack Chalker in his lords of the diamond books (the "spell" was used to cause all rebels in the area - known and unknown - to grow horns). This type of spell could replace detects if it's not written/watched well. Maybe not, although even as a NND and AOE spell, it stil might be cheaper than a detect. Hmm (getting ideas to try out in Hero Designer)...