Haymaker Rules

[Metaphysician]

From the Champions board, an idea for an alternate Haymaker rule:

 

Basically, the haymaker works as currently except for the damage. Specifically, the number of damage classes is increased to 1.5x normal.

 

*However,* the damage rolled cannot exceed the theoretical maximum damage for the base attack before haymaker. IOW, a 20d6 punch, haymakered to 30d6, could still not inflict more than 40 Body and 120 Stun.

 

The rules for setting up, and disrupting, a haymaker remain the same.

 

Thoughts??

[Derek Hiemforth]

I think the current standard Haymaker is better. Bricks already have a sizable advantage due to the nature and cost of STR. Making Haymaker a damage multiplier just makes that edge larger. In your example, saying the 30d6 attack can only do a max of 120 STUN and 40 BODY isn't particularly limiting, because it would only be expected to do 105 STUN and 30 BODY on average anyway. (There is only a 6% chance of doing 120 STUN on 30 dice.)

 

If anything, I would lessen the existing Haymaker by saying it adds +4DC, up to a maximum of twice the original attack. So a 12d6 attack would be increased to 16d6, but a 2d6 attack would only be increased to 4d6.

[Arthur]

Originally posted by Derek Hiemforth

I think the current standard Haymaker is better. Bricks already have a sizable advantage due to the nature and cost of STR.

 

What he said. Squared.

 

Haymaker as a +4 DC was a House Rule of mine ten years before FRED. It makes Haymaker into a zero-point Martial Arts Maneuver.

 

In fact, the whole notion of "zero-point" Maneuvers built using UMA is coming up soon in an issue of Digital Hero. It was written by an, ummm, close friend of mine. He looks just like me but without glasses. We've never been seen together, but that's just a coincidence!!

[Lord Liaden]

Since I started the discussion of Haymakers in the aforementioned thread, I should probably describe where I was going with this:

 

First of all, I'm not certain if everyone is clear on the fact that in 5E, Haymakers can be performed with Ranged attacks as well as HTH, and even Mental and Presence Attacks in some cases (check the FAQ for details of the last two). The damage advantage that bricks used to have under 4E and earlier editions through use of that Maneuver has now been evened out.

 

Secondly, 5E Haymakers already work under the rules exactly as Derek suggests: they add a maximum of 4 Damage Classes to the attack, but never more than double the base damage however low it is.

 

My suggestion for going with the 4E Damage Multiplier version of a Haymaker was meant to be an optional rule in high-powered campaigns where characters might be expected to have to fight military-grade hardware like tanks, or even supertech like starships. It was meant to allow them to do effective damage in such circumstances without giving the characters humongous Character Points and monstrous DC attacks, or changing how supers interact with each other in combat.

 

I haven't changed how Haymakers work for lower DC attacks, but I've been experimenting with letting players choose a x1.5 damage Haymaker (prorated for Advantages, which 5E Haymakers are not) when those would allow them to do more damage. So far the inherent restrictions on Haymakers have meant little change to combat between supers (although it helps to have characters with Ranged attacks make some show of gathering power for a major assault, so that defenders are warned to prepare for it), but against slow-reacting vehicles or stationary targets that you need to do BODY damage to, the difference can be crucial.

 

Metaphysician suggested the cap on Haymaker damage equalling the max that the base attack could do, which I found to be an excellent suggestion. Unlike 5E Haymakers, this version would increase in damage geometrically as the size of the base attack increases, giving the potential for truly obscene totals from huge attacks with a good die roll. (I shudder at the thought of letting Dr. Destroyer use one like that!) Letting a Haymaker effectively turn a 20D6 EB into 30D6, but capping the damage at the maximum for 20D6, doesn't make the attack inherently more powerful but greatly increases the chance of doing maximum or close to maximum damage. And the odds of doing that much damage are signicantly higher than with just adding 4 DC to the base attack.

 

Anyway, that's where I was coming from with this. I welcome other suggestions as well as any comments on the ones here, pro or con.

[Lord Liaden]

Originally posted by Derek Hiemforth

In your example, saying the 30d6 attack can only do a max of 120 STUN and 40 BODY isn't particularly limiting, because it would only be expected to do 105 STUN and 30 BODY on average anyway. (There is only a 6% chance of doing 120 STUN on 30 dice.)

 

For the example in question, it wouldn't be a matter of going from rolling 20D6 to rolling 30D6; it would be rolling 20D6, then multiplying the result by 1 1/2. Decidedly better odds of getting that 120 STUN.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

For the example in question, it wouldn't be a matter of going from rolling 20D6 to rolling 30D6; it would be rolling 20D6, then multiplying the result by 1 1/2. Decidedly better odds of getting that 120 STUN.

Not all that much better. 11% instead of 6%...

[SleepyDrug]

The main issue I have with the +4d6 Haymaker is that this is basically a non-martial Offensive Strike. In my super-heroic campaign, I want more then that for characters. For Heroic level I like it because I want trained fighters to be much more effective.

[Trebuchet]

Originally posted by SleepyDrug

The main issue I have with the +4d6 Haymaker is that this is basically a non-martial Offensive Strike. In my super-heroic campaign, I want more then that for characters. For Heroic level I like it because I want trained fighters to be much more effective.

I disagree that it is equivalent to a non-martial Offensive Strike. While it adds the same amount of damage classes, the OCV/DCV penalties and necessary extra time to deliver a Haymaker (+0/-5, plus not landing until the end of the next Segment) vs. an Offensive Strike (-2/+1) makes the Haymaker much less effective. (For most bricks -5 DCV more than halves their DCV.) If a brick decides to Haymaker a martial artist, the MA will probably get in a hit and quite possibly move away before the brick lands his blow; and that's assuming no Knockdown/Knockback. Plus you can't add Damage Classes to a Haymaker. Certainly no martial artist would ever bother using a Haymaker for HtH combat.

 

You might consider it a poor man's Offensive Strike, but it's a piss poor substitute.

[Arthur]

Haymaker works out nicely as a zero-point maneuver using UMA:

 

Haymaker: -5 DCV (-5); +4 Damage Classes (+6); Extra Time (-1).

 

You just have to stretch the maximum negative DCV modifier. It also works out better if the extra DC from a Haymaker add to Killing Attacks at half value.

[Lord Liaden]

The 5E type of Haymaker works very well for Heroic-level games, or for lower-powered Superheroic ones. As far as the latter goes I've seen several people here state that they don't want their superheroes to be able to match major military forces, often because they find the scenario too unrealistic. If that's the kind of game they want to play then they certainly should be able to use the ruleset to do that.

 

But Champions is supposed to allow one to play the full gamut of superhero style gaming, and supers vs. the army, even supers vs. the invading space fleet, is one part of the genre. It's a part that I enjoy playing from time to time. When I look at the heavyweight characters written up for 5E Champions, I see most of them starting at around 18-20 Damage Classes, like Grond or Firewing. These are supposed to be the major-league threats that often take entire teams to beat. Then I look at some of the modern day hardware written up in FREd and The Ultimate Vehicle, and realize that if these things show up most of these "heavyweights" are likely gonna be toast. That doesn't really allow for the high-powered part of the genre, unless you really start boosting Character Points for attacks and defenses, or cut down the effectiveness of the modern weapons and vehicles.

 

However, I don't want to majorly rewrite so much of what's been created in Hero books to date, so I've started experimenting with rule variants to better fit this kind of game without substantially changing anything else. There's certainly plenty of precedent for that already in published Hero Games material.

 

Should anyone be curious as to other suggestions I've made regarding this kind of game, you can check the last two or three pages of "Can Worldbeaters beat the military?" over on the Champions board.

[Metaphysician]

The real benefit with this idea for Haymaker's is that you can actually inflict damage on objects with normal attacks. While normal attacks have roughly equal theoretical max Body damage, the actual range of Body damage inflict is insanely narrow. For all intents and purposes, a 12 Def object is immune to 10d6 normal attacks.

[Lord Liaden]

Well, Meta, that's open to interpretation.

 

You can already Haymaker a 10D6 attack for 14D6 damage, enough to do BODY to that DEF 12 object. You could also Push your attack to bring the damage up to 16D6, but a lot of GMs are uncomfortable with casually Pushing Powers or Strength (myself among them), and FREd does discourage Pushing other than in desperate circumstances. (I have my own house rules for Pushing, too, but that's another thread... )

 

The Haymaker option I'm discussing would increase the damage for a 10D6 attack to 15D6, which can be crucial if you need to do BODY to a target but really isn't that big of a change. In fact, for the suggested power levels in a Standard Superhero campaign it wouldn't make a lot of difference for combat between supers. What it will do is make it easier to perform some of those comic-book feats that are sometimes difficult for heroes to do given the DEF of some objects in official books: feats like peeling the hatch off an armored vehicle, or ripping the door out of a bank vault. Remember the "I Can Juggle a Tank but not Smash It?" thread from a while back?

 

Because the extra damage from the x1.5 Haymaker increases geometrically with the base damage, where you really start to see the difference is with attacks common to High Powered (and higher) Superheroic campaigns. DC 14 Haymakered would go from DC 18 under 5E, to DC 21 this way. DC 18 Haymakered would go from 22 to 27, and so on.

[Metaphysician]

OTOH, the standard haymaker setup limitations would, IMHO, mitigate the combat-utility of these more-powerful haymakers. Certainly, you *could* create a character designed around setting up his own haymakers, but it probably wouldn't be easy.

[Guest Keneton]

Unless you down power haymaker (as I did in my house rule making haymaker = +20 active) it is not the equvelent of a 0 point martail maneuver. It adds DC's STRAIGHT to an advantaged power. 3d6+1 Killing AP AF 5 becomes 4 1/2 d6 Killing AP AF5. Thats 40 active points more!

 

I do understand the 0 point basis thing and in theory that is true, but in practice people canhaymaker advantage attacks leading to a big abuse. Hence my house rule.