The importance of limits

[CorpCommander]

Hero is an unlimited system, in that you can devise characters using any power at any level, limited only by the points you are given. Suggestions for limitations are given for lower level games, but the GM is free to ignore them.

 

Having run a campaign for 9 months I've come to see the wisdom in that. The problem you have to face is that if one character has a really powerful attack, for example, such as 4d6 Killing then in order to make the combat sensible the GM has to send reasonably tough creatures against the party with high enough DEF/BODY etc. The problem comes when the rest of the party isn't so inclined with the ability to cause as much damage. You end up with opponents that either A) can only be effected by one party member or opponents that one party member can off in one phase.

 

I am sure others have come across this dilema as well. What say you?

[Guest Kolava]

What are the SFX of the killing attack?

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: The importance of limits

 

Originally posted by CorpCommander

I am sure others have come across this dilema as well. What say you?

You need to either make sure the characters are reasonably well-balanced against each other in terms of DCs, CVs, SPDs, etc., or you need to make sure that there are drawbacks to being more combat-oriented and advantages to being less combat-oriented.

[CorpCommander]

Guns Guns Guns

 

Originally posted by Kolava

What are the SFX of the killing attack?

 

Its a steampunk fantasy setting (Iron Kingdoms, if you've heard of it.)

 

Its fun but I took a liberal approach and the character with the rifle now has a powerful attack. Very powerful. It could use some triming down and I'll probably get him to cut it down a bit and give him something useful in exchange for cooperation. Now, he can't mow down massive numbers of things attacking at once but when it comes to solitary single things his ability to inflict gruesome damage is legendary (assuming his bad luck doesn't show up as an additional opponent.)

 

I now see the utility behind limiting attacks to X dice and overall DEF to X depending on the system. For example, when faced with a nearly 350 point demon spider from Monster, Minions and Mauraders (or whatever the order of those words is!) he needed only a couple of shots to bring one of them unconscious. Once at that point it was a simple detail to do "coup de gras." Since he is point costed out to 180 points this seemed to lack the drama one would have thought for such a battle. Note that said beastie is around 20 body with ok def and a 50% damage reduction! Yowza.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Yeah, running a game with no limits on DCs, CVs, and so on is not usually a good idea.

[BoneDaddy]

While we're on the topic, what's the general concensus on Entangle, Darkness, Change Environment, and Find Weakness in terms of offensive power point totals?

 

A fifty point entangle doesn't seem as useful as I might want it to be, especially when put next to a 3d6 RKA or a 10d6EB. A 50 STR brick can shrug that off in half a phase.

 

Fifty points worth of darkness is nice, but is 60 unbalancing in a 50 point limit offensive game? Change Environment is more diversely useful (I can create a radius around myself where you can't run away, or catch me. Xeno's Tortoise finally wins!) but I ask the same question - do these odd powers fall into the same category as EB and RKA and Flash?

 

CorpCommander creates a great explanation as to why max power points are necessary. How far should they extend?

[TheEmerged]

Personally, I prefer to establish a campaign framework and let players find their nitch within that.

 

RE: Entangle, Darkness, Change Environment, and Find Weakness in terms of offensive power point totals. I have to confess I haven't tried an NCM-default campaign under 5th Edition yet, although I've run literally dozens under 4th Edition.

 

Entangle is a mixed bird. What you really need to compare it to is the phases it costs the enemy. If it costs the average opponent more than 2 phases it MIGHT be unbalanced. You should also keep in mind that, in a campaign where the Gestures limitation is common (if you magic system is traditional, for example), Entangle can take certain characters out *for a fight* instead of for a phase or three.

 

The usefulness of Darkness depends heavily on how regularly extra senses (especially extra targetting senses) are going to come into play. In a typical fantasy campaign, for example, a Darkness is going to be more dangerous than in the typical Ninja HERO campaign (with Combat Sense, "Ears That See", and what have you) than in a typical superhero campaign (every one of my PC's has a second targetting sense).

 

You're going to get differing views on Find Weakness, I'll warn you right now. Many will tell you that it should be treated as a +1/2 advantage on the power -- that's too heavy in my opinion. It costs a half-phase, is subject to a roll (and ranged penalties!), and is pretty expensive in its own right (insert opportunity cost argument here). +1/4 is more accurate, in my opinion at least.

 

Change Environment? I haven't tried this in an NCM-default (where PC's have Normal Characteristic Maxima by default) under the new 5th Edition rules so I can't fairly say. What I've seen under the superheroic genre so far is rather impressive -- making debuff style powers cost about what they should. I've seen some particularly impressive effects of deductions to PER rolls, OCV and/or DCV for example.

[MarioTani]

I'm new to he Hero so maybe my personal experience will seem a little strange-_^.

 

I've started by a couple of months my first campaign with hero, a 75+75 FH campaign, I've thinkered for some time with an AP limit, but without finding a good way to explain it.

 

The DCs limit alone can be not perfectly balanced with power that has no direct combat effect, the DEF one has to be linked to the DCs...

 

More than a fast rule it was a web of opinions and warnings... so in the end I've told to the Players that I had decided to not use any fixed limit, instead I would reserve the right to step back to hacve accepted a power if it would happen to be too abusing.

 

They have understood the real problem behind this: Hero system is so vast I need some practice with it to grasp the potential interactions between the various powers.

 

In this way I'm sure notto forbid anything could be used without too much strains.

 

For example one of the players has the ability:

21 Powerfull Sweep: AoE Nonselective (8 Frontal Hexes) 67, Red END (0 END) +1/2 (AP = 100 END = 0); Real Weapon -1/4, STR min (18) - 1, 2H -1/2, OAF Difficult -1.25, ET (Full phase) -1/2, Conc (DCV = 1/2) -1/4. Real Cost 21

 

It Can Be used only with a particularly great weapon, that needs a minimum of STR 18 and two hands to be effectively Wielded, Even Than it works similarly to a sweep, the manuever uses a Full Phase, and the wielder is at 1/2 DCV.

 

The AP are 100 and, sure, it is a massive power, maxed out at a great number of DCs I Believe they are 9 as it has to be used with a 3d6 HKA (an huge axe) but has not make any particular great damage to the playability of the game

 

Up until now I've made two changes:

 

1) The human magic was to cheap to start with, and I've fixed it with a Perk has prerequisite to access the mana

2) A player had come out with an interesting power of a flame sword, with an HA trough a sword (used as a focus), it was acceptable at a low level, but it could easily taken out of the power level I was thinking about, as it added to the weapon damage, altough the opponent ED was subtracted)

 

Sure the player has protested a bit, but after explaining the situation has understood it was not an outright act against the character and has accepted some limitation on it.

 

I find in this way there are some advantages, all the players are free to play with the system, every one make a little more of experience.

[zornwil]

I have no hard limits or even mentioned guidelines for DCs or defenses. I find it's best to ensure that PCs with big attacks have something serious to offset it, and often that is simply something in their roleplaying. Getting down their character and how it will interact is paramount.

 

As to the one guy with the big bad attack...well, I don't think it's that bad for the other players. The bad guys learn to shoot at the guy with the big bad attack and not worry so much about "lesser" offensive players. Typically, anyway, and of course depends a bit on the roleplaying, again.

 

However, I have almost always been able to GM for mature players. I've heard tell of groups this would fail utterly in.

[Arthur]

Originally posted by zornwil

I have no hard limits or even mentioned guidelines for DCs or defenses. I find it's best to ensure that PCs with big attacks have something serious to offset it, and often that is simply something in their roleplaying. Getting down their character and how it will interact is paramount.

 

Right. If the PCs are turning into Combat Monsters, it's probably because the game is too combat-heavy. I've made that mistake in the past. If every game is mostly a fight scene, then of course the characters are going to adapt to it and go for more combat effectiveness. It's almost an evolution effect.

 

If a PC is too one-dimensional in any way, it should be a drawback in some way, just as it would be in most literature.

 

However, that's easier said than done.

 

 

As to the one guy with the big bad attack...well, I don't think it's that bad for the other players. The bad guys learn to shoot at the guy with the big bad attack and not worry so much about "lesser" offensive players. Typically, anyway, and of course depends a bit on the roleplaying, again.

 

Matches my experience. For many years, most of the time *I* was playing the "flying howitzer" wizard in Fantasy Hero (or GURPS Fantasy).

 

Then I had an eye-opening game. I started in a FH game with a hankering to play something different. So I made up a pacifist (would fight in self-defense) ki-based martial artist. Reasonably effective in combat, but more into stealth and ninja-type skills.

Another player made up the flying wizard with the campaign max attack (4d RKA). First big fight, my character stood back and mostly watched while the opposition focussed their heavy firepower on the wizard. It was an interesting change in perspective, to say the least. It was a totally realistic consequence within the setting.

[CorpCommander]

Originally posted by zornwil

As to the one guy with the big bad attack...well, I don't think it's that bad for the other players. The bad guys learn to shoot at the guy with the big bad attack and not worry so much about "lesser" offensive players.

 

His attack is ranged, with massive penalty skill levels to offset range. It fits his character concept quite well. The problem he has is when he gets surprised. He's not all that good in close combat.

 

Its quite clear that toning down maximum attacks to 9 DCs is probably the best thing.

[dugfromthearth]

I prefer no limits, I just have to approve the characters.

 

For example one character was allowed a 60 str AOE tk - which let him do 12d6 AOE attack. 120pt power.

 

But he could only do it in full darkness. In daylight he had only an 8d6 attack (he couldn't do AOE in daylight).

 

 

I've played a character who had a 15d6 punch with OCV 15 and around 45 PD and ED (most resistant, some hardened), in a campaign where the normal limit was 12d6. But he was spd 4 and had a 0 DCV (psych lim, wouldn't avoid attack). So he was great against martial artists, not great against bricks, and lousy against agents with autofire. He had a teammate who did 10d6 move-bys which were "underpowered" but great against agents (he did multiple move-bys). They worked as a team.

[GrimJesta]

Forgive my ignorance, but whats an NCM?

 

-=Grim=-

[TheEmerged]

Originally posted by GrimJesta

Forgive my ignorance, but whats an NCM?

 

-=Grim=-

 

Depending on the context, either "Non-combatant Movement" or "Normal Characteristic Maxima". If you're refering to my post where I talked about NCM-default campaigns, I explained that I meant campaigns where the PC's have Normal Characteristic Maxima by default -- often called "heroic" campaigns. However I see I only explained that in the last paragraph, so I apologize.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by CorpCommander

His attack is ranged, with massive penalty skill levels to offset range. It fits his character concept quite well. The problem he has is when he gets surprised. He's not all that good in close combat.

 

Its quite clear that toning down maximum attacks to 9 DCs is probably the best thing.

 

No argument on your specifics. Just stating my common practice. Certainly I have told players "That's too much." It may take them a while to find that button (that's been the feedback I've gotten from Lamrok and Chromatic) but it's there, and every GM needs to use it on some occassion to keep the game enjoyable for everyone - including, importantly, the GM himself.

[TheEmerged]

See, that's why I like to give them a framework to work in better than hard limits. That way they know a 60 point MP is effectively the minimum, 75 point MP is considered a little on the high side and 90 point MP will exist but only with appropriate limitations.

[dugfromthearth]

I have found consistently that if you say 8d6 is the min, 10d6 is norm, and 12d6 is max - everyone has 12d6

[Kristopher]

Some GMs have a limit on SPD x AP in attacks, or restrict certain Characteristics and Powers to certain levels based on the character concept.

[Beowulf]

Re: The importance of limits

 

Originally posted by CorpCommander

Hero is an unlimited system, in that you can devise characters using any power at any level, limited only by the points you are given. Suggestions for limitations are given for lower level games, but the GM is free to ignore them.

 

Having run a campaign for 9 months I've come to see the wisdom in that. The problem you have to face is that if one character has a really powerful attack, for example, such as 4d6 Killing then in order to make the combat sensible the GM has to send reasonably tough creatures against the party with high enough DEF/BODY etc. The problem comes when the rest of the party isn't so inclined with the ability to cause as much damage. You end up with opponents that either A) can only be effected by one party member or opponents that one party member can off in one phase.

 

I am sure others have come across this dilema as well. What say you?

 

Any time a power is unbalancing, the character is somehow out of balance.

 

A character with a 4d6 KA would quickly become the first casuality in fights as the bad guys go after the biggest threat.

 

His character probably has some gaps because of all the points spent on the KA that would, when compounded by the disadvantages make him a much softer target then the other player characters.

 

A character with 12 speed would quickly find his character frustrating to play because of weak attacks and non existant defenses.

 

In the hands of a experienced GM I think most unbalanced characters quickly see the folly of their ways.

[devlin1]

Originally posted by TheEmerged

(every one of my PC's has a second targetting sense).

 

Really? How can that be justified?

[zornwil]

Originally posted by TheEmerged

See, that's why I like to give them a framework to work in better than hard limits. That way they know a 60 point MP is effectively the minimum, 75 point MP is considered a little on the high side and 90 point MP will exist but only with appropriate limitations.

 

Eh, but I find people too often work towards the maxes and mins, I like to allow for it to be more open-ended.

[TheEmerged]

Originally posted by devlin1

Really? How can that be justified?

 

Well, the *real* justification is that one of the PC's has a self-targetted Darkness that follows him around. The other players figured that if they didn't already have a good reason to want it, that was reason enough on its own.

 

For other superheroic campaigns?

 

/shrugs

 

Not that hard at all. In the superheroic genre (which is the campaign I'm GM-ing) in particular there are LOADS of justifications.

 

The shadow character purchases ranged touch to represent the fact that his shadow field is a part of him -- he can feel something moving within its radius like it were under his skin.

 

The insectoid ninja type possesses "the ear that sees" -- targetting bought for hearing. His justifies this by saying his antanae serve as "better ears", allowing him to target in a manner not unlike Daredevil's ability to target people by their heartbeats.

 

The gadgeteer has radar built into his battlesuit.

 

Hexadecimal, with her 16 forms, doesn't actually have them on all modes but has one with most. From the fire-based form that can target people based on heat to the water form detects the water in their bodies to the earth form with "tremorsense" that detects everything touching the ground to the mental form with Mind Scan to the air form that senses air moving around object to the bestial form with targetting scent to the ninja form with Combat Sense...

 

Enhanced senses are actually pretty common in the genre -- it takes *very* little effort to justify them.