Oops...

[Dust Raven]

A few questions have been coming up at my game table and I'm finding myself responding with "well, that's a really good question!"

 

So I come to all of you for help.

 

Here's the deal. We've been having a lot of heavy hitter fights that are resulting in knockback. Well, some of my players want to know what their options are while prone (prone being the state of being at 1/2 DCV due to KB, DFC or being thrown and not necessarily on the ground). In my (and their) opinion they shouldn't get screwed twice because of KB, and should at least have some option of defending themselves. I'm wondering what I should allow and how do adjucate it.

 

Right now I'm allowing them to continue to abort (as long as they aren't stunned) to a defensive maneuver and modifying their DCV from that. I'm not sure what affect being prone would have on Diving for Cover if I allowed it though. Those with Acrobatics I allow to abort to "defensive squirming" and if they make their roll they maintain full DCV. I'm thinking of changing this because the UMA says they can just make the roll (no mention of using an action or aborting) but they have to make the roll by half. Or may I could allow both.

 

The second problem is what happens if you perform an action that modifies you DCV, such as Haymaker or some Martial Maneuvers, and in a later Segment aborting you next Phase to Dodge? Does the Dodge just add it's DCV bonus to your already modified DCV, or do you immedately recover from the penalty (or bonus) and take you normal DCV plus the Dodge bonus? I can see it going either way, but I'm getting sick of people performing Haymakers and then aborting to Dodge if attacked and completely negating the -5 to DCV.

 

What advice have you for me, denizens of all that is HERO?

[zornwil]

Re: Oops...

 

Re the first issue, I'm unsure. I actually don't like knockback and I used to pretty much not allow it unless you bought it specifically as an advantage to your strike. Then when I started my most recent campaign I allowed it again as I tried to make my house rules less unorthodox (somewhat). I didn't like the results in general, and now have made KB harder - to quote from the house rules:

 

Knockback is less effective. Any character with "significant resistant defenses" (GM's discretion) automatically adds +1d6 to the roll, period. Most serious super-characters have this - everyone in the Justice Squad does (Sammy's and Troll's "rubbery" bodies afford a similar resistance as smacks tend to go into or through them as much as against them). In general, that means you're rolling against 3d6. If the BOD damage does not exceed resistant defenses, add 1d6 to the knockback roll as well. So much of the time it's against 4d6, as BOD rarely gets through. However, the 1.5x and double knockback options are available at 1/4 less than book price. Also, a character may voluntary use the old knockback rules when they are targeted as a method of creating distance albeit with damage. This is not the same as rolling with the punch, which you may abort to as preferred.

 

Sorry I don't have more help though.

 

As to the second part, I have always understood that as soon as you go to any maneuver (including dodge), you receive that maneuver's value, replacing any prior one. At least in general, and of course assuming you're not performing 2 things in parallel that each alter CV.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Oops...

 

Well, the way to not get screwed twice by Knockback is to buy Breakfall, as far as 'rules-as-written' ways of handling it, since that means you may land on your feet.

 

I would permit the 'abort to stand up' maneuver, myself, though I'd probably require an acrobatics roll to pull it off. Brick DCVs are so low that halving their DCVs isn't THAT big of a problem, but high DCV martial artists get the shaft.

 

As far as the 'maneuver shuffle', the new modifier replaces the old one; so if you Haymakered, then dodged on a later segment, you get a +3DCV (which is why the time to attack someone in a Haymaker is *before* it goes off).

[KA.]

Re: Oops...

 

A few questions have been coming up at my game table and I'm finding myself responding with "well, that's a really good question!"

 

So I come to all of you for help.

 

Here's the deal. We've been having a lot of heavy hitter fights that are resulting in knockback. Well, some of my players want to know what their options are while prone (prone being the state of being at 1/2 DCV due to KB, DFC or being thrown and not necessarily on the ground). In my (and their) opinion they shouldn't get screwed twice because of KB, and should at least have some option of defending themselves. I'm wondering what I should allow and how do adjucate it.

 

Right now I'm allowing them to continue to abort (as long as they aren't stunned) to a defensive maneuver and modifying their DCV from that. I'm not sure what affect being prone would have on Diving for Cover if I allowed it though. Those with Acrobatics I allow to abort to "defensive squirming" and if they make their roll they maintain full DCV. I'm thinking of changing this because the UMA says they can just make the roll (no mention of using an action or aborting) but they have to make the roll by half. Or may I could allow both.

 

The second problem is what happens if you perform an action that modifies you DCV, such as Haymaker or some Martial Maneuvers, and in a later Segment aborting you next Phase to Dodge? Does the Dodge just add it's DCV bonus to your already modified DCV, or do you immedately recover from the penalty (or bonus) and take you normal DCV plus the Dodge bonus? I can see it going either way, but I'm getting sick of people performing Haymakers and then aborting to Dodge if attacked and completely negating the -5 to DCV.

 

What advice have you for me, denizens of all that is HERO?

 

Wow, these are good questions.

Let me try to pull out some good answers.

 

1) Well, prone is prone. It is supposed to cause a problem, but not necessarily make you into a "sitting duck".

One solution might be to have the PC's invest 3 points in some sort of "Ground Fighting" skill. That way they, and selected villains, could have a reason for being able to function well while prone, while it would still have a harsher effect on the average mook. As I am sure you know, there are real-world martial arts that focus, at least in part, on this sort of thing. So it is not ridiculous to assume that Supers, in a world where they get knocked down all the time, might decide to work on being more effective when on the ground.

As far as the existing rules, I think you are handling things the right way, i.e. let them Dodge, compute their DCV, and then apply the 1/2 modifier. (I think that is what you said you do currently.) It just makes sense that you can not Dodge as well while laying on the ground, as you can when you have 3 dimensions to operate in.

I am not sure I would allow full DCV, even for those with Acrobatics.

I am pretty sure that if you knocked Mary Lou Retton to the ground, and then started trying to hit her with a club, she would have just as hard a time getting out of the way as anyone else.

I am willing to perform the research, in necessary.

(just kidding)

 

But if they had a specific "Ground Fighting" skill, I could see it.

 

I may not have read your post correctly, but I would not allow someone to Dive for Cover while prone. I don't even think Captain America could get out ot the way if someone tossed a grenade into his hex while he was prone.

(Oh, he'd get his shield up or something, but not get out of the hex.)

Unless someone had Teleportation, or Tunneling, they would just be screwed.

 

2) I guess I see this differently than most people. I think the penalty is still in force, and the Dodge just modifies it.

I see it this way.

Character A is in a boxing match.

He's shucking and jiving and doing the shuffle, waiting for an opening. (Normal DCV)

The Mob Boss that tried to get him to fix the fight, pulls out a gun and starts shooting.

Character A aborts his attempt to land a left jab, and starts Dodging like crazy. So he gets the full benefit.

 

Character B, same situation.

Except, rather than trying to land a jab, Character B is going for the full, slow-motion, "end of the boxing movie", Haymaker, to knock out the reigning Champ.

When the gun goes off, he is still "flat footed". He goes into his Dodge, but he doesn't get the same start as Character A, who was "floating like a butterfly".

So, while the Dodge improves his DCV, it doesn't do it as much as for Character A.

 

Just my opinion, but I see the Haymaker as a "committed" position, you can't just "erase" it by trying to Dodge.

 

Not exactly the same, but sort of like this.

 

Two guys, egual in every way, are in the gym.

A psycho bursts in and starts shooting at random.

Both guys decide to Dodge.

But the first guy was lifting a barbell over his head.

He was in a committed position.

So, he is going to be a step slower than the other guy.

He is not going to just stand there and get shot,

but he still is going to take longer to go into his Dodge than the other guy,

so, he will not get as much of a DCV boost.

 

KA.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Oops...

 

One of the problems I've always had with the way Hero handles Prone is that in some situations being prone is a good thing for defensive purposes. Do you think infantrymen "hit the dirt" so they can halve their DCV? No, they throw themselves prone to make themselves a smaller target. It makes them half or perhaps only a quarter as large a target which should provide a +2 to +4 DCV bonus.

 

So while going Prone might suck if you're being attacked by someone at point blank range or at a sharp angle above you, it should actually give a DCV bonus against most non-area ranged attacks. What it should more realistically do is severely reduce movement (by at least half), which might adversely effect attempts to dive for cover or move to attack.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Oops...

 

Two guys, egual in every way, are in the gym.

A psycho bursts in and starts shooting at random.

Both guys decide to Dodge.

But the first guy was lifting a barbell over his head.

He was in a committed position.

So, he is going to be a step slower than the other guy.

He is not going to just stand there and get shot,

but he still is going to take longer to go into his Dodge than the other guy,

so, he will not get as much of a DCV boost.

 

KA.

This case I would adjucate a bit differently, and a bit more clear cut. Unless the guy lifting the barbell was strong enough not to be encumbered by it's weight he's counted as having Grabbed someone (or, in a heroic campaign, I'd just use the encumberance rules) and he DCV would be modified accordingly.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Oops...

 

One of the problems I've always had with the way Hero handles Prone is that in some situations being prone is a good thing for defensive purposes. Do you think infantrymen "hit the dirt" so they can halve their DCV? No, they throw themselves prone to make themselves a smaller target. It makes them half or perhaps only a quarter as large a target which should provide a +2 to +4 DCV bonus.

 

So while going Prone might suck if you're being attacked by someone at point blank range or at a sharp angle above you, it should actually give a DCV bonus against most non-area ranged attacks. What it should more realistically do is severely reduce movement (by at least half), which might adversely effect attempts to dive for cover or move to attack.

I understand the advantages of being prone. Those are easy. I'm wondering what a character's options are for defense if he's attack at close range (say, by the brick or martial artist that proned him.

 

I'm not sure if I like the idea of "aborting to stand up." Well, if the character has Possition Shift I would allow it, but not otherwise.

 

In any case, I'll bring up some of these suggestions with my group and see what they think.

[pinecone]

Re: Oops...

 

Yeah I've always considered being prone to constitute "Cover" that bumps up DCV , etc vs ranged attacks, I guess I'd suggest buying Breakfall and or a "ground fighting" skill group...say +1 point "usable when prone" on your MA to reprisent various ground fighting techniques. Breakfall is built for most basic fall down situations...I don't think I am moved much by the scr*wed twice argument, let me use it for a simular situation..."Man I'm losing Body from being shot And I'm bleeding? Isn't that getting scr*wed twice?" My answer, "Yes, getting shot Is bad" I could see a master of Wu shu having levels with DCV and levels with DCV when disadvantaged (PSLs for penaltys to DCV) so it seems like options exist if the costs aren't too big of a barrier.....

[Snarf]

Re: Oops...

 

One of the problems I've always had with the way Hero handles Prone is that in some situations being prone is a good thing for defensive purposes. Do you think infantrymen "hit the dirt" so they can halve their DCV? No, they throw themselves prone to make themselves a smaller target. It makes them half or perhaps only a quarter as large a target which should provide a +2 to +4 DCV bonus.

 

So while going Prone might suck if you're being attacked by someone at point blank range or at a sharp angle above you, it should actually give a DCV bonus against most non-area ranged attacks. What it should more realistically do is severely reduce movement (by at least half), which might adversely effect attempts to dive for cover or move to attack.

The rules for concealment coould handle that. When only half a person's body is exposed, that gives -2 OCV to the attacker. When only a person's head and shoulders are exposed, it's -4 OCV. Looks like it has exactly the result as your +2/+4 DCV Bonuses. So, super martial artists are better off with full DCV, but bricks and normals are usually better off hitting the dirt.

[Foxx!]

Re: Oops...

 

Dust Raven!

 

I think UMA covers this in some detail?

 

Cheers

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Oops...

 

You don't have to use Knockback, you know. It is listed as an optional rule.

[zornwil]

Re: Oops...

 

You don't have to use Knockback' date=' you know. It is listed as an optional rule.[/quote']

Speaking for myself, I feel compelled to leave it as an option at least for people to get as in superhero games it's just too signature for some characters.

[KA.]

Re: Oops...

 

This case I would adjucate a bit differently' date=' and a bit more clear cut. Unless the guy lifting the barbell was strong enough not to be encumbered by it's weight he's counted as having Grabbed someone (or, in a heroic campaign, I'd just use the encumberance rules) and he DCV would be modified accordingly.[/quote']

 

Dust Raven,

I understand that.

I was just trying to come up with an example where someone was in an "awkward" position that put them at a disadvantage when they decided to Dodge.

 

Let me try again.

 

The classic Horror movie situation.

Two guys looking for the source of the mysterious noise they heard.

They come up to a hatch that enters into a crawlspace.

One guy bends over to look, and the other guy is just standing there.

(The first guy isn't prone or anything, just bent over at the waist looking into the hole.)

The killer, of course, comes up behind them.

As they hear the theme music suddenly kick in, they both turn their heads and try to get out of the way of the oncoming knife, crowbar, chainsaw, whatever.

The guy who was not bent over dodges out of the way, the killer will have to get him in the next reel.

The bent over guy cannot get into Dodging mode quite a quickly because he was in a bad position, so he gets it.

 

That is the way I see the Haymaker thing. You are putting yourself off-balance somewhat, or into a "committed position", where it is harder to Dodge if things go wrong, even if you Abort.

 

Since a Haymaker is not necessarily just a strong punch, some other examples might illustrate it better.

 

1) Your Haymaker is a "flying kick". Even if you figure out at the last second that something is going to take a shot at you, you cannot change your direction that much in the air. You cannot Dodge as well as someone on their feet that can move in any direction.

 

2) Your Haymaker is the classic "Double Axe Handle" from Pro Wrestling. You lock your hands together and swing like you have an invisible bat. Since the range is so short, and the position is unbalanced, even if you decide to Dodge at the last second, you can't do it as well as someone else.

 

I just think that it makes sense for the penalties to apply. The whole point of a Haymaker is exposing yourself to attack in order to land an extra-powerful blow. If you aren't really taking any risk, why should you get the extra damage?

 

On the other topic.

I never thought about it until this thread, but you probably should get the DCV bonus for being prone, as long as you are talking about Ranged attacks from someone who is not "above" you.

I mean you are on the ground, and providing a smaller target.

Maybe including this in your house rules would help to keep your players from feeling "screwed" by knockback.

They will be prone, but if someone wants to finish them they will have to come into close range to do it, or take a chance on missing.

How humiliating would that be for your typical Overconfident SuperVillain?

They blast the Hero. He is laying, stunned and prone, several hexes away, due to the Knockback of their mighty blast.

"Now, Captain Valor, I'll finish you once and for all!"

And then they miss, because of the DCV modifiers for the prone opponent and the Range!

The other villains would never let them forget that!

 

Of course the "nasty" villains will just start lobbing a grenade into the hex to finish downed heroes, but that is what villains are for.

 

KA.

[schir1964]

Re: Oops...

 

How about allowing a "Blocking While Prone" skill. Works the same as Blocking but only while prone.

 

Just An Idea

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Dust Raven]

Re: Oops...

 

Dust Raven!

 

I think UMA covers this in some detail?

 

Cheers

If it does I can't fine it. The only rules I can find that don't involve how to become prone are for how to stand up, plus one rule for Acrobatics to keep you DCV while prone. I can't find any discussion on what you options are while prone, how it affects other Combat Maneuvers or anything other than your DCV.

 

don't have to use Knockback, you know. It is listed as an optional rule.

It's either that or Knockdown. Either way you're prone so it makes no difference.

How about allowing a "Blocking While Prone" skill. Works the same as Blocking but only while prone.

 

Just An Idea

 

- Christopher Mullins

I allow that normally. I've seen enough movies to realize it's you still get your full OCV while prone, and that it's usually much easier to Block than Dodge.

 

But I've also seen people roll out of the way of what would be AE attacks (falling bookshelves, a car falling out of a tree, etc). It's usually not very far, so may I could allow a DFC with a max of 1". Or maybe half their Leap, like with throwing.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Oops...

 

Dust Raven,

Since a Haymaker is not necessarily just a strong punch, some other examples might illustrate it better.

 

1) Your Haymaker is a "flying kick". Even if you figure out at the last second that something is going to take a shot at you, you cannot change your direction that much in the air. You cannot Dodge as well as someone on their feet that can move in any direction.

 

2) Your Haymaker is the classic "Double Axe Handle" from Pro Wrestling. You lock your hands together and swing like you have an invisible bat. Since the range is so short, and the position is unbalanced, even if you decide to Dodge at the last second, you can't do it as well as someone else.

I don't allow characters to abort commited actions. Once you've declared your action, that's what you're doing. So if you perform a Haymaker, you are so occupied until the end of the next Segment can't can't dodge. I assume this is standard rules, maybe it's not.

 

Assuming it is, my question would be what would the attacking character's DCV be after the Haymaker if he aborted to Dodge?

 

I suppose, using your analogies. That would be like asking what these character's DCV is after they put down the barbell or finish looking down the hole? I suppose that answers my question, though I'm not sure if I'm satisfied with it.

[KA.]

Re: Oops...

 

I don't allow characters to abort commited actions. Once you've declared your action' date=' that's what you're doing. So if you perform a Haymaker, you are so occupied until the end of the next Segment can't [i']can't[/i] dodge. I assume this is standard rules, maybe it's not.

 

Assuming it is, my question would be what would the attacking character's DCV be after the Haymaker if he aborted to Dodge?

 

I suppose, using your analogies. That would be like asking what these character's DCV is after they put down the barbell or finish looking down the hole? I suppose that answers my question, though I'm not sure if I'm satisfied with it.

 

Okay, I must have misunderstood your initial post.

I thought that you had players setting up for a Haymaker, and then Aborting out if anything showed up to attack them before it went off.

(Which is legal according to Fred, but they have to throw away the attack to do it. Don't care much for that myself. I think I would have to vary that ruling by SFX of the attack.)

 

But now that I look closely at it, I think I am in the same position you are.

I don't think the penalty should apply, even though I don't really like that answer.

 

Think of it this way.

 

Let's say a character performs a Martial Strike, giving them a +2 to DCV.

 

After they hit, before their next Phase, someone comes after them with a Light Sabre.

They can't risk being hit by it, so they Abort their next action to Martial Dodge.

What is the modifier to their DCV?

They don't get to add the +2 from their Martial Strike, to the +5 for the Martial Dodge, even though it would have been in effect until the start of their next segment.

They just get the +5 for the Martial Dodge.

 

So, it is only fair that if they don't get to add bonuses when the Abort, they shouldn't have to subtract penalties, either.

 

Again, I don't really like this answer, but I think it is the correct way to go.

 

KA.

 

P.S. I have really enjoyed this exchange. Your really read what people post, and hold them to a high standard of accuracy. To me, that only improves everyone's understanding of the game.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Oops...

 

Think of it this way.

 

Let's say a character performs a Martial Strike, giving them a +2 to DCV.

 

After they hit, before their next Phase, someone comes after them with a Light Sabre.

They can't risk being hit by it, so they Abort their next action to Martial Dodge.

What is the modifier to their DCV?

They don't get to add the +2 from their Martial Strike, to the +5 for the Martial Dodge, even though it would have been in effect until the start of their next segment.

They just get the +5 for the Martial Dodge.

 

So, it is only fair that if they don't get to add bonuses when the Abort, they shouldn't have to subtract penalties, either.

 

I follow your logic, but I'm not sure I agree. The character using the Martial Strike was already taking defensive actions to some degree. Would the Martial Dodge's defensive maneuvering be completely different, or just build on the +2 already achieved from Martial Strike, subsuming its +2?

 

By contrast, the Haymaker penalized DCV by taking Our Hero off his pins, and requiring (normally) until his next phase to recover from being off-balance. As such, enforcing the penalty even if he aborts to a more defensive maneuver could be seen as reasonable.

 

Presumably, had I not aborted, but continued my Martial Strike, I would continue to move defensively by choice. I'm not choosing to be off balance after my haymaker - I am off balance. Maybe aborting doesn't help recover that balance any quicker, so the oenalty stacks with whatever bonus my new maneuver provides.

 

Doesn't Sweep with multiple maneuvers impose the worst of all DCV penalties on the character? If I Sweep and include a Martial Strike, I only get the DCV bonus if no other maneuver included in the Sweep has less than a +2 bonus' If I included, say, an Offensive Strike with -1 DCV, then I get the -1 DCV penalty.

 

Now the Abort costs the next phase, so it should be better than the Sweep result, but it doesn't necessarily follow that it must eliminate the penalty from the prior maneuver just because it would eliminate the bonus.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Oops...

 

Adding more worms to this open can...

 

And what if, after your Haymaker, instead of aborting to Dodge, you abort to Block? Should you get your full OCV/DCV? (since Block gives +0/+0) Or do you use the penalties left over from your Haymaker?

[lemming]

Re: Oops...

 

Adding more worms to this open can...

 

And what if, after your Haymaker, instead of aborting to Dodge, you abort to Block? Should you get your full OCV/DCV? (since Block gives +0/+0) Or do you use the penalties left over from your Haymaker?

Full DCV & OCV. Any levels that would be Haymaker only couldn't be used on the block either. Completly seperate manuever

 

Oh, and yes whatever you abort to will be all new penalties or bonuses from a clean slate.

[Farkling]

Re: Oops...

 

"screwed twice by knockback"

Because they took damage AND are prone I presume?

 

Force Fields and such do not come fail until end of phase. If EVERY exchange ends with heroes knocked back into a vertical surface for 12D6, there is something wrong with your gaming style....an average 15d6 hit should only result in about 8" KB on average....so 8d6 of damage from impactig a vertical surface (well, through in many cases, shoddy construction). And they are prone with partial cover versus range fire. To attack they have to get back up. wish maybe that you'd bought the "position shift" on your flight now aren't you? But no....you wanted to be FAST. A brick who whines about 8d6 of KB damage shoul dplay smarter. He used his STR that phase. HE should've braced against knockback too...he already PAID the END for the phase anyway !!

 

Speaking of said flyer, he shouldn't impact a solid surface unless shot with particular care. Knockback from our 15d6 Blast will ballistic arc him quite nicely for 12", or 12d6 on unlucky impact. THEN he falls (Acceleration 5" / segment) until his next phase if his flight shut down. Hmm....persistant might have been useful in this case. Or maybe you should have utilized some flight " to anchor against the incoming knockback...overconfident SOB's aren't you.

 

Old school rules allowed youo to AIM your target if you made a second roll with 1/2 OCV. Needless rolls and computation I say. If a PC wants to determine KB direction, it needs to be declared BEFORE the attack. Impose a penalty in your head to dictate whether the targetting works.

 

If the character is wimpy enough to take damage from 4d6 of knockback (assuming the 8" KB above), they should look into Breakfall or some DCV levels or more defenses.. or maybe they shouldn't be standing around geting shot at.

 

if they are whining about a few STUN pips....what the hell?

Where's the fun in a game with no risks or results from bad planning? Are the PC's aware of the extra options?

 

SO....let's see...the complaint must be that they can't leap to their feet and attack full throttle. It's a half phase to get up isn't it? If you have flight, you can get airborne...just not off the ground. Position Shift ... it haunts us.

 

The brick can't attack full throttle...he can get up and brace....and then close with the target (Colossus and the Hulk fight like that...so does Supes). EB's can get up and shoot, OR they can move. Martial Artists that CAN get up need to rethink strategy (a la Spiderman). Most Martial Artists and Egoists will come out dazed from 8d6 against a vertical surface though....

 

Things PC's need to know:

Acrobatics, Breakfall, Rules for Bracing with STR and Movement abilities. Position Shift. Stunts. Not closing on the villain from the side where he will blast you through the hardware store, close on him from the street! Then you just have to come back. It's genre.

Make bracers/anchor types some little arrows to lay on the map and show which direction they are "stopped" against.

 

My gut instinct is that think they are "screwed twice" because they are slash and hackers in a tactical combat scenario. They need to look at more of their options.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Oops...

 

A brick who whines about 8d6 of KB damage shoul dplay smarter. He used his STR that phase. HE should've braced against knockback too...he already PAID the END for the phase anyway !!

 

Speaking of said flyer,

Or maybe you should have utilized some flight " to anchor against the incoming knockback...overconfident SOB's aren't you.

 

Farkling, don't both those maneuvers halve your DCV? I'm not saying you're wrong (especially for the Brick!) but there is a price to pay for bracing. So, do you want to reduce your chances of being hit, or reduce your knockback if you are hit? Depends on whether I'm a 5 DCV Brick or a 12 DCV agile flyer, I guess...

 

And maybe the flier should consider landing - that shaves off 3.5" of knockback on average.

 

Maybe we should shell out some points for knockback resistance? Clinging? Now we get into concept, of course.

 

I also wonder how it is the heroes are getting knocked all over the map, but the villains aren't.

 

I agree that "knocked back and prone" is disadvantageous, but that it's not overwhelming, so I think we're on the same page here.

[Blue]

Re: Oops...

 

I can't remember off the top of my head: Is there a modifier for trying to hit a Prone character at a range, because he's lying down and making himself a smaller target?

 

There's a lot of use of Breakfall in my game for mitigating the knockdown so that the characters end up right on their feet.

 

My martial artist, Anthem, is too small to logically have KB resistance (despite her high defenses), so I bought her some KB Resistance and called it "Rolling with the punch" and gave it an RSR: Acrobatics. As long as she knows there's a hit coming, she can make a roll to alleviate some of the KB distance.

 

There's only one PC in the game who is regularly doing KB, and one of his powers is designed mostly to do damage from KB. The heroes haven't been taking that kind of pounding. I'm not sure why it hasn't been an issue, but it hasn't so far.

[Farkling]

Re: Oops...

 

Hugh....bracing for range fire bonuses is different than bracing against knockback...I'm sure.

 

Anchoring and using STR to "lean into" knockback are free actions I'm pretty sure.

 

But since you called me on it...give a couple hours to find my book and my lists. Cause I haven't runa game in months and my memory is rusty.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Oops...

 

Hugh....bracing for range fire bonuses is different than bracing against knockback...I'm sure.

 

Anchoring and using STR to "lean into" knockback are free actions I'm pretty sure.

 

But since you called me on it...give a couple hours to find my book and my lists. Cause I haven't runa game in months and my memory is rusty.

 

One might also note the lack of references in my own post which indicates I don't know the answer - I'm going purely from memory of an ability I only see used rarely. From a very quick search of the FAQ, Bracing is a zero phase action in any case, so there's no use of phases. Nothing on whether bracing to resist knockback has any impact on DCV.

 

If I recall correctly, you have to specify the direction from which the Knockback you are bracing against will come. I think Flight roots you against all directions, though. Hmm...curious enough to ask The Man now. Off to the Rules Q's board.