Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

[PoorWandering 1]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

It's true you can't combine block and thrust or block and cover, but it's because block is not an attack. You can only combine attacks.

Though for some campaigns (spy vs spy) I think it would be a great house rule.

Hmmm i wonder if there is something in UMA that covers block-repost or block cover. Hmmm time to buy a new book.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

RE: EC Restrictions. I dunno' date=' this seems to be a key balancer to me (right up there with "one attack roll"). EC slots allow you to buy 2 powers for the price of 1, thereby doubling the number of available attacks.[/quote']

 

True as far as it goes. How often do you see an EC with multiple attacks compared to a multipower with multiple attacks? In a multipower or VPP, you can use any number of powers in an MPA, provided you have enough points to make it work. For example, I can have a 75 point Multipower with fivestandard slots, a 15d6 EB, a 15d6 Flash, a 5d6 ranged STUN drain, a 6d6 AVLD vs Flash Defense and a 5d6 RKA. It costs me 150 points. I can use that to fire a 12d6 EB + 3d6 Flash, or mix and match in any way I choose.

 

If I buy an EC with the same powers, it costs 223 points, about 50% more (it would be 50% more but for rounding). Under the rules as written. I do not get anything more than the Multipower would have provided. Further, I can't even mix and match the powers, which the Multipower would have allowed. And I'm subject to all the resrictions of the EC, including the implications of adjustment powers and the fact that I can't have differing special effects on my attacks to take advantage of a wider array of susceptibilities and vulnerabilities.

 

I'd rather have a system where the EC has an advantage over the Multipower than one that "keeps the EC in its place" by restricting this advantage to powers purchased with no framework.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

At least in heroic games MPAs are not supposed to have similar effects.

 

Squeeze and Headbutt wouldn't work. Multiple energy blasts wouldn't work. Grab & Headbutt would. EB and Entangle would.

 

Even if at the superheroic level I would require the separation of effects, otherwise it seems like a cheap way to sweep.

No to all counts, pretty much. I think you're confused by the discussion of "distinct effects" in the FAQ, but I'd like to note that this refers specifically to combat maneuvers using STR. If you have two distinct energy blasts - separately purchased powers - or two separate foci, you certainly can use them both in the same MPA, just as you could use a Drain and an EB or a Flash and a RKA or whatever in the same attack. Basically, if you paid twice for a Power/Maneuver *and* said Power/Maneuver is not simply an add-on to STR that does bonus normal-damage dice, you can automatically do both in a MPA. You may not like it, but that appears to fit both the word and the spirit of the rules.

 

You may possibly have a point re: Squeeze and Headbutt, as both utilize STR and do the same type of damage, but you miss something by questioning that combo but not Grab and Headbutt - namely, per the discussion in ULTIMATE MARTIAL ARTIST and elsewhere, Grab and Squeeze are essentially two parts of one maneuver, just as are Grab/Control, Grab/Shove, Grab/Throw, etc. Given that a Grab has a distinct effect from a Headbutt, Grab/Squeeze + Headbutt would appear to be a legal option -and it certainly makes conceptual sense. Does this make bricks super-tough? Well, yeah... but that's sort of the point. Nobody in their right mind - save maybe another brick - should want to grapple with a brick.

 

Really, it makes no sense to me that a character can use his STR with both a HKA and a HA - simply because one does killing damage and the other does not - but not do an Offensive Strike and a legsweep in the same segment, simply because they both apply to PD... but at least you have the FAQ on your side in that case.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

I solved this debate for myself a long, long time ago (basically, the same day I bought HERO5)

 

I use both MPA and Sweep/Rapid Fire. MPA are used to represent combining individual powers to make something new and unique. Example a character with both a Flash and an Energy Blast could MPA both powers into a single attack (Starburst attack!)

Sweep/Rapid Fire is used for standard multiple attack attempts. Shooting someone 3 times with your pistol is Rapidfire. A punch, roundhouse, spearhand Martial Arts Combo is a Sweep maneuver. So is a Grab/Squeeze + Headbutt combo. (Grab 'n Squeeze is one maneuver)

 

In general, I require that powers used in a MPA be fairly different. That doesn't mean that you cant MPA two RKA's or an RKA and an EB...its simply that the functionality should be different. For Example:

 

Raylene has 4 different ranged attack powers:

Fireblast (RKA, Pen)

Heatwave (EB, Stun only)

Pressure wave (EB, X2Kb)

Explosion (EB, Explosion)

 

She develops a few MPA's with these powers:

Overpressure! (Heatwave + Pressure wave)

Megaflame! (Fireblast + Pressure wave)

Supernova! (Fireblast + Explosion)

 

Each one of these attack powers do damage, but their method and functionality is different. In the example of Overpressure the Heatwave's goal is to Stun the target, while the Pressure wave's goal is to blow the target back. Since the basic goal is different, they are usable together in a MPA. Combining the two powers aren't for the purpose of simply doing more damage, but for combining the effects of high stun damage and Knock back together in a single attack.

 

Using this method, I allow for quite a few MPA's but I keep a close eye on them. In general, I do not allow 0 End powers in a MPA except in special cases. Using that particular restriction keeps MPA's rare. They are for that special occasion when normal firepower simply isn't enough (or you just want to look cool taking out the badguy)

[Zanthis]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

I have to agree. As long as the attacks in question cost END, I don't find MPAs to be too bad (assuming you don't allow cheap equipment doubling). Using them repeatedly can rack up huge END drain very fast.

 

But charges or 0 END on attacks that are MPA'd can be very bad. Also, big END reserves to cover the powers can also be dangerous. I can't remember if you need to pay END for the STR used in multiple MA manuavers in a MPA at the moment (my mind is blanking) but I've had a few issues with that rule in the past so I always require END to be paid for each use of STR.

 

And if your players overuse MPAs, Martial Dodge is a nice way to screw them. With all that firepower combined into a single attack roll, the +5 DCV is extremely rude. If you thought missing was bad, trying missing with a triple power MPA that cost you 18 END.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

. I can't remember if you need to pay END for the STR used in multiple MA manuavers in a MPA at the moment

 

Nope. You pay for STR used only once per phase, excepting very unusual circumstances.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

I have to agree. As long as the attacks in question cost END, I don't find MPAs to be too bad (assuming you don't allow cheap equipment doubling). Using them repeatedly can rack up huge END drain very fast.

 

But charges or 0 END on attacks that are MPA'd can be very bad. Also, big END reserves to cover the powers can also be dangerous. I can't remember if you need to pay END for the STR used in multiple MA manuavers in a MPA at the moment (my mind is blanking) but I've had a few issues with that rule in the past so I always require END to be paid for each use of STR.

 

And if your players overuse MPAs, Martial Dodge is a nice way to screw them. With all that firepower combined into a single attack roll, the +5 DCV is extremely rude. If you thought missing was bad, trying missing with a triple power MPA that cost you 18 END.

 

 

See... this No END house rule is just another example of where you have to add complexity to a rule in order to try and reduce abusiveness. In my campaign, the characters most likely to use the MPA would be long running 600-700 point characters who have lots of powers bought to 0 END because they have used them so much that they are powerful and efficient... like great athletes who can exert themselves much more efficiently than lesser types. Why should I screw these guys from using MPAs just because their characters have evolved to a higher power level? By all reason, these are the characters that should be most proficient in the use of their powers.

 

Seems to me that the "coolness" factor of the MPA is far overwhelmed by all the rules policing you have to do to control it. Appreciate the feedback... and I'll probably keep my game as is, utilizing the sweep/rapid fire for multiple martial attacks or guns blazing and not worry too much about MPAs.

 

thanks for the feedback

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

See... this No END house rule is just another example of where you have to add complexity to a rule in order to try and reduce abusiveness. In my campaign' date=' the characters most likely to use the MPA would be long running 600-700 point characters who have lots of powers bought to 0 END because they have used them so much that they are powerful and efficient... like great athletes who can exert themselves much more efficiently than lesser types. Why should I screw these guys from using MPAs just because their characters have evolved to a higher power level? By all reason, these are the characters that should be most proficient in the use of their powers.[/quote']

 

Is this a major concern if the opposition they are facing has similar power levels, and can also use MPA's with similar latitude? At 600-700 points, I would expect the villains can afford similar MPA's at 0 END. END is just one more balancing factor for any character - if your powers are 0 END and you can keep on firing the,m all day, it's easy to Dodge, Block, etc. until your opponent's END-costing powers tire him out anyway - MPA or no MPA.

 

BTW, last I looked, olympic level marathoners still get tired.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

BTW, last I looked, olympic level marathoners still get tired.

 

This is an issue of "long term END" which has never been well handled by the Hero System. END use as it stands is usually "drain myself by using my powers WAY TOO FAST vs. I don't spend any END at all!"

 

As it stands I find my own house rule on pushing works best for this. I encourage reduced END (even 0 End) as a place to spend points as characters get EXP... but I allow pushing up to 1/2 the Active points of the power. 1 END for 1 Active Point

 

Ex: 14d6 EB can be pushed to 21d6 for 35 extra END! Yeah, this might seem excessive... but it really works. Characters whittle and blast, and then, if they see an opening, they go for the big shot... but with risk. They miss, or the shot isn't enough... they've most likely put themselves down to 20 or less END, and have to really be cautious. Many players have had their characters push into negative END, doing stun to themselves, to get off the big blast. Classic scenes of exhausted hero dropping over the smoking, fallen foe! It's a great rule.

 

(Oh... and I don't use the Speed Chart... so there is no such thing as a Post-Segment 12, or anything like an auto-recovery on post-segment 12, so unless you use an action (or luck chit) for recovery, you don't get your END back. This makes for insanely fast, tense, increasingly desperate combats... rather than the long, drawn out, "I recover, and we start all over again" style that the Speed Chart encourages.)

[Zed-F]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

Nope. You pay for STR used only once per phase' date=' excepting very unusual circumstances.[/quote']

 

Not true according to the FAQ. If you sweep or MPA using STR-based attacks, you pay STR for each attack. This is an exception to the usual 'STR only costs END once per phase' rule.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

Not true according to the FAQ. If you sweep or MPA using STR-based attacks' date=' you pay STR for each attack. This is an exception to the usual 'STR only costs END once per phase' rule.[/quote']

 

As long as we classify those as "very unusual circumstances", you're both right. Works for me!

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

Not true according to the FAQ. If you sweep or MPA using STR-based attacks' date=' you pay STR for each attack. This is an exception to the usual 'STR only costs END once per phase' rule.[/quote']

 

Where'd you see that? The only place I see that stated is under STR-based Autofire attacks.

 

Mind you, I don't mind that ruling at all, for purposes of game balance and such.

[pinecone]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

I've always alowed them as I have always though you could use more than one power at a time...it just doesn't come up that often because most everyone buys their powers in frameworks...but if I pay Full points for a coupla powers why woudn't I be able to throw them both at once?...I'm limited to one attack a phase not one power....I have never allowed multiple combat maneuvers as a multi-power atk but I'd have to see it before I'd say no....because in 5 it is now "sorta" OK.......

[Zed-F]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

Where'd you see that? The only place I see that stated is under STR-based Autofire attacks.

 

Mind you, I don't mind that ruling at all, for purposes of game balance and such.

Hmm, I thought I had seen that somewhere. Perhaps I was thinking of the autofire rule. Looking in the FAQ now, I can't see it, so obviously whereever I saw it, it wasn't there.

 

I still think it's a good rule, though.

[Zanthis]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

If you've got 600-700 point characters, I wouldn't worry too much about MPAs. But for starting supers, if one player does a bunch of 0 END attacks (or some with Charges) his MPA can quickly leave everyone else in the dust. Mainly this applies against targets with little or no defenses. Early game MPAs with killing attacks (two swords anyone?) can deal massive damage well over campaign damage caps*.

 

Consider two 2d6+1 HKA, 0 END wielded by a character with a 35 STR. He can MPA for two 4.5d6 attacks, effectively delivering 140 Real Points in attack damage for only 3 END! He spends 129 Points to do so (assuming no limitations like OAF). Against a foe with 6rPD he'll deal an average 20 BODY and 42.7 STUN. This is like having a 7d6+1 Killing Attack (110 Active Points) for 3 END.

 

Optionally, what if you wanted to do the same with Reduced Penetration? Still with a 35 STR, but now a 6.5d6 HKA would allow a 9d6 Killing attack (split in half) for only 3 END. That costs 125 Points, just 4 less points.

 

So cost wise they are nearly the same, but don't forget Active Points! In the MPA case the character spent at most 52 Active Points in any power. In the Reduced Penetration case cost a whooping 125 Active Points! Far above most starting game AP caps.

 

But my personal house rule (which doesn't just apply to MPAs) is you pay for Strength whenever you use it. Period. It is just too confusing to do otherwise and lends itself to some abuses by a few of my more creative players. I hate having to house rule that, but it is such a minor thing most of my players don't ever notice.

 

And by the way, I'd view this house rule as reducing complexity of the game overall, not adding to it. I challenge anyone who disagrees to name off the top of his (or her) head under what circumstances a character must pay additional END for STR used more than once in a Phase .

 

*One of about 10,000 reasons I don't like, approve of, or use caps of any kind.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

I challenge anyone who disagrees to name off the top of his (or her) head under what circumstances a character must pay additional END for STR used more than once in a Phase .

 

Well, as noted above, if you have a STR-based Autofire attack, you have to pay the STR for each attack in the phase.

 

I believe that if you break through an entangle/grab/other obstacle well enough to get in another action, you have to pay for STR twice.

 

If you Leap a half-move then punch (or do another STR-based attack) on someone, you have to pay for STR twice.

[Zanthis]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

I believe you are missing at least one IIRC it has to do with the various moving attacks.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

General opinion:

 

Anything *can* be abused.

Nothing *should* be abused.

The best way, IMHO, to prevent rules abuse is for the GM and Players to all realize that the spirit of the rules is as important as the letter.

[kloster]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

General opinion:

 

Anything *can* be abused.

Nothing *should* be abused.

The best way, IMHO, to prevent rules abuse is for the GM and Players to all realize that the spirit of the rules is as important as the letter.

 

Hi,

 

Completely agree.

 

On the basic subject, MPA are a good way to simulate complex attacks or maneuvers (the disarm/cover fencing combo is a very good example). We use them, most of the time by characters that bought duplicate equipments, and found no problems.

 

Our GM solved the problem of abuse very simply (in a previous shadowrun campaign, but he kept the trick): every trick used by players can be used by the GM against them. This has the effect of keeping in line the most cheesy effects, as players don't like to have their character being removed from play by their own tricks. On the MPA, this has lead to usage like usage of 2 swords, or 2 quasi-standard guns (Steyr GBs) in aChamp campaign.

 

Regards,

 

Kloster

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

Our GM solved the problem of abuse very simply (in a previous shadowrun campaign, but he kept the trick): every trick used by players can be used by the GM against them.

 

Also known as the 'Sauce For The Goose, Sauce For The Gander' rule ... one I also employ.

[Ndreare]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

I use all three- Sweep, Rapid Strike & Multiple Power attacks. They work great. Just remeber that if a player can do so can an NPC. I have the NPC's use them even when the players forget. Plus the DCV mods can become a bugger when all is said and done.

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

Hmm, I thought I had seen that somewhere. Perhaps I was thinking of the autofire rule. Looking in the FAQ now, I can't see it, so obviously whereever I saw it, it wasn't there.

 

I still think it's a good rule, though.

It's in one of the recent books - Dark Champions???

 

I expect it'll be in 5ER as well...

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

Well, as noted above, if you have a STR-based Autofire attack, you have to pay the STR for each attack in the phase.

 

I believe that if you break through an entangle/grab/other obstacle well enough to get in another action, you have to pay for STR twice.

 

If you Leap a half-move then punch (or do another STR-based attack) on someone, you have to pay for STR twice.

You never pay for STR more than once per Phase regardless of how many uses you get out of it. Page 20, under STR.

 

However the END from the Attack Power itself is paid on each shot/swing.

 

So a 2d6 HKA swung by a character with 15 STR, Autofired for 3 shots would cost 1 END for STR and 9 END for Autofiring 3 Shots for a total of 10 END.

 

Also, though Leaping is figured from STR, its a seperate statistic and the END for it is paid for seperately from STR for inches in excess of the base Leaping.

 

Q: Does the rule that a character only pays END once in a Phase for all uses of STR extend to to his Leaping based on STR?

 

 

A: Yes, though any additional Leaping the character has purchased costs END at the normal rate.

[Rapier]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

Also known as the 'Sauce For The Goose' date=' Sauce For The Gander' rule ... one I also employ.[/quote']

 

There's an option to not use Sauce?

 

I always laugh, shortly after I took over 1/2 of the campaign universe (I got everything except the USA) I had someone all but demand Absorbtion into his RKA. Couldn't talk him out of it, so let him have it. It wasn't 2 games later before the rest of the team demanded he drop the absorbtion. Seems they were a bit miffed at Absorbtion RKAs. Heck, its not like I need to worry about points!

[Zanthis]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: Abused?

 

An interesting point I've made is on character design. When my players keep their characters in concept, building their powers (and picking new powers with xp) by designing through effect, that's how I build the villians. When they build with just HERO base powers and slap a SFX that might work on later, then I build my villians that way instead. Villians built the with the latter method are signifigantly more dangerous, annoying and unfun.

 

I mean, it can be great fun to go against Mr. Ice, who has all manner of icy powers. But going against Mr. Ice whose got an answer to everything and the defense for everything and had the SFX "ice" slapped on it all gets pretty damn annoying.

 

"He has Ice Goggles that give him Flash Defense!? How the hell did he get resistant Mental Defense?! His Ice is a natural barrier to Mental Powers???? WTF!"