Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

[DoctorItron]

I'm GMing a supers campaign and disallowed the Passing Strike maneuver. It seemed too powerful when compared to a Move By: better OCV, better DCV, and better damage.

 

The effectiveness of Passing Strike over Move By isn't much of a concern at lower point levels, but as characters' STR and velocity increase, Passing Strike becomes ever more powerful.

 

I wonder if the rest of Herodom agrees or disagrees...

[MitchellS]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I don't see it as being overly-powerful. On average it adds only 1-2d6 of extra damage over a Move-by (full Str over 1/2 Str) and +3 Ocv, +2 DCV compared to it. If the OCV/DCV issues bother you then just decrease them. It is a 5 point maneuver though and should give more perks than a free maneuver, in my opinion.

[Gary]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

All of the Fmove maneuvers are extremely unbalancing in a Supers campaign.

 

Imagine a brick with 60 str and 40" superleap doing a Passing Strike...

[MagicPegasus]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

The problem with passing strike is that it gets too powerful when you got a martial artist with fast movement. Take a MA with 50 STR and 30" Flight. He has the following maneuvers:

 

10d6 Defensive Strike (+1 OCV, +3 DCV)

12d6 Martial Punch (+0 OCV, +2 DCV)

16d6 Passing Strike (+1 OCV, +0 DCV)

 

With those three options I would go with Passing Strike almost all the time and crush my enemy quickly. I made a character like this for myself but decided he was too powerfull and a bit overbalanced. I'd be doing lots more damage than the other players for the same amount of points.

 

I would change Passing Strike in my campaign because of this. It could be changed to STR + v/10 to reduce the damage and maybe make it +1 OCV, +1 DCV. I don't know how many points this would come to for the maneuver because I don't have the book. But it looks like 4 pts for the maneuver might be fair. Using the above example the new Passing Strike would look like this:

 

13d6 Passing Strike (+1 OCV, +1 DCV)

[MitchellS]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

The problem with passing strike is that it gets too powerful when you got a martial artist with fast movement. Take a MA with 50 STR and 30" Flight. He has the following maneuvers:

 

10d6 Defensive Strike (+1 OCV, +3 DCV)

12d6 Martial Punch (+0 OCV, +2 DCV)

16d6 Passing Strike (+1 OCV, +0 DCV)

 

With those three options I would go with Passing Strike almost all the time and crush my enemy quickly. I made a character like this for myself but decided he was too powerfull and a bit overbalanced. I'd be doing lots more damage than the other players for the same amount of points.

 

I would change Passing Strike in my campaign because of this. It could be changed to STR + v/10 to reduce the damage and maybe make it +1 OCV, +1 DCV. I don't know how many points this would come to for the maneuver because I don't have the book. But it looks like 4 pts for the maneuver might be fair. Using the above example the new Passing Strike would look like this:

 

13d6 Passing Strike (+1 OCV, +1 DCV)

How many martial artists have a 50 Str and 30" flight? My character Midknight has a 50 Str, martial arts, and 10" flight, and he's a character in a 500 point game.

[John T]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

All of the Fmove maneuvers are extremely unbalancing in a Supers campaign.

 

Imagine a brick with 60 str and 40" superleap doing a Passing Strike...

Now, imagine that brick in a 10" diameter room (pretty good sized room, by most standards) with reinforced walls...

 

John T

[MagicPegasus]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Imagine that MA with 50 STR and 30" Flight doing a Passing Strike flying downward and hitting a target in the air. Flying downward he gets 60" velocity. He does 22d6 damage and gets +1 OCV as a bonus.

 

Now do you see how it can be overly powerful?

[DoctorItron]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I don't see it as being overly-powerful. On average it adds only 1-2d6 of extra damage over a Move-by (full Str over 1/2 Str) and +3 Ocv' date=' +2 DCV compared to it. If the OCV/DCV issues bother you then just decrease them. It is a 5 point maneuver though and should give more perks than a free maneuver, in my opinion.[/quote']

 

Of course something for which you pay points should give you something in return. However, "only 1-2d6 of extra damage" only applies to a heroic campaign where virtually no one has more than 20 STR. My original post said superhero campaign. Let's look at what a slow brick with 60 STR gets by taking Passing Strike:

 

+3 OCV w/ one maneuver: 6 active points

+2 DCV: 10 active points

+6d6 damage: 30 active points

+1d6 damage with the default 6" running: 5 active points

 

There's 51 active points! IMO, it's not the movement adder that causes the problem. The problem is that you can use your full STR.

 

Passing Strike is priced correctly for heroic campaigns, but breaks for superheroes because, rather than adding a fixed amount of damage, it adds damage proportional to STR.

[JMHammer]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Consider:

-The character has paid points for its Strength, Martial Arts, and Movement. The character could have put all or most of those points into Strength and a few Combat Skill Levels. Does this generate a very different result in terms of damage and OCV/DCV bonuses for the same number of points?

-If one uses the optional falling/velocity damage system, the effect of high speed on damage is not as great and produces results, especially from falling damage, which are a better simulation. It is not more difficult to use; it's just a different chart.

-Such a character must use maneuver in order to get the best effect from his combination of powers and skills; it can't just go toe-to-toe with opponents. In confined spaces it will have some trouble getting all three elements to synergize.

-Shouldn't any "passing" or "flying" maneuver which receives a velocity-based damage bonus score reflected damage on the attacker in the same manner as a Move-By (1/3 damage scored to target)?

-One of the issues I've had with Hero for more than 20 years is a lack of zone-of-control. A fast character can move to melee range of another character, then away, then into melee range of another character, then out again, ad infinitum, and unless one of those other characters has a held action the moving character will be unmolested. I won't go into the exact mechanics of how I've house-ruled this, but in general the inactive character has a chance to make an attack at a small OCV penalty against any character moving out of its zone-of-control unless the active character took an action against the inactive character.

 

John H

Joining DoctorIron's game tomorrow with a flying character...

[BNakagawa]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I agree with the thread starter. It's unbalanced in a champions setting.

[DoctorItron]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Consider:

-The character has paid points for its Strength, Martial Arts, and Movement. The character could have put all or most of those points into Strength and a few Combat Skill Levels. Does this generate a very different result in terms of damage and OCV/DCV bonuses for the same number of points?

-If one uses the optional falling/velocity damage system, the effect of high speed on damage is not as great and produces results, especially from falling damage, which are a better simulation. It is not more difficult to use; it's just a different chart.

-Such a character must use maneuver in order to get the best effect from his combination of powers and skills; it can't just go toe-to-toe with opponents. In confined spaces it will have some trouble getting all three elements to synergize.

-Shouldn't any "passing" or "flying" maneuver which receives a velocity-based damage bonus score reflected damage on the attacker in the same manner as a Move-By (1/3 damage scored to target)?

-One of the issues I've had with Hero for more than 20 years is a lack of zone-of-control. A fast character can move to melee range of another character, then away, then into melee range of another character, then out again, ad infinitum, and unless one of those other characters has a held action the moving character will be unmolested. I won't go into the exact mechanics of how I've house-ruled this, but in general the inactive character has a chance to make an attack at a small OCV penalty against any character moving out of its zone-of-control unless the active character took an action against the inactive character.

 

John H

Joining DoctorIron's game tomorrow with a flying character...

 

Good to see the footnote at the bottom of the post. That confirms you'll be showing up. Remember, if you're running late, call ahead if you want in on our junk food order.

 

We can try the character with Passing Strike and see how it works out. IIRC, your character will do ~11 dice on a flying Passing Strike, because you're neither a brick nor a speedster. That's fine.

 

The gliding, on the other hand, needs some sort of house rule. Avianne can zip along at something like 54", IIRC. Maybe I'll cap Passing Strike at STR+4d6 damage, just like the 5th ed. Haymaker.

[Vondy]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Its just an advanced move-by. Much like martial block is an advanced form of the basic block maneuver.

[Christougher]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Its just an advanced move-by. Much like martial block is an advanced form of the basic block maneuver.

 

An *extremely* advanced move by. With Martial Block, you get 4 CV for 4 points. With Passing Strike, you get 5 CV for 5 points, plus the extra half of your strength, plus you don't take any reciprocal damage.

[Gary]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Now, imagine that brick in a 10" diameter room (pretty good sized room, by most standards) with reinforced walls...

 

John T

 

 

Doesn't matter. You get all the velocity right at the beginning with Superleap.

[Gary]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Consider:

-The character has paid points for its Strength, Martial Arts, and Movement. The character could have put all or most of those points into Strength and a few Combat Skill Levels. Does this generate a very different result in terms of damage and OCV/DCV bonuses for the same number of points?

-If one uses the optional falling/velocity damage system, the effect of high speed on damage is not as great and produces results, especially from falling damage, which are a better simulation. It is not more difficult to use; it's just a different chart.

-Such a character must use maneuver in order to get the best effect from his combination of powers and skills; it can't just go toe-to-toe with opponents. In confined spaces it will have some trouble getting all three elements to synergize.

-Shouldn't any "passing" or "flying" maneuver which receives a velocity-based damage bonus score reflected damage on the attacker in the same manner as a Move-By (1/3 damage scored to target)?

-One of the issues I've had with Hero for more than 20 years is a lack of zone-of-control. A fast character can move to melee range of another character, then away, then into melee range of another character, then out again, ad infinitum, and unless one of those other characters has a held action the moving character will be unmolested. I won't go into the exact mechanics of how I've house-ruled this, but in general the inactive character has a chance to make an attack at a small OCV penalty against any character moving out of its zone-of-control unless the active character took an action against the inactive character.

 

John H

Joining DoctorIron's game tomorrow with a flying character...

 

 

 

1) It doesn't generate a whole lot of difference, except that you get the extra movement compared to simply buying damage and skill levels. Having 40" of movement is inherently good whether you get damage or not. Allowing 40" movement and +8d6 damage is too much.

 

2) Does your game use the optional velocity damage system?

 

3) Listing exceptions doesn't work. The general case is that the person with +8d6 damage for 5 pts is going to kick most peoples heinies. And it's the general case that should be looked at, not specific exceptions.

 

4) With passing strike, the attacker takes no difference. Even if the attacker takes 1/3 damage, it's completely trivial most of the time.

[MitchellS]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Of course something for which you pay points should give you something in return. However, "only 1-2d6 of extra damage" only applies to a heroic campaign where virtually no one has more than 20 STR. My original post said superhero campaign. Let's look at what a slow brick with 60 STR gets by taking Passing Strike:

 

+3 OCV w/ one maneuver: 6 active points

+2 DCV: 10 active points

+6d6 damage: 30 active points

+1d6 damage with the default 6" running: 5 active points

 

There's 51 active points! IMO, it's not the movement adder that causes the problem. The problem is that you can use your full STR.

 

Passing Strike is priced correctly for heroic campaigns, but breaks for superheroes because, rather than adding a fixed amount of damage, it adds damage proportional to STR.

Your numbers are scued to make your point but they are not what would normally be considered correct for a beginning character within the game. There is no experienced GM who would allow a 60 Str brick to take passing strike in a 350 point game. It greatly over-shoots the damage class caps. In higher-powered games like the one I play in it does not make that much of a difference because everyone is using 15-20d6 attacks.

 

The passing strike was primarily designed for speedster characters to give them some advantage in the system. Those characters seldom have a Str higher than 20. You need to use the maneuver within the context of what it was primarliy designed for. That doesn't mean it doesn't have other uses but the GM needs to look at characters and make those decisions on a case-by-case basis. Giving a mentalist x-ray vision and 1" tunneling is not very expensive either but would ruin a game. Does that mean those powers are too powerful? No. I just means that anything can be abused if the GM allows it.

 

There are few bricks I can think of in comic books who do passing strike attacks. Most bricks do Move-throughs not passing strikes. There are dozens of examples of speedsters who do passing strike attacks though, and for them it works whether at a heroic or superherioc level of play.

[MitchellS]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Doesn't matter. You get all the velocity right at the beginning with Superleap.

Logic would seem to indicate that you can't make a 60" leap in a 10" room. You'd just go shooting over the target due to velocity. There are also height limits so a 10" high room only allows you to leave a maximum of 20", if I remember correctly.

[DoctorItron]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Your numbers are scued to make your point but they are not what would normally be considered correct for a beginning character within the game. There is no experienced GM who would allow a 60 Str brick to take passing strike in a 350 point game. It greatly over-shoots the damage class caps. In higher-powered games like the one I play in it does not make that much of a difference because everyone is using 15-20d6 attacks.

 

The passing strike was primarily designed for speedster characters to give them some advantage in the system. Those characters seldom have a Str higher than 20. You need to use the maneuver within the context of what it was primarliy designed for. That doesn't mean it doesn't have other uses but the GM needs to look at characters and make those decisions on a case-by-case basis. Giving a mentalist x-ray vision and 1" tunneling is not very expensive either but would ruin a game. Does that mean those powers are too powerful? No. I just means that anything can be abused if the GM allows it.

 

There are few bricks I can think of in comic books who do passing strike attacks. Most bricks do Move-throughs not passing strikes. There are dozens of examples of speedsters who do passing strike attacks though, and for them it works whether at a heroic or superherioc level of play.

 

Even a 30 STR character gets too much from Passing Strike: +3d6 damage on top of the 5 OCV/DCV levels. As the STR increases, the "brokenness" becomes more apparent.

 

If Passing Strike only works for characters with low STR and high velocity, then, IMO, the rule is bad. It should be changed to something like ((STR/2)+2d6+velocity) damage rather than (STR+velocity) to remove the unfair advantage that Passing Strike gives to strong characters.

 

With that change, a 10 STR character will do 3d6+v, a 20 STR character will do 4d6+v, and a 60 STR character will do 8d6+v. The 10 STR character comes out 1d6 ahead of the official rule, the 20 STR is even, and the 60 STR brick does 4d6 less. That goes a long way towards making Passing Strike a balanced improvement over Move By, rather than the game-breaker it currently is.

[Gary]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Logic would seem to indicate that you can't make a 60" leap in a 10" room. You'd just go shooting over the target due to velocity. There are also height limits so a 10" high room only allows you to leave a maximum of 20"' date=' if I remember correctly.[/quote']

 

 

It just means that you'll crash into the wall or ceiling if you use more leap than the height of the room. No big deal since your target will as well, and also take the initial hit. However, the rules on leap are clear that you get all the velocity at the beginning.

[MitchellS]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

However' date=' the rules on leap are clear that you get all the velocity at the beginning.[/quote']

Would you care to point out where that rule is? I did not see it under Movement Powers (pages 82-84), Leaping (page 126), Normal Movement Leaping (pages 239-240), or Move-By/Move-Through (page 258).

 

The FAQ says this:

Q: Is acceleration with Leaping instantaneous?

 

A: No. For rules purposes, acceleration on Leaping works the same as acceleration for any other form of movement. This isn’t necessarily logical, but it’s consistent and easier to remember. GMs who wish to adopt a more “realistic†rule are of course free to do so.

[MitchellS]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Even a 30 STR character gets too much from Passing Strike: +3d6 damage on top of the 5 OCV/DCV levels. As the STR increases, the "brokenness" becomes more apparent.

 

If Passing Strike only works for characters with low STR and high velocity, then, IMO, the rule is bad. It should be changed to something like ((STR/2)+2d6+velocity) damage rather than (STR+velocity) to remove the unfair advantage that Passing Strike gives to strong characters.

 

With that change, a 10 STR character will do 3d6+v, a 20 STR character will do 4d6+v, and a 60 STR character will do 8d6+v. The 10 STR character comes out 1d6 ahead of the official rule, the 20 STR is even, and the 60 STR brick does 4d6 less. That goes a long way towards making Passing Strike a balanced improvement over Move By, rather than the game-breaker it currently is.

I understand what you're saying but all martial arts maneuvers are all the same basic process. Let's take another example. Offensive Strike costs 5 points is -2 OCV, +1 DCV, and +4d6. Haymaker is -0 OCV, -5 DCV, +4d6, and +1 segment. If you choose to buy Offensive Strike you gain 4 CV and save a segment of time. That's not that much different than gaining 5 CV and 1d6+ extra damage with the Passing Strike. Passing Strike is no-more screwed up than most other martial arts maneuvers, in my opinion.

[Gary]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Would you care to point out where that rule is? I did not see it under Movement Powers (pages 82-84), Leaping (page 126), Normal Movement Leaping (pages 239-240), or Move-By/Move-Through (page 258).

 

The FAQ says this:

 

 

Hmm, that seems very inconsistent with the fact that you can use your leap velocity as Str. If you didn't get all the velocity right at the beginning, then logically you wouldn't be able to add any leap to your Str.

[Gary]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I understand what you're saying but all martial arts maneuvers are all the same basic process. Let's take another example. Offensive Strike costs 5 points is -2 OCV' date=' +1 DCV, and +4d6. Haymaker is -0 OCV, -5 DCV, +4d6, and +1 segment. If you choose to buy Offensive Strike you gain 4 CV and save a segment of time. That's not that much different than gaining 5 CV and 1d6+ extra damage with the Passing Strike. Passing Strike is no-more screwed up than most other martial arts maneuvers, in my opinion.[/quote']

 

 

You're comparing something with a fixed effect to something with a variable effect. Passing Strike that adds 2d6 damage isn't a problem. Passing Strike that adds 8d6 damage is a major problem.

[DoctorItron]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I understand what you're saying but all martial arts maneuvers are all the same basic process. Let's take another example. Offensive Strike costs 5 points is -2 OCV' date=' +1 DCV, and +4d6. Haymaker is -0 OCV, -5 DCV, +4d6, and +1 segment. If you choose to buy Offensive Strike you gain 4 CV and save a segment of time. That's not that much different than gaining 5 CV and 1d6+ extra damage with the Passing Strike. Passing Strike is no-more screwed up than most other martial arts maneuvers, in my opinion.[/quote']

 

Offensive Strike always gives +4d6, and is priced as such. Whether Martial Arts are priced right is arguable, but most maneuvers always give the same bonus, so a group of players could easily adjust costs if they want a house rule.

 

Passing Strike gives +(STR/2) when compared to the nearest standard maneuver, Move By. That means Passing Strike gives a variable effect. That's the crux of the problem. Whatever Passing Strike costs, it will either be too expensive for the value gained by low STR characters, or too cheap for the value gained by characters with high STR.

 

Everyone's free to keep posting, of course, but this thread has served its purpose by giving me enough information to clarify my thoughts. I'm now ready to work on a house rule with my players when we meet tomorrow. Tahns to all who posted.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

FMove is a potent thing in a high-power campaign where movement rates are high.

 

Whether it's unbalanced or not will vary however based on other factors, primarily average DEFs and CVs.