Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

[Dust Raven]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Okay after reading the whole thread I can see how Passing Strike, in particular, can be awfully powerful for a super campaign with high movement rate characters. Based upon what I have read I am trying to figure out why two of the gamers in our group (both very experienced with the Hero System) were telling me that they felt that FMove MA maneuvers were overpowering in Heroic level games but not so in Superheroic level games. I think I need to email a couple of people to make sure I understood them correctly.

 

This has all come about because I am preparing to start my new Dark Champions campaign (heroic-level characters). We have pretty much decided that Combat Luck needs to be limited (perhaps to not stack with armor) and that Flying Dodge needs work (that's been discussed at length in other threads). The suggestion that FMove maneuvers were too powerful for heroic-level games kind of caught me by surprise.

 

I think the reason it's seen as too powerful in low-level games is because you are not buying as much movement, you just spend the points on the maneuver and you get a MUCH better Move By. A normal with a STR 15 and 6" of running will only do 2 1/2d6 with a Move By, and suffer a -2 to both OCV and DCV doing so. With Passing Strike he does 4d6 with a +1 OCV and no change in DCV. A 1 1/2d6, +3 OCV and +2 DCV change. Compared to what you'd get in a supers game, this is a huge increase for the points invested.

 

Personally, I've never had a problem with any of the FMove maneuvers. Unlike Move By, you can't hit multiple targets, and the taget has to be at the end of your movement (you aren't actually passing with a Passing Strike ) for example. Flying Dodge doesn't guarentee a miss for non-AE attacks like DFC does for another. I suppose it can still be debated on balance issues, but I think the rules need them (to cover those instances where they should exist), but the actual costs might be off (though as martial maneuvers can't cost more than 5, so not much can be done but house rule them anyway).

[Edsel]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

One of the problems that my group has with the FMove maneuvers is that you can attack an opponent and then move away to avoid retribution.

 

For instance say my character has 8" of running and I am attacking an armed agent who is right next to me. With a passing strike I can slug him and then run 8" away behind cover. If I Stun him or knock him out no problem. However if I miss or roll poorly for damage then I have run far enough away behind cover that the agent can't attack me in return or move close enough to get a shot at me (neither can any of his buddies if there is a group of them). Even if your movement is as good as mine I can probably get away with it.

 

For this situation a house rule I am looking at would use a suggestion from UMA. Any FMove Attack maneuver must be carried out in the last half of the character's movement. A character with a half held action could still use a FMove attack but the attack would have to be carried out on his last hex of movement. This should take care of the "hit-and-run" problem. However most of the FMove attacks are still tremendous bargains just for the OCV/DCV bonuses.

 

Perhaps to make them less of a bargain (and to reduce the trouble of designing a character in HD) I could impose a 5 point perk to allow characters to take FMove martial arts maneuvers.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

One of the problems that my group has with the FMove maneuvers is that you can attack an opponent and then move away to avoid retribution.

 

For instance say my character has 8" of running and I am attacking an armed agent who is right next to me. With a passing strike I can slug him and then run 8" away behind cover. If I Stun him or knock him out no problem. However if I miss or roll poorly for damage then I have run far enough away behind cover that the agent can't attack me in return or move close enough to get a shot at me (neither can any of his buddies if there is a group of them). Even if your movement is as good as mine I can probably get away with it.

 

For this situation a house rule I am looking at would use a suggestion from UMA. Any FMove Attack maneuver must be carried out in the last half of the character's movement. A character with a half held action could still use a FMove attack but the attack would have to be carried out on his last hex of movement. This should take care of the "hit-and-run" problem. However most of the FMove attacks are still tremendous bargains just for the OCV/DCV bonuses.

Another potential way to balance this is to impose a Turn Mode on Running (see my Alternate Turn Modes thread, which still allows Running--and other modes of movement, for that matter--to exist without a Turn Mode at low velocities). This would allow someone to take up a position in many environments which would make Move Bys and such very difficult to pull off if the attacker wishes to keep moving. With standard rules, someone on a horse can charge right up to you when you are in a corner, attack with all he is worth utilizing his full velocity, then turn 180 degrees and charge right back the way he came without missing a beat (provided he doesn't decelerate of course ). Weeeee!

[Sean Waters]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

One of the problems that my group has with the FMove maneuvers is that you can attack an opponent and then move away to avoid retribution.

 

For instance say my character has 8" of running and I am attacking an armed agent who is right next to me. With a passing strike I can slug him and then run 8" away behind cover. If I Stun him or knock him out no problem. However if I miss or roll poorly for damage then I have run far enough away behind cover that the agent can't attack me in return or move close enough to get a shot at me (neither can any of his buddies if there is a group of them). Even if your movement is as good as mine I can probably get away with it.

 

For this situation a house rule I am looking at would use a suggestion from UMA. Any FMove Attack maneuver must be carried out in the last half of the character's movement. A character with a half held action could still use a FMove attack but the attack would have to be carried out on his last hex of movement. This should take care of the "hit-and-run" problem. However most of the FMove attacks are still tremendous bargains just for the OCV/DCV bonuses.

 

Perhaps to make them less of a bargain (and to reduce the trouble of designing a character in HD) I could impose a 5 point perk to allow characters to take FMove martial arts maneuvers.

 

Chap right next to you? No damage add from velocity then: there would need to be 2" between you to accelerate to your full 8" move. Also I generally say characters making a FMove combat manouevre have to do so basically in a straight line or at most a simple curve. Even if you are running and have no turn mode I don't allow overly complex manouvres like running round three opponents and ducking inside a building when performing a FMove attack.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I enforce a Damage Cap: How you reach the cap is your buisness' date=' so IF you wanted a namor clone, and max damage is 15 DC then your character Could have Str 40; 35" of Movement, and FMove (8+7=15 DC). I would also consider allowing you to go over if it was seriously limited IMO (If the above also had 70" of swimming, in a game that will not have many fights in the water maybe?)[/quote']

I enforce an EXPECTED DAMAGE PER UNIT TIME Cap.

 

This allows for

a) The unskilled, BIG Damage attack, that's slow (miss, miss, BAM!)

The VERY skilled, small damage attack, that's fast (bip, bip, bip, bip, bip, bip...)

c) The unskilled, small damage, that's LUDICROUSLY fast (missbibmissbip...)

d) The average skill, average damage attack, at the campaign's average SPD.

 

These are all VERY different characters, who will "play" differently and have different approaches, strength and weaknesses in combat as well different preferred combat opponents and situations... Yet they are all balanced with respect to each other.

 

Despite being balanced, every one of them will tend to have a "shtick" different from the others and therefore be fun to play...

 

...and isn't that why everyone plays?

[Phil]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

No, no, you're all thinking too small! The problem isnt Passing Strike, it's Martial Arts!! Either go back to 2nd edition, where martial arts cost a variable amount depending on STR, or scrap them and just build them all as CSL / HA constructs. Easy-peasy, problem solved.

 

Hehe, at this rate, I'll have scrapped pretty much every rule by september

 

Phil

[DangerousDan]

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)

 

Many of the GMs and players that I know consider Passing anything to be unbalanced, and relegate them all to where they originated: the Martial Arts campaign, where hardly anyone had either 50 STR or 30" of movement, much less both. And, since no one I know actually runs a Martial arts-based campaign, we don't have a lot of problems with Passing attacks unbalancing the game.

 

You did the right thing when you decided not to play the character with that over-powerful attack. Just because something is legal and can be done, doesn't mean that it should be done.

[zornwil]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

No, no, you're all thinking too small! The problem isnt Passing Strike, it's Martial Arts!! Either go back to 2nd edition, where martial arts cost a variable amount depending on STR, or scrap them and just build them all as CSL / HA constructs. Easy-peasy, problem solved.

 

Hehe, at this rate, I'll have scrapped pretty much every rule by september

 

Phil

I still run Martial Arts along, but not the same as, these lines.

 

Basically, you pay a +1/4 Advantage on STR for every +5 points in Martial Arts. Just maneuvers, not counting Damage Classes or Weapon Familiarities (each bought normally).

[Black Rose]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

No, no, you're all thinking too small! The problem isnt Passing Strike, it's Martial Arts!! Either go back to 2nd edition, where martial arts cost a variable amount depending on STR, or scrap them and just build them all as CSL / HA constructs. Easy-peasy, problem solved.

 

Hehe, at this rate, I'll have scrapped pretty much every rule by september

 

Phil

 

If you're at all serious (not saying you are) PM either Hierax or myself about the point-based Martial Art Maneuvers write-ups. It seems a little odd at first (and would prolly bring down the "Do you have to stat out a dishcloth now?!?" crowd) but there's something very pleasing about its elegant simplicity.

[zornwil]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

The rules in the earliest edition basically made you pay your STR for a set of martial skills (what has sense become 20 points' worth), and for x1.5 damage you paid x1.5 STR, if I recall correctly. Or something very close to that. Someone would have to look it up, I can't as I'm away.

[pinecone]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I've not yet had a problem with passing strike....I was figuring that if it came up I'd go with Passing strike adding 1/2 strength, just like move-by, I was thinking that would keep it in the arsenal of the "pure" MA and keep the speedster bricks semi-honest......

[Dust Raven]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

One of the problems that my group has with the FMove maneuvers is that you can attack an opponent and then move away to avoid retribution.

 

For instance say my character has 8" of running and I am attacking an armed agent who is right next to me. With a passing strike I can slug him and then run 8" away behind cover. If I Stun him or knock him out no problem. However if I miss or roll poorly for damage then I have run far enough away behind cover that the agent can't attack me in return or move close enough to get a shot at me (neither can any of his buddies if there is a group of them). Even if your movement is as good as mine I can probably get away with it.

 

For this situation a house rule I am looking at would use a suggestion from UMA. Any FMove Attack maneuver must be carried out in the last half of the character's movement. A character with a half held action could still use a FMove attack but the attack would have to be carried out on his last hex of movement. This should take care of the "hit-and-run" problem. However most of the FMove attacks are still tremendous bargains just for the OCV/DCV bonuses.

 

Perhaps to make them less of a bargain (and to reduce the trouble of designing a character in HD) I could impose a 5 point perk to allow characters to take FMove martial arts maneuvers.

 

I could have sworn that this "suggestion" as you call it is a rule, not a suggestion. I'll have to check my UMA to conform. To the best of my knowledge the only maneuver that allows you to move after striking an opponent is Move By. To a limited degree, Move Through as well, but the movement you make afterward is not controlled and subject to whether or not you miss, hit, and did KB.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

The rules in the earliest edition basically made you pay your STR for a set of martial skills (what has sense become 20 points' worth)' date=' and for x1.5 damage you paid x1.5 STR, if I recall correctly. Or something very close to that. Someone would have to look it up, I can't as I'm away.[/quote']

 

STR points got you the martial maneuvers. All damage adjustments were multipliers, rather than adders, to STR damage. +1/2 STR points gained you +1/2 to each multipler.

[zornwil]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

STR points got you the martial maneuvers. All damage adjustments were multipliers' date=' rather than adders, to STR damage. +1/2 STR points gained you +1/2 to each multipler.[/quote']

Thanks, that's what I was trying to say, reading your note it's much clearer.

 

BTW, FTR and FWiW I liked this a lot for supers games because it helps keeps bricks away from having MA, I think in supers games that's both abusive and just doesn't "feel" right. That's why I use 5 pts in maneuvers = +1/4 Adv to STR in supers games. I don't use that in modern action or other games.

 

Of course it's easy for bricks to just buy skill levels. I'm okay with that, I don't mind that bricks can hit, I just think the nuances of MA should be paid for in a way that is proporational to STR.

[Phil]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I liked this a lot for supers games because it helps keeps bricks away from having MA' date=' I think in supers games that's both abusive and just doesn't "feel" right. [/quote']

 

It's for things like that that the DC limit can enforce a bit of balance. Bats is loaded up with MA but STR in the low 20s, Spidey as a mid-STR character may have a martial strike but no extra DCs, the Thing dont need no lousy martial arts!

 

Although, in all seriousness, I dont understand why Hero has martial arts at all. They've retconned talents to make them nothing more than semi-mundane powers, and it strikes me that martial arts are the same. The bonuses for different martial maneuvers - OCV, DCV, Damage - are nothing more than different ways of applying HTH combat levels. I really dont understand why there is the need to complicate it further - I call on my favourite Hero System mantra: "It's all SFX"

[Ki-rin]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

After folllowing this whole thread and thinking/reading about it awhile with The Official Sources, I've got a few suggestions:

 

1= anyone who is leaping, flying, or swimming while using any variant of Move Through or a Move By (including Passing Strike) is a =ballistic missile=. That means Missile Deflection/Reflection works on them and that Dodge is more effective.

 

2= Anyone moving fast enough that they should have a Turn Mode of greater than 0 (or maybe 1) is ALSO effectively a ballistic missile since you are moving so fast you can't change your direction very quickly. Same story.

 

It doesn't matter how many uber-d6 you will do in damage if that damage doesn't hit what it needs to.

 

Passing Strike is then no longer a game balance problem, and the munchkins Lose

[zornwil]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

It's for things like that that the DC limit can enforce a bit of balance. Bats is loaded up with MA but STR in the low 20s, Spidey as a mid-STR character may have a martial strike but no extra DCs, the Thing dont need no lousy martial arts!

 

Although, in all seriousness, I dont understand why Hero has martial arts at all. They've retconned talents to make them nothing more than semi-mundane powers, and it strikes me that martial arts are the same. The bonuses for different martial maneuvers - OCV, DCV, Damage - are nothing more than different ways of applying HTH combat levels. I really dont understand why there is the need to complicate it further - I call on my favourite Hero System mantra: "It's all SFX"

Martial arts have many SFX benefits and they're basically a nice short-hand instead of writing out the capabilities, plus as some have demonstrated they are actually under-costed, so they are promoting some abilities for genre purposes against cost.

 

You're right that MAs are essentially Talents of a sort, I believe.

 

I hate DC limits, I find those and other such constructs counteproductive to variety in concept execution. This is a sort of "holy war" issue among people so I understand and respect the opposition and am not inviting the war - it's just not fo rme.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

After folllowing this whole thread and thinking/reading about it awhile with The Official Sources, I've got a few suggestions:

 

1= anyone who is leaping, flying, or swimming while using any variant of Move Through or a Move By (including Passing Strike) is a =ballistic missile=. That means Missile Deflection/Reflection works on them and that Dodge is more effective.

 

2= Anyone moving fast enough that they should have a Turn Mode of greater than 0 (or maybe 1) is ALSO effectively a ballistic missile since you are moving so fast you can't change your direction very quickly. Same story.

 

It doesn't matter how many uber-d6 you will do in damage if that damage doesn't hit what it needs to.

 

Passing Strike is then no longer a game balance problem, and the munchkins Lose

 

I agree with this to a point. I've seen enough kung-fu films to think it's pretty much just a block, which everyone has, that can stop the attack.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I agree with this to a point. I've seen enough kung-fu films to think it's pretty much just a block' date=' which everyone has, that can stop the attack.[/quote']

"Block" usually means "stop the attack cold".

 

ITRW, if I "block" a bullet with a body part not covered in armor, I've just been damaged.

 

ITRW, if I "block" a greater than or equal to man-sized object coming at me at greater than or equal to running velocity, I'm getting slammed, probably falling, and taking damage.

 

IMHO, Block shouldn't work very well vs Move Throughs and Move Bys (including Passing Strike).

 

Dodge and Missile Deflection OTOH are both variants of Get Out of The Way . Dodge being completely so and MD being the ultimate expression of the Aikido art of Blending until you avoid or control the attack.

 

As Mr Miyagi said "The BEST defense: no be there."

 

It's axiomatic in the combat arts that an uncontrollable or uncontrolled attack is potentially just as dangerous to the aggressor as the defender. The standard rules give us a way to achieve this, and THAT puts MT, MB, and PS back into a game-balanced role.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

"Block" usually means "stop the attack cold".

Yes, but in Hero "Block" means "stop/prevent/evade/redirect the attack." It might mean just stepping back out of the way or ducking. That's why a martial artist can Block a brick's punch. So any Block could certainly stop a Move By/Through or Passing _______ maneuver.

[Ki-rin]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Yes' date=' but in Hero "Block" means "stop/prevent/evade/redirect the attack." It might mean just stepping back out of the way or ducking. That's why a martial artist can Block a brick's punch. So any Block could certainly stop a Move By/Through or Passing _______ maneuver.[/quote']

Hmmm. Really? I'd have thought "just stepping back out of the way or ducking" would be a Dodge? Else how do you differentiate the two?

 

I have to go read The Book closely, then get back to you...

[zornwil]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Hmmm. Really? I'd have thought "just stepping back out of the way or ducking" would be a Dodge? Else how do you differentiate the two?

 

I have to go read The Book closely, then get back to you...

I think the words Dodge and Block are just emblematic - like all things in HERO - of what some presumed/"regular" SFX are for what these maneuvers represent - Block is a careful, offense-maintaining position that risks more damage, whlie Dodge is an all-out evasion of damage, at nearly all costs to position.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Hmmm. Really? I'd have thought "just stepping back out of the way or ducking" would be a Dodge? Else how do you differentiate the two?

 

I have to go read The Book closely, then get back to you...

 

As far as game mechanics go, the only difference is that one provides a +3 DCV versus all attacks for your Phase, and one lets you make an attack roll against the attacker's OCV (and if successful allows you to act first if you and the attack share your next Phases in the same Segment).

 

For me, using Block means you do something to the attack to make it miss you, and using Dodge means you do something to yourself to make the attack miss you. And watch a few martial arts films. You'll see kung fu fighter #7 do this leap kick that flies him across the field and all Jet Li does is throw up an arm and the guy just stops and falls to the ground (well, unless Jet Li then grabs his foot and throws or kicks him back across the field). That's a block if I've ever seen one (especially since I've never seen him deflect thrown rocks in the same movie).

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

looked at from a practical fighting POV, block is an active defence, whereas Dodge is a passive one. In RL fighting, blocks cover both stopping an attack cold and deflecting an attack so that there is no impact.

Missile deflection, IMO, is basically an adder to block that allows it to be used on ranged attacks. One of our Irish games we used to trot out at faires and special occasions like Lughnassa is a varioation on the old Irish Spear feat... The object is to hit your opponent with a javelin while avoiding being struck. Catching an incoming javelin and hurling it back is an accepted part of the game. Our more rigourous version, used for initiations and to wow onlookers, is a variation on the Fianna trials, where 9 people each have a javelin and the target gets a stick to defend himself. Personnaly, I have about a 80% return rate on the first game, and about a 75% success rate in avoiding being hit in the group game. So Missle deflection isn't exactly a superpower... for thrown weapons, its pretty easy, with practice.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I would say the fact that Blocks (available to everybody) and Throws make the various Passing attacks far less imbalancing, if they actually ever were in the first place. Personally I'd love to have some 40"/Phase demibrick try a Passing Strike on Zl'f. He'd be picking concrete out from between his teeth for a week after being Martial Thrown for 14d6.