Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

[Silbeg]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Of course' date=' the character type who "always gives 110%" is a valid one too, and a character who "is almost always Pushing" certainly looks to me like a valid way to model that in-game.[/quote']

 

I have recently begun disallowing pushing save for "heroic" occassions. In a combat where the character is holding his own, and there are no outstanding issues that would require a push, the "extraordinary effort" of pushing just shouldn't be required. If you want a 70 STR brick, buy 70 STR, don't buy 60 STR and push every phase.

 

Situations such as buildings falling and innocents in danger are the times that pushes should be used.

 

If you want your character to be able to push at will, you need to buy additional powers at X10 END... this would be a "casual push", so to speak.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

You people have been busy! I don't think I'm going to read all that right now, but I would like to put forward one point with regard to Haymakers in heroic games: they still can't push your damage over the normal doubled limit. It is my experience that characters tend to be built such that they can just about reach the maximum of doubling their attack damages when using their full Strength and CSLs. That means that performing a Haymaker actually wouldn't be very likely to give them much more damage then they can normally deliver. Instead, if they are a decently skill-based character, it frees up some CSLs to use purely for OCV or DCV. This apples to both the new rules and the old 4th ed. rules (although since Strength tends to be low in most heroic games, all damage was pro-rated in 4th ed., and Haymakers added half again to your Strength, not damage, the 4th ed. rules were actually a lot less beneficial).

[Ki-rin]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

You people have been busy! I don't think I'm going to read all that right now' date=' but I would like to put forward one point with regard to Haymakers in [i']heroic[/i] games: they still can't push your damage over the normal doubled limit. It is my experience that characters tend to be built such that they can just about reach the maximum of doubling their attack damages when using their full Strength and CSLs. That means that performing a Haymaker actually wouldn't be very likely to give them much more damage then they can normally deliver. Instead, if they are a decently skill-based character, it frees up some CSLs to use purely for OCV or DCV. This apples to both the new rules and the old 4th ed. rules (although since Strength tends to be low in most heroic games, all damage was pro-rated in 4th ed., and Haymakers added half again to your Strength, not damage, the 4th ed. rules were actually a lot less beneficial).

Since I like GMing "realistic" Graphic Novel style Champions campaigns, I also enforce the "they still can't push your damage over the normal doubled limit" rule.

 

I've also experimented with rewriting it as "they still can't push your damage over 3x their base".

 

Either works better than "standard" HERO IMHO.

[Nadrakas]

Re: Does it fit the character concept or is the player "gaming" the system?

 

Take another look at UMA: Those full-move maneuvers are reserved for specific martial arts styles ("football" gets running tackle, for instance)

 

Ok...where can I find a write-up of "Football?" I don't care if it's official or not...as long as it's "accurate."

 

 

Nadrakas...

[prestidigitator]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Football as a combat style?! Sorry, I just have to laugh my ass off at that one!

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Football as a combat style?! Sorry' date=' I just have to laugh my ass off at that one![/quote']

In a not-that-long ago campaign, I had a high-dex brick who was a former football player. He took the "Football" martial arts package write-up. He was very effective!

[Mike W]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

My recent experience is that the maneuver is a bit unbalanced. You get a big damage bonus, plus an OCV bonus, plus it has a full move element, so you can do very good damage with a high CV and still stay away from a lot of the hand to hand guys. I made one of my players convert the maneuver to Offensive Strike recently as a blance issue.

[Guest C--]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I don't have a problem with it. Of course, I play superheroic games.

 

The reason it's not unbalancing is that, for supers, the only time they'll get real good damage out of it is when they're using tons of movement. At those speeds, they could just as easily do move-bys and move-throughs. Generally, a Passing Strike will be a bit more accurate, and do a bit more damage than a move-by. However, the player won't buy any of the little tricks that can make move-bys really effective (like extra defense, only for move-by, levels with it, etc). Why is this important? Because most of those things apply to move-through as well. Sure, Sally the Superspeedser has 20 Str and 40" of Running and performs a Passing Strike for 12D6. Her move-by would only by 10D6 (of course, it's free, while she's spent 10 points to get martial arts so she can use Passing Strike). She could have instead bought extra defense and some levels. But she didn't. Why is this important? Because, now she's not doing move-throughs. If she had instead spent some points on extra PD, only for velocity-attacks, and a few 3 point OCV levels, she could have not only done a 10D6 move-by with the same OCV as her Passing Strike, but she could also have done 17D6 move-throughs at only a slightly reduced OCV.

 

Passing Strike is the trade-off. Ever see a Passing Strike character try to do a move-through? Nope. That's because they don't want to give up their nice, pretty OCV and risk taking Stun, even at the possibility of increased damage.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I don't have a problem with it. Of course, I play superheroic games.

 

The reason it's not unbalancing is that, for supers, the only time they'll get real good damage out of it is when they're using tons of movement. At those speeds, they could just as easily do move-bys and move-throughs. Generally, a Passing Strike will be a bit more accurate, and do a bit more damage than a move-by. However, the player won't buy any of the little tricks that can make move-bys really effective (like extra defense, only for move-by, levels with it, etc). Why is this important? Because most of those things apply to move-through as well. Sure, Sally the Superspeedser has 20 Str and 40" of Running and performs a Passing Strike for 12D6. Her move-by would only by 10D6 (of course, it's free, while she's spent 10 points to get martial arts so she can use Passing Strike). She could have instead bought extra defense and some levels. But she didn't. Why is this important? Because, now she's not doing move-throughs. If she had instead spent some points on extra PD, only for velocity-attacks, and a few 3 point OCV levels, she could have not only done a 10D6 move-by with the same OCV as her Passing Strike, but she could also have done 17D6 move-throughs at only a slightly reduced OCV.

 

Passing Strike is the trade-off. Ever see a Passing Strike character try to do a move-through? Nope. That's because they don't want to give up their nice, pretty OCV and risk taking Stun, even at the possibility of increased damage.

Well said!

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Consider: The character has paid points for its Strength' date=' Martial Arts, and Movement. The character could have put all or most of those points into Strength and a few Combat Skill Levels.[/quote']

 

I'm glad someone here is talking sense.

 

I have one character (in a 350 pt. game) who has Passing Strike. She's my one and only speedster character, and it's her main attack. She currently does 11d6, but I'll soon be buying up her movement so that she will do 12d6.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Passing Strike is the trade-off. Ever see a Passing Strike character try to do a move-through? Nope. That's because they don't want to give up their nice' date=' pretty OCV and risk taking Stun, even at the possibility of increased damage.[/quote']

 

Good point. To date, Blueshift has never done a Move Through. She may, some day, but if so, it will be a heroic, last-ditch-effort-to-save-the-day kind of thing.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Good point. To date' date=' Blueshift has never done a Move Through. She may, some day, but if so, it will be a heroic, last-ditch-effort-to-save-the-day kind of thing.[/quote']Absolutely. Zl'f has done Move Throughs only twice in her 12 year career as a PC; both times to save a teammate. With STR 15 and 30" of Running she does 13d6 with a Move Through. However, since literally half of her physical defenses are Combat Luck and thus don't protect her against self-inflicted damage, she has only 6 PD against the 6½d6 she takes if she does Knockback to her target and all 13d6 she would take if she failed to generate KB (Which will put her at -10 Stun ). It's a desperation move only. I should note that Pushing her STR for the extra +2d6 means she will automatically be Stunned on an average roll even if she does KB; not a good thing when your defenses are comprised mostly of not getting hit due to agility.

 

Of the two Move Throughs, one Stunned Zl'f but it put down the villain and she missed being Stunned by only one point with the other (the villain then fled, but not because of Zl'f's attack but rather because he was already in very bad shape after attempting his own Move Through on our ultradense brick Silhouette - all 400,000 Kg of her).

[Dust Raven]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

In a not-that-long ago campaign' date=' I had a high-dex brick who was a former football player. He took the "Football" martial arts package write-up. He was [i']very[/i] effective!

 

The Scarlet Shield from Millennium City has the Football martial art, though not Passing Strike. He does have a Flying Dodge though...

 

I've always loved the idea of turning popular sports moves into martial arts. Justifies characters like Casy Jones from TMNT and Martin Lawrence's character from Black Knight (his fight at the end where he used football and golf to take down his opponent).

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

The Scarlet Shield from Millennium City has the Football martial art, though not Passing Strike. He does have a Flying Dodge though...

 

I've always loved the idea of turning popular sports moves into martial arts. Justifies characters like Casy Jones from TMNT and Martin Lawrence's character from Black Knight (his fight at the end where he used football and golf to take down his opponent).

Not to mention the movie version of Flash Gordon

One of my all time favorite high camp pulp sci fi pleasures.

 

*Go Flash Go!*

[Dust Raven]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Not to mention the movie version of Flash Gordon

One of my all time favorite high camp pulp sci fi pleasures.

 

*Go Flash Go!*

 

Damn! I had totally forgotten about Flash! Thanks for the reminder...

 

Now where's that soundtrack at...

[laxrulz777]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I think the problem most people have is that Passing Strike is too efficient. People are saying abusive and getting the response of, "Then don't allow it" but that's missing the main point they're making... so let's examine the main point they're making...

 

If your campaign has a DC cap of 15d6 here are some simple ways to get there

 

STR 50

Passing Strike

+10" leap

55 pnts

 

STR 35

2 1/2d6 HKA

65 pnts

 

STR 20

Offensive Strike

+7 DCs with Martial arts

43 pnts

 

so far passing strike doesn't look too bad...

 

Or we could look at it this way: I know I want to make a Brick. I know I want to hit the damage cap. My choices are

 

STR 75

in which case I pay 65 pnts and have a 7 end 15d6 punch

 

STR 50

Passing Strike

+10" Leap

55 pnts

I've saved 10 pnts and have some more leaping but i'm also down 5 PD and 12.5 STUN and I can't lift anywhere near as much...

 

Note: I actually wrote this email thinking I would side with the Passing Strike haters but I now think that Passing Strike is okay. As long as the GM is paying attention to who buys it I think it's probably just fine and (as demonstrated above) its not terribly more efficient then other choices.

[Mike W]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

The problem, in my experience, was with a flyer. 35 STR(equivalent, some was in HA), and 20" of Flight. He got 11D6 with it, the same he could have gotten out of move by, but was +3OCV and +2DCV for the passing strike. He could have gotten 14D6 out of a move through, but the CVs were so bad, he never used it. In fact, he rarely did anything other than passing strike unless forced to.

 

For me, I don't buy into some of the recent comparisons of "well, if you buy X STR and Y movement, it's more efficient so passing strike is ok" because if you're willing to take the time, you can always find a way to monkey around with those numbers to support your point. Besides, when you buy those differing amounts of STR and movement, you're getting a lot of other abilities. You're not just buying them to influence your damage on one maneuver. I'd rather compare how it works among similar characters. In other words, establish a few different character baselines and then decide whether passing strike is overbalanced compared to other ways said character might buy a similar attack. In doing so, I've come to the conclusion that it works okay for characters who are defined strictly as martial artists because they don't have enough move to get more than 2 or 3 dice of damage with the move(we're not playing high powered), so it can balance okay. But anyone capable of getting 4 or more dice of damage out of the maneuver shouldn't be allowed to buy it, IMO. It gets too powerful compared to their other attacks and completely outstrips the Offensive Strike for the same points since you effectively get the same damage, +3 OCV, and the full move element for evasive purposes in exchange for giving up the +1 DCV that Offensive Strike gets.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

The problem is still more one of concept than power. As you've noted, there are a lot of ways to hit that damage cap in a campaign that uses them. In general, as a GM I would probably disallow Passing Strike for characters who are not some variation of a martial artist or speedster, nor would I allow them to match the brick's (more conventionally derived) damage in number of dice regardless. In our campaign, not stepping on another character's schtick is very important.

 

Speedsters and martial artists balance in play because while they both attack and hit more often, they're not generating the same kind of dice as the team brick(s), nor are they nearly as tough. Were they to start doing the same level of damage per hit, they'd be stealing too much of the brick's central role, and probably violating genre in most cases as well. (While I can't think of a speedster or martial artist in the comics who hits for the same levels of megadamage on the order of major bricks, I'll concede I may have missed some since I haven't read comics in over 15 years. And of course, comic books tend to have much wider ranges of power levels than do most point-based Champions campaigns.)

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Note: I actually wrote this email thinking I would side with the Passing Strike haters but I now think that Passing Strike is okay. As long as the GM is paying attention to who buys it I think it's probably just fine and (as demonstrated above) its not terribly more efficient then other choices.

 

That's what happens when people actually look at the numbers. I wish more people would do that.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

In our campaign' date=' not stepping on another character's [i']schtick[/i] is very important.

 

That's a valid point, but it doesn't apply to Passing Strike any more than it applies to everything else. It applies to everything, and Passing Strike is no different in that respect.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

...I've come to the conclusion that it works okay for characters who are defined strictly as martial artists because they don't have enough move to get more than 2 or 3 dice of damage with the move(we're not playing high powered)' date=' so it can balance okay. But anyone capable of getting 4 or more dice of damage out of the maneuver shouldn't be allowed to buy it, IMO.[/quote']

 

This same faulty reasoning would lead one to say that no one should buy more than 30 Strength. Read laxrulz777's post again.

[Guest C--]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

The problem, in my experience, was with a flyer. 35 STR(equivalent, some was in HA), and 20" of Flight. He got 11D6 with it, the same he could have gotten out of move by, but was +3OCV and +2DCV for the passing strike. He could have gotten 14D6 out of a move through, but the CVs were so bad, he never used it. In fact, he rarely did anything other than passing strike unless forced to.

 

He spent 65 points to do 11D6. Man, what a jerk. He must have dominated your games.

[Gary]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

I think the problem most people have is that Passing Strike is too efficient. People are saying abusive and getting the response of, "Then don't allow it" but that's missing the main point they're making... so let's examine the main point they're making...

 

If your campaign has a DC cap of 15d6 here are some simple ways to get there

 

STR 50

Passing Strike

+10" leap

55 pnts

 

STR 35

2 1/2d6 HKA

65 pnts

 

STR 20

Offensive Strike

+7 DCs with Martial arts

43 pnts

 

so far passing strike doesn't look too bad...

 

Or we could look at it this way: I know I want to make a Brick. I know I want to hit the damage cap. My choices are

 

STR 75

in which case I pay 65 pnts and have a 7 end 15d6 punch

 

STR 50

Passing Strike

+10" Leap

55 pnts

I've saved 10 pnts and have some more leaping but i'm also down 5 PD and 12.5 STUN and I can't lift anywhere near as much...

 

Note: I actually wrote this email thinking I would side with the Passing Strike haters but I now think that Passing Strike is okay. As long as the GM is paying attention to who buys it I think it's probably just fine and (as demonstrated above) its not terribly more efficient then other choices.

 

 

1) Your analysis is fine, but somewhat incomplete for games with a hard damage cap. In games without a hard damage cap, Passing Strike is more of a bargain.

 

2) Don't forget the 2 pt savings because of the OCV bonus for Passing Strike.

 

3) Leap can and often does get placed in a EC, thus making it much cheaper.

 

4) One huge advantage of Passing Strike, is that you can attack with a Full Move. So now the guy with Passing Strike is attacking people from further away and has more movement to boot. Against low movement HTH opponents, he never has to end an attack within a half move of that opponent. This is something you absolutely cannot achieve with the Str approach and standard maneuvers without paying bucketloads of CV and DC penalties.

[Guest C--]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

1) Your analysis is fine' date=' but somewhat incomplete for games with a hard damage cap. In games without a hard damage cap, Passing Strike is more of a bargain.[/quote']

 

Yeah, but other things are more of a bargain, too. Like buying AE: Hex on your brick's Strength, and then using his Superleap to do easy movethroughs.

 

4) One huge advantage of Passing Strike, is that you can attack with a Full Move. So now the guy with Passing Strike is attacking people from further away and has more movement to boot. Against low movement HTH opponents, he never has to end an attack within a half move of that opponent. This is something you absolutely cannot achieve with the Str approach and standard maneuvers without paying bucketloads of CV and DC penalties.

 

Yeah, that's nice, but an EBer can buy levels vs range and strike from even farther away. There's lots and lots of nasty things you can build. I don't see Passing Strike as any worse than anything else.

[Gary]

Re: Passing Strike (martial maneuver) Unbalanced?

 

Yeah' date=' but other things are more of a bargain, too. Like buying AE: Hex on your brick's Strength, and then using his Superleap to do easy movethroughs.[/quote']

 

The brick is paying buttloads of points for AE Hex, and the additional damage from movethrough is devalued by 50% since it must be prorated for the advantage. Now it's +1d6 for 4.5" movement, as opposed to +1d6 for 5" movement for Passing Strike. And a DCV penalty of -3 to boot. Not to mention that if he has serious amounts of movement, there's a reasonable chance that he could even miss the hex.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, that's nice, but an EBer can buy levels vs range and strike from even farther away. There's lots and lots of nasty things you can build. I don't see Passing Strike as any worse than anything else.

 

 

The EBer is paying more points for those levels, and those levels don't add to damage. Apples and Oranges.