Intelligent Question?

[TheRealDeal]

Ablative defenses on Bricks is another option. Use the version where each time the defense is overcome reduce it by 5 APs. Perhaps allow the Brick to gain his REC to his defenses so reduced whenever he takes a Recovery, or since that may be too much, make it like Drain and just recover a flat 5 APs per Turn to such reduced defenses. Maybe only apply the Ablative reduction if the attack has at least X APs to keep lesser attacks from really doing so, and only let hard hits do this. Maybe X is equal to the APs the Brick has in that defense.

[Trebuchet]

The problem I have with that is that even without caps the range from non-effective to effective to super effective is actually quite narrow in the HERO System and the difference of a few dice can really shift things. For instance in a "standard" campaign (what I have seen from here so far) with 12d6 being the standard cap 9d6 attacks (without mitigating advantages like NND or AP) are barely able to affect most people. On the other hand 15d6 is almost a guaranteed Stunned result on anything that has a chance of being stunned at 12d6. Every die of damage adds 3.5 pts of damage to the average roll and because of the way defenses and stunning work in this system each additional die is more effective than the last meaning without a system in place which increases the cost of additional dice of damage the "effective" range of attacks is actually quite narrow.

 

There is some truth to this, but it obfuscates the fact that there are many more ways to be "effective" in combat than just delivering a lot of damage and/or Stunning or KO'ing the opponent. People focus too much on blasting and not enough on being useful. A lower-damage character can block to protect teammates or civilians, they can throw opponents to the ground to set them up for the heavy hitters, they can leak just enough STUN through to prevent the opponent from getting his Recovery, they can figure out how to steal or disable the Evil McGuffin, they can engage the mooks who are slowing down the team's heavy hitters. As a rule of thumb low damage characters compensate for doing less damage per Phase by having more Phases to act, unusual powers, and/or by being ignored by the Big Bad because "they're harmless." Anyone think Black Widow or Captain America were "ineffective" in The Avengers movie? Should players only want to run Iron Man, Thor, or Hulk wannabes?

 

I've been playing the "low-damage" character in our campaign, Sil'f, for nearly 21 years, and I can guarantee nobody in our gaming group would even remotely categorize Sil'f as ineffective. On more than one occasion she's been the only team member still standing during a fight, including a notable one against Eurostar about 10 years ago which we discussed on this forum.

 

As I noted above, our team's damage spread goes from 9d6 to 17d6 (with an average of about 13d6) and yet everyone seems to have plenty of fun. And that's the whole point of the exercise, isn't it?

[Trebuchet]

I often feel that there's an inherent need amongst many players to maximize defenses. A conscious or unconscious desire to play it safe' date=' to put themselves in the character's shoes perhaps, or to identify with them, and to want them to have the best protection that points will buy. Especially in a situation where you have a feel for what the worst they might encounter is. If you know most enemies are going to have 12DC attacks, then 24 resistant defense is enough to ensure that normal (not AP) attacks can't ever do BODY damage - which is a nice place to be if you're trying to keep your character alive. Add in the defense-like nature of things like a high CON or STUN, and Bricks are probably the most prone to this sort of defense focus.[/quote']

 

It has long been the consensus among the eight players in our campaign that the true role of bricks is "damage sponge" rather than "heavy hitter." Sure, most bricks are also heavy hitters, but it is their inherent toughness that truly defines a brick.

[psyber624]

The problem I have with that is that even without caps the range from non-effective to effective to super effective is actually quite narrow in the HERO System and the difference of a few dice can really shift things. For instance in a "standard" campaign (what I have seen from here so far) with 12d6 being the standard cap 9d6 attacks (without mitigating advantages like NND or AP) are barely able to affect most people. On the other hand 15d6 is almost a guaranteed Stunned result on anything that has a chance of being stunned at 12d6. Every die of damage adds 3.5 pts of damage to the average roll and because of the way defenses and stunning work in this system each additional die is more effective than the last meaning without a system in place which increases the cost of additional dice of damage the "effective" range of attacks is actually quite narrow.

 

There is some truth to this, but it obfuscates the fact that there are many more ways to be "effective" in combat than just delivering a lot of damage and/or Stunning or KO'ing the opponent. People focus too much on blasting and not enough on being useful. A lower-damage character can block to protect teammates or civilians, they can throw opponents to the ground to set them up for the heavy hitters, they can leak just enough STUN through to prevent the opponent from getting his Recovery, they can figure out how to steal or disable the Evil McGuffin, they can engage the mooks who are slowing down the team's heavy hitters. As a rule of thumb low damage characters compensate for doing less damage per Phase by having more Phases to act, unusual powers, and/or by being ignored by the Big Bad because "they're harmless." Anyone think Black Widow or Captain America were "ineffective" in The Avengers movie? Should players only want to run Iron Man, Thor, or Hulk wannabes?

 

I've been playing the "low-damage" character in our campaign, Sil'f, for nearly 21 years, and I can guarantee nobody in our gaming group would even remotely categorize Sil'f as ineffective. On more than one occasion she's been the only team member still standing during a fight, including a notable one against Eurostar about 10 years ago which we discussed on this forum.

 

As I noted above, our team's damage spread goes from 9d6 to 17d6 (with an average of about 13d6) and yet everyone seems to have plenty of fun. And that's the whole point of the exercise, isn't it?

Don't get me wrong, I am sure with a great group and an awesome GM it can work just fine. And there are many other things to do other than damage in a fight as you point out. I just don't feel that a 9d6 attack would be worth the points in a game with attacks running up to 17 dice all things being equal. They just wouldn't be useful enough to justify the cost is all I am saying.

 

And then on the flip side without caps how do you reign in someone who just wants to dump all their points into one mega attack? If you limit them as a GM then you actually DO have some sort of a cap in mind, your just not spelling it out to your players as such. If not then hopefully you are lucky enough to have a group of players that don't get into the power game at all.

[Trebuchet]

Don't get me wrong, I am sure with a great group and an awesome GM it can work just fine. And there are many other things to do other than damage in a fight as you point out. I just don't feel that a 9d6 attack would be worth the points in a game with attacks running up to 17 dice all things being equal. They just wouldn't be useful enough to justify the cost is all I am saying.

 

And then on the flip side without caps how do you reign in someone who just wants to dump all their points into one mega attack? If you limit them as a GM then you actually DO have some sort of a cap in mind, your just not spelling it out to your players as such. If not then hopefully you are lucky enough to have a group of players that don't get into the power game at all.

 

Well, I'm not going to claim we are a typical group because we certainly are not. We have eight players in our group and every one of them also GM's. This means nobody gets isolated behind a GM screen permanently and forgets what it's like to be a player; and conversely every player knows how disruptive an unbalanced power can be. We self-limit because we want to keep the ratios in line. We have, in fact, continually pushed our brick's player to increase her STR and defenses because she is supposed to be that tough; just as I have deliberately kept my MA's attacks and defenses very low (her defenses are just over a third of the brick's). What we have done, in essence, is create - with deliberate aforethought - an Avenger-like spread of power levels and made it work in a Champions campaign for over 20 years, but the only way we could make that work was to dump the formal caps. Lower damage characters compensate with more SPD; and so for years our only "Rule of X" (which is more like a guideline anyway) has been very simple: Damage Classes + Speed <= 20. That's been exceeded now, but not until about 2 or 3 years ago; and I think only 3 characters have exceeded it, by only 1 or 2 points. (My PC Sil'f is one of them, but she is the most experienced member of the team and her standard 9d6 attack with her SPD of 9 exceeds it only if she uses her +1/2 Advantaged attacks, which burn too much END for her to use throughout any battle.)

 

A 9d6 attack, IME, is really not all that weak in a game which averages 13d6 attacks. An average roll does 31.5 points of STUN, which will hurt almost any non-brick, and good rolls - or adding +1/2 Advantages such as AP or PEN - can do even better. Would that hurt our team's brick? Not in the least. But then I don't expect Captain America, Hawkeye, or the Black Widow could actually hurt Thor or the Hulk either. Annoy, yes. Actually inflict significant injury, no.