Is Flying Dodge too good?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

This seems to boil down to two schools of thought:

 

(a) No way should there be a maneuver which lets someone avoid attacks "just by" making a roll (be it 11-, 10- or 9-) and ignore the OCV opf the attacker. It's silly because FTFSG can dive for cover [what possible justificatioon could there be for him having Flying Dodge?]

 

( For sure it should be possible - it happens all the time in the source material.

 

Seems to be there is a reason both these maneuvers are OPTIONAL. OPTIONAL maneuvers should be used in those campaigns and genres where they are appropriate. If you don't consider them appropriate for your game, don't use them. This is why they are OPTIONAL. If you think they are appropriate only in certain circumstances, or should be modified to make them more appropriate, do so. They are OPTIONAL, so restricting their availability or utility is a viable option. Maybe you think only characters with some level of combat ability, or comnbat experience, should have access to certain maneuverrs (no issue for Flying Dodge, which costs points, but certainly an issue for DFC0. In that case, resruct the types of characters to which these OPTIONAL maneuvers are available (eg. "only characters built on 200+ points or possessing martial arts or military training may use DFC in this Superheroic campaign"). Perhaps you feel the maneuvers should be even more restricted. Charge ppoints for them and add them to appropriate Martial Arts packages. Now you can control who can, and cannot dive for cover.

 

And if you don't have a problem with these OPTIONAL maneuvers, you should have the ability to allow them in your campaign.

 

Remember that key word, OPTIONAL. In a toolbox game where everything is "optional" by definition, the fact a specific rule is flagged as "optional" should be taken to have some meaning, specifically that this may be inappropriate in many genres and/or campaigns.

[Vorsch]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Even OPTIONAL rules are consisered cannon in hero.

 

If even one published character has it, its fair game for PCs.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Even OPTIONAL rules are consisered cannon in hero.

 

If even one published character has it, its fair game for PCs.

 

What is considered "canon" is up to each group. If a group has decided "everything oublished by Hero is legit", that is a decision to allow use of optional rules.

 

I have no problem telling players "This maneuver/contruct/ability is not appropriate to my campaign and will not be allowed." or "is modified as follows." That also means that any published character who has it either isn't in that campaign, or has that ability removed or modified to conform with the campaign rules.

 

If a GM wants to ban, say, flying dodge, all the fmove maneuvers, or even all the UMA maneuvers, I can libve with that. However, that means no one, PC or NPC, should have access to those maneuvers. Either they are inappropriate for the game, or they are not.

[Vorsch]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

You sound to reasonable to be a GM, my last GM espoused exactly the opposite " all banned powers to be used by NPCs, at every oppertunity"

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

You sound to reasonable to be a GM' date=' my last GM espoused exactly the opposite " all banned powers to be used by NPCs, at every oppertunity"[/quote']

 

Hmmm...maybe that's why I've had no time to run games for the last few years. But I suspect my players may not buy the "too reasonable" argument

[Lupus]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

I'll note for the record that I've never met a game system that I haven't tweaked. Even way back playing basic D&D, I had house rules.

 

I'm just that way. So I have no problem reading a FAQ and going 'nah, I'll use a different interpretation.' It's not really a weakness in the system, just a difference of opinion.

[OddHat]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Two points:

 

1) Moving one hex away is still HtH range. Fred has to DfC at least 2" to avoid an HtH attack. So he's at a 9 or less. If we're going to be pedants, let's at least be accurate pedants.

 

2) Assuming Fred successfully DfCs 2" away from Evil Dude, what's to prevent Evil Dude from either a) Moving 1" and attacking the now-prone (1/2 DCV) Fred Attacking Fred with a ranged or Area Effect attack? DfC only works the way it's been described in this thread if the character in question uses it to avoid an already incoming attack. If Evil Dude just Holds until Fat Fred has DfC'd, ED can still obliterate Freddy in his first attack just by waiting.

 

It's even easier with Flying Dodge: Moving away with FD still only gains the dodger +4 DCV, and he's still hittable with an EX attack, Area Effect attack, or even someone with sufficient OCV.

 

To Summarize: These are useful maneuvers. They are in no way unbalanced or overly powerful if used as written. Many maneuvers are powerful against a tactically clumsy opponent. Watch what happens when our fearless speedster Mr. Quick tries a 30" Move By on a martial artist who has Martial Throw. Mr. Quick will be eating concrete. Does that make Martial Throw too powerful, or does it simply mean Mr. Quick needs to adjust his tactics against martial artists?

 

1) You may wish to re-read 5thER page 394 under non-area attacks. Fred only needs a 1" DfC to avoid Zl'f's punch. Are you comfortable knowing that, should your GM so decide, there's a 10 or less chance that it may cost your super-speedster two phases just to land a punch on a fat middle aged non-super?

 

2) So Fred may go down in the next phase, if nothing else happens. So what? It is still a case of a gamism allowing an ordinary fat middle-aged man to dodge a fist moving at bullet speeds. It's absurd.

 

3) Flying dodge - Is still allowing an absurd outcome, if the GM makes the choice to give it to a character for whom it is not dramatically appropriate. Yes, there are even more mechanical hoops you can jump through to make up for the goofiness of Fred waddling away to safety. Why the heck would you want to go through all that crap rather than just not permitting an absurd situation from coming up in the first place?

 

To Sumarize: When the use of a game mechanic coflicts with dramatic and common sense, it's the use of that mechanic that's at fault. A GM who chooses to include these options in his campaign had best think through who gets to use them, when and how.

[Furry Fox]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Flying Dodge is good don't get me wrong and far more interesting than the standard Martial Dodge but generally I don't think that defensive manuevers are game threatening. I know that there will be some cases where it possibly can be abusive (I can't think of any off the top of my head but I am sure that Hero members will quickly point them out to me) but it is difficult to win the day solely through aborting to a defensive action. My speedster that has Flying Dodge also has invisibility, desolidification and missile deflection so it really does not add that much in the way of defense. Still it is a cool stunt that I think that he should have. Of course its addition to heroic campaigns or to non-super characters is questionable at best. Unless your character is playing a super martial artist type character in a heroic campaign I would not allow it.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Its the 'any idiot' part that bugs me' date=' regardless of stats you have a 100% guaranteed, cast iron, get out of jail free card. Thats just wrong.[/quote']

For an idiot with a DEX of 10 or less, that chance is no better than 50% if using DFC. If the idiot has bought Flying Dodge, he's not just any idiot; he's an idiot that avoid nearly any HTH attack. But then that's what he paid points for. All some other idiot has to do is buy a HTH attack that Flying Dodge won't be of any help against (IPE, among others).

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Flying Dodge is good don't get me wrong and far more interesting than the standard Martial Dodge but generally I don't think that defensive manuevers are game threatening. I know that there will be some cases where it possibly can be abusive (I can't think of any off the top of my head but I am sure that Hero members will quickly point them out to me) but it is difficult to win the day solely through aborting to a defensive action. My speedster that has Flying Dodge also has invisibility' date=' desolidification and missile deflection so it really does not add that much in the way of defense. Still it is a cool stunt that I think that he should have. Of course its addition to heroic campaigns or to non-super characters is questionable at best. Unless your character is playing a super martial artist type character in a heroic campaign I would not allow it.[/quote']

to boil this down to it's most essential point...

If someone is Dodging (normal, martial or flying) they aren't doing much else (unless it something uncontrolled or such). It's really not too different than Ultra-boy from Legion setting his powers to Invulnerability. At that point he's tougher to hurt than even Mon-El or Superboy (the pre-Crises one) but then he's not a credible threat at that moment either.

 

HM

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

This seems to boil down to two schools of thought:

 

(a) No way should there be a maneuver which lets someone avoid attacks "just by" making a roll (be it 11-, 10- or 9-) and ignore the OCV opf the attacker. It's silly because FTFSG can dive for cover [what possible justificatioon could there be for him having Flying Dodge?]

 

( For sure it should be possible - it happens all the time in the source material.

 

Seems to be there is a reason both these maneuvers are OPTIONAL. OPTIONAL maneuvers should be used in those campaigns and genres where they are appropriate. If you don't consider them appropriate for your game, don't use them. This is why they are OPTIONAL. If you think they are appropriate only in certain circumstances, or should be modified to make them more appropriate, do so. They are OPTIONAL, so restricting their availability or utility is a viable option. Maybe you think only characters with some level of combat ability, or comnbat experience, should have access to certain maneuverrs (no issue for Flying Dodge, which costs points, but certainly an issue for DFC0. In that case, resruct the types of characters to which these OPTIONAL maneuvers are available (eg. "only characters built on 200+ points or possessing martial arts or military training may use DFC in this Superheroic campaign"). Perhaps you feel the maneuvers should be even more restricted. Charge ppoints for them and add them to appropriate Martial Arts packages. Now you can control who can, and cannot dive for cover.

 

And if you don't have a problem with these OPTIONAL maneuvers, you should have the ability to allow them in your campaign.

 

Remember that key word, OPTIONAL. In a toolbox game where everything is "optional" by definition, the fact a specific rule is flagged as "optional" should be taken to have some meaning, specifically that this may be inappropriate in many genres and/or campaigns.

Very well put.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Even OPTIONAL rules are consisered cannon in hero.

 

If even one published character has it, its fair game for PCs.

As a player and a GM, I tend to look at anything a published character has as being an example of what's possible using the Hero Toolkit, and nothing else. I suspect that most players and GMs would do this as well, but I might be assuming too much. I do know there's plenty of players of GMs that just use everything out of the box as-is, but I know there are far more that prefer to change what they see to suit themselves, their character and their campaign.

[Oruncrest]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

The flash: power Superspeed at lightspeed level

 

Human MA with dex 10 spt 2, dives for cover. The Flash fails to hit him with his OCV 50 attack, he acted first, won iniative if used, still missed.

 

in fact its worse the flash cant hit him at all this phase, no matter what. No amount of superspeed can beat dive for cover. Next phase is a different story i admit.

 

This seems obviously wrong, though probabilly not to hard core Herophiles "its the rules". sad but true

 

But wouldn't the Flash be making a Passing Strike, or even a Move-Bye? It so, then it doesn't matter how far the Dex 10, Spd 2 Martial Artist runs, because the Dex 150, SPD 16 , probably 75" running Flash will just catch up to him, 'cause he's moving too and he's got more inches of movement.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

As far as getting upset about the 'broken-ness' of Flying Dodge...

 

 

• If a GM is upset that a combat is taking too long because a player has this maneuver then it's his own fault for allowing it in the first place. Adjustments to his NPC's or just having a talk with the player will go a long way towards resolving any issues.
  

 

• If a Player is upset due to..
  
  • Another player being allowed to have this MA maneuver but not him I still say talk to the GM if this appears to be a violation of 'schtick preservation'.
    
  • The GM having NPC's with this ability but players not being allowed to purchase it as well. Big Fricken' Deal!?! As a GM I would adjust to this by not using HERO-speak in combats at all, just describe what the NPC did in english. Any previous complaints are just a form of meta-gaming and using real world descriptions would elimate that option.
    

HM

[Hyper-Man]

Countdown Post (3... 2... 1... BOOM!)

 

As a player and a GM' date=' I tend to look at anything a published character has as being an example of what's possible using the Hero Toolkit, and nothing else. I suspect that most players and GMs would do this as well, but I might be assuming too much. I do know there's plenty of players of GMs that just use everything out of the box as-is, but I know there are far more that prefer to change what they see to suit themselves, their character and their campaign.[/quote']To emphasize this point a little further...

 

I've heard from more than one other poster that HERO rules in general as well as published characters are just an example of Steve Long's house rules. I don't have a problem with that one bit but it bears consideration nonetheless. Every shared experience that we call roleplaying is different no matter if the same game and/or house rules is being used. Some people enjoy different degrees of detail on just about every aspect of the games they play. That fact does not make one house rule more valid than any other.

 

With that said, DOJ and Steve do an outstanding job of presenting as consistent a product as they do. Part of their job is to present a possible set of rules to start from. It's nice when as many people as possible agree on most of those since it is a sort of common language (great for convention games for instance) but the rules should not be thought of as a straight-jacket for players or GM's if they are not having fun.

 

HM

[Alibear]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

I do have a problem with this maneuver as it is in the rules.

 

In our group this allows you extra DCV and to be somewhere else at the end of your turn, nothing else.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

The reason the AE attacks still "miss" is because they were never aimed at the character. The only reason the HTH attacks miss is because the target isn't in range anymore.

I think this is just a semantic argument. If I throw a grenade at you, you are the target. Just because I don't need to hit you in the chest to do damage doesn't mean I'm not targeting you. I really don't care about damaging the ground you happen to be standing on.

 

My point was that AE is a +1 Advantage, and will automatically miss if you FD, when if I hadn't *paid twice as much* for AE, I'd still have a chance of hitting you. Advantages are supposed to be advantageous. A 5-point maneuver renders a 100-point attack useless.

 

And targeting your DCV is not much of a solution. One of the main reasons to buy AE is to increase the chance of hitting by only having to hit DCV 3. If I have to target your DCV, it's doubly worse, because you'll then be at +4 in addition!

 

What if I bought 1-Hex Accurate instead? How would you rule then?

 

(Re-reading what I wrote above, I may have come across as a bit hostile. I didn't mean to. *I* don't really want to throw a grenade at *you*, it just seemed quicker than making up some example names.)

[Dust Raven]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

I think this is just a semantic argument. If I throw a grenade at you' date=' you are the target. Just because I don't need to hit you in the chest to do damage doesn't mean I'm not targeting you. I really don't care about damaging the ground you happen to be standing on.[/quote']Actually, people who are trained to throw grenades are trained to throw them at the area their target is standing in. In real life, if you throw a grenade directly at a person (as if it were a baseball, for example) and you miss by even the tiniest amount, the grenade goes flying past and the target is likely not even if the area any more. While that's not necessarily the case with all attacks that cover an area, the theory holds true.

 

Going back to the rules mechanics... there isn't much harm is targeting an AE attack against the target's DCV. Even if you miss by a few, the target might still be in the area. If the character with the AE attack knows the target has Flying Dodge, he just alters his tactics a bit. Either attack the character, and hope you don't miss by too much (better at closer range, as the attack can't miss by more hexes than half the range to the target), or he can hold his action and wait for the FD character to attack first and attack in the same phase (and if the target is too close, land it behind him to the edge of the effect still catches him in it).

 

My point was that AE is a +1 Advantage, and will automatically miss if you FD, when if I hadn't *paid twice as much* for AE, I'd still have a chance of hitting you. Advantages are supposed to be advantageous. A 5-point maneuver renders a 100-point attack useless.

The attack cost more points. The defense against it costs fewer. And the defense isn't absolute... just increases the posibility of remaining unharmed.

 

And targeting your DCV is not much of a solution. One of the main reasons to buy AE is to increase the chance of hitting by only having to hit DCV 3. If I have to target your DCV, it's doubly worse, because you'll then be at +4 in addition!

 

What if I bought 1-Hex Accurate instead? How would you rule then?

As I mentioned above, AE attacks cover an area, and even if you miss the target might still be in that area. And you can't miss your target by more than half the target's range. If the target is no more than twice the Radius of the AE, the attack will automatically hit him (though it might hit you too). If you aren't using Radius AE, it gets a little trickier.

 

(Re-reading what I wrote above, I may have come across as a bit hostile. I didn't mean to. *I* don't really want to throw a grenade at *you*, it just seemed quicker than making up some example names.)

Don't worry. I don't need Flying Dodge. I have Desolidification .

[gewing]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

If you think about it, pretty much any movement allows the character to automatically move out of HtH range. All Flying Dodge really does is permit the character to both move and gain a +4 to DCV. There is nothing to prohibit the attacker from targeting the character with a ranged attack after he executes his Flying Dodge.

 

It's not a particularly cheap maneuver. It's effective, but in many ways it's not as good as a DfC. My character Zl'f has it, but it's a maneuver she's never actually used and I bought it mostly because it seems to make sense for a high DEX combatant. From the FAQ (in fact I was the one who originally asked Steve Long this question on the Hero System Questions board):

 

 

I just started the thread, and reading this got the smoke coming out of my head... what if the attacker has stretching/Growth? Then he can probably still hit, I guess.

[Agent X]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

But wouldn't the Flash be making a Passing Strike' date=' or even a Move-Bye? It so, then it doesn't matter how far the Dex 10, Spd 2 Martial Artist runs, because the Dex 150, SPD 16 , probably 75" running Flash will just catch up to him, 'cause he's moving too and he's got more inches of movement.[/quote'] Shhhh, you're not stacking the deck in the favor of criticizing a rule.

[OddHat]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Shhhh' date=' you're not stacking the deck in the favor of criticizing a rule.[/quote']

 

Fred the Fat 50 Year Old can DfC or Flying Dodge one hex to the East or West while the Flash Does a Passing Strike or Move By from North to South. The Flash would charge straight by. Middle-aged security guards rule in Hero System.

[Oruncrest]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Fred the Fat 50 Year Old can DfC or Flying Dodge one hex to the East or West while the Flash Does a Passing Strike or Move By from North to South. The Flash would charge straight by. Middle-aged security guards rule in Hero System.

 

Running doesn't have a Turn Mode...

[OddHat]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Running doesn't have a Turn Mode...

 

Which by the rules as written makes no difference at all when a foe aborts to a defensive maneuver.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

Which by the rules as written makes no difference at all when a foe aborts to a defensive maneuver.

in a 1 on 1 combat between mutually knowledgable opponents in an empty arena that is correct.

 

But, add a few other civilians and other random objects and assuming a speedster with at least 30" of combat running you have a situation where the speedster can probably zig-zag several times around the room/battlefield before actually attacking his 'chosen' target (the security guard). In all fairness to schtick in the superhero genre, the security guard or even an experienced member of a villain team who is not very knowledgable of the speedster's powers should probably have some minuses to his perception roll to even keep track of a Flash-esq character in a combat situation much less be able to abort to a defensive action when attacked by him.

 

HM

[OddHat]

Re: Is Flying Dodge too good?

 

in a 1 on 1 combat between mutually knowledgable opponents in an empty arena that is correct.

 

But, add a few other civilians and other random objects and assuming a speedster with at least 30" of combat running you have a situation where the speedster can probably zig-zag several times around the room/battlefield before actually attacking his 'chosen' target (the security guard). In all fairness to schtick in the superhero genre, the security guard or even an experienced member of a villain team who is not very knowledgable of the speedster's powers should probably have some minuses to his perception roll to even keep track of a Flash-esq character in a combat situation much less be able to abort to a defensive action when attacked by him.

 

HM

 

As a GM, you are free to use dramatic and common sense to enforce the interpretation you give above. That's the difference between treating the combat as a role playing excercise and treating it as an excercise in war-gaming. However, by-the-book, without the restrictions imposed by dramatic sense, DfC and Flying Dodge are war-gamist twinkery.

 

(Re-statement of my position for those who don't like to read the whole thread before replying: these rules work well enough in the right campaigns and with the right characters, so long as dramatic and common sense are kept in mind. It is when GMs start to treat this as a war-game rather than an RPG that you get absurd situations like the Flash missing his attempt to punch a normal security guard.)