Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

[zornwil]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I'm thinking Darkness wouldn't work too well. The logic becomes circular: I can't see the hex? Okay, I aim at the hex because I know exactly where it is. I know I can't see it, it's in Darkness, but it's obvious where it is.

(snip)

Bear in mind it's IPE. You don't know that the Darkness even exists, you think you see a blur but really you are seeing where something was. I don't see it as terrible different than Images, just another method.

 

Of course realy, I think Invisibility is better than Darkness or Images as I consider it. The SFX of the Invisibility is a blur where one was, and I'd add a Limitation that the path could be deduced from that (depending of course on character concept).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I'm thinking Darkness wouldn't work too well. The logic becomes circular: I can't see the hex? Okay, I aim at the hex because I know exactly where it is. I know I can't see it, it's in Darkness, but it's obvious where it is.

 

In any case, here's some ideas I have for methods of making yourself harder to hit with an AE attack:

 

Afterimages II: Sight and Hearing Groups and Radar Images Increased Size (8" radius; +3/4), -5 to PER Rolls (61 Active Points); Limited Range (character must be withing the effects area; -1/4). Total Cost: 49

The character moves so fast that it's difficult for others to know exactly where he's standing.

 

I do like your suggestions.

 

However, not knowing which hex the target is in due to darkness, and not knowing which hex he's in due to images seems very similar to me. As well, you probably need to cover more senses (darkness or images). We have a player character in one campaign with targetting smell, and spatial awareness isn't too rare either.

 

I had a GM run the very greative "darkness IPE" on one game. If you were in the field, you could perceive nothing. If you were outside, you could see where people were in theory, but actually they were placed randomly while the GM tracked actual movements on his own map. Aiming where he seems to be would result in a miss.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

No, it really isn't. See, there is no deception involved. You're simply too fast to be hit. Short of amazing luck, reflexes and/or a HUGE AE, it should not be possible to tag someone moving fast enough.

 

Scatter them along their planned movement path. Have them either not have arrived yet (it landed 'during' your last movement) (and remember, the AE guy WAS aiming at wher you're going), or have them gone past (subtract the moved inches from their next movement, perhaps?)

The problem I have using Change Environment as a Defense is that it directly affects the attacker, rather than the defender. The defender isn't actually doing anything, receiving a bonus, or anything. If the character is Stunned or KO'ed he'd still have the benifit of reducing an attacker's OCV until the end of the Phase, even though his DCV immediately dropped to 0. The mechanics don't fit the SFX anymore than using a Flash or Entangle to represent a knife.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I do like your suggestions.

 

However, not knowing which hex the target is in due to darkness, and not knowing which hex he's in due to images seems very similar to me. As well, you probably need to cover more senses (darkness or images). We have a player character in one campaign with targetting smell, and spatial awareness isn't too rare either.

 

I had a GM run the very greative "darkness IPE" on one game. If you were in the field, you could perceive nothing. If you were outside, you could see where people were in theory, but actually they were placed randomly while the GM tracked actual movements on his own map. Aiming where he seems to be would result in a miss.

I just think it's using the wrong tool for the job. What reason is there to use Darkness when there is Images? Besides, if the Darkness would impare those looking in, it would completely blind the speedster who's inside, which Images wouldn't.

 

I used the senses I did because I figured those would be the most affected. Spatial Awareness is often some kind of supernatural sense (though not always) and costs more than Radar, so I figure if someone actually spend those points they should be able to target the character. Now that you mention it, Smell would probably be appropriate because if he's moving round that much and that fast, his scent is gonna be all over the place. But Targeting Smell isn't that common and without it you have an additional -4 to use it to negate some penalties (better to use hearing). But I was also thinking that many super-senses might not be fooled by it.

[badger3k]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

OK' date=' I mean that a hex does not have a DCV the way that a character has a DCV. There is a standard DCV to hit a specific 2 meter wide area. But that is not the same thing as being a character. Can you use aid on a hex? Does it have a speed? Can you stun it? Can you effect it with an ego attack? Even if you use the phrase "Area Affect" in place of "Usable by others" (which i think would be more on target), there is still nothing to effect. The usable by others rules specifcally say that they let a [i']character[/i] use the power. A hex is not a charcter. It doesn't start to dodge around and evade attacks. Its always a hex.

 

Well, I see more of your reasoning, but you still read the book way too literally for my tastes. Not as bad as some D&D players arguing for 24 pages of posts over one word in the rules, but the same basics. Probably why I should stay away from these boards.

 

For charcters DCV is a measure of ability to defend oneself. Unless you could give me a special effect where the 2 meter region of space I was targeting with my area affect was defending itself, by say moving around or blocking my attack, I dont think I buy the idea that the hex should have a higher DCV. It just sits their being a region of space for me to shoot at.

 

To make character A miss a hex character B has to do something to character A. That could be a number of things, from a dex drain to a change envrionment with a CV penalty, to images to make them aim at a false target, to a perception penalty through Darkness, or something on those lines. The hex remains just the hex. You have to do something to the shooter to make them less able to hit it.

 

No. All I have to do is come up with an effect, and determine what rules or powers I can use to make that affect. Whether it has to apply to the character or not doesn't bother me. I've seen effects that have to be simulated backwards, due to the ways the rules work - some powers in other systems can't be directly translated into Hero due to rules differences. Same idea.

 

Ok, so I can hear you thinking, "what if I'm playing Captian Euclid,and I warp space to make the hex harder to hit". Well, thats Change Environment, "Warp Space", with penalties to OCV, and the charcter with the power would be affected as well unless they bought the personal immunity advantage. You have changed the nature of space in the region to make attacks more difficult to target, but the hex is still DCV 3. I would think most of these types of powers would be through change environment, or in the case of the "speedster dodge", images to make targeting harder.

 

This is what I mean. If you want to use change environment that way, you either have to use it as an attack, have a HUGE area, or else it will only affect hth attacks. You can impose an OCV penalty around you, but unless the attack starts out within that radius, there's no effect. Unless you want to buy enough area to handle the NRM 14d6 EB the bad guy has (pretty costly), changing the OCV isn't practical as a defense. It can be used as an offense, as I said, but then you're not changing the area around you, but playing with others. Slight difference, but it may not fit the concept.

 

Nothing is so hard about that, but I have yet to hear a Fx jusutification at would support giving a Hex higher DCV.

 

Ok. I have. As akways, YMMV.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I just think it's using the wrong tool for the job. What reason is there to use Darkness when there is Images? Besides' date=' if the Darkness would impare those looking in, it would completely blind the speedster who's inside, which Images wouldn't.[/quote']

 

You'd need personal immunity, as well as some other limitations to ensure that only the speedster was hidden. With images, you need some ability to ensure the speedster's image doesn't result in someone else in his aea being targeted. But I do prefer the use of Images for the specific reason that a more perceptive character should be more likely to ascertain the speedster's real position.

 

I used the senses I did because I figured those would be the most affected. Spatial Awareness is often some kind of supernatural sense (though not always) and costs more than Radar' date=' so I figure if someone actually spend those points they should be able to target the character. Now that you mention it, Smell would probably be appropriate because if he's moving round that much and that fast, his scent is gonna be all over the place. But Targeting Smell isn't that common and without it you have an additional -4 to use it to negate some penalties (better to use hearing). But I was also thinking that many super-senses might not be fooled by it.[/quote']

 

I'd add in Smell (for the reasons you suggest, and because I use targetting smell for many animalistic characters). Some other senses would definitely be a judgement call, but I'd be inclined to buy impages against most senses, but limit it so "rapid processing" allows the attacker to see through the images.

[The Hyborian]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

Not as bad as some D&D players arguing for 24 pages of posts over one word in the rules, but the same basics. Probably why I should stay away from these boards

.

 

Ok, I will adimit that on another forum I once started a "DnD Clerics are overpowerer" thread that went more than five hundred posts. But debate and vigorous argument are the fun part. What did Al Gore invent the internet for, if not to grouse about complete strangers? Its like politics, you champion your case and dont take it personal. No need to stay away from the boards.

[Roger Books]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

So does anyone have a problem with this from a PC death point of view? The PC has lots of armour so goes toe-toe with a big heavy hitter. The big guy pushes because he is just nicking the hero. One good attack roll and one failed DS roll and the PC is toast.

 

Roger

[badger3k]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

.

 

Ok, I will adimit that on another forum I once started a "DnD Clerics are overpowerer" thread that went more than five hundred posts. But debate and vigorous argument are the fun part. What did Al Gore invent the internet for, if not to grouse about complete strangers? Its like politics, you champion your case and dont take it personal. No need to stay away from the boards.

 

Well, I'm trying to get away from the attachment to opinion that these kind of debates can incur. I've been bad about these things sometimes, and I still need to work on it. Part of me sees no sense to debate something if it's just an opinion, while at the same time seeing some intellectual stimulation in it. Now, it's nowhere as bad here as it is elsewhere - more mature people I think. Even the NGD boards have calmed down tremendously (where I think I've tended to post more).

 

Only 500 for a "clerics are overpowered thread"? I'd expect a lot more. Try "does shape change change hp" or anything with Haste. Or how magic has been broken in the new version...

[badger3k]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

So does anyone have a problem with this from a PC death point of view? The PC has lots of armour so goes toe-toe with a big heavy hitter. The big guy pushes because he is just nicking the hero. One good attack roll and one failed DS roll and the PC is toast.

 

Roger

 

Personally, I don't. That's what makes the game fun. The PC in this case should not be going toe-to-toe - he should be using this to help his defense, but he should also be using some kind of tactics to avoid that final blast from the BBEG. Of course, if the PC is going to die from my own choices and his roll, well, I might modify the result, but it depends on story and situation (and the genre - dark hero, four color, etc). If it were a fantasy game, I'd let the chips fall where they may.

[The Hyborian]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

Well' date=' I'm trying to get away from the attachment to opinion that these kind of debates can incur. I've been bad about these things sometimes, and I still need to work on it. Part of me sees no sense to debate something if it's just an opinion, while at the same time seeing some intellectual stimulation in it. [/quote']

 

Well, there truely isn't a GOOD reason for it, but it can be fun. I hope I did not become strident to the point it offended you personally.

 

Only 500 for a "clerics are overpowered thread"? I'd expect a lot more. Try "does shape change change hp" or anything with Haste. Or how magic has been broken in the new version.

]

 

We forgot "Are Druids the New Clerics (overpowered)" and "A level 20 Wizard and a level 20 cleric are having a duel. . . . ."

[badger3k]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

Well' date=' there truely isn't a GOOD reason for it, but it can be fun. I hope I did not become strident to the point it offended you personally.[/quote']

 

No - you didn't (and in fact I am trying to figure if I responded too strongly). I guess I got a bad flashback to the "I'm right! You're wrong!" arguments. It's been a looooong week. You had good points, although for my tastes it got a little to lawyerly, but I think we have two different styles of play.

 

We forgot "Are Druids the New Clerics (overpowered)" and "A level 20 Wizard and a level 20 cleric are having a duel. . . . ."

 

Irk. Great, now I remember....

Months of therapy, down the drain...

[Dust Raven]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I believe this was in reference to a SFX to justify increasing the DCV of a hex.

 

Nothing is so hard about that' date=' but I have yet to hear a Fx jusutification at would support giving a Hex higher DCV.[/quote']

How about: I'm warping space and making the hex you are aiming at appear much further away (actually an OCV penalty, but the same results), or I'm making the hex appear much smaller (definately a DCV mod using the size of target rules).

 

If the attacks will actually interact with the hex and surrounding hexes as if they were smaller, the end effect will be that the hex really does have a higher DCV.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

Welcome to the boards Roger!

So does anyone have a problem with this from a PC death point of view? The PC has lots of armour so goes toe-toe with a big heavy hitter. The big guy pushes because he is just nicking the hero. One good attack roll and one failed DS roll and the PC is toast.

 

Roger

I'm okay with it. I'd warn a character that with defenses being really low and relying on not actually taking a hit to remain conscious (and even alive sometimes) is dangerous. Such a character will have to use many of their actions "guarenteeing" they won't get hit (lots of Dodging, Flying Dodge, DFC and whatever else helps). Being forces to perform such actions constantly will severely reduce their opportunity to go on the offensive except against those targets they can get a massive jump on and keep them from getting a shot off in the first place.

 

If a player doesn't want to play a character like that, they'll have to change things, I'm okay with it if the player is.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I believe this was in reference to a SFX to justify increasing the DCV of a hex.

 

 

How about: I'm warping space and making the hex you are aiming at appear much further away (actually an OCV penalty, but the same results), or I'm making the hex appear much smaller (definately a DCV mod using the size of target rules).

 

If the attacks will actually interact with the hex and surrounding hexes as if they were smaller, the end effect will be that the hex really does have a higher DCV.

Here's another that's probably more familiar to anyone who's played D&D.

 

Combine the effects of a Blur spell with a Mirror Images spell and you get a 2-fold effect. To be targeted your attacker has to choose which image is the real you. Then the attacker has to actually hit the chosen image. Combining the effects by using CE as described by Dust Raven would be an quicker way of resolving the spell effects in the heat of a large combat.

 

HM

[The Hyborian]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I believe this was in reference to a SFX to justify increasing the DCV of a hex.

 

 

How about: I'm warping space and making the hex you are aiming at appear much further away (actually an OCV penalty, but the same results), or I'm making the hex appear much smaller (definately a DCV mod using the size of target rules).

 

If the attacks will actually interact with the hex and surrounding hexes as if they were smaller, the end effect will be that the hex really does have a higher DCV.

 

I still think that I would go with a change environemnt for that effect. Im not sure how you make the hex appear further away by itself. Is there an empty spot and the hex shows up over thataway? How do you make the hex look smaller by itself? Everything in it little and there is a empty gap around the outside? I woud, however, certainly allow a power that affected the perception of the attacker. One possible one would be Change Environemnt, warped spacial perception, with CV penalties. You focus it on the attacker (not the hex that you are in) and everything looks like funhouse mirrors to him, making it a bugger to aim. But doing something to the hex itself IMHO, would result in a very funny looking hex, surrounded by normal looking hexes, and would thus be no harder to hit with a hand grenade or garden hose.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I still think that I would go with a change environemnt for that effect. Im not sure how you make the hex appear further away by itself. Is there an empty spot and the hex shows up over thataway? How do you make the hex look smaller by itself? Everything in it little and there is a empty gap around the outside? I woud' date=' however, certainly allow a power that affected the perception of the attacker. One possible one would be Change Environemnt, warped spacial perception, with CV penalties. You focus it on the attacker (not the hex that you are in) and everything looks like funhouse mirrors to him, making it a bugger to aim. But doing something [i']to the hex itself[/i] IMHO, would result in a very funny looking hex, surrounded by normal looking hexes, and would thus be no harder to hit with a hand grenade or garden hose.

True, logic would inply that to appear further away from one thing, it couldn't not appear further away from the opposite direction.

 

Then again, if you are simulating an ability that defies the laws of physics or simulates magic, anything is possible.

[badger3k]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

I still think that I would go with a change environemnt for that effect. Im not sure how you make the hex appear further away by itself. Is there an empty spot and the hex shows up over thataway? How do you make the hex look smaller by itself? Everything in it little and there is a empty gap around the outside? I woud' date=' however, certainly allow a power that affected the perception of the attacker. One possible one would be Change Environemnt, warped spacial perception, with CV penalties. You focus it on the attacker (not the hex that you are in) and everything looks like funhouse mirrors to him, making it a bugger to aim. But doing something [i']to the hex itself[/i] IMHO, would result in a very funny looking hex, surrounded by normal looking hexes, and would thus be no harder to hit with a hand grenade or garden hose.

 

That's not bad, but what about the effects of having one eye. I've had the occasion to wear an eyepatch for various reasons (the last due to injury), and my depth perception did suffer a bit. The defensive CE could achieve a similar result. The object looks like it is further away (or even closer) than it actualy is, making the attacker aim further or closer. It might not help with some area attacks, depending on where they actually hit, but it might make some difference.

[The Hyborian]

Re: Question about "DANGER SENSE DODGING"

 

 

Then again, if you are simulating an ability that defies the laws of physics or simulates magic, anything is possible.

 

Thats quite true. I guess in a genre where a player might want to play a characer who turns into a big green monsters when they get angry I should not get too hung up on "realism".