No more "Abort to Dodge?"

[sbarron]

Has anyone considered removing the option of aborting to defensive actions from their games? What got me thinking about this are the several threads that have sprung up recently discussing perceived problems with the SPD chart. Many of the problems seems to boil down to players taking advantage of the way aborting to dive for cover and dodge work, and looking for ways to stop it.

 

So I started thinking about the SPD chart and combat. To me, combat involves everyone acting as quickly as they are physically able to take actions (offensive and defensive) against their opponents (with the understanding that they can go slower if they want, but never faster than they can). The only thing that prevents the speed chart from perfectly representing this idea is the ability to abort future actions for current defensive actions. If everyone is doing things as quickly as they can (each time their phase comes up), then suddenly being able to act sooner (aborting) doesn't seem to make much sense.

 

So has anyone given this a try, or thought about why it works the way it does? Or how about the ramification of removing the ability to abort?

 

Thanks!

[Guest Champsguy]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

No, because I view combat differently. Your Speed represents how quickly you can make intelligent, measured actions. You've surveyed the situation, and made a conscious decision and action. You're not just flinging yourself about wildly.

 

In a real fight, people take brief moments to size each other up, to stand back and think "Hmm... that didn't work. I'll try this!" With aborting, you're just getting out of the way. It's instinctive. There's no decision making other than "Oh crap!"

[austenandrews]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

I attribute the "act as quickly as possible" idea to player impatience. Most players can't stand to waste Phases and many can't even be bothered to Delay. But as I see it SPD represents how frequently you can act - say, about three times every twelve seconds. It doesn't (and can't, really) define exactly how much time must pass before your next action can occur. Myself, I think Delays are an integral part of an experienced combatant's repertoire in real life. And Aborts are a close cousin to Delays, in that they both represent actions a little closer together in time than average.

 

Basically, I don't see the problem that some do with "gaming the SPD chart" if it's not done egregiously, since I think it maps to a lot of real-world behavior.

[Dust Raven]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

Well, between Champsguy and Austenandrews I have little to add other than "I agree with them."

 

I've never experience a problem using the SPD chart and initiative rules as long as they've been used by the book. It's only when someone introduced a hourse rule that things get funky and there become special situations and things that you can't do or things that you can do that you should't be able to.

[Trebuchet]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

I'd oppose this idea for two reasons:

 

1) It would severely penalize martial artists and other characters who depend on Dive for Cover and other defensive actions to protect themselves.

 

2) It would almost inevitably lead to DEX and SPD "arms races" as characters would need more actual Phases to act defensively.

[BNakagawa]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

I am thinking it would just cause people who rely on aborting actions to stay conscious and/or alive to just delay all the time and use their held actions to dodge/dfc when needed or to move/attack at the last instant before their next phase comes up.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

I am thinking it would just cause people who rely on aborting actions to stay conscious and/or alive to just delay all the time and use their held actions to dodge/dfc when needed or to move/attack at the last instant before their next phase comes up.

 

Thisis no better - still metagaming. "Oh, I'll wait until Dex 0 on Phase 3 and then I'll act so IO don't lose my Phase 4 move". How do you know when "Dex 0" is?

 

For that matter, the guy who held his Phase 3 can now fire at you at Dex 150 on Phase 4, and you can't abort to a defensive action. nyah nyah!

 

You can pretty much bury non-persistent defense powers as well. "Since I can't abort to activate my force field, the Martial Artist takes my head off at 35 DEX in Segment 12, as combat begins."

[CBikle]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

I think you'll see a lot more metagaming involved with held phases and it'll make combat seem even more predictable. You'll need to rethink how you do maneuvers like Dive For Cover ,Blocks and Missile Deflection.

 

It will make the Haymaker maneuver very popular again though.

[Kickingent]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

I don't always agree with aborting, but when you do use aborting, there's metagaming usually anyway. Aborting makes for a more cinematic game, however calling the fact that your aborting can still be metagaming. Its ultimately how the GM regulates its use.

[lapsedgamer]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

Thisis no better - still metagaming. "Oh, I'll wait until Dex 0 on Phase 3 and then I'll act so IO don't lose my Phase 4 move". How do you know when "Dex 0" is?

 

For that matter, the guy who held his Phase 3 can now fire at you at Dex 150 on Phase 4, and you can't abort to a defensive action. nyah nyah!

 

You can pretty much bury non-persistent defense powers as well. "Since I can't abort to activate my force field, the Martial Artist takes my head off at 35 DEX in Segment 12, as combat begins."

 

I don't always agree with aborting' date=' but when you do use aborting, there's metagaming usually anyway. Aborting makes for a more cinematic game, however calling the fact that your aborting can still be metagaming. Its ultimately how the GM regulates its use.[/quote']

 

I don't think that using the SPD chart to your advantage is really metagaming. It's up to the players and GMs to make the combat fun instead of just dice rolls and marking off damage. It's all in the way you see things.

 

If I'm fighting in real life, I am planning as much as possible as I go. I watch for an opening, or a back off to catch my breath, or I see as blow coming and decide to block or evade it rather than attack.

 

It's much more fun to say "I've seen what that Mega Blast can do. I can't afford to get once" than to say, "I know he's got about 5D6 in that Killing attack and my armor and combat luck only add up to 10 resistant, so I'll abort my next phase and dodge."

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

I'd oppose this idea for two reasons:

 

1) It would severely penalize martial artists and other characters who depend on Dive for Cover and other defensive actions to protect themselves.

 

2) It would almost inevitably lead to DEX and SPD "arms races" as characters would need more actual Phases to act defensively.

 

3) It would likely result in some dead characters.

[Greywind]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

3) It would likely result in some dead characters.

Nothing wrong with that. Ask the Harbinger of Justice.

[prestidigitator]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

Better disallow all Multiple Attacks as well if the problems you have with Abort have to do with being able to act faster than normal.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

Holy 5 year old thread resurrection!

[dmjalund]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

3) It would likely result in some dead characters.

Nothing wrong with that. Ask the Harbinger of Justice.

It would likely result in some dead HEROES

[Greywind]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

It would likely result in some dead HEROES

According to Stick Figure Theater, Harbinger of Justice saw everyone as experience points.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

No. If you removed the reactive nature of HERO System combat and the impact it has on tactics, I would remove myself from the game.

[Reality]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

One way to resolve the abuse of Abort to Dodge and similar issues is for the GM to make such actions more expensive by declaring that such actions always cost Endurance, or even double Endurance. This would represent the extra effort a character makes to act faster than normal.

 

Another is to limit the number of Aborts a character can make per Turn, say to no more than two per Turn. This second option would penalize high-Speed characters more than low-Speed ones, but it's probably the high-Speed characters you have to worry about, anyway (you know, kind of like taxing the rich more than the poor).

 

Of course, you could implement both options if you wanted to be cruel about it.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

non-Martial Art combat maneuvers already cost a minimum of 1 END to use.

 

from 6e2 page 54:

Using a Combat Maneuver typically costs 1 END (see 6E2 131), and the character also has to pay the END cost for any STR or power used with the Maneuver.

[Greywind]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

One way to resolve the abuse of Abort to Dodge and similar issues is for the GM to make such actions more expensive by declaring that such actions always cost Endurance, or even double Endurance. This would represent the extra effort a character makes to act faster than normal.

 

Another is to limit the number of Aborts a character can make per Turn, say to no more than two per Turn. This second option would penalize high-Speed characters more than low-Speed ones, but it's probably the high-Speed characters you have to worry about, anyway (you know, kind of like taxing the rich more than the poor).

 

Of course, you could implement both options if you wanted to be cruel about it.

I find the loss of an offensive option for the duration is more than enough penalty for an abort.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

I find the loss of an offensive option for the duration is more than enough penalty for an abort.

 

That penalty is paid if you Dodge on your phase or Abort to accelerate that phase. That said, however, there is a penalty for aborting. When you Abort to Dodge, you lose the opportunity to take a half phase action, and any number of 0 phase actions, before Dodging, which you could have done in your own phase. That's the cost of accelerating your next action - you can't take any non-defensive actions. To me, that cost is quite adequate to discourage excessive use of Aborting.

 

Of course, it can be abused. So can timing your actions. I've had a number of groups discover how effective it is to surround the Big Bad, with each character reserving until the Big Bad commits to an action. Whoever is targeted uses an immediate defensive action to reduce the chance of taking damage. The rest attack. One character low on STUN? He backs out of the fight and takes a couple of recoveries while the rest of the team covers for him and keeps the Big Bad busy. Once players break the overwhelming addiction to attacking each and every phase, they can become a much more effective team.

[Fireg0lem]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

Of course' date=' it can be abused. So can timing your actions. I've had a number of groups discover how effective it is to surround the Big Bad, with each character reserving until the Big Bad commits to an action. Whoever is targeted uses an immediate defensive action to reduce the chance of taking damage. The rest attack. One character low on STUN? He backs out of the fight and takes a couple of recoveries while the rest of the team covers for him and keeps the Big Bad busy. Once players break the overwhelming addiction to attacking each and every phase, they can become a much more effective team.[/quote']

 

Where we differ is that I don't think this is bad, and in fact it's a lot of what I like about HERO combat.

[Escafarc]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

That penalty is paid if you Dodge on your phase or Abort to accelerate that phase. That said, however, there is a penalty for aborting. When you Abort to Dodge, you lose the opportunity to take a half phase action, and any number of 0 phase actions, before Dodging, which you could have done in your own phase. That's the cost of accelerating your next action - you can't take any non-defensive actions. To me, that cost is quite adequate to discourage excessive use of Aborting.

 

Of course, it can be abused. So can timing your actions. I've had a number of groups discover how effective it is to surround the Big Bad, with each character reserving until the Big Bad commits to an action. Whoever is targeted uses an immediate defensive action to reduce the chance of taking damage. The rest attack. One character low on STUN? He backs out of the fight and takes a couple of recoveries while the rest of the team covers for him and keeps the Big Bad busy. Once players break the overwhelming addiction to attacking each and every phase, they can become a much more effective team.

 

Where we differ is that I don't think this is bad' date=' and in fact it's a lot of what I like about HERO combat.[/quote']

 

I agree with Fireg0lem. I think anything that encourgages teamwork is good. In my group I have two players who have been playing since the late '70s who still haven't gotten the concept of teamwork(or Tactics for that matter) regardless of the game.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

Where we differ is that I don't think this is bad' date=' and in fact it's a lot of what I like about HERO combat.[/quote']

 

I agree with Fireg0lem. I think anything that encourgages teamwork is good. In my group I have two players who have been playing since the late '70s who still haven't gotten the concept of teamwork(or Tactics for that matter) regardless of the game.

 

I don't have a concern with such tactics. But I also don't believe there is any reason to eliminate Aborting. That said, if the Heroes all reserve waiting for the Bad Guy to attack, and the Bad Guy reserves so he can respond to the Heroes' tactics, it's going to be a long, dull battle.

 

hmmmm

 

GM: Well, it's now been 150 Turns since the combat began, and each of you stands, waiting for the other to make the first move. Suddenly, Bad Guy cocks his head, then smiles, and accelerates into flight. GadgetGuy's radio has picked up a transmission. "Boss, you wuz right - we just walked in, grabbed the OmniMaguffin and walked out again while dem Super Goodies was tryin to stare you down! We's back at the base now!"

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: No more "Abort to Dodge?"

 

That penalty is paid if you Dodge on your phase or Abort to accelerate that phase. That said, however, there is a penalty for aborting. When you Abort to Dodge, you lose the opportunity to take a half phase action, and any number of 0 phase actions, before Dodging, which you could have done in your own phase. That's the cost of accelerating your next action - you can't take any non-defensive actions. To me, that cost is quite adequate to discourage excessive use of Aborting.

 

Of course, it can be abused. So can timing your actions. I've had a number of groups discover how effective it is to surround the Big Bad, with each character reserving until the Big Bad commits to an action. Whoever is targeted uses an immediate defensive action to reduce the chance of taking damage. The rest attack. One character low on STUN? He backs out of the fight and takes a couple of recoveries while the rest of the team covers for him and keeps the Big Bad busy. Once players break the overwhelming addiction to attacking each and every phase, they can become a much more effective team.

 

On the contrary -- I don't see anything abusive about PC's working together. I find it makes the game more enjoyable and gets everyone more involved in the action. As a GM, I'd give out extra XP for this kind of teamwork.

 

[hyperbole]And when I'm not the GM, some of the groups I've played with have had me ready to give up vital organs for this kind of teamwork! This thing called "teamwork" isn't abusive; it's a rare and beautiful phenomenon among gamers which is to be cherished whenever they pull their heads out of their collective butts long enough to think of something beyond their own character's next phase, which is... almost never![/hyperbole]