Does Body, bypassing defences

[Ki-rin]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Your point above has nothing to do with why I think there should be NNDs that do BODY.

 

If a PC wants to have an attack such as Poisen Gas, or Radiation, that situation is where an NND that does BODY is relevant.

 

As for your other points above:

 

If you want to do a great deal of BODY compared to STUN, try using Limitations. You might think about a reduced STUN mulitplyer for killing attacks. And you could easily put similar limitations on normal attacks. You could try "only does 1/2 of the STUN rolled," or even "does not do STUN."

 

And that is how you do an attack which will kill you without stunning you.

You are missing the the +very+ relevant point here. Ads and Dis Ads are in HERO to provide more flexibility to the underlying basic system. If that basic system itself were more flexible, then there would be less need to create more complicated constructs to adequately simulate things. The more complicated the construct, the more likely it is to be A Problem.

 

The Ads ALVD, NND, and the Does Body modifier to them are band-aids applied to the grossly unrealistic damage system in an attempt to mask/fix a fundamental underlying problem. IMHO, it hasn't worked and the side effects of the cure have been worse than the disease.

 

 

But, getting back to the real issue here. . . .

NNDs and NNDs that Do Body, and the issues underlying and regarding why we have them, >are< the real issue of this thread.

 

 

You seem to be making an unwarrented assumption. . . .

 

Nerve Gas was only one example of an NND that does BODY which is given in the book (page 262 of the 4th Edition Book), there are others.

 

I would also include most other poisen gasses as NNDs which do BODY (with the defense being Life Support).

 

I would ALSO include Radiation as an NND which does BODY.

 

And on page 261 of the 4th edition book (The 4th paragraph down, under the heading "chemicals"): All chemical attacks are No Normal Defense attacks that do STUN and BODY damage.

 

So yes, Nerve Gas would really be no more effective than other types of similar attacks (including other Poisen Gasses, Corrosive Chemicals, and Radiation).

 

Finally, to sum it up again: The real reason that I want NNDs that do BODY is in order to simulate attacks like various types of Poisen Gas, or Corrosive Chemicals or Radiation.

 

The "real reason" you want NNDs that Do Body because there is currently no other way to simulate the effect you want with what you feel is the appropriate "reality" of effect and lethality using the current HERO system.

 

AVLD, NND, and AVLD/NND Do Body provably lead to game balance problems. They are poorly defined Ads (particularly the "what is the defense and correct frequency of the defense" part) that lead to systems abuse. They also don't always do a particularly good job of simulating certain desired effects such as VX gas. Therefore system tweaks involving them a) do not attack the real problems, and almost inevitably lead to game balance issues.

 

HERO's concepts of a) non resistant and resistant defenses, and damage being split up into an easy to heal component (STUN) and a hard to heal component (Body) are brilliant. Unfortunately, the original systems design did not take the idea far enough for all the uses we are now trying to apply it to.

 

AVLD and NND exist at all because the basic defense system treats all attacks as being external threats attempting to get through some form of "skin" to damage something. The basic system does not address attacks that bypass a "skin" so AVLD and NND were invented as band-aids. Over ~20 years the issue has remained problematic. What we need is to make less assumptions in the defense system and free ourselves from the idea that all atacks are against "skin". Then we would not need AVLD nor NND.

 

ALVDs and NNDs that Do Body exist because the basic defense system is not flexible enough and too heavily weighted towards causing easy to defend against and easy to recover from damage. A more flexible basic damage system that allows the base lethality of an attack to be more tunable fixes that and allows us to get rid of these hacks that have been the cornerstone of many play balance problems.

 

IMHO, we need could better simulate a wider variety of damage causing phenomena more cleanly and safely if we a) allowed STUN and Body causing potential to be defined independantly of each other and extended the non resistant and resistant defense concepts beyond simply "skin". I'm not yet sure what the best way is to this, but it's clear to me that it needs doing.

 

One thing this thread has convinced me of so far is that Does Body _is_ too cheap. The munchkin constructs have convinced me that NND should not be allowed to do Body. It should only be allowed on AVLD. AVLD should be a (+2) Ad and Does Body should be a (+2) modifier to AVLD. That's a band-aid not a fix, but it makes these munchkin constructs expensive enough to help slow down their adoption.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Ki-rin: "Was the change from 4th Ed to 5th Ed that allows an NND to do Body a Good, Neutral, or Bad Thing?" and "Is the Ad "Does Body" (+1) properly costed game balance wise in 5ed?"

 

That seems like a good topic, or these seem like two naturally entwined topics, to be included in this thread.

 

Related and on-topic issues for this thread would include Penetrating, Killing, Autofire, and all sorts of nasty attacks versus Power Defence. Plunging the dagger in the heart, disregarding the steel or the steel-hard skin in the way, via any mechanic you can imagine - let's hear the whole gory list, and your ideas.

 

This is my first thread. I'd really love it if discussion could remain on the topic of the ever-growing list of ways to act against BODY while bypassing defences.

 

... The desirability or usefulness of that for various games and genres, the costing and balance issues, the tendency of this to simplify and speed up or complexify and slow down the game, transparency or uncertainty about characters and powers and what they do and - stuff like that is all on-topic, but all only when connected to killing while/by bypassing defences. No big topic drift, please.

 

It's a good thing: it gives a simple enough mechanic and cost to allow you to do something in game. In practice it can be utterly devastating: a villain (Red Fist - for obvious reasons) had NND Does BODY HtH attacks (phasing fists!). Terrified the players when the indestructible brick got a stomach punch that really did punch him in the stomach! I'd never use gimmicky stuff like this to actually kill a player though, and I'd be incredibly wary of letting a player use this advantage.

 

I think the question is not so much 'should we have it' as 'should we use it'. It's a bit like nukes: you probably need some in case the other fella has some but only a fool would actually use one in anger...

 

There have been posts about the use of autofire penetrating killing attacks: they're cheaper than NND does BODY attacks and probably more dangerous in the right situation. I don't think that they should be banned, but I do think that they have to be watched and only used in appropriate situations, where the story calls for blood, there should be blood.

 

Think, though, of all those Hitchcock thrillers: when you saw the blood, something terrible was happening. Cf with your basic slasher movie: they start off ankle deep in gore and wind up drowning in it: a slasher movie can be fun to watch now and then, but the shock is something that you soon become immune to - the Psycho shower scene can still send a tingle up the spine even now.

 

I suppose that it all depends what you want in a game. I think that the inclusion of the tools in the rules is excellent, if only because it allows us to remind characters who may become jaded with their own puissance and invulnerability, that there's always someone out there that can bring them down. If the tools are used all the time, though, all you'l be doing is creating an aura of pointlessness: I'm Superman and STILL I die nearly every game...what's the point?

 

That's not a bad example in fact: if Superman gets a cut finger, or a visible bruise, it is a sign to the reader that his opponent is a world-shaker.

 

Even in games where there is a lot of blood and gore (maybe a Marshall Law type game?) I'd try and do it with construction guidelines - limiting defences etc rather than over-emphasising penetrating and Does BODY: they should still be scary attacks.

 

As for costing and balance issues, well, they are not really going to be properly costed. Take a 60 AP attack: that'll be 4d6 NND Does BODY, averaging 14 STUN and 4 BODY every time it gets through. 3 or 4 hits and the target is probably dying. Worse yet, if you've bought it as Hand Attack, it costs 40 points and you can double the damage with 20 points of strength. There is no way on Earth that could be considered a balanced attack in terms of either cost OR game effect. Moreover, I don't think that mucking about with cost is the answer: it is inherently unbalancing.

 

Mind you, that doesn't bother me: like I said these advantages only get trotted out when necessary, so the cost is, to a large extent, irrelevant. The fact that you CAN do it doesn't mean you SHOULD....and if I'm running a game, PCs who can kill with a touch are GENERALLY not welcome. If there is a good reason for the powers being used, and I don't think that it'll detract from everyone else's enjoyment (or we're doing a slasher movie game....), then fine. Otherwise, I keep it in the Box of Scary Villains, and only take it out when it'll do some good

 

...anyway, now my fingers are tired...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

AVLD and NND exist at all because the basic defense system treats all attacks as being external threats attempting to get through some form of "skin" to damage something. The basic system does not address attacks that bypass a "skin" so AVLD and NND were invented as band-aids. Over ~20 years the issue has remained problematic. What we need is to make less assumptions in the defense system and free ourselves from the idea that all atacks are against "skin". Then we would not need AVLD nor NND.

 

ALVDs and NNDs that Do Body exist because the basic defense system is not flexible enough and too heavily weighted towards causing easy to defend against and easy to recover from damage. A more flexible basic damage system that allows the base lethality of an attack to be more tunable fixes that and allows us to get rid of these hacks that have been the cornerstone of many play balance problems.

 

IMHO, we need could better simulate a wider variety of damage causing phenomena more cleanly and safely if we a) allowed STUN and Body causing potential to be defined independantly of each other and extended the non resistant and resistant defense concepts beyond simply "skin". I'm not yet sure what the best way is to this, but it's clear to me that it needs doing.

 

 

Pardon the edit if I cut out juicy stuff, but it was a long post...

 

First off, one of the things I always liked about Hero, and still do, was the damage system. STUN, BODY and different defences for each: excellent. You can punch someone and hurt them; bruises and bumps...but if you increase the power of the punch then eventually you'll do more serious (and permanent) damage.

 

The damage system is not as 'detailed' as say, RoleMaster, but that is a good thing in my opinion: the overall effect is usually in line with my expectations, and I've found the inclusion of hit location, disabling and so on tends to make the system quite believeable in terms of damage.

 

On the skin point, I hear you, but I've always thought that Damage Reduction was the way to simulate the power character that has defences all the way through: and this power is effective against AVLD and NND. I think that the basic damage system is realistic: most attacks DO go through the skin. Attacks that don't are relatively rare on the average, or ever super battlefield.

 

I'm not sure what your 'tunable' lethality means really: changing the ratio of BODY to STUN damage? Well, you can do that with low multiple killing attacks or reduced penetration normal attacks. If I'm missing the point, (which is likely) hit me with an example or two.

 

One possible modification that might address my perception of your concerns is to have ALL damage as NO DEFENCE: the damage you roll goes straight to STUN and/or BODY BUT you have to define what defences/sfx can reduce or negate the damage. Generally you'd have to define a defence as common as PD/ED but, for an advantage, you could define more esoteric defences. For a limitation you could define MORE common defences. I have no idea if that is what you are looking for...

 

The other thing on 'tunable' attacks, I suppose, is the BODY/STUN ratio. STUN only attacks are considered a -0 limitation (or is it -1/4?) We don't have a BODY-only limitation, but you could add one for (say) -1. That way you could build the exact ration of STUN/BODY that you wanted for the attack. Killing attacks already have a mechanism for tuning the STUN/BODY ratio...Having said that I can't really think of an attack that is likely to do BODY but NO STUN. Even getting hit by a radiation blast which fries your internal organs is going to effect your ability to stay conscious even if you don't actually feel any pain when the damage is done...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

One thing this thread has convinced me of so far is that Does Body _is_ too cheap. The munchkin constructs have convinced me that NND should not be allowed to do Body. It should only be allowed on AVLD. AVLD should be a (+2) Ad and Does Body should be a (+2) modifier to AVLD. That's a band-aid not a fix' date=' but it makes these munchkin constructs expensive enough to help slow down their adoption.[/quote']

 

I disagree about AVLD: at present it is +1.5. NND is +1 and is all or nothing. What that means is that a 50 AP attack has 25 AP of damage potential, or 5 dice. With AVLD it had just 4 dice of potential damage.

 

AVLD, certainly in campaigns that have progressed a way will encounter defences quite often: far more than NND will, and given the low maximum damage, even a small amount of defence will have a large proportional effect. To an extend +1.5 is too much!

 

Many munchkin builds ignore the AP limits on campaigns. I always look at AP limits and I need a darned good reason to ignore them. That's one of the safety valves in the sysytem: disconnect it at your peril.

 

Of course you can get around the AP limit with some munchkin builds (many of them involving Hand Attack! and/or autofire) BUT to say that means that Does BODY and AVLD are too cheap throws the baby out with the bathwater: you are removing the viability of otherwise perfectly legitimate and playable constructs. If you see a build with a tiny active point base power and scads of advantages, you should already be shaking your head...

 

I've said on another post that Does BODY is one to watch, and you really do need to think about that STOP sign, but making it more expensive is not the answer, to my mind. The STOP sign is another safety valve and it shouldn't be circumvented. Players can present characters with STOP powers, but shouldn't moan if they are turned down or asked to re-design them. They are there as warnings, and though the munchkins cluster round them like moths to a flame, all they'll get, like the lepidoptera they resumble, is a sore head.

[OddHat]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Many munchkin builds ignore the AP limits on campaigns. I always look at AP limits and I need a darned good reason to ignore them. That's one of the safety valves in the sysytem: disconnect it at your peril.

 

Of course you can get around the AP limit with some munchkin builds (many of them involving Hand Attack! and/or autofire) BUT to say that means that Does BODY and AVLD are too cheap throws the baby out with the bathwater: you are removing the viability of otherwise perfectly legitimate and playable constructs. If you see a build with a tiny active point base power and scads of advantages, you should already be shaking your head...

 

I've said on another post that Does BODY is one to watch, and you really do need to think about that STOP sign, but making it more expensive is not the answer, to my mind. The STOP sign is another safety valve and it shouldn't be circumvented. Players can present characters with STOP powers, but shouldn't moan if they are turned down or asked to re-design them. They are there as warnings, and though the munchkins cluster round them like moths to a flame, all they'll get, like the lepidoptera they resumble, is a sore head.

 

Agreed. I'd add that the ultimate answer to any build you don't want in your campaign is to look at the player and say "No". There are legitimate uses for nerve gas bombs or global mind control satellites in some campaigns and settings, though almost never (IME) in the hands of players. That's where GM decision making comes in, and where Hero ceases to be a simple numbers game. If you do need to know exactly how many active points the Nude Bomb is built on, Hero should be able to model it; that doesn't mean that you as GM are obligated to let players deploy it.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Too bad you can't buy the Does BODY Advantage as a Naked Advantage for your Presence and do BODY damage with a Presence Attack.

 

Does BODY can't be bought for attacks that don't normally do STUN; is there a way (other than buying an Ego Attack Triggered by a Presence Attack) to get an attack (like Flash or a PRE Attack) that doesn't normally do STUN to do STUN? I don't recall ever seeing a "Does STUN" Advantage...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Too bad you can't buy the Does BODY Advantage as a Naked Advantage for your Presence and do BODY damage with a Presence Attack.

 

Does BODY can't be bought for attacks that don't normally do STUN; is there a way (other than buying an Ego Attack Triggered by a Presence Attack) to get an attack (like Flash or a PRE Attack) that doesn't normally do STUN to do STUN? I don't recall ever seeing a "Does STUN" Advantage...

 

I'm already shaking my head....

[Sean Waters]

Just say NO!

 

Agreed. I'd add that the ultimate answer to any build you don't want in your campaign is to look at the player and say "No". There are legitimate uses for nerve gas bombs or global mind control satellites in some campaigns and settings' date=' though almost never (IME) in the hands of players. That's where GM decision making comes in, and where Hero ceases to be a simple numbers game. If you do need to know exactly how many active points the Nude Bomb is built on, Hero should be able to model it; that doesn't mean that you as GM are obligated to let players deploy it.[/quote']

 

Perhaps there ought to be a short chapter in the GM section: Head shaking exercises and the proper position of the lips for pronouncing the perfunctory negative.

 

I quite agree that there are things the players generally shouldn't have access to (except as a target for their EB, perhaps). There was an article in one of the old Champions supliments (possibly one of the Almanacs) featuring characters you shouldn't allow. I'll always fondly remember the Landlord: spent all his points on base and followers with enough doublings to own the Earth and every normal on it. You try and attack and he'll evict you. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

[David Blue]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

I can't see a way through with Presence. Darn.

 

What I'm looking at myself now is Martial Throw: STR+v/5, target falls. The ideal would be to get that strength to do BODY, bypassing defences, and get the v/5 to stack as that, the way Hand-to-Hand Attack (no normal defence, does Body and Always Add Autofire) stacks with STR. I can't see a way to do it, but the incentive is v/5.

 

Of course Martial Manoeuvres can already be no normal defence (NND) (Choke Hold), so making a few to do BODY is only proper and right. But it's not very impressive compared to a strong HAND. (Hand attack, Autofire, No normal defence, Diee!!)

 

Combat Luck stops damage, right? Can you see any objection to an attack versus limited defences (AVLD) against Combat Luck? (Built with the usuals of course.) It looks very reasonable to me.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

I can't see a way through with Presence. Darn.

 

What I'm looking at myself now is Martial Throw: STR+v/5, target falls. The ideal would be to get that strength to do BODY, bypassing defences, and get the v/5 to stack as that, the way Hand-to-Hand Attack (no normal defence, does Body and Always Add Autofire) stacks with STR. I can't see a way to do it, but the incentive is v/5.

 

Of course Martial Manoeuvres can already be no normal defence (NND) (Choke Hold), so making a few to do BODY is only proper and right. But it's not very impressive compared to a strong HAND. (Hand attack, Autofire, No normal defence, Diee!!)

 

Combat Luck stops damage, right? Can you see any objection to an attack versus limited defences (AVLD) against Combat Luck? (Built with the usuals of course.) It looks very reasonable to me.

 

 

Naked power advantage for your martial arts throw would do it.

 

You would need an EB linked to your PRE attack to do damage with it, but I can't imagine how you'd justify it.

 

As for combat luck, the sfx is that the attack missed, but sfx do not overule build - if the combat luck build did not contain the right defence then AVLD would work fine. I can see combat luck being a defence to an NND attack though - the only defence is that the attack didn't hit!

[OddHat]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Naked power advantage for your martial arts throw would do it.

 

You would need an EB linked to your PRE attack to do damage with it, but I can't imagine how you'd justify it.

 

Muscle spasms or a heart attack induced by lust or terror.

 

Busty Gal unleashes her Deadly Shimmy, and every male in the room sprains his neck.

[David Blue]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Naked power advantage for your martial arts throw would do it.

Good, an easy one.

 

You would need an EB linked to your PRE attack to do damage with it' date=' but I can't imagine how you'd justify it.[/quote']Mighty Endowed was able to knock people over and/or Flash them with her awesome presents - ah Presence - so, there's impact (soft impact?) there, Knockback anyway. Meaning Energy Blast (with advantages) linked to Presence Attack, meaning Femme Fatale strikes!!

 

As for combat luck' date=' the sfx is that the attack missed, but sfx do not overule build - if the combat luck build did not contain the right defence then AVLD would work fine. I can see combat luck being a defence to an NND attack though - the only defence is that the attack didn't hit![/quote']This is fun.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Well, there's nothing at all to keep you from buying Does Knockback and then Double Knockback on a Presence attack, but it won't directly get damage past defenses.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Muscle spasms or a heart attack induced by lust or terror.

 

Busty Gal unleashes her Deadly Shimmy, and every male in the room sprains his neck.

 

 

NND: Defence: gay male/straight female/blind/leg man

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

 

Mighty Endowed was able to knock people over and/or Flash them with her awesome presents - ah Presence - so, there's impact (soft impact?) there, Knockback anyway. Meaning Energy Blast (with advantages) linked to Presence Attack, meaning Femme Fatale strikes!!

 

 

Hmm. Double entendre attacks. For the sake of all that's holy, no one mention reduced penetration.....

[David Blue]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Agreed. I'd add that the ultimate answer to any build you don't want in your campaign is to look at the player and say "No".

Hero is a very, very difficult game. I'm trying to introduce some new players to it now, and they've gone into shock, which upset me - I don't like my players, including one who I know from Amber to be a red-hot roleplayer, to be shocked like that, and lobbying me to pick a simpler system.

 

Champions is extraordinarily difficult to balance. Extraordinarily difficult. I have seen new-budding games die in one session. I saw one, to be run my a highly intelligent player expert in several systems, ended with the very first attack (a massive gliding area effect move-through that he hadn't realised was possible).

 

Gamemasters disregard the rules all the time. If not, they get into terrible trouble. If they do they get into trouble in other ways, but still, for example, disregard for the essential restrictions on Elemental Controls seems normal, even among the most expert players.

 

Players who don't avail themselves of this weakness often lose out, because the system is too hard to expect gamemasters to run it fairly and reliably. And they often don't. "On balance...when no one else follows it." was a very pointed and totally valid thread recently. That's how it is.

 

Given that the gamemasters are on the whole very far from being able just to say "No." always and only when they should, I don't think "Just say no!" covers everything. I don't think it's all the justification the present rules need.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

For new players, I build the characters for them and leave the build numbers off: all they get is a character sheet with, basically, what they can do, including a simplified version of the manoeuvres chart.

 

The game is NOT difficult to play: no more so than any other rpg in my experience. If can be difficult to get your head round building a balanced and workable character, so that's why I don't let them go through that step until they've played a bit.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Gamemasters disregard the rules all the time. If not, they get into terrible trouble. If they do they get into trouble in other ways, but still, for example, disregard for the essential restrictions on Elemental Controls seems normal, even among the most expert players.

 

Players who don't avail themselves of this weakness often lose out, because the system is too hard to expect gamemasters to run it fairly and reliably. And they often don't. "On balance...when no one else follows it." was a very pointed and totally valid thread recently. That's how it is.

 

You're quite right: experienced GMs often ignore the rules, but then they have a decent idea of what the consequences will be. I stick by the rules pretty tight. I use AP maxima, all the restrictions on ECs, the whole nine yards. I have not found that this causes me problems in running or balancing the game, but then I have quite a conservative approach to the system, and the way in which it is used to build characters. I'm pretty good at spotting trouble a way off, and adapting to it if I don't, but I don't change the rules - I'll find an ingame way of smoothing things out, if I can, or extreme, localised violence if I can't

[David Blue]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

You're quite right: experienced GMs often ignore the rules' date=' but then they have a decent idea of what the consequences will be. I stick by the rules pretty tight. I use AP maxima, all the restrictions on ECs, the whole nine yards. I have not found that this causes me problems in running or balancing the game, but then I have quite a conservative approach to the system, and the way in which it is used to build characters. I'm pretty good at spotting trouble a way off, and adapting to it if I don't, but I don't change the rules - I'll find an ingame way of smoothing things out, if I can, or extreme, localised violence if I can't [/quote']I feel the same.

 

But to an inexperienced and weakly oriented or disoriented gamemaster or player, even a +4 advantage with a tiny base need not raise any red flags.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

I feel the same.

 

But to an inexperienced and weakly oriented or disoriented gamemaster or player, even a +4 advantage with a tiny base need not raise any red flags.

 

It will the second time

 

 

...if, I suppose, there is one...

[OddHat]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

I feel the same.

 

But to an inexperienced and weakly oriented or disoriented gamemaster or player, even a +4 advantage with a tiny base need not raise any red flags.

 

An inexperienced, weakly oriented, dioriented gamemaster is going to frack up no matter what happens. Then the learning process kicks in. "Don't do this" is the best advice a game designer can offer.

[OddHat]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Hero is a very' date=' very difficult game. I'm trying to introduce some new players to it now, and they've gone into shock, which upset me - I don't like my players, including one who I know from Amber to be a red-hot roleplayer, to be shocked like that, and lobbying me to pick a simpler system.[/quote']

 

I don't find it all that more complicated than any other system, though it can look that way when presented with all the mechanics showing. My wife had a great time playing Hero for years before learning how to build characters.

 

Sidekick, Hero Designer, pre-made characters, CKC and the USPDB will (IMO) greatly simplify the lives of any new GM's and players interested in Hero.

 

Champions is extraordinarily difficult to balance. Extraordinarily difficult. I have seen new-budding games die in one session. I saw one, to be run my a highly intelligent player expert in several systems, ended with the very first attack (a massive gliding area effect move-through that he hadn't realised was possible).

 

Then you should have aid "no". That's the learning curve for you.

 

In all seriousness, that sort of problem is why I make or carefully audit all characters both for my FtF and my online game. It greatly cuts down on that type of surprise.

 

Gamemasters disregard the rules all the time. If not, they get into terrible trouble. If they do they get into trouble in other ways, but still, for example, disregard for the essential restrictions on Elemental Controls seems normal, even among the most expert players.

 

I'd say this comes down to play style. I enfore the rules very strictly during character creation, and strictly within the bounds of what I consider logic and good storytelling when GMing. The only rules I do change I doccument. YMMV.

 

Players who don't avail themselves of this weakness often lose out, because the system is too hard to expect gamemasters to run it fairly and reliably. And they often don't. "On balance...when no one else follows it." was a very pointed and totally valid thread recently. That's how it is.

 

I disagree here. My players don't "lose out", but then I'm much more in it for the story than the war-game, and again I try to make sure that every player has an effective character. As to "too hard to run fairly and reliably", I can recal major rules abuses in every game system I played in my teens and twenties, as well as grossly unfair GMs.

 

Given that the gamemasters are on the whole very far from being able just to say "No." always and only when they should, I don't think "Just say no!" covers everything. I don't think it's all the justification the present rules need.

 

It has nothing to do with justification; a broken rule should be fixed, if it's the rule rather than the application of that rule that's broken. As to saying "no", it covers the situation perfectly when players hand the GM a character that he considers broken, or try to twist a rule in a way he considers abusive.

[casualplayer]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Hero is a very' date=' very difficult game. I'm trying to introduce some new players to it now, and they've gone into shock, which upset me - I don't like my players, including one who I know from Amber to be a red-hot roleplayer, to be shocked like that, and lobbying me to pick a simpler system.[/quote']

 

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Lots of people love to ride motorcycles. Some love to tune their bikes, adjusting the points just so. Some dislike even knowing their bike has points.

 

Going from Amber (Diceless! RPG) to HERO, without an intermediate step, is a huge leap. Try to minimize the high rolling action of HERO by having the player roll 3d6 a couple dozen times before the game even starts and record them. Then when a roll would be called for in a non-vital situation just cross off one of the pre-rolls and describe the results. Speeds up the play immensely.

 

Character creation can be a grind, if building ships in a bottle is not your thing. Let the non-interested player go on a shopping spree through published material and find someone that looks interesting. A nip here, a tuck there and Sapphire becomes Delta V, inertia queen. Why build from the ground up when you can get by with a remodeling?

 

As far as NND Does BODY goes, there are too many real world examples for it not to exist or be too costly. As it sits right now it is too costly, mostly because people have been getting away with not defining a broad enough set of defenses that work against their NND. Venoms should have more anti-venoms than just the appropriate Life Support. NNDs tend to emphasize the aspect of the game that HERO is supposed to avoid, special effect vs. special effect, and whenever conflict isn't clearly illustrated in the rules there is a huge chance of a breakdown. Kinda a Cowboys and Indians "I shot you" "You missed" "I shot you!" thing.

 

I have an alternate way for NNDs in mind, but it's not ready for posting yet. And anyway, why muddy the waters further?

[David Blue]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

Hoy, someone's derailing my thread! I think it's ... me. Bad me, no biscuit!

 

(Lotsa helpful and much-appreciated advice snipped. Thanks to all.)

 

As far as NND Does BODY goes' date=' there are too many real world examples for it not to exist or be too costly. As it sits right now it is too costly, mostly because people have been getting away with not defining a broad enough set of defenses that work against their NND. Venoms should have more anti-venoms than just the appropriate Life Support. NNDs tend to emphasize the aspect of the game that HERO is supposed to avoid, special effect vs. special effect, and whenever conflict isn't clearly illustrated in the rules there is a huge chance of a breakdown. Kinda a Cowboys and Indians "I shot you" "You missed" "I shot you!" thing.[/quote']So, you would like NNDs that do body to be more limited by numerous defences, and cheaper?

 

Does it not work right to just take a limitation for having an extra defence that works against the attack? It looks to me that it works very well, at the end of the does BODY, bypassing defence construct.

[David Blue]

Re: Does Body, bypassing defences

 

I'd like to ask: how much of all this do you think is "about right"?

 

I speak as a repentant sinner on the topic of setting up lots of blood-spurting, soul-reaving scenarios. (It comes of starting with a game that combined supers with Call of Cthulu.) For me, after much bloody experimentation, "about right" is when your players want to buy a few points of extra BODY if it fits their character's conception, because they know they are likely to need it. (It everyone has BODY 10 because they know they won't need more, the game is not violent enough.) "Go Back, Wrong Way" is when your players want Regeneration. (Or Healing, and/or Automaton powers.)

 

And it matters dramatically how people take BODY. For me, really intense violence was the right way. (Though Killing Attacks not really, if only because of the STUN lottery.) It didn't seem to work right, for me or my players, to be bypassing defences. (If the villains get to be gee-wow effective by bypassing defences to do deadly damage, the implication is obvious.) Of course, everyone's mileage would vary on that.

 

If you want "gasses" (toxic dispersants), Satan Bug scenarios and so on, your priorities need to be different, even reversed. It may even be good to encourage your players to develop some technical skills. And - maybe you need these attacks to be cheap enough that your evil masterminds can easily manage them in your tool kits and the players can fight back?

 

I never liked drains and Power Defence (or Absorption) the way they work in Champions, still don't. I used them to build killer powers in Superworld, then lost all interest in them. Everyone's fascinated with PD and to some extent ED "invulnerability", but how can you be fascinated and awed by whatever it is that Power Defence simulates? The whole field feels like deadly rules-mongering to me.

 

So I'd be interested to hear from those who have more experience with these attacks - about how much is right and how much is too much, especially with going through Power Defence (in various ways) to BODY. What do you want to see that tells you this is working right for you, and what do you not want to see?