Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

The best house rule I have ever seen for Hero, bar none, applies to this. (It's not mine, so I can't take credit for it, but I don't remember who came up with it.)

 

If the weapon has Real Weapon, and the rDEF does not have Real Armor, then it does no (edit) STUN if it does no (edit) BODY.

 

Real Weapon vs. Real Armor, or no Real Weapon vs. no Real Armor, everything works the way it normally does.

I like this....it gives a bit more game rules effect to the "Real" limitations.

I'm also thinking about adopting the 20 stun damage +1 body blunt trauma rule mentioned in another thread, probably again for "real" armor only.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

I like this....it gives a bit more game rules effect to the "Real" limitations.

I'm also thinking about adopting the 20 stun damage +1 body blunt trauma rule mentioned in another thread, probably again for "real" armor only.

 

The 1 For 20 Rule is something I began using maybe seven years ago. It was a specific, genre breaking idea I wanted in my games. I wanted High Defense characters to have a chance to be "injured" by high powered attacks. The classic Hulk vs. Thing bit... where the Hulk can actually get a black-eye or cracked rib... the Thing can get a broken hand or damaged knee.

 

In Play Experience, it tends to do two things... 1) signify a really hard hit, even if no Con Stun or Unconsciousness takes place... and 2) provide that "I've been in a fight!" bruized and battered feel, after a fight, as Heroes limp away with minus one or two Body, and though they were never in danger of dying, that means they are down one or two stun until that Body heals.

 

Again... more 4-Color games have no need of this... but it has provided a little bit grittier "feel" in my games... so that no attack is 100% safe (even NND will do a Body if it does 20 stun or more... Ego Blasts often leave ears leaking blood, etc.) and reinforces that violence has consequences. Thus, I love the rule for what I want in my game.

[zornwil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

I like this: it makes a lot of sense and differentiates between 'real' and non-real stuff, especially if you allow 'real' equipment to be picked up without spending XP. Looks a bit daft if you are using a 6d6 RKA 'real' explosive artillery shell against someone with a flak jacket they didn't buy with 'real' but there you go...it's pretty good for handguns and you might want to rule that it only applies if the BODY rolled doesn't exceed the unreal rDEF.

 

Killjoy Kristopher says everything is real in his games, which is fine, but this quite simple approach smooths out one of my biggest gripes in the game: not so much killing attacks, but normal guns built as killing attacks that can hurt characters that should (IMO, and in-genre) be invulnerable to them. Some people seem to believe that either handguns are far more powerful than they really are or that superheroes are far weaker than they (un)really are

I've heard of some variation where Real Weapons are ALwAYs standard effect, and stun multiple is 3x.

 

PS (accidentally hit a button too soon), I would add that I like the "Real Weapon" construct, I think in general it's useful in supers and High Fantasy and other ultra-powered games. I haven't made good advantage of it, though.

[zornwil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

The 1 For 20 Rule is something I began using maybe seven years ago. It was a specific, genre breaking idea I wanted in my games. I wanted High Defense characters to have a chance to be "injured" by high powered attacks. The classic Hulk vs. Thing bit... where the Hulk can actually get a black-eye or cracked rib... the Thing can get a broken hand or damaged knee.

 

In Play Experience, it tends to do two things... 1) signify a really hard hit, even if no Con Stun or Unconsciousness takes place... and 2) provide that "I've been in a fight!" bruized and battered feel, after a fight, as Heroes limp away with minus one or two Body, and though they were never in danger of dying, that means they are down one or two stun until that Body heals.

 

Again... more 4-Color games have no need of this... but it has provided a little bit grittier "feel" in my games... so that no attack is 100% safe (even NND will do a Body if it does 20 stun or more... Ego Blasts often leave ears leaking blood, etc.) and reinforces that violence has consequences. Thus, I love the rule for what I want in my game.

My games are more 4-color than not, but this sounds interesting as a possible application, and not just for PCs of course but for NPCs. It would add a new, possibly decent dimension. Then again, I consider a lot of things I don't end up doing, so we'll see, anyway... wait, I would certainly consider it in my Disavowed, grittier modern occult detective thing, yes, it would fit perfectly there and the players would "get it" in that context, probably too much "extra" bookkeeping for supers for too little value - yeah, I think that's it...

 

But I'm not sure I understand it - how is this actually applied in detail? Is it 1 BOD gets through for every 20 STuN? I noticed you included NND, are there ANY exceptions (aside from possibly obvious SFX)?

 

PS - and it's for STUN actual DAMAGE, correct, not just STUN inflicted but prevented from being taken as damage due to defenses?

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

My games are more 4-color than not, but this sounds interesting as a possible application, and not just for PCs of course but for NPCs. It would add a new, possibly decent dimension. Then again, I consider a lot of things I don't end up doing, so we'll see, anyway... wait, I would certainly consider it in my Disavowed, grittier modern occult detective thing, yes, it would fit perfectly there and the players would "get it" in that context, probably too much "extra" bookkeeping for supers for too little value - yeah, I think that's it...

 

But I'm not sure I understand it - how is this actually applied in detail? Is it 1 BOD gets through for every 20 STuN? I noticed you included NND, are there ANY exceptions (aside from possibly obvious SFX)?

 

PS - and it's for STUN actual DAMAGE, correct, not just STUN inflicted but prevented from being taken as damage due to defenses?

I don't know how the rule was written in Fuzion (*shudders*...I can't believe that there is actually a rule from Fuzion I'm considering using....) But I'd play it on an attack by attack basis... every 20 stun inflicted in an attack, through defences = +1 body damage minimum (if more body penetrates then don't add additional body). No extra bookkeeping, and allows a bit of Body damage in a Supers game, something that seems to be lacking, especially from Normal attacks. IME, Body damage in champs games tends to come very rarely, but then in big chunks, unless taking body is part of a characters Shtick (wolverine clones and the like).

[RDU Neil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

I had no idea this was in Fuzion (never played it) I discussed it online before Fuzion every came out (way back on a Compuserve board) and have used it for a long time since.

 

1 Body damage done for every 20 stun AFTER defenses.

 

I do add that Body on top of any Body damage actually done normally... It makes KAs vs. unarmored opponents a touch more deadly, without increasing the damage classes.

 

So far, I've made no exceptions in terms of 20 Stun = 1 body. A gas attack... your lungs are mildly scorched. An Ego blast... it ruptured some blood vessels (a'la Scanners, but milder)... A taser? Burns at the spot where the darts hit, or maybe you pulled a muscle in convulsion... whatever.

 

What I really like is that it makes CvK heroes even more hesitant to use full force attacks. None of this "I throw 12 dice around 'cause it's normal dalmage! They won't die!" Now, a weak enough target will take 1 or even 2 more Body on top of whatever got through regularly.

 

It allows martial artists to really beat each-other up... not just do stun.

 

It helps establish things like in Ultimate Spider-Man, where Peter has to worry about being bruised or beat-up after a fight, to keep his secret ID.

 

A brick could technically beat another Brick to death (if he kept hitting him after he was down) where this was totall impossible in many cases, before.

 

All in all, I love, I use it all the time... and I forget it's not a regular rule until someone reminds me.

 

Fuzion... huh? Who knew?

[zornwil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

RDU Neil or AmadanNaBriona or anyone, what about Damage Reduction, before or after? Thanks.

[zornwil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

PS - I thinik you guys might be selling me on it even for Champions, then again I'm easily influenced when drinking beer in a bar (the hotel has wireless).

 

Light of day, I dunno, I am partial to damage the way it works in Champions (specifically), but much of what you say makes sense and I do always run a semi-realistic and semi-fantastic game (so which way to go?). And there's a problem (for me) in introducing a mechanic for a superhero game which has no effect other than essentially cosmetic. I grant the rare case of a brick with high DEF being beaten on to no effect, but if the attack is STUN only or less than defenses, I'm not sure it really should do any damage, anyway, except for allowing for hitting vital spots and the like (SFX) on a helpless target.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

RDU Neil or AmadanNaBriona or anyone' date=' what about Damage Reduction, before or after? Thanks.[/quote']

 

I tend to go "before" which mean DR often negates this effect... but then I very, VERY rarely allow DR for PCs... and only the big bads tend to get it... or I reduce normal defeneses.

 

My general rule of thumb with DR is 75% no way. 50% only if you have 10 TOTAL defenses or less. 25% if you have 20 TOTAL defenses or less (in either PD or ED) I do not allow DR vs. Mental Attacks, as it utterly shuts down the effectiveness of Mind Contorl/Mental Illusions, et al.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

PS - I thinik you guys might be selling me on it even for Champions, then again I'm easily influenced when drinking beer in a bar (the hotel has wireless).

 

Light of day, I dunno, I am partial to damage the way it works in Champions (specifically), but much of what you say makes sense and I do always run a semi-realistic and semi-fantastic game (so which way to go?). And there's a problem (for me) in introducing a mechanic for a superhero game which has no effect other than essentially cosmetic. I grant the rare case of a brick with high DEF being beaten on to no effect, but if the attack is STUN only or less than defenses, I'm not sure it really should do any damage, anyway, except for allowing for hitting vital spots and the like (SFX) on a helpless target.

 

In many ways it is TOTALLY a flavor thing... but one that adds to what our play group wants in a game. Recently, it has been an issue, as I had a dozen adventures over the course of a week and half, with very little rest... and by the time the big showdown came... two or three heroes went into it down two or three body they hadn't had a chance to heal. It wasn't so much walking wounded, as a weary combat veteran kind of feal (which worked, 'cause it was a super-terrorist threat they were facing).

 

Often it is a mark of honor to the players/PCs. "Holy Crap! I took four body from STUN damage in that fight!" kind of thing.

 

Of course if you were playing in a Munchkin-king type campaign like Champsguy or the classic Lemming stories... this might not work or need to be changed... since throwing around 30 dice becomes common, not the high extreme.

 

Milage will vary considerably on this model!

[zornwil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

I tend to go "before" which mean DR often negates this effect... but then I very, VERY rarely allow DR for PCs... and only the big bads tend to get it... or I reduce normal defeneses.

 

My general rule of thumb with DR is 75% no way. 50% only if you have 10 TOTAL defenses or less. 25% if you have 20 TOTAL defenses or less (in either PD or ED) I do not allow DR vs. Mental Attacks, as it utterly shuts down the effectiveness of Mind Contorl/Mental Illusions, et al.

Yeah, but you're a curmudgeonly meanie!

 

(thx)

[zornwil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

In many ways it is TOTALLY a flavor thing... but one that adds to what our play group wants in a game. Recently' date=' it has been an issue, as I had a dozen adventures over the course of a week and half, with very little rest... and by the time the big showdown came... two or three heroes went into it down two or three body they hadn't had a chance to heal. It wasn't so much walking wounded, as a weary combat veteran kind of feal (which worked, 'cause it was a super-terrorist threat they were facing). [/quote']

 

Yeah, thanks for that extension, that helps. I would not do it for supers given the scenario you cited, specifically, that "proves" it's not for my game, but it is perfect for the Disavowed game.

 

Often it is a mark of honor to the players/PCs. "Holy Crap! I took four body from STUN damage in that fight!" kind of thing.

 

Of course if you were playing in a Munchkin-king type campaign like Champsguy or the classic Lemming stories... this might not work or need to be changed... since throwing around 30 dice becomes common, not the high extreme.

 

Milage will vary considerably on this model!

 

I miss Champsguy.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

Hmmm.... Hadn't really thought about DR.... I'd be inclined to agree with RDU neil and say that the body is determined from Stun before DR, but I'd then let the DR reduce the damage. I like the rule for the same reason you mentioned, Zorn... I've seen major brick on brick slugfests that have resulted in NO body damage at all, even with old skool haymakers in play. When Granite got slammed with a 90 str haymaker (old rules... 27d6 damage) and then knocked back into an "unbreakable" wall for another 22d6 or so damage (in an average 14 DC campaign) and took NO body damage, it just felt somewhat wrong. Maybe not crippling amounts of harm, but like someone else mentioned, it just seems that in there circumstances, he should have come away a bit cracked up. My martial artists tend to be very low DEF compared to their offence, so I'm OK with thier body taking rate (and MA characters are the most common DR heros in my games, usually), but your standard brick is nigh invunerable in many circumstances. Heck...In one star hero game, a PC in Jump Armor launched a VERY large missle into an underground fuel storage tank, under a skyscraper in the underground parking structure, basicallly causing a Oklahoma City bomb effect with himself at ground zero. He took no body. The player didn't even blink at the iidea...he knew that he was effectively immmune to normal attack body, so he did something his character probably wouldn't have done logically. He got a stern talking to afterwords, but it made an impression on me as a GM. (I also let him know that the next time he tried something that stupid, he was going to run into a GM fiat intervention)

EDIT: I did make him miss about a week of game play, however... The suit had sufficent life support systems to keep him OK, but there wasn't enough leverage for him to dig himmself out Petty, yes, but so was his munchkin approach to the fight.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

Hmmm.... Hadn't really thought about DR.... I'd be inclined to agree with RDU neil and say that the body is determined from Stun before DR' date=' but I'd then let the DR reduce the damage.[/quote']

 

Actually, I let the DR reduce the stun, and THEN if there is actually 20 or more left, they take a Body... so in my games DR make Body from STUN damage rare.

 

When Granite got slammed with a 90 str haymaker (old rules... 27d6 damage) and then knocked back into an "unbreakable" wall for another 22d6 or so damage (in an average 14 DC campaign) and took NO body damage, it just felt somewhat wrong. Maybe not crippling amounts of harm, but like someone else mentioned, it just seems that in there circumstances, he should have come away a bit cracked up.

 

Exactly...

 

Heck...In one star hero game, a PC in Jump Armor launched a VERY large missle into an underground fuel storage tank, under a skyscraper in the underground parking structure, basicallly causing a Oklahoma City bomb effect with himself at ground zero. He took no body. The player didn't even blink at the iidea...he knew that he was effectively immmune to normal attack body, so he did something his character probably wouldn't have done logically. He got a stern talking to afterwords, but it made an impression on me as a GM. (I also let him know that the next time he tried something that stupid, he was going to run into a GM fiat intervention)

EDIT: I did make him miss about a week of game play, however... The suit had sufficent life support systems to keep him OK, but there wasn't enough leverage for him to dig himmself out Petty, yes, but so was his munchkin approach to the fight.

 

When a character purposefully puts themselves in direct harms way (putting a gun to their head, or doing what you described above) I consider that an automatic Critical Hit against them... doing Double Damage before defenses. (This does not include jumping in front of a shot intended for someone else. Take a shot for someone else is different than putting yourself in a fully vulnerable position.)

 

Also, in the description above... the damage/explosion taking place in a tight/enclosed area... I'd have added a lot of dice and maybe changed it to Killing Damage. Interior explosions are utterly devastating in many ways that an outside explosion can't even begin to approach.

[David Blue]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

Players feelings and rules tweaks .. .

 

This is mostly an issue before the game. During the game, I want to change nothing. The players also become more emotionally robust with experience.

 

Three big things:

(1) Don't put newcomers to Hero into a state of shock. It's very easy to do. Just give them a character sheet with only what they need to know, written in words. ("Strength" not STR.) Rules tweaks definitely fall into "don't need to know."

(2) The best workaround for a veteran is an older version of the rule. I don't like how Desolidification works now. Is version one, where you went through only so much body and shed only so much damage, depending on your points in Desolidification, a good enough fix? Yes. Then don't even think about making up a new house rule, use the old one. That's one example.

(3) Don't get the players trying not to think of a white horse. This applies to veterans and newbies alike.

 

If you print out a list of things you're not allowed to buy and do, even though you may or likely will have crafted it with exquisite care to help simulate the world you want, what you are really doing is waving sweets past the players noses and saying: "These are too good for you!" That entrances the players' imagination and causes problems.

 

Haven't you noticed sometimes, "everything" seems to be banned and it's only clear what the gamemaster doesn't want? Even though the gamemaster didn't seem to think there was a problem at all? Or you had no special idea for a character till the gamemaster said "I'd be reluctant to allow X", and instantly you thought "why not X, X could rock, what if X was something just tweaked a little like - hey, I'd really like to play that!" It's a devilish lure.

 

And you're also creating the bad impression that the stuff you didn't mention isn't worth talking about because it's not interesting - whereas it's just what you want to see in your game.

 

I'm coming round to the view: it's better to keep your lists of banned things secret, and talk only about what you want, the sorts of characters that will be waved past inspection with a smile, and the sorts of action there won’t be much trouble with. (Because, just quietly, you've nerfed the natural enemies of these preferred actions.)

 

For example, if you want mega-movethroughs all over the place - I wouldn't - the neat, economical way to support this is to throw out stuff like Martial Throw and Knockback Resistance. Don't talk about that or everyone will instantly flip into the mental role of a martial artist or a brick having their good staff unfairly barred. Talk about how you want high-speed, effective characters and that (not exactly how) you are going to favour them.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

1 Body damage done for every 20 stun AFTER defenses.

That's a neat idea. I'd like to try it. Do you do it per individual hit? Per phase? Or is it cumulative?

 

If I take two hits for 12 and 8 STUN, respectively, do I lose 1 BODY? What if the hits are during the same segment (from two different opponents)? What if they are coordinated attacks (e.g., with Teamwork)?

[concord]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

I don't know how the rule was written in Fuzion (*shudders*...I can't believe that there is actually a rule from Fuzion I'm considering using....)

As the former Fuzion Heretic, I can answer this question... need to set the stage first...

 

In order to "fix" the stun lottery of killing attacks, Fuzion made KAs have a die per DC just like normal attacks (not the exact mechanic, but close enough)

 

To keep folks with KAs from slaughtering people, Fuzion introduced a new figured characteristic, HITS (BODY x 5). KAs did HITS 1 for 1 when they exceeded the target's defenses.

 

Now to the answer...

 

In Fuzion, a normal attack did 1 HIT for every 5 STUN that got past the target's defenses.

 

So the direct correlation between Fuzion and Hero for this mechanic would yield a result of 1 BODY per 25 STUN past the target's defense.

 

I like the 1 to 20 that RDUNeil uses... I might add it to my house rules... but then I might be accused of returning to my old Fuzion ways and my players will abandon me for the one true system, the Hero System... the pain, the pain...

 

The torment I must face for being a reformed heretic...

[arcady]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

We (ummmm, okay, I... ) bandy about a bunch of crazy notions here, sometimes, though, very seriously.

 

But what about how players actually FEEL about house rules and system changes? Many experiments I don't try because it's unfair to just muck about with a game people are playing in and thusly affecting them.

Two sessions ago, in mid campaign, the GM in the GURPS game I play in changed how magic works.

 

I was playing the mage. I'm playing an archer now.

 

Don't like house rules. I can accept limits on what options can or cannot be taken, or how abilities in a system like Hero have to be constructed (mages have to have gestures, or speedsters have to have to have berserk, or whatever) if it's given to me at least in general concept at the outset. Even if it's - this option you're taking now might need to get pulled from you later if it proves to be a problem, or we might change the advantages and limitations on it to better this concept if we have to.

 

But house rules? No.

 

I'll do anything I have to do to avoid them. I told the group my mage no longer existed, end of story. Next session I showed up with the archer, and it was up to them to figure out what happened to the mage. We had broken at the last round of a combat - hectic moment where I'd just rained stones down upon the enemy. You change the rules on me, it's not my responsibility to deal with the mess. And if that means I go, I go.

[Mutant for Hire]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

Players have feelings?

 

I thought they existed to be tormented at the whim of the GM...

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

Actually, since in Fusion BODY was about a third of what the comparative HERO benchmark is (officially), that would be... uhm.

 

Okay. 10 BODY individual. Is 3 Fuzion BODY, so 15 hits. (and 15 Stun).

 

so it's actually about a 3:1 ratio of BODY to STUN.

 

But BODY tends to be much higher in Fuzion. So just go with a ratio you like. 20 to 1 or 10 to 1 is workable.

[RDU Neil]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

That's a neat idea. I'd like to try it. Do you do it per individual hit? Per phase? Or is it cumulative?

 

If I take two hits for 12 and 8 STUN, respectively, do I lose 1 BODY? What if the hits are during the same segment (from two different opponents)? What if they are coordinated attacks (e.g., with Teamwork)?

 

Per hit... to show that it was a "MIGHTY BLOW!"

[concord]

Re: Reality check time: so what about the players' feelings?

 

Actually, since in Fusion BODY was about a third of what the comparative HERO benchmark is (officially), that would be... uhm.

 

Okay. 10 BODY individual. Is 3 Fuzion BODY, so 15 hits. (and 15 Stun).

 

so it's actually about a 3:1 ratio of BODY to STUN.

 

But BODY tends to be much higher in Fuzion. So just go with a ratio you like. 20 to 1 or 10 to 1 is workable.

ugh... or should that be yay!!! I forgot about BODY being less in Fuzion... maybe I am forgetting my heretical ways...

 

I like the 20 to 1... a character in Hero will be bruised but not really battered in combat by normal attacks