Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

[tesuji]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

What's that you say? The attacks bought Reduced End Cost (i.e., "it appears the attacker isn't tiring")? Oh. Okay. Then I'll simply attack and not worry about their little MPAs, as they aren't going to get through my decently high defenses.

 

or 16c each for no reduction in attack or a 21 pts 200 end 1 rec end reserve for not much overall.

 

END usage IMX is only an issue IF the character was deliberately built to highlight that achilles heel.

[Vondy]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

After many years of gamemastering champions I've concluded there are two kinds of problems:

 

Construct problems, which can be sniffed out and adjusted in design time.

 

And mechanics problems, which generally have to be sniffed out at run time.

 

A mechanic may raise my eyebrow, but until its a problem in play its not a problem. To date, no one has even bothered to use one. The constructs that make them worthwhile are generally more expensive than the one's who don't, so unless a character is specifically designed to leverage the mechanic, its not something (my) players run towards.

 

I guess my question is: has the mechanic proven to be a problem in actual play, or are you proposing it might be a problem based on your reading of the text?

[MitchellS]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

I guess my question is: has the mechanic proven to be a problem in actual play' date=' or are you proposing it might be a problem based on your reading of the text?[/quote']

Ultimately I think this was just a gut reaction on his part. Someone can far more easily purchase +6 levels with rapid fire penalties and the rapid attack skill and get off 4 shots every phase then the can purchase 4 attack powers all usable at once.

 

MPAs have their place in the game, as in the examples I listed above, but they're no more inbalancing than anything else in the game and often add a lot of flavor to an otherwise routine combat.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

Ultimately I think this was just a gut reaction on his part. Someone can far more easily purchase +6 levels with rapid fire penalties and the rapid attack skill and get off 4 shots every phase then the can purchase 4 attack powers all usable at once.

 

My impression is a little different.

 

My impression is its one of surprise and "sudden" realization that "this doesn't work anymore like it used to."

 

In the old days, before anyone knew that MPA was "the way it was supposed to be" a primary balancing tool among Gms was to look at "DAMAGE DONE" and the most direct way was DCs. If you kept your main attacks within a certain Dc range, you had handled many balance issues.

 

Its an easy look to see if "normal defense" shots stays within 10-15 DCs and "abnornal defense" shots stays within 5-7 Dcs.

 

Oddball ways around this like combat levels applying to "sweep", "rapid fire", "move thrus" and such as spotlights which draw these to the attention of the GM, so he knows to look at things other than the base dc for the attack. So would be linked power combos.

 

But, "suddenly" in 5e, the DCs don't tell you the story as much. A guy can have three 12 dc attacks abd be fine or be woefully overgunned if he can MPA them all. Moreover, there are not "watch out, here's trouble" tags like "+ 6 CSLs with imbalancing maneuvers i am trying to slip thru."

 

When i saw MPAs, i saw right away that this meant i needed to change my balance assessments a bit. i also saw how, for many Gms, this might be more of a shock.

 

At least with sweep rapid fire, its a trade off. you cut your DCV in half to say triple tap the enemy. Your reduced DCV now leabes you just as vulnerable to the same tactic, they can shoot you rapid fire and their OCV penalties still leaves them with a fine shot at your 1/2 DCV bad self.

 

As for "the way it always was" and linked and what not, they could just as easily have made it...

 

+1/4 if powers can be fired together as one attack

+0 if powers can be used separately but not at the same time.

-1/4 to -1/2 if they must be used at the same time

 

you do not need FREE MPAs to have linked be a disad.

[MitchellS]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

I see it differently. To me an MPA is more a reason to use different types of attacks at the same time rather than multiple damage-causing attacks. To me an MPA is best used when the Batman throws a flash grenade and a baterang at the same time, or when Thor calls down lightning to both flash and electrocute, or Professor X wants to read the mind and hold someone immobile. Yes, MPAs can be used for damaging attack powers but only thinking of them that way really limits the purpose behind them, IMO.

[Silbeg]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

I also agree that MPAs have their place in the game. The most common example I have seen in my games is an EB/Flash MPA - now, in the pre-5E world, these would often be done as linked powers... but some of that was the misunderstanding on the unwritten rule.

 

In fact, looking back, MPAs make certain characters actually playable. Power Crusher was supposedly a very powerful opponent, with an array of Drains and Transfers, but without MPAs he would have to first use his guantlets to power up to a decent STR, DEX, etc., and then start doing damage. This was far, far, FAR too slow.

 

With MPAs, he would be truly "Crushing" with his blows, as he would drain his opponent as he was doing damage. This makes what seems to be an overrated character live up to his name!

 

In my game, currently, two of the six characters regularly use MPAs. Kid Comet oftens throws an EB/Flash combo (as often as not spread to cover multiple opponents!), while Cumo's "Sumo Yell" combines a Hearing Flash and a DEX Drain, while he is using his Shove or Slap maneuver!

 

In the case of KC, he is throwing two 65 Active Point powers which have less of an effect than a single 130 AP EB would have.

 

Cumo links a 20 Active Point Drain to a 24 Active Point Flash, and MPAs them with his 50STR maneuver. By spending the 22 real points on STR of DCs, he would do more real damage than his 3-power attack would do, and possibly for less END!

 

And, yes, using MPAs will have a tendancy to push a heavy END-burner's Endurance beyond its capacity! It is the alpha-strike mentality... take 'em down early if you can, but leave yourself vulnerable if you can't.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

Ok heres a question, who do you think falls within the category of "only thinking about them for damaging attacks"???

 

thats certainly the issue most in discussion in this thread, but i think its a matter of "this is where we are seeing a problem, or a potential one."

 

For us in 4e, it was "obvious", and partly from the MP rules of all places, that you could build 10d6 Eb with 3d6 Flash as a single power and throw it as a single power with one attack rolls and so forth. It also went along with Eb+drain and so forth.

 

but, those were noted as part of the same power, sometimes by linked or sometimes by sharing the same Ec/MP slot.

 

Also, typically, the Gm would judge balance for these by adding DCs, and the fact that the tag-on power was usually against special defense made this not grossly wrong. A 10d6 eb 1d6 drain would count as much the same as 12 dcs unless it was a higher than most PowD game.

 

it was never "i have these two totally separate powers listed on my sheet and the Gm better catch that i can fire both simultaneously."

 

I think thats part of why the 5e "non-change" caught so many people off guard.

 

But i really cannot see the number of people who only think of MPAs as stacking straight damage attacks instead of normal attack+oddball attack as that much of a number as to be relevent.

 

I see it differently. To me an MPA is more a reason to use different types of attacks at the same time rather than multiple damage-causing attacks. To me an MPA is best used when the Batman throws a flash grenade and a baterang at the same time' date=' or when Thor calls down lightning to both flash and electrocute, or Professor X wants to read the mind and hold someone immobile. Yes, MPAs can be used for damaging attack powers but only thinking of them that way really limits the purpose behind them, IMO.[/quote']

[MitchellS]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

The MPA rules answer the question that was never before answered: How, for example, in the game can Batman throw a flash grenade and a batarang at the same time when they are not the same power? Yes, you could always build the "flashing" batarang that hit and burst into light but you could never before take both attacks and use them at once; or at least it was not clear that you could. These types of things happen fairly regularly in comics but for over 20 years were never addressed. Now it's addressed and, for the most part, it works. The only place it doesn't seem to work perfectly is on damage-causing attacks, and that issue is no more screwed up than rapid fire or sweep, and so not something to get overly concerned about, IMO.

[Kitsune]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

Personally my rule of thumb for any power tends to work on this, if the player cannot come up with a convincing reason that his power exists, then don't allow it. Sure people can come up with some pretty obnoxious concepts that justify abusive powers, but this rule filters quite a bit of stuff out.

[Ndreare]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

although not used often I allow them in my games and my NPC's use them also.

 

They have never caused that big of a stir as they are very pricy, cost tons of end & when you miss you cry. However we did have an NPC with control over the four elements. With his 4 seperate 50 AP attacks combined he could do as much damage to a target as a single 75 AP attack most of the time, but was still hard pressed to hurt the tanks. The players never hated him nor di they decide at that point they all needed to make Multiple Power attacks all the time.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

This means that the average martial artist' date=' with, let's say, 5 martial maneuvers, can use them all on a single enemy, all in one Phase.[/quote']

 

No, they can't. It probably won't matter to you -- it doesn't seem to matter to anyone else who keeps repeating this misinformation -- but the books says point blank that you can't use the same attack -- or even similar attacks, like damage-causing Martial Arts maneuvers -- in a Multi-Power Attack. The exeptions are explictly GM's options, depending on the character and the special effects involved.

 

It's in H5R on page 358. Read it.

[Glupii]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

I am on board with everything Mitchells said.

 

I have come to a point that my trust of the system and its self balancing ways is near complete. If a player builds a character so unbalanced that nearly 2/3's of his starting points are in attacks, he is going to be very weak in other areas. I have, in the past, allowed my players to play any character they could balance by the rules. So if they wanted to do this, they could.

 

But over the many sessions, they have all come to the point of understanding that I play my villains intelligently. If they spend all their points on one area and leave their non combat abilities untouched, they have to sit back and do nothing when we are not in battle. More often then not, they have skimped on some area of defense or built in some debilitating weakness that grants them the room and points to have their massive offensive powers. And eventually, a villain figures this out or just stumbles blindly on it. When that happenes, they become disenchanted with their character and want to scrap them.

 

So today, my players (and myself included when someone else runs) tend more toward balanced characters. And Balanced characters generally do not have much that would allow MPA's that would be game killers. And they are a heck of a lot more fun to play since you have a decent chance of being useful in just about all normal situations in a game.

 

So my advice to the creator of this thread is to simply sit back and wait to see if it actually happens, understand the rules, use them to show the players why unbalanced characters have their weak sides, and all will be OK. The system IS pretty sound from a gameplay standpoint. Some argue with the realism of this rule or that, but playability wise, I think it is pretty solid.

 

Anyway, there are my 2 cents.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

Personally, I think Multi-Power Attacks allow characters to do too much at one time. However, if they are acceptable, then the prohibition against using two powers in the same framework in a Multi-Power Attack is inane. It's an awkward exeption that complicates the game for no apparent reason (a trend I am seeing more of in every edition of Hero Sytem).

[Agent X]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

On this notion that the designers are falsely claiming that multiple power attacks were always intended - I suggest those who feel this way check out the write-up of Bruiser from the group the Corruptors of All - I believe that was in Enemies III (?). Bruiser is a brick who has a PD drain as well. It is NOT linked to his strength or anything else. In his description it is flatly explained that one of his tactics is to use a punishing blow that not only delivers stun and body but also weakens the defenses of his opponent through the use the PD drain. So, IOW, there is at least one character that demonstrates the use of MPAs.

 

Oh yeah, I've built a character with multiple power attacks as a central point of the character. He was not overpowering. Of course, he was working at fewer damage classes than the majority of the characters in the game.

 

P.S. I hate hard and fast damage caps and active point limits. There are so many balanced, original characters that suddenly don't get made.

[Silbeg]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

On this notion that the designers are falsely claiming that multiple power attacks were always intended - I suggest those who feel this way check out the write-up of Bruiser from the group the Corruptors of All - I believe that was in Enemies III (?). Bruiser is a brick who has a PD drain as well. It is NOT linked to his strength or anything else. In his description it is flatly explained that one of his tactics is to use a punishing blow that not only delivers stun and body but also weakens the defenses of his opponent through the use the PD drain. So, IOW, there is at least one character that demonstrates the use of MPAs.

 

Oh yeah, I've built a character with multiple power attacks as a central point of the character. He was not overpowering. Of course, he was working at fewer damage classes than the majority of the characters in the game.

 

P.S. I hate hard and fast damage caps and active point limits. There are so many balanced, original characters that suddenly don't get made.

 

Good reference! Have to give rep for that! Also, don't forget Power Crusher (Enemies III, I believe, and redone in Classic Enemies for 4E)

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

I suspect that MPAs were always intended. Linked just never made sense to me (before 5E, that is), and I can't see that they would ever have included it in the system if MPAs were't possible. On the other hand, I can easily believe that they did a terrible job of communicating MPAs in the book (as in forgetting to mention them at all).

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

I suggest those who feel this way check out the write-up of Bruiser from the group the Corruptors of All - I believe that was in Enemies III (?).

 

In all fairness, it's worth remembering that it was not at all unusual for characters in the Enemies books to be written up incorrectly or in ways which blatantly violated the rules.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

Personally' date=' I think Multi-Power Attacks allow characters to do too much at one time. However, if they [i']are[/i] acceptable, then the prohibition against using two powers in the same framework in a Multi-Power Attack is inane. It's an awkward exeption that complicates the game for no apparent reason (a trend I am seeing more of in every edition of Hero Sytem).

I would tend to agree. However, I can see how the restriction makes a little sense from a balance perspective. Powers in frameworks share some cost and thus were not paid for in full, so it makes sense that they cannot be utilized together completely. It is (in part) like using the exact same Power twice in a MPA ("it's Indirect, so I can shoot it out of either hand; that means I should be able to shoot it simultaneously from both hands, right?").

 

This last just shouldn't be allowed. You could just decide to use the same Power an infinite number of times in the same MPA (or a very, very large number of times in any case), and argue that maximum damage will be rolled enough times in all those effect rolls that if max damage can surpass an opponent's defenses, you should simply be able to apply any arbitrarily large amount of damage to them.

[Agent X]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

In all fairness' date=' it's worth remembering that it was not at all unusual for characters in the Enemies books to be written up incorrectly or in ways which blatantly violated the rules.[/quote'] A reasonably attentive reading of the Bruiser character sheet should get a bright Hero gamer thinking though. It did just that for me. I didn't realize MPAs were okay until I stared at that character though I never pushed it because, at the time, most Hero gamers around here would have pitched a fit.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

A reasonably attentive reading of the Bruiser character sheet should get a bright Hero gamer thinking though. It did just that for me. I didn't realize MPAs were okay until I stared at that character though I never pushed it because' date=' at the time, most Hero gamers around here would have pitched a fit.[/quote']

Actually, I think I even remember puzzling over something like this when reading through my basic 4E Champions book at some point. I think I buried it as it gave me mental indigestion.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

Powers in frameworks share some cost and thus were not paid for in full' date=' so it makes sense that they cannot be utilized together completely.[/quote']

 

But unless I am mistaken, they can be, in every other way. I'm not aware of any other such restriction on using two powers in an Elemental Control, or on using two 50 point powers in a 100 point Multipower. Do you know of one?

 

("it's Indirect' date=' so I can shoot it out of either hand; that means I should be able to shoot it simultaneously from [i']both[/i] hands, right?"). This last just shouldn't be allowed. You could just decide to use the same Power an infinite number of times...

 

Has anyone suggested anything like this? If not, then why mention it? We have enough problems with people who mistakenly think you can use the same attack twice just because they spent 5 points on a spare focus. Don't give them any ideas.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

But unless I am mistaken' date=' they [i']can[/i] be, in every other way. I'm not aware of any other such restriction on using two powers in an Elemental Control, or on using two 50 point powers in a 100 point Multipower. Do you know of one?

I believe there has been the restriction that you cannot Link two slots of a Framework since before 5E. As I said, it makes sense to place some limit on how different slots of the same Framework can be combined. Essentially you didn't pay to be able to. It is a balance issue. Now, I think it would become too complicated to say that you can't perform a Move Through with an Attack Power in a Framework if you use the movement from a Movement Power in the same Framework, but it would be the same kind of restriction on combining. Defense Powers could also be restricted in a similar way (not stacking if from the same Framework), which would again be too complicated IMO.

 

The current rule that is simply about MPAs may be reasonable. I don't know. I'm not saying I would include the rule if I were refining the system; I'd really have to think about it, and how to balance Frameworks in general. I don't care to takle the whole problem right now.

 

Has anyone suggested anything like this? If not, then why mention it? We have enough problems with people who mistakenly think you can use the same attack twice just because they spent 5 points on a spare focus. Don't give them any ideas.

I would see this as the main reason you can't use the same Power more than once in a MPA. As long as there is a definite bound to the Powers you can put in a MPA (and I think giving it a finite limit based upon the number of Powers you have actually bought is reasonable), I don't see any general balance issues with allowing even identical Attack Powers (or strike-type Martial Maneuvers, for that matter) to be used together in a MPA.

 

That seems to be the opinion of several others in this thread, too, so I thought this issue might be a good one to mention. It serves as a bounds check, I guess. A reason we shouldn't go even further.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

I would see this as the main reason you can't use the same Power more than once in a MPA.

 

I don't see how your infinite number of attacks is even in the ballpark of what anyone else is talking about, much less having any relevance to the actual game system. It's on par with the a Republican saying that society shouldn't allow gay marriage because some people are pedophiles. It just doesn't connect.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

I don't see how your infinite number of attacks is even in the ballpark of what anyone else is talking about' date=' much less having any relevance to the actual game system. It's on par with the a Republican saying that society shouldn't allow gay marriage because some people are pedophiles. It just doesn't connect.[/quote']

Well, I certainly won't thank you for likening anything about me to a republican, but thanks for acknowledging my out-of-the-box thinking. It's good to stretch your nonlinear brain muscles now and then. You can't see how it is relavent? Well, people don't always think alike, I guess.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Multiple-Power Attacks--Untenable Rule

 

Well' date=' I certainly won't thank you for likening anything about me to a republican...[/quote']

 

Sorry. If I could think of a better non-political example of a non-sequitur, I would have used it.