Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

[dropblack]

I’m new to the Hero System, and I’m still studying the rules (so please forgive me if I’m missing something obvious). So far I’m very impressed with its versatility. It seems to be a good system for smash-them-up epic battles during which combatants suffer large amounts of damage and keep getting up for more. While I can appreciate the role-playing entertainment value of not killing off the player’s characters every time an NPC starts shooting a revolver, I also appreciate having the option of adding a gritty realism to my games (e.g. a goblin waves a spear, and it’s actually threatening). For obvious reasons I find myself comparing HS to GURPS, a system I respect for its realism—at least in regards to the value of damage. Is there an optional rule that makes Killing Damage more deadly? I’ve noticed the Hero System Combat book on the game store shelf, but haven’t leafed through it yet—perhaps it contains some ideas?)?

 

[Bloodstone]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

Wounding, Hit Locations, Impairing, Disabling and Bleeding will all make combat more gritty and realistic. Assuming you have 5th Edition Revised, check out the optional rules that start on p414.

 

The other main factor to keep in mind is how you build your PC's and NPC's. If you want a goblin witha spear to be a threat, it needs to have enough damage classes, combat value and defenses to actully threaten the PC's.

 

The Combat Handbook reprints the Combat Rules from the main book and has rules compiled together from (I believe) six other sources. You may want to check it out if you are looking for more options. It's also good to have around mid game when players need to reference something, especially if not every one has their own main book yet.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

I’m new to the Hero System' date=' and I’m still studying the rules (so please forgive me if I’m missing something obvious). So far I’m very impressed with its versatility. It seems to be a good system for smash-them-up epic battles during which combatants suffer large amounts of damage and keep getting up for more. While I can appreciate the role-playing entertainment value of not killing off the player’s characters every time an NPC starts shooting a revolver, I also appreciate having the option of adding a gritty realism to my games (e.g. a goblin waves a spear, and it’s actually threatening). For obvious reasons I find myself comparing HS to GURPS, a system I respect for its realism—at least in regards to the value of damage. Is there an optional rule that makes Killing Damage more deadly? I’ve noticed the Hero System Combat book on the game store shelf, but haven’t leafed through it yet—perhaps it contains some ideas?)?[/font']

 

 

In Hero by the book, that Goblin is quite deadly. He might not be able to instantly kill a Hero, but he can stun them, hit them again and knock them out, and then cut their throat.

 

That's pretty deadly. If you don't have resistant defenses or a ton of BODY and STUN, _anyone_ could kill you. Maybe not in a single thrust (so if you've got someone to help save you, you will live), but you can easily die inside a Turn.

 

 

The Bleeding rules are what you want if you want a single arrow or spear thrust to be able to kill over time (remember, there's usually a delay before they die - a Turn feels like a long time, but it's only a matter of seconds). Hit Locations if you want it to be possible to decapitate.

 

 

Edit: That said, this requires your PC's to not have purchased "I don't die when stabbed" type powers! If you can apply armour to a hit, it probably won't kill you - that's what it's there for. If you want them to be able to die, you have to not have them create Action Heroes.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

Having played a lot of GURPS, what are your concerns? Using the optional rules as mentioned that add much of the detail that is standard in GURPS you end up with very nearly the same thing.

 

Using these options, characters tend to get taken out of a fight and if untreated will die. Take a .45 shot to the chest against an armored man in both systems:

 

GURPS (target = 10 HP): 2d6 pi+ (avg 7); target takes 10 HP and must check for Unc. every second and will bleed 1 pt per minute. Target is stunned and possibly knocked down.

 

HERO (target = 8 BODY): 2d6-1, +1 STUNx (avg 6); target takes 6 BODY and 24 STUN, is unconcious, and will bleed 2d6 per turn.

 

Both have about an equal chance of death. Now, to the head (brain):

 

GURPS (target = 10 HP): 2d6 pi+ (avg 7); target takes 20 HP (7 - 2 for skull DR, sum times 4 for brain) and must check for death immediately (HT roll), but otherwise will not be in danger of dying until he takes another 5 pts (possibly from bleeding). He will bleed 1 pt per minute. Target is unconcious.

 

HERO (target = 8 BODY): 2d6-1, +1 STUNx (avg 6); target takes 12 BODY and 36 STUN, is unconcious, and will bleed 3d6 per turn and optionally with a minimum of 1 pt per turn since he is in negative BODY territory. He is most likely dead in less than a minute (using 1 pt per turn), or 2 minutes (using 1 pt per 6 rolled on the bleeding dice).

 

That seems pretty similar. It is harder to shoot someone in the head in Hero (-8 vs. -5) or especially the vitals (-8 vs. -3), but I think that is a good game balance thing.

 

The advantage you gain with Hero in terms of lethality is when put 150-200 pt Heroic characters up against an 800 pt Dragon they don't get turned into flambe. Especially using normal damage attacks (such as fire breath), you are less likely to kill the characters outright, although you can still take them out of a fight. The fight in Hero will end up more epic because the Dragon isn't doing 4d6 cu damage with claws or 6d6 fire breath. In Hero claws like great swords still only do 2 to 3d6 (which is survivable with 6-9 DEF) and the firebreath is going to be 8-16d6 (depending on how nasty).

 

Take it from someone who's done dragons, demons, cyborgs, golems, and such in both systems and I can tell you that the Hero fights always seemed more epic. Don't misunderstand however, the GURPS fights were awesome and tons of fun, stemming from the detail of the combat system and how realistic it is, I just enjoy cinematic reality a bit more and Hero handles that a little more easily.

[dropblack]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

I appreciate the responses! And I just noticed something in Fantasy Hero page 159 (Hit Locations) that might be worth mentioning. Two methods are offered to simulate deadlier damage--

 

"You can use the Disabling/impairing rules to get around this, but those rules are a little complicated".----I'm still learning the combat system and don't know what this sentence is referring to yet, but will check it out later this evening.

 

"As a simpler option for more "realistic" campaigns, try this instead: double the BODYx Column of the Hit Location Chart for Killing Damage attacks."

[Edsel]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

Impairing rules can be found on page 416 of the Hero System 5th Edition Revised rules (commonly known as 5ER). If you are using the non-revised 5th Edition rules book (commonly known as FREd) it is on page 278.

 

Disabling rules are on page 417 of 5ER or page 279 of FREd.

 

Bleeding rules are on page 417 of 5ER or page 279 of FREd.

 

The option you mention of doubling the BODYx Column of the Hit Location Chart is also mentioned in the Dark Champions genre book. It makes guns much more lethal.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

One of the things that I always look at first in a game is the way in which damage is taken and inflicted. I personally think that Hero has an excellent balance: 4 colour superheroes rarely get killed, gritty heroic characters live with the constant threat of death in anything even vaguely combat oriented.

 

There are bits I don't like (specifically the mechanical system for determining STUN from killing attacks) but the system has more flexibilty than almost any other system I know, and produces believeable results, if it is that sort of campaign.

 

The differentiation between STUN and BODY and the ways in which dmage of each type is taken or stopped really is a defining feature of Hero for me, an almost unique system that allows a great deal to be done with combat that other systems don't seem to be able to define.

 

Maybe I'm biased

[Legendsmiths]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

Disabling/Impairing rules can add a lot of flavor to damage results. Coming from GURPS they will seem very familiar to you. Essentially more than 1/2 BODY to any location impairs it and more than BODY disables it - very similar to the HP/2 crippling of GURPS.

 

The only thing I do for extremities (hands/feet) is use BODY/3 since those locations are much more fragile.

[OddHat]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

I played GURPS for many years, including multiple high and low powered Superhero campaigns. Hero is certainly better at maintaining the feel of Superheroic combat from the start, though GURPS can be tweaked to manage it.

 

That said, play a Fantasy Hero game for a while, using hit locations, disabling and impairing rules, and bleeding. Don't allow the more powerful defensive spells and tallents to PCs. You may be surprised at just how dangerous it can be.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

In a this recent thread, we were discussing "realistic" deadliness of combat. One of the things brought up was how non-deadly brutal combat really is. What kills isn't the weapon, but the time it takes for medical assistance to arrive and the quality of such assistance. In a fantasy game, such assistance, if not magical, is likely to be very poor quality and long in coming if at all. Anyone with a bleeding wound is better off left for dead.

 

In a gritty modern setting, keep in mind that medical personel only arrive after someone calls for them, and it still takes time to arrive. The bleaker the setting, the longer it takes for them to get there and the less helpful they'll be when they arrive.

 

Of course, if you want to skip all the drama, you can just bar the players from buying up BODY (maybe even lowering it a bit) and/or increase the damage all the weapons do.

[OddHat]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

Of course, if you want to skip all the drama, you can just bar the players from buying up BODY (maybe even lowering it a bit) and/or increase the damage all the weapons do.

 

I sometimes doubled all body damage before defenses to get bloodier combat without hit locations.

[Toadmaster]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

The differentiation between STUN and BODY and the ways in which dmage of each type is taken or stopped really is a defining feature of Hero for me, an almost unique system that allows a great deal to be done with combat that other systems don't seem to be able to define.

 

 

I agree with this 100%, although there is much more to HERO the way damage works really sets it apart.

[actingkeith]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

First, welcome to my favorite RPG system of all time.

 

Is there an optional rule that makes Killing Damage more deadly?

 

I think you need to take another look at things because I think that your perspective may be a bit skewed... Here's why:

 

Killing Attacks are amazingly deadly to everyday normal folks like you and me.

 

When you compare HERO's combat/damage/injury stuff, it's vitally important for your sense of perspective to always come back and test the effect you're looking into against normals first, rather than just comparing them to the Superheroes you're building...

 

What we're really looking at is not that various powers and attacks are underpowered, but that the heros you're building are just that frickin' tough!

 

Always compare a Power against a Normal (2PD/2ED, 10 BOD, 20 STUN, no Resistant Defenses, 10 EGO, No Mental Defense, No Power Defense) to give yourself a "Real World" example of the Power's effects because that 'normal' guy is what you see most every day in this world... and a HERO System Normal is probably better than the average normal person in the world we live in.

 

And like others have suggested, if you use Hit Location Rules, Killing Attacks become even more threatening to Normals...

 

Peace,

 

Keith

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

Hey, welcome to HERO. I'm new here as well, so any advice that I can offer from the perspective of someone getting vested in the system, I'd be happy to give.

 

One of the things that Fantasy Hero mentions sticks in my mind: "Some people may find that weapons in Fantasy Hero don't kill people even with the spotty regularlity of real world weapons." Pardon me for being trite a moment: "This is a feature, not a bug." You may, in fact, want to bump up the damage quality of your weapons, but by all means, play test first. I've gone with hit locations, and without. I've seen the results of a (glarck) head shot. Pretty it ain't.

 

There are a ton of options to add realism to your combat, but consider the following. If you aren't familiar with the concept of STUN, allow me to enlighten you. STUN is the X factor of combat; it represents the punishment taken in a normal fight; it isn't permanent, but it can put you on the floor very neatly. A normal Longsword deals (I think) 1d6+1 damage. On average, that's 4 BODY and (d6-1, we'll say '3' for arguments sake) 12 STUN.

 

4 BODY is going to slice through anyone who isn't wearing a resistant defense; the STUN is partially soaked by everyone's natural PD rating (I think 3 is about average, but meh). So a normal without resistant defense is going to take 4 BODY and 9 STUN. Assuming a CON score of 8, the target is STUNNED and won't act. It's a short matter of slicing him/her to ribbons in this time.

 

The thing is, the example I'm giving barely scratches the surface of the myriad ways to Hurt People Very Badly (thank you, TF2V, RIP). We can hurt them with edged weapons, Normal Damage weapons, Energy Blasts, all sorts of nonsense. I think, after some playtesting, you'll discover that while your HEROs aren't dead, they do tend to end up on their backs quite a bit from the STUN damage alone.

 

As I mentioned, I was GMing a one-shot and the local PC archer made a Called Shot to the Head; on a Surprised (1/2 DCV) target. BAM, nails it. He tosses damage dice, and rolled 10 BODY, which doubled to 20 BODY and 100 STUN or something equally insane. There was a gurgle, a spray of blood, and a wet thud as the target hit the deck. It was a beautiful thing. I really can't express it in words.

 

I find, generally, that no one (once faced with it) wants realistic combat. We want dramatic combat that has a tinge of realism to it. As a GM, I want to have my players have a sense of exhiliration entering a fight; knowing it could be deadly, knowing they can pull off some incredible manuevers, knowing they can get dropped. HERO does all of those without fiddling.

 

Now you may play and decide that your PCs are just too freakin' tough. Then you might want to consider ramping up the bad guys with more DCs, tougher weaponry, more called shots, etc. But before modifying the damage, test the mechanics first.

 

[Edit: I play Fantasy & Horror primarily - I can recommend the Combat Handbook just because it has dern near every rule in it for personal fighting ever put into the game. ~DEM]

[Toadmaster]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

I find' date=' generally, that no one (once faced with it) wants [i']realistic combat[/i]. We want dramatic combat that has a tinge of realism to it. As a GM, I want to have my players have a sense of exhiliration entering a fight; knowing it could be deadly, knowing they can pull off some incredible manuevers, knowing they can get dropped. HERO does all of those without fiddling.

 

I agree with you for the most part, however I do take some exception to this. "Realistic" combat is great in the right game.

 

If you don't want players fighting their way through every problem "realistic" combat is what you want. I actually ran and played in a campaign using Phoenix Command (PC is probably the most realistic combat game ever created, I am also one of the only people that seems to have actually done this ), it was a great game however it was very different from anything I have ever played, to make it even more interesting were using it for a post apacalypse game. As a result we either talked or we hit them with everything we had from a position of advantage, we didn't start fights when the other side had the drop on us. I would not recommend the system for a game where you expect to have lots of combat but little actual death (like many movies), it would be a very poor choice to play an A-Team campaign.

 

If you want great honking battles (as I think most gamers do), then I agree with you realistic-ish is really what most who say they want realistic combat actually want, it kind of bites when your Clint Man with No name character takes one between the eyes and dies in a gurgle of blood, instead of flipping back that poncho and shooting down 7 badguys (with his 6 shot revolver)while cool spaghetti western music plays.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

*nod* 100% agreed.

[Toadmaster]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

It seems to be a good system for smash-them-up epic battles during which combatants suffer large amounts of damage and keep getting up for more. While I can appreciate the role-playing entertainment value of not killing off the player’s characters every time an NPC starts shooting a revolver' date=' I also appreciate having the option of adding a gritty realism to my games (e.g. a goblin waves a spear, and it’s actually threatening). For obvious reasons I find myself comparing HS to GURPS, a system I respect for its realism—at least in regards to the value of damage. Is there an optional rule that makes Killing Damage more deadly? [/b']

 

 

Here is where I think HERO excells, its flexibility, as you noticed HERO does massive damage but the heros get back up time after time, well, this is also where the basic write ups typically are as well. It is this feature that allows HERO to do genres like Supers so well. However if you start using the optional rules you can really start to change this, by using some you can increase the likelyhood of the PC's getting taken out of a fight, but not raise the mortality rate greatly, by using all you can really up the threat, by changing the writeups (not the rules simply how things are built) you can change this drastically. This same concept also allows much more granularity than many think HERO can do.

 

For example you could write up a mace as

 

Mace 5d6 (normal) HTH attack

 

or

 

Mace 1d6+1 KA

 

the difference in lethality just went way up because although the first mace can do more damage it is normal damage which even an unarmored person can absorb a fair bit of the body (assume a decent PC with PD 4, on an typical hit (5 body) he will only take 1 body from the first mace, while the second write up will cause an average of 4-5 body and the PC's PD doesn't stop any of it).

 

Now that 2nd Mace however pretty much looks just like a sword, so you might want to make it different, at the lowest level you could add +1 stnX to the mace so it is more likely to knock someone out, than a sword, but maybe that is still not enough, so how about

 

Mace 1d6 KA, +1 Stn, Penetrating

 

Now this mace does less actual damage then a sword (assuming 1d6+1 KA for a sword) but does more stun and even against a heavily armored opponent some damage will usually get through (sounds like a mace to me, they were used to bash through plate armor).

 

Combat not deadly enough, add a damage class or two or 3 until it fits what you want.

 

 

Don't get hung up on the official write ups, unlike most games while the write ups are "official" nobody really expects them to be followed exactly, they are basically given as examples (and in my opinion are written to the lowest level of lethality for Champions). HERO is made to allow tinkering, re-writing a weapon is not a house rule it is part of the campaign parameters just like making all the characters take a certain package or which "everyman" skills they get. If you want to run a very gritty game with "realistic" (ie deadly) combat you will probably want to write up the weapons differently from a cinematic the hero can get shot a dozen times before feeling the effects style game.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

I'm going to echo what Toadmaster is saying here - because of the Toolkit, each weapon is, in and of itself, a write up. It has individual properties. One of the things that d20 does is model each weapon based on some basic criteria:

 

- Class. Simple, Martial, Exotic. This alters the cost of the weapon for the character, and determines whether they have to use a Feat (in HERO, spend CP) to pick it up. All weapons in HERO require a WF, but you can rule that some weapons have their own category. Easily.

 

- Damage. Damage slides from 1d3 up to 2d6 and change.

 

- Critical Hit Ratio. A percentage, expressed as solutions on a d20. For example, a long sword crits on either a 19 or 20, thus a 10% critical chance ratio.

 

Modeling weapons in HERO is very different, because things that are special abilities in d20 (Trip potential, Knock down, Trap, Entangle, etc.) are poorly explained and don't make sense to everyone. In HERO its much easier to model this per weapon, as necessary. You charge CP as Weapon Focuses as necessary, and voila.

 

You can have a 1d6+1 HKA Penetrating Mace. A 2d6 1/2 Zweihander, requires two hands to wield. All damage, no flash. A pointy dagger which does 1d6-1 HKA, Reduced Penetration (small blade). It'll still pop a normal for some damage. Your hands are unbound from the normal boundaries of "What the book says" and the kit is placed in your hands to do what needs done. The only restrictions are common sense, dramatic sense, and reasonability.

[Toadmaster]

Re: Damage: Realistic vs. Epic

 

and to take what Thia said one step further it allows you to adjust the games reality to your view of reality, how often have you seen stats in a game and your first thought was "what were they smoking when they stated that out" if you think the stats are wrong its easy to adjust them and it rarely knocks the rest out of whack.