HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

[zornwil]

Sorry, the thread title isn't really that good but I couldn't come up with a clearer one...

 

From a prior discussion (the notorious Spiderman vs. Firelord one), there was a sub-thread about how an illustration on some page(s) demonstrated all of the blows in a particular super-combat. From there, I asked if a poster felt that in HERO combat every single punch or weapon firing or so on was represented necessarily by a to-hit roll and (if applicable) damage roll. Or if instead those only represent the "serious" blows.

 

I figured it would be a potentially interesting more general topic. I know it's come up before, but we have many newbies since then and I can't recall a full thread on this topic.

 

I think HERO combat only represents the serious blows. The Turns and Phases are simply too long against the number of actions likely taken to see otherwise, IMHO. I find it silly to think that in 12 seconds, in heroic combat let alone superheroic, that a "high level fighter" who is likely to have a 4 SPD can only strike 4 times. And even with Rapid Strike or such it doesn't wash, to me, as it's normal for anyone to be able to strike many, many times against an equal opponent in that amount of time.

 

But what do you, the viewer, think?

[ghost-angel]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

I think it's whatever you want it to be. The Book doesn't specify.

 

It's all in the cinematic presentation of the GM and Players at hand.

 

It's why we have imaginations, to imagine the fight as we see it in all it's glory.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

I think HERO does a pretty good job of describing the 'blow-by-blow' aspect of combat in usable detail. If an attacker stuns an opponent and jumps on top of them (pinning them) they certainly should be able to rain down a hail of blows much faster than 1/Phase. This might be considered a very limited form of an 'everyman' autofire-punch (or HTH Blazing-Away?!). With regards to blows against a fully defensive target (full DCV), the Autofire advantaged HA works well for speedsters and martial artists who want a flurry-of-blows attack (Spider-Man falls somewhere between those 2). But at a certain point further detail than this doesn't serve any purpose other than flavor and would probably slow down combat needlessly IMHO.

 

HM

[Chuckg]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

Doesn't Sweep allow for multiple attacks vs. a single target?

 

And to quote what I said on another thread:

 

My view is, if I want a game that 'abstracts' combat, where one roll reprseents the aggregate effect of an entire exchange of blows and misses, I should go back to D&D.

 

Besides, the game itself says that a Segment is 1 second long, so where the heck is there *time* for extended fight sequences inside a single roll? 5e and USPD already tell me how to model speedster 'rain of blows' punches, and it's not compatible with a 'this one attack and damage roll actually abstracts a lot of different punches' approach.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

Doesn't Sweep allow for multiple attacks vs. a single target?

 

And to quote what I said on another thread:

 

Indeed. Sweep allows for anyone to "flurry", Blazing Away allows for someone to empty that million round machine gun, and in a "real" fight, you are probably only going to be attacking every so often (unless it looks like they're at a DCV penalty, then you might want to sweep).

 

Of course, having a power/maneuver with the sfx "good sweeping" that says you punch them repeatedly is fine too.

 

And a feint might just be part of a single attack roll, too.

[Inu]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

There MUST be at least some minimal level of abstraction. Otherwise, two guys in a fistfight are standing in the same positions, trading blows once every 3-6 seconds (assuming normal human speeds).

 

I've never assumed fights look like that, myself... I usually insert probing punches in here and there, some circling going on, then one guy lunges in for an attack. Bam! Other guy takes advantage of the opening, launches a counter-attack, bam!

 

There's a lot going on besides what is explicitly handled in the rules. To represent a pair of opposed attack rolls as an exchange of blows? That's entirely within the spirit of the rules, in my opinion.

 

Individual games will certain vary, between the minimum levels of abstraction and D&D levels (where an attack roll represents not a single lunge, but a single chance of hitting). I vary between the two extremes, depending on the fight. But I spend more time towards the higher end than the lower.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

There MUST be at least some minimal level of abstraction. Otherwise, two guys in a fistfight are standing in the same positions, trading blows once every 3-6 seconds (assuming normal human speeds).

 

I've never assumed fights look like that, myself... I usually insert probing punches in here and there, some circling going on, then one guy lunges in for an attack. Bam! Other guy takes advantage of the opening, launches a counter-attack, bam!

 

There's a lot going on besides what is explicitly handled in the rules. To represent a pair of opposed attack rolls as an exchange of blows? That's entirely within the spirit of the rules, in my opinion.

 

Individual games will certain vary, between the minimum levels of abstraction and D&D levels (where an attack roll represents not a single lunge, but a single chance of hitting). I vary between the two extremes, depending on the fight. But I spend more time towards the higher end than the lower.

 

Moving around is "abstracted" - you can be anywhere in your hex, remember? That's a fair bit of movement. Plus, your actions _are_ spread out over time, you don't move that 6m in half a second.

 

Two average guys? They might not punch more than an average of once every six seconds, and if they're punching more, that can be a sweep.

[zornwil]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

Moving around is "abstracted" - you can be anywhere in your hex, remember? That's a fair bit of movement. Plus, your actions _are_ spread out over time, you don't move that 6m in half a second.

 

Two average guys? They might not punch more than an average of once every six seconds, and if they're punching more, that can be a sweep.

What about many blows a second for several seconds? That's a general question to all, btw.

[zornwil]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

I have always tended to think that one roll = one hit' date=' but I keep getting pointed out that things like "offensive strike" could be flurries that have the same effect.[/quote']

 

Okay, great point. I do tend to agree with this and had (weirdly) forgotten this thought. I do tend to think that one punch can equal several in a brief period. It doesn't have to be that single second, either, just that the "effect" is really in that second. It's all SFX, basically.

 

In fact, I prefer that unless there's a solid reason otherwise, Autofire be simulated with just higher power or such. BUT I stress that last bit is JUST personal. I just have a weird thing about Autofire.

 

(PS - FYI, I took gewing's quote from the Spiderman-Firelord thread and put it here for the sake of this topic)

[tesuji]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

if an attack has charges or several other possible limitations like side effects perhaps, then I think you have to boil down to "one attack roll is one attack" otherwise your abstraction runs handily into conflict with the more hard coded aspects of the power/attack.

 

it seems a bit odd to say "it represents multiple actions unless there is a counter on those actions like charges, in which case it only represents a single one" so i tend to go with it being more representative of a single attack most all the time.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

When I've watched matches between boxers or other trained fighters, I've noticed that actual exchanges of forceful blows, large movements around a ring, or significant efforts to block or avoid a blow are explosive, interspersed with periods where the fighters are bobbing and weaving, shifting their stance, feinting and watching each other closely looking for an opening to strike. I've always played/run the time in between Attacks like that, sometimes describing it in those terms to add color.

 

There are times when I think that a "flurry of blows" are best represented by a single attack roll (Sweep and Multiple-Power Attacks can both fit this bill), and other times when the "look" of a single Attack should be one carefully-timed blow. For me it's contextual, and the context of a fight is constantly shifting. I rather enjoy how that keeps my creative imagination on its toes. And I like that HERO can readily accomodate either interpretation.

[McCoy]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

Well, to quote myself

 

The concept of END and charges means we do need to keep tract of the attacks.

 

Imagine the alternative. You have a six-gun, simply as the prototypical focus with charges. You fire in your first phase, again in your second. In your third phase the hammer clicks on an empty chamber.

 

"What happened to my other four bullets?"

 

"They were implied to have been fired, off panel, between phases."

[Trained Chicken]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

It's abstract in exactly the same way that calculus is abstract: the steps between start and finish are hard to understand and may or may not relate to actual phenomena; but the end result is always surprisingly accurate.

[Toadmaster]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

For the most part I look at it as one roll one attack, but there has to be a certain amount of abstraction, particularly with hand to hand fighting, maybe not multiple swings but definately fienting, some dancing around the hex and such. It is harder to agree to this with missile weapons though, even assuming aimed shots are the standard, it is very slow to assume a normal can only get off 2 shots in 12 seconds and the ammo pretty much means that is what is happening. Really the big problem is probably a turn should be 6 seconds with 1/2 second phases (still slowish but not as obvious), or just ignore the time lag and have fun which is what I do.

[zornwil]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

Well, to quote myself

 

The concept of END and charges means we do need to keep tract of the attacks.

 

Imagine the alternative. You have a six-gun, simply as the prototypical focus with charges. You fire in your first phase, again in your second. In your third phase the hammer clicks on an empty chamber.

 

"What happened to my other four bullets?"

 

"They were implied to have been fired, off panel, between phases."

 

Yeah, I think the earlier comment re a punch thrown might be really a collection of several over 2-3 seconds works for that sort of melee stuff, while as I said otherwise but owe you here, I agree charges-based and similar attacks are pretty much entirely explicit.

 

But it depends a bit, too...if you play without END and mostly without Charges except to model unusual cases within a highly-"cinematic" (broad) context, then HERO can just as easily support a few shots as the better placed shots within a hail of fire.

[Rapier]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

Hero Combat describes all the blows not just the serious ones (oh there is SO a joke in there someplace).

 

However, I do think most Hero Players do a poor job of describing their combat actions. I would say that about 90% of the people I have played with "fire off a 12d6 EB" or "throw a haymaker." They don't "wind way up and try to punch his jaw through the top of his skull." It makes the combats somewhat lackluster.

[Legendsmiths]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

One thing to promote posturing would be a "Posturing Maneuver". This would be a contest of OCV as a half-phase attack action. If you win, you gain the initiative and will automatically win a contest of DEX (such as for a held action). If you win by 3, you get +1 skill level. If you win by more than half (or by 6 if your opponent makes his roll as well), you get +2 skill levels and hold the initiative until your opponent stuns you or wins a Posturing Maneuver contest.

 

I am in the blow by blow camp since there are many ways for people to make multiple attacks in a single phase.

[ghost-angel]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

I'm thinking it's a combination of all of the above.

 

With a gun, and charges, you're specifically firing what you're firing - one round or autofire.

 

With a fist fight it could simulate a series of feignts, blocks and hits. It could be waiting patiently for that one moment and then striking. It could vary from one combat to the next.

 

Either way both could involve small movements about your current Hex, standing still or whatever the combatant feels is appropriate.

 

combat should be fluid to the situation and be adapatable to the fight you want to describe at hand.

[Zeropoint]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

I just don't think too hard about the number of attacks in a given amount of time. The system works pretty well and is more or less realistic in its results, which is good enough for me.

 

But yes, I do find it odd that in the Hero system, the average person can fire a total of TWO shots in twelve seconds, whereas in real life, I can empty a ten-round magazine, reload, and empty the second magazine in that time without even trying very hard.

[zornwil]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

I'm thinking it's a combination of all of the above.

 

With a gun, and charges, you're specifically firing what you're firing - one round or autofire.

 

With a fist fight it could simulate a series of feignts, blocks and hits. It could be waiting patiently for that one moment and then striking. It could vary from one combat to the next.

 

Either way both could involve small movements about your current Hex, standing still or whatever the combatant feels is appropriate.

 

combat should be fluid to the situation and be adapatable to the fight you want to describe at hand.

Yeah, that's where I ended up after some brain farting.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

To me this is pure cinema - we acknowledge in d20 that we're exchanging "the major" blows of the combat, the results in cinematic slow motion of movement, combat and those exchanges. HERO breaks things down much more minutely, although I think it's reasonable (for balance purposes, at least) to argue that in terms of cinema, the system itself models things just fine.

 

Having stood around swinging foam weapons at other people, there are long periods (multiple seconds) in between swings - there can be all sorts of explanations, but even in combat, there's exchanges, face offs, balances, fall backs, charges - all these things occur in cinema which in combat often devolve to swing/hit.

 

It's largely DMO, but I'm also of the camp that tries to make combat as dramatic as possible.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

Imagine the alternative. You have a six-gun, simply as the prototypical focus with charges. You fire in your first phase, again in your second. In your third phase the hammer clicks on an empty chamber.

 

"What happened to my other four bullets?"

 

"They were implied to have been fired, off panel, between phases."

 

For melee combat, I always tend to visualize it a little more abstracted: jab-jab-feint-WHAM! where the wham is the actual attack roll and the preliminaries are the effects of OCV/DCV/CSLs/etc setting up the money shot.

 

For missile combat, the system doesn't make too much sense if you really think about it. So I try not to think about it too hard. That's what suspension of disbelief is for. I figure there's a bit more movement and ducking-behind-cover in between shots.

 

But really, all that is SPFX. In terms of mechanics, one roll per shot/punch is the only way that works.

 

 

[Edit: I somehow posted this without seing there was a second page of posts, and now realize everyone's already said this. Oh well.]

 

 

bigdamnhero

“I said it was our only chance -- I did not say it was a good one.”

[Lord Liaden]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

I just don't think too hard about the number of attacks in a given amount of time. The system works pretty well and is more or less realistic in its results, which is good enough for me.

 

But yes, I do find it odd that in the Hero system, the average person can fire a total of TWO shots in twelve seconds, whereas in real life, I can empty a ten-round magazine, reload, and empty the second magazine in that time without even trying very hard.

 

If you haven't seen them in the 5E rulebook, the optional Combat Maneuvers, "Blazing Away" and "Rapid Fire," cover this situation very well IMHO.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

I think it's whatever you want it to be. The Book doesn't specify.

 

It's all in the cinematic presentation of the GM and Players at hand.

 

It's why we have imaginations, to imagine the fight as we see it in all it's glory.

Agreed. And by the way zorn, as far as the flurry of blows you seem to think are not being represented, dont forget that Sweep, Rapid Fire, MPA's, and Autofire present options for characters to make more Attacks / hits than their SPD alone indicates.

[Cancer]

Re: HERO combat - somewhat abstract or entirely specific?

 

Remember, in a fistfight, bobbing & weaving is just the sfx for maintaining nonzero DCV.

 

Because that statement is at least arguably true, you must be abstracting stuff somewhat. Otherwise you have to sink into microdetail about how the bob/weave is going. Bleah.

 

As you move away from situations which are just two humans in melee combat, it gets more abstract. This is painfully clear for vehicle combat. As the long ramblings in the Star Hero forum about spaceship combat suggest, some abstraction is absolutely necessary because you don't really know what's going on. If you're trying to model a battlewagon as a single entity even though it's clustered with more or less independent weapons systems, you have to be abstracting things.