Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

[Phil]

One of the things I like about M&M is the simplicity of its 'Rule of X'. Simplicity has its own problems, but i thought I'd highlight how the idea might be applied in HERO.

 

In M&M you have four combat factors: Attack, Defence, Damage, Toughness. Essentially, each of these is capped at 'Power Level', which begins at 10 in the standard rules. However, you can flex them somewhat. So if you want a character who does a lot of damage (e.g. Brick) you can increase your maximum damage to 14 so long as you cap your Attack at 6. Similarly, you can flex your defence and your Toughness (equivalent of PD/ED) to allow for slow-n-tough or agile-yet-squishy.

 

You could apply something similar in HERO. E.g. Maximum attack is 50AP, maximum CV is 10, Maximum DEF is 20. Exchange 5 AP for 2 OCV, or 1 DCV for 1 DEF. This would then allow Mr Brick (STR 60, OCV 6, DCV 4, DEF 26) or Mr Agile (Martial Arts 7d6, OCV 16, DCV 16, PD 14).

 

The one major downside is the bell-curve. M&M can have a like-for-like exchange, because of the linear probability curve. Because HERO uses 3d6, you're always going to be better off at extremes, thus getting more benefit from going for exceptionally high CV values. As such, the numbers would almost certainly need more complication than I've given them here. Halving the benefit gained when reducing AP or DEF to boost CV would give an keep Mr Brick as he was, but change Mr Agile to MA7d6, OCV 13, DCV 13, PD 14, which would maintain the 1d6 vs. DEF 2 balance. Hmm, by blind luck that does seems to work!

 

Thoughts?

[Eosin]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Interestingly, I am pretty sure Rule of X was a concept in 4th Ed Hero which got imported to FUZION and thence into M&M.

 

It is floating around here somewhere.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

One of the things that I was not too keen on with MnM is the fact taht characters always tended to look (mechanically) very similar because they would all try and max their stats. The flexing gives some scope for variation but still leaves the character very predictable: you KNOW thatif you are having a hard time hitting then you'll do a lot of damage if you do hit.

 

Hero has a much broader control mechanism: character points. You can be agile AND tough and have a good chance of hitting buit you probably won't have so many points left over for damage and other twiddly bits.

 

One option, and it is not something I'd do, but something that has been discussed previously, would be to relpace 3d6 with 1d20 but otherwise use Hero rules - bye-bye bell curve.

 

A less drastic solution would be to say something like this:

 

Campaign averages:

 

Damage: 12DC (unit = 1 DC)

OCV: 8 (unit = 1 OCV)

DCV: 8 (unit = 1 DCV)

Defence (PD and ED total) 50 (unit = 5 defence)

 

Each 1DC, 1OCV, 1DCV or 5 defence reduced by 1 unit can be used to increase any other by 1 unit.

 

If you want to increase anything by more than 2 it takes twice as many units and by more than 4 takes 4 times as many units.

 

So, for example you can reduce your DCV by 2 and increase your damage by 2DCs, or reduce your DCV by 4 and increase damage by 3DCs.

 

Rough and ready but should work. If it doesn't you could peg the doublings at:

 

Increase by 1: 1 unit

Increase by 2: 2 units

Increase by 3: 4 units

Increase by 4: 8 units

 

and so on, which at least has a Heroesque feel to it.

[The Souljourner]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Yeah, see, Sean hit the nail on the head - that's what character points are for. if you spend 20 points on defense, that's 20 points you can't spend on attack. Simple. It's just a hell of a lot more flexible than M&M overly (to me) simple system.

 

-Nate

[Phil]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Yeah, see, Sean hit the nail on the head - that's what character points are for. if you spend 20 points on defense, that's 20 points you can't spend on attack. Simple. It's just a hell of a lot more flexible than M&M overly (to me) simple system.

 

-Nate

 

Sorry to be rude, but this is so much nonsense.

 

a) M&M is also a points-build system.

If this were true, you wouldnt need campaign maxima.

 

Are you suggesting that a 300 point character can have 150 PD and 150 ED? I'm sure you're not, as we know that is patently campaign-breaking. So the argument that points are the only balance you need is completely falacious.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Sorry to be rude, but this is so much nonsense.

 

a) M&M is also a points-build system.

If this were true, you wouldnt need campaign maxima.

 

Are you suggesting that a 300 point character can have 150 PD and 150 ED? I'm sure you're not, as we know that is patently campaign-breaking. So the argument that points are the only balance you need is completely falacious.

 

Phil, come on, man, they'll be thinking us Brits a mite snappy Well, it's probably the weather.

 

To be honest a 150/150 pd/ed character would be a relatively easy takedown, but I fully concede your use of hyperbole to emphasise the point.

 

It seems to me a lot of Heroites do not use the full range of measures built into the system to limit abuse: DC caps, AP caps and so on.

 

Whilst I wouldn't like to go all the way to MnM (which incorporates a number of Hero-like ideas in a sort of homage, no doubt), I have come up with a sort of building block idea for Hero that you can create characters with point blocks adding to a base character, rather than defining every aspect of character. Once built the characters all seem reasonable.

 

My main analytical tool is the eyeball, but I can see how a sort of Rule of X would be useful in many games.

 

The bell curve and threshold nature of Hero does make such things problematic though. I am constantly amazed by lpayers taking down, with no apparent effort, villains I had thought to eb nigh invulnerable, and having all sorts of problems with villains who were mainly there for comic relief.

 

Ah well.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Sorry to be rude, but this is so much nonsense.

 

a) M&M is also a points-build system.

If this were true, you wouldnt need campaign maxima.

 

Are you suggesting that a 300 point character can have 150 PD and 150 ED? I'm sure you're not, as we know that is patently campaign-breaking. So the argument that points are the only balance you need is completely falacious.

 

Not all of us use campaign maxima, or at least fixed limits. I'm open to characters who are superior offensively, and inferior defensively (or vice versa), to the campaign norm, for example.

 

To your example, I would be more inclined to focus the player in question on the fact that he has minimal offense and movement due to his defense levels. Sure, he's invulnerable to normal attacks, but he'll be an easy takedown for entangles, mental attacks, adjustment powers and killing attacks. Even if his opponent has only normal attacks, what are you going to do to stop him from achieving his goals? You're not even a good road block, since he can just grab you and move you out of the way.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

To almost directly contradict what I said earlier, it is sometimes quite enjoyable to play horribly unbalanced characters, so long as they are not horribly unbalanced in the 'good at absolutely everything' direction.

 

Characters with 100pd hardened armour or SPD 12 or 23d6 punches can be fun, if somewhat shortlived, in many cases.

 

To be honest I tend to assume that PCs should, by and large, be good all-rounders and villains should be, by and large, unbalanced but dangerous (both in terms of mentality and powers). That way the villains feel like a real threat without being undefeatable.

 

Off topic, really, but I thought I'd mention it.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

The thread below went into substantial discussion of various "Rule of X" concepts for HERO. Although it does tend to sidetrack into debate over Keneton's "Effectiveness Rating" formula, several other good guidelines and formulas were laid out:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=469

 

Another of our boardmates, nyakki, creating a "Combat Rating" computer app based on formulas from an issue of Adventurers Club:

http://www.trimira.com/hero_stuff/combat_rating.html#

 

nyakki provided instructions on how to copy that to your own computer:

http://www.trimira.com/hero_stuff/combat_rating_text.html

[John Desmarais]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Sorry to be rude, but this is so much nonsense.

 

a) M&M is also a points-build system.

If this were true, you wouldnt need campaign maxima.

 

Well, you don't need them. In fact, if running a game where I know all of the playes, and know that their knowledge of the system is all about at the same level, and know that none of them are going to be deliberately munchkiny - I don't use them.

 

Are you suggesting that a 300 point character can have 150 PD and 150 ED? I'm sure you're not, as we know that is patently campaign-breaking. So the argument that points are the only balance you need is completely falacious.

 

A 300 point character with 150 points spent on PD and 150 spent on ED is an almost useless character. He has no particularly useful attacks; he can't get around very fast; and he has no useful skills. All in all, not particularly likely to break a campaign. Also not likely to be particularly fun to play or interesting/useful to have in the game. In general this type of silly extremism is self correcting as characters this out of whack are mostly worthless.

 

Now, points are not the only balance factor you need. Like any other game, you also need a GM who pays attention to what the players are building or players who can be trusted no to try to screw up your game. However, Hero is a reasonably well balance game system - meaning that two reasonable character built on the same numbers of points, by players with similar grasps of the character building rules, will be reasonably close to the same overall effectiveness. Spending your entire wad of points on a two characteristics is not a reasonable character.

[John Desmarais]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

One of the things I like about M&M is the simplicity of its 'Rule of X'. Simplicity has its own problems, but i thought I'd highlight how the idea might be applied in HERO.

 

In M&M you have four combat factors: Attack, Defence, Damage, Toughness. Essentially, each of these is capped at 'Power Level', which begins at 10 in the standard rules. However, you can flex them somewhat. So if you want a character who does a lot of damage (e.g. Brick) you can increase your maximum damage to 14 so long as you cap your Attack at 6. Similarly, you can flex your defence and your Toughness (equivalent of PD/ED) to allow for slow-n-tough or agile-yet-squishy.

 

You could apply something similar in HERO. E.g. Maximum attack is 50AP, maximum CV is 10, Maximum DEF is 20. Exchange 5 AP for 2 OCV, or 1 DCV for 1 DEF. This would then allow Mr Brick (STR 60, OCV 6, DCV 4, DEF 26) or Mr Agile (Martial Arts 7d6, OCV 16, DCV 16, PD 14).

 

The one major downside is the bell-curve. M&M can have a like-for-like exchange, because of the linear probability curve. Because HERO uses 3d6, you're always going to be better off at extremes, thus getting more benefit from going for exceptionally high CV values. As such, the numbers would almost certainly need more complication than I've given them here. Halving the benefit gained when reducing AP or DEF to boost CV would give an keep Mr Brick as he was, but change Mr Agile to MA7d6, OCV 13, DCV 13, PD 14, which would maintain the 1d6 vs. DEF 2 balance. Hmm, by blind luck that does seems to work!

 

Thoughts?

 

The problem with trying to build a Rule of X in Hero is that Hero has some many options that can impact combat that trying to factor in all of them causes your head to explode. (For example, how would you factor in Desolification into your method?)

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Interestingly, I am pretty sure Rule of X was a concept in 4th Ed Hero which got imported to FUZION and thence into M&M.

 

It is floating around here somewhere.

 

I'm 99% certain that the term and concept of "Rule of X" was introduced in Champions: New Millennium, which of course also introduced the Fuzion game system.

[John Desmarais]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

I'm 99% certain that the term and concept of "Rule of X" was introduced in Champions: New Millennium' date=' which of course also introduced the Fuzion game system.[/quote']

 

Fuzion was the first I saw of the term "Rule of X", and teh first time I'd seen the concept published in a set of rules; but I'd seen the idea used by people with other games (including pre-Fuzion Hero) prior to that.

[massey]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

One of the things I like about M&M is the simplicity of its 'Rule of X'. Simplicity has its own problems, but i thought I'd highlight how the idea might be applied in HERO.

 

In M&M you have four combat factors: Attack, Defence, Damage, Toughness. Essentially, each of these is capped at 'Power Level', which begins at 10 in the standard rules. However, you can flex them somewhat. So if you want a character who does a lot of damage (e.g. Brick) you can increase your maximum damage to 14 so long as you cap your Attack at 6. Similarly, you can flex your defence and your Toughness (equivalent of PD/ED) to allow for slow-n-tough or agile-yet-squishy.

 

You could apply something similar in HERO. E.g. Maximum attack is 50AP, maximum CV is 10, Maximum DEF is 20. Exchange 5 AP for 2 OCV, or 1 DCV for 1 DEF. This would then allow Mr Brick (STR 60, OCV 6, DCV 4, DEF 26) or Mr Agile (Martial Arts 7d6, OCV 16, DCV 16, PD 14).

 

The one major downside is the bell-curve. M&M can have a like-for-like exchange, because of the linear probability curve. Because HERO uses 3d6, you're always going to be better off at extremes, thus getting more benefit from going for exceptionally high CV values. As such, the numbers would almost certainly need more complication than I've given them here. Halving the benefit gained when reducing AP or DEF to boost CV would give an keep Mr Brick as he was, but change Mr Agile to MA7d6, OCV 13, DCV 13, PD 14, which would maintain the 1d6 vs. DEF 2 balance. Hmm, by blind luck that does seems to work!

 

Thoughts?

 

Hero uses a bell curve, so you're better off if you stay away from extremes. There's not much of a difference between a 14 DCV and a 17 DCV. Both are high enough that most characters can't hit you, so they'll resort to Area Effect attacks and Explosions. The bell curve benefits people in the middle by marginalizing the effect of those at the extremes. Of course, with Hero's Defense structure, attacks require a certain minimum amount in order to be useful. In M&M, you can have a +15 attack and a +5 damage. The opponent can always fail his save (or you can always crit, or make use of Autofire, etc). In Hero, a 5D6 attack is less than worthless. It's bad, because not only does it NOT penetrate the target's defense, but it also used up your action and cost you Endurance.

 

M&M works because it's a linear progression for both attack and damage. Each point is 5%. If you've got an 8 attack and a 12 damage, you're 40% likely to hit (vs a default of 10/10) and 60% likely for him to fail his save by 5 or more. With a 4 attack and a 16 damage, you're 20% likely to hit and 80% likely for him to fail by 5 or more. There's a direct relationship between hitting and damage. In Hero, the bell curve says you're better off going for a slightly above average chance to hit and a reasonably powerful attack. Of course, once you consider Desolidification, NNDs, etc, it quickly becomes futile.

 

 

The method I use is simple. If someone shows me a character that appears to be unbalanced, I say "No. I think he's too powerful for this game. Re-write him, please." I say the same thing if someone tries to play a stupid character idea. "I'm gonna be... the Fiddler!!! He'll have a fiddle, see, and..." "No. I think he's too stupid for this game. Play something else, please." The eyeball is a good test.

 

By the way, a guy with 150 PD and ED is easy pickings for a bank robber with a shotgun.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Sorry to be rude, but this is so much nonsense.

 

a) M&M is also a points-build system.

If this were true, you wouldnt need campaign maxima.

 

Are you suggesting that a 300 point character can have 150 PD and 150 ED? I'm sure you're not, as we know that is patently campaign-breaking. So the argument that points are the only balance you need is completely falacious.

Not every campaign uses campaign maxima. (Ours doesn't.) I've seen wonderful campaigns without maxima, and terrible ones with strictly enforced maxima. Maxima are not some kind of magic formula for campaign "balance" (whatever that is), they're simply one possible approach. With good players and GMs Rules of X are largely superfluous IME; they tend to produce a sameness of build which is detrimental to innovative design and roleplaying.

 

With regard to your rather tongue in cheek example of a 150 PD/ 150 ED character, those would be mostly wasted points in most games. If the average villain in a campaign does 15d6 (for example) with his EB, then his average damage generated would be 52 Stun. After that 52 Stun the other 98 points spent on those defenses are utterly useless. And a puny 4d6 NND would still flatten the character in one hit. Not much of a hero, that.

[Phil]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

I have to say I'm disappointed how many people are picking up on the clearly facetious example of 150PD/ED rather than the principle, which is that points alone are not a balance mechanism.

 

Also, while I 100% accept the importance of GM scrutiny, the trouble with this is the high degree of subjectivity that it creates, making things harder for players to go away and create a character. In essence it reflects clear flaws in the system, and while no rpg system will ever be perfect, the high degree of GM scrutiny required in HERO demonstrates the large number of scalability flaws. That is the reason that campaign maxima are suggested, even if not taken up, and it is also the reason that 'rules of x' were first mooted.

 

Hero uses a bell curve, so you're better off if you stay away from extremes. There's not much of a difference between a 14 DCV and a 17 DCV.

True enough. Perhaps a more accurate comment is that the bellcurve favours high values, but that there are swift diminishing returns. The main benefit of DCV 17 rather than 14 is for situations where DCV is halved.

 

However, my original point was simply that M&M has a quick n dirty system which I thought might have some applicability to HERO. No Q n' D system is ever going to be perfect, but as pointed out the inherent complexity of HERO means that a thorough system is either impossible or restrictively unwieldy.

[Mister E]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

If a GM actually tool-kits a game, neither Rule-of-X, nor Active Points, need be used as a control measure. Rarely is this done.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

I have to say I'm disappointed how many people are picking up on the clearly facetious example of 150PD/ED rather than the principle' date=' which is that points alone are not a balance mechanism.[/quote']If that was the point you were trying to illustrate, perhaps you should have selected a better example. A 150PD/ED character isn't at all unbalancing within the context of most games. I assumed your example was tongue in cheek.

 

Also, while I 100% accept the importance of GM scrutiny, the trouble with this is the high degree of subjectivity that it creates, making things harder for players to go away and create a character. In essence it reflects clear flaws in the system, and while no rpg system will ever be perfect, the high degree of GM scrutiny required in HERO demonstrates the large number of scalability flaws. That is the reason that campaign maxima are suggested, even if not taken up, and it is also the reason that 'rules of x' were first mooted.

Role playing games will always be subjective. The high degree of GM scrutiny inherent to Hero also provides it with enormous flexibility to create unusual effects and powersets which some other systems may lack (I'm not saying that is true of M&M, because I've never seen it.). While Rules of X are not without certain merits, IME their negatives outweigh their positives. Our campaign has successfully run for 13 years with a guideline of (SPD + DC) <= 20 and "Don't step on another character's schtick." Neither are etched in stone.

 

However, my original point was simply that M&M has a quick n dirty system which I thought might have some applicability to HERO. No Q n' D system is ever going to be perfect, but as pointed out the inherent complexity of HERO means that a thorough system is either impossible or restrictively unwieldy.

Quick 'n Dirty can also easily become "Easy 'n Shallow." Rules of X as a general guideline rather than as an absolute may be useful to set parameters, but I think a far better way to do that is still to sit down with the players and discuss expectations for the campaign. It tells the players a lot more when the GM says "Heavy military weapons are a threat to the heroes" than simply his stating "There is a maximum attack of 75 Active Points, and no defenses above 35." Ultimately flavor is what good campaigns strive for rather than numbers. This is not a game about numbers; it is a role playing game which uses numbers to quantify certain aspects. Rules of X are simply too formulaic for my tastes. YMMV.

[Vondy]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Interestingly, I am pretty sure Rule of X was a concept in 4th Ed Hero which got imported to FUZION and thence into M&M.

 

It is floating around here somewhere.

 

The first time I can remember seeing the Rule of X was fusion. I don't remember it in 4th, but my memory is imperfect.

[Vondy]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

If a GM actually tool-kits a game' date=' neither Rule-of-X, nor Active Points, need be used as a control measure. Rarely is this done.[/quote']

 

This miraculous took-kittingyou speak of: can you explain it in greater detail?

[Eosin]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

The first time I can remember seeing the Rule of X was fusion. I don't remember it in 4th' date=' but my memory is imperfect.[/quote']

 

I didn't hang around during the fuzion days... Once 4E hung up its hat, I was done. However, I remember the Rule of X and bet I still have a copy on my old computer. Could be that I ain't recollectin correctly but I reckon it had to be 4E.

[massey]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Rule of X was not in 4th edition. It first appeared in Fuzion.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

It first appeared in a copy of Adventurers Club which was Hero's magazine in the 1980's. I don't recall whether it was called that, but that's where the concept first appeared. It predates Fuzion by a good 10 years, at least.

[Vondy]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

It first appeared in a copy of Adventurers Club which was Hero's magazine in the 1980's. I don't recall whether it was called that' date=' but that's where the concept first appeared. It predates Fuzion by a good 10 years, at least.[/quote']

 

Cool, thanks.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Using M&M's Rule of X in HERO

 

Also' date=' while I 100% accept the importance of GM scrutiny, the trouble with this is the high degree of subjectivity that it creates[/quote']

GMs and Players should work together to create a game.

 

The subjectivity is what keeps me coming back - I have to INTERACT with those around me to create my character, the Game, the World, The Event Itself is a cooperative effort. Why should I lock myself in a closet with a bunch of limits and come out expecting to plug in like a expansion pack....

 

ptah! I spit on the rule of X.

 

Give me subjective judgement, give me interaction, give me choices and negotiations. Give me cooperation.