Multiple Attacks in a Phase

[Silbeg]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

Nope' date=' simply buy +4 OCV with the Sweep manuever for 8 points. You can then perform a 3 attack Sweep with no OCV penalty.[/quote']

 

The issue here is that you can perform a 2-attack sweep at a +2 OCV... which is what I am trying to avoid.

 

In any case, I have always thought that levels with Sweep are far to cheesy, and cheep.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

In D&D when attacked by spells' date=' the caster doesn't roll to see whether he "hits", the defender rolls to see whether he "evades". That's what saving throws are. So if you preferred that approach then the thing to do would be to let the defender roll. Of course, I can recall at least one game where the player always rolled whether he was attacker or defender.[/quote']

 

There's a possibility. Just change the spell rules so that the defender rolls. The defender needs a roll of 10 + DCV - OCV, or less, to be missed.

 

EXAMPLE:

 

OCV 5 vs DCV 5 normally the attacker rolls 11- to hit (62.5% chance of hitting). Now, defender must roll 10- (a 50% chance of evading).

 

OCV8 vs DCV 5, normally the attacker needs 14 or less, an 83.8% chance of success. Now, Defender needs a 7-, a 16.2% chance of evading.

 

OCV 5 vs DCV 8 normally requires the attacker get an 8-, a 25.93% chance of hitting. Now, the evader needs a 14-, an 83.8% chance of evasion.

 

If OCV > DCV, the odds of a hit are unchanged. If OCV < DCV, or equal, a hit is less likely than under the current rules.

 

Alternatively, the defender needs a roll of 9 + DCV - OCV, or less, to be missed.

 

EXAMPLE:

 

OCV 5 vs DCV 5 normally the attacker rolls 11- to hit (62.5% chance of hitting). Now, defender must roll 9- (a 62.5% chance of evading).

 

OCV8 vs DCV 5, normally the attacker needs 14 or less, an 83.8% chance of success. Now, Defender needs a 6-, a 9.26% chance of evading.

 

OCV 5 vs DCV 8 normally requires the attacker get an 8-, a 25.93% chance of hitting. Now, the evader needs a 13-, a 74.07 chance of evasion.

 

If OCV > DCV, the odds of a hit are increased. If OCV < DCV, or equal, a hit is as likely as under the current rules.

 

This actually seems more consistent with the current version of d20, as most spells either require the attacker roll to hit, OR allow the defender a saving throw. By adding a resistance roll with no other change to the Hero mechanics, the defender gets two chances to avoid the effects of the spell instead of just one.

 

Plus, unlike D&D, the defender still gets his defenses in Hero (but he probably doesn't have Stun/BOD totals than match D&D hit points).

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

Of course' date=' I can recall at least one game where the player always rolled whether he was attacker or defender.[/quote']Y'know, always having the player roll is an interesting idea, even if you don't change anything mechanically. When on offense, they roll (11+OCV)-3d6 to determine the DCV they hit. On defense, they roll (11+DCV)-3d6 to determine the OCV required to hit them.

 

It doesn't change anything, really, other than the dynamic of who's rolling the bones. But there might be times when this method is more fun/interesting/practical, etc.

[SuperKlaus]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

Actually, the answer does appear to be 'Sweep' since you can incorporate multiple manuevers into one volley, it's just a matter of net OCV penalty assessed against the attacker. A Claw/Claw/Bite sequence would simply manifest as a Sweep Attack against a single target. So here's the wrinkle.

 

The Barghest is at 17- with Claw Attacks, and 20- with his bite; do I execute the whole attack as 17- with a -4 penalty? Do I deal with them separately? Thoughts?

 

I don't believe anyone's directly answered this question. The Sweep-with-different-moves rules say that when Sweeping with different Maneuvers each move has its own OCV bonus but you suffer stacked DCV penalties. Clawing and biting is all the same Manuever (Strike), but I figure that's a technical point.

 

I believe you would be rolling two 13- and a 16-, that being what happens when you put the Sweep penalty to the numbers you gave. I trust the Bite is 20- because of CSLs: +3 w/ Bite?

 

The rules are not clear on the order in which you attack, which of course is important because a miss causes all remaining rolls to miss...I'd say lead with the claws because Sweep is weaker that way and I personally feel it needs to be very carefully watched.

 

In any case' date=' I have always thought that levels with Sweep are far to cheesy, and cheap.[/quote']

 

Yeah, I've noticed that they seem awful effective. I'm actually really torn on allowing Sweep. On the one hand it can really grossly spike a character's killing power, to the point of insanity, but on the other I do love fighting video games and Sweep is the finest way to represent a MASTER COMBO!

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

In D&D when attacked by spells' date=' the caster doesn't roll to see whether he "hits", the defender rolls to see whether he "evades". That's what saving throws are. So if you preferred that approach then the thing to do would be to let the defender roll. Of course, I can recall at least one game where the player always rolled whether he was attacker or defender.[/quote']

And sometimes you want a form of resistance that does not necessarily involve evading (/Dex/DCV), or an Area of Effect attack that allows people to avoid being affected without having to Dive for Cover (if you want to handle that with a Non-Selective Area of Effect, go ahead, but I'm not convinced it always fits the desired affect). I think it's a good general addition to the system, even if you or others don't choose to use it.

 

(A good example of a place it might be nice is a disease that allows some kind of Con or Body roll to avoid the affects. It is one that a lot of people wind up wanting to build at one point or another, but we never seem to come to a consensus on how to build it.)

[David Johnston]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

For a CON save versus deliberate disease infection you could go with Requires a Skill Roll (subject to Skill versus Attribute Roll contests -3/4). Then natural diseases could just be assigned a "skill" based on how infectious the GM decides they'll be.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

The issue here is that you can perform a 2-attack sweep at a +2 OCV... which is what I am trying to avoid.

 

In any case, I have always thought that levels with Sweep are far to cheesy, and cheep.

I would use Penalty Skill Levels: Offset Sweep Penalties.

 

You can buy any number of levels but only apply as many as you have Sweep Penalties for.

 

PSLs are, in essence, CSLs with Limitations applied. No need to guy buying 5pt CSLs w/ Limitations when you can get a 2pt PSL to do the job.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

For a CON save versus deliberate disease infection you could go with Requires a Skill Roll (subject to Skill versus Attribute Roll contests -3/4). Then natural diseases could just be assigned a "skill" based on how infectious the GM decides they'll be.

..which is basically what the Limitation I built comes down to. It's just prepackaged with a few extra options.

[Silbeg]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

I would use Penalty Skill Levels: Offset Sweep Penalties.

 

You can buy any number of levels but only apply as many as you have Sweep Penalties for.

 

PSLs are, in essence, CSLs with Limitations applied. No need to guy buying 5pt CSLs w/ Limitations when you can get a 2pt PSL to do the job.

 

Except that per the rules this isn't legal. The -2/extra attack are technically manuever "bonuses", as I understand it, not penalties. So, you cannot take a PSL with them.

 

So, that is why my group has come up with the inelegant solution of the 5-point CSLs with a -1 lim.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

I just House Rule that the behavior of 2-point CSLs with Sweep and Rapid Fire (and some others such as Move By, too, for that matter) is such that you can only use them to raise the maneuver modifier to -0. If you want a net bonus you are just going to have to apply CSLs to the attack (weapon or maneuver) that you are using inside the Sweep/Rapid Fire. I'm not sure this is a great thing, but it's worked okay in heroic fantasy games so far.

[Silbeg]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

I just House Rule that the behavior of 2-point CSLs with Sweep and Rapid Fire (and some others such as Move By' date=' too, for that matter) is such that you can only use them to raise the maneuver modifier to -0. If you want a net bonus you are just going to have to apply CSLs to the attack (weapon or maneuver) that you are using inside the Sweep/Rapid Fire. I'm not sure this is a great thing, but it's worked okay in heroic fantasy games so far.[/quote']

 

Sounds like a good idea... effectively, it treats the 2-pt CSL for Sweep as a PSL. Elegant, and to the point!

 

Rep!

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

Except that per the rules this isn't legal. The -2/extra attack are technically manuever "bonuses", as I understand it, not penalties. So, you cannot take a PSL with them.

 

So, that is why my group has come up with the inelegant solution of the 5-point CSLs with a -1 lim.

No, actually it's exactly what Penalty Skill Levels are for: To offset the Negative OCV Modifier of a maneuver or attack.

 

You can buy 1.5 pt PSLs to offset the negative OCV Modifier for Sweep Maneuvers.

[Silbeg]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

No, actually it's exactly what Penalty Skill Levels are for: To offset the Negative OCV Modifier of a maneuver or attack.

 

You can buy 1.5 pt PSLs to offset the negative OCV Modifier for Sweep Maneuvers.

 

see this post:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10300&highlight=sweep+PSL

 

Also see

Nor can he buy Penalty Skill Levels to counteract the standard OCV penalty imposed by a Combat Maneuver (such as the -3 OCV for a Grab By)

 

The -2/extra attack is a "standard OCV penalty imposed by a Combat Manuever" - in this case, Sweep. This is exactly like the situation referred to with Grab By, though Sweep would probably be a better example.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

I stand corrected.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

That'd be one of those official rules that I threw out almost as soon as I first read or heard about it.

Counter Intuative and generally pointless.

 

I don't mind the addition of PSL's to the system, but they should, IMO, be able to be applied pretty much across the board to negative penalties, regardless of what source those penalties come from.

PSLs are, in my game, levels that can't bring you to higher than base level... ones that let you counteract penalties. I don't restrict them from WHAT penalties they apply to, nor require clunky Limited CSL/SL constructs to simulate PSLs.

To do anything else smacks of building too many SFX into the system. Which HERO has been trying to move away from for a long time.

 

 

If I want to simulate a Seven headed monster who can attack with all his heads at once with no penalty, but don't want it to have a huge bonus for just Sweeping two attacks (And don' want to go with the Duplication route)... I'll write it up as a grip of PSLs with Sweep and bugger the official rules

 

By the same token... I seem to remember an official ruling that PSL's couldn't be applied to DCV. If I want a fighter who is so skilled in maneuvering in his armor that he can ignore the Encumberance Penalties to DCV... I do it.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

Speed

The most direct method of increasing one's actions is to simply buy more SPEED. However since Fantasy HERO is a Heroic level game, with Normal Characteristic Maxima in place, this can get expensive once the Maxima has been hit. Due to the "force multiplying" effect of SPEED, many GM's will also actively resist Character concepts pertaining to increasing it too far. However, if your GM is amenable, even a single point of SPEED over the Characteristic Maxima can give a solid character a definite edge and should be considered.

 

Killing Machine: +1 SPD (Over Characteristic Maxima); Real Cost: 20 points

 

Sweep / Rapid Fire / TWF

Sweep and Rapid Fire are Optional Manuever accesibles to all Characters for free which allows a Character to attack multiple opponents in HtH or Range respectively, but at a stiff penalty. To ensure superiority at it, a character could buy several +2 OCV Combat Skill Levels with Sweep. There is also the Two Weapon Fighting Skill, but under the hood it uses the Sweep / Rapid Fire rules.

 

Willow parted 4 Times: +6 OCV with SWEEP {allows 4 strikes without penalty}; Real Cost: 12 points

 

Naked Autofire

Alternately, with your GM's permission, you can buy Autofire x3 with up to a 4d6 HKA, OIF (Weapon of Opportunity (-1/2)). This is a personal ability inherent to the Character, an it is usable with any weapon of the appropriate type. This will enable your character to strike multiple times with each attack as described under Autofire.

 

Flurry of Strikes: Naked Modifier, Autofire (3 shots; +1/4) (15 Active Points); OIF (Sword of Opportunity, -1/2) Costs 1 END; Real Cost: 10 points

 

Custom Power

Alternately, with your GM's permission, you can buy a special Attack Power that allows you to do damage to more than 1 opponent at a time. You can use variations on Area of Effect: Any Area with No Range to indicate an ability to accurately attack all the hexes adjacent to your character for example. This is likely the most expensive option presented, but also makes for interesting flavor for a given Character; also, dont forget the advantage of only needing to hit a hexes DCV of 3! Presented below is an example of this sort of Power.

 

Reaping the Whirlwind: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 2d6 (plus STR) (vs. PD), +1 STUN Multiplier (+1/4), Area Of Effect (4" Any Area; +1) (67 Active Points); OIF (Sword of Opportunity; -1/2), All hexes must be adjacent to own hex (-1/2) Costs 7 END; Real Cost: 33 points

 

Multiple Power Attack

Another choice available to characters that have several attacks and are not using Frameworks in such a way as to disqualify themselves from this option is the idea of a Multiple Power Attack, where a character unleashes several different attacks simultaneously. Not all GM's allow this option, but it is definitely a powerful one.

 

Spreading

Some Powers can be Spread to affect more than one hex at the cost of doing less effect; a SFX of this could be "multiple shots".

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

Also:

 

TWO-FOR-ONE SPECIAL

Using one action to take out two opponents, particularly in a case where one is adjacent (in HtH range) and the other isn't, is a very effective tactic. There are several ways to do this.

KNOCKBACK RICOCHET

Not in the main rulebook, but clarified in the Rules FAQ and later publications (such as the aforementioned Combat Handbook), a character can Knockback an opponent in such a way as to hit a third character. This requires a to-hit roll using only the attackers base OCV vs. the third character's DCV.

PITCHING ENEMIES

Similarly, though not as efficiently, it is possible to throw an opponent that has already been grabbed in a previous Phase at another character.

SHOVE

The Martial Maneuver Shove is quite useful in this regard -- you can Shove one character some distance and into another, also gaining some movement yourself. It is also one of the easier ways to move opponents around against their will, and all in all a very under utilized Maneuver.

MARTIAL MANEUVERS AND MULTIPLE POWER ATTACKS

Martial Maneuvers built on different bases can be used together as a Multiple Power Attack to pull off very efficient actions like Nerve Strike + Take Away + Leg Sweep and other such devastating combos. If one is prone to watching Kung Fu movies, a lot of the crazier stunts seen therein are most closely modeled in the HERO System via creative combinations of MPA'd Martial Maneuvers.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

Speed

The most direct method of increasing one's actions is to simply buy more SPEED. However since Fantasy HERO is a Heroic level game, with Normal Characteristic Maxima in place, this can get expensive once the Maxima has been hit. Due to the "force multiplying" effect of SPEED, many GM's will also actively resist Character concepts pertaining to increasing it too far. However, if your GM is amenable, even a single point of SPEED over the Characteristic Maxima can give a solid character a definite edge and should be considered.

 

Killing Machine: +1 SPD (Over Characteristic Maxima); Real Cost: 20 points

You can even Limit the Speed: Only To Make Attacks -1

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

You can even Limit the Speed: Only To Make Attacks -1

True, but I personally only allow limited SPD in very rare circumstances. More trouble than it's worth IMO.

[Robyn]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

True' date=' but I personally only allow limited SPD in very rare circumstances. More trouble than it's worth IMO.[/quote']

 

I think it sounds like an excellent way of simulating various abilities. Instead of buying extra REC (and going over the NCM for that), buy extra SPD - only for taking recoveries. Your character isn't faster, she just recovers faster.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

I think it sounds like an excellent way of simulating various abilities. Instead of buying extra REC (and going over the NCM for that)' date=' buy extra SPD - only for taking recoveries. Your character isn't faster, she just [i']recovers[/i] faster.

I think its safe to say at this point that we have widely diverging philosophies of gaming and just leave it at that.

[Alibear]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

I think it sounds like an excellent way of simulating various abilities. Instead of buying extra REC (and going over the NCM for that)' date=' buy extra SPD - only for taking recoveries. Your character isn't faster, she just [i']recovers[/i] faster.

 

 

Extra Rec is for people who recover faster.

 

I know that you only recover once every 12 seconds due to the limitations of the game mechanics but that 12 second recovery is spread out over those 12 seconds in the real world.

 

If you want to recover faster buy more Rec, don't overcomplicate things for no good reason.

 

edit: I see that you just want a sneaky way to circumvent the NCM. If I was the GM I would tell you to stop Rules Raping.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

I think it sounds like an excellent way of simulating various abilities. Instead of buying extra REC (and going over the NCM for that)' date=' buy extra SPD - only for taking recoveries. Your character isn't faster, she just [i']recovers[/i] faster.

So if "recovers faster" isn't the description of REC, what is?

[Robyn]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

If you want to recover faster buy more Rec' date=' don't overcomplicate things for no good reason.[/quote']

 

It's mathematics. You can buy extra REC up to a certain point, but after that it's more cost-efficient to buy SPD as an effective multiplier of your REC.

 

edit: I see that you just want a sneaky way to circumvent the NCM. If I was the GM I would tell you to stop Rules Raping.

 

It doesn't matter if there is NCM or not, it's still a legitimate build (provided the extra SPD doesn't itself exceed the NCM).

[Vurbal]

Re: Multiple Attacks in a Phase

 

It's mathematics. You can buy extra REC up to a certain point' date=' but after that it's more cost-efficient to buy SPD as an effective multiplier of your REC.[/quote'] Keep in mind that this wouldn't give you the equivalent of 2 post-12 recoveries. Recovering as an action puts you at half DCV and you can't maintain constant powers or take any action besides turning off powers at the beginning of your phase. Also, if you take damage after your phase starts but before the end of the segment you don't recover anything.

It doesn't matter if there is NCM or not, it's still a legitimate build (provided the extra SPD doesn't itself exceed the NCM).

Since this is well into GM discretion territory, whether it's a legitimate build is really a judgement call. I probably wouldn't allow it, but as with most things that's dependent on whether the player could justify it to my satisfaction.