Moving from D&D - rules issues

[Kenn]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

The point some people are trying to make is simply to point out that all the existing mechanisms for stopping "run arounds" require that you have a held action' date=' which isn't always feasible.[/quote']

 

Yes, it isn't always feasible to have a held action. And you cannot, generally, make two attack actions in the same segment, so if you want to be able to react offensivly to a run around (or defensivly in the same segment you attacked) you're probably out of luck.

 

There is another possibility. If it's that bloody important, and your GM will let you have it, there's the power:

 

Attack of Opportunity: 2d6 Killing Attack - Hand-to-hand, Trigger(+1/4) - someone tries to get around me right after I attacked; OIF - bladed weapons of opportunity. (37 active points; 25 real points.)

 

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

 

Yes, it isn't always feasible to have a held action. And you cannot, generally, make two attack actions in the same segment, so if you want to be able to react offensivly to a run around (or defensivly in the same segment you attacked) you're probably out of luck.

 

Actually you cannot take two attack actions in the same segment period, unless the GM is allowing layered SPD, which is very fringe.

 

That aside you don't have to declare what you are holding an action for; you can just hold and wait. When you eventually chose to act you make a DEX off if someone else was in the process of acting and if you win you interrupt them with your action. If you don't end up interrupting someone elses action, you can still take your held action as late as the very end of the Segment immediately before the next Segment you have a Phase in.

[Kenn]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Actually you cannot take two attack actions in the same segment period, unless the GM is allowing layered SPD, which is very fringe.

 

That aside you don't have to declare what you are holding an action for; you can just hold and wait. When you eventually chose to act you make a DEX off if someone else was in the process of acting and if you win you interrupt them with your action. If you don't end up interrupting someone elses action, you can still take your held action as late as the very end of the Segment immediately before the next Segment you have a Phase in.

 

Yes. I know.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Ill even go so far as to say this: I've likely run more games with the HERO System' date=' particularly Fantasy HERO, than perhaps 90% of the people on these boards...[/quote']

[YAWN] Get over yourself, KS. For the record, I'm not some "recent convert" trying to make Hero feel like d20. Hero has been my system of choice for 20 years now; in fact, up until a year ago, I hadn't played a D&D/d20 game since college. And I have already stated that I don't like d20's AoO mechanism either. That's not the point. [/YAWN]

 

there has never once been a situation where looking back an Attack of Opportunity equivalent beyond the many different options for accomplishing similar effects at the cost of allocating an action to do so would have been beneficial or needed. Its a non-issue.

If it's not an issue in your games, that's fine. It has come up in a few (not many) games that I've played, and given that this question seems to come up here every six months or so, obviously I'm not the only one.

 

Im arguing that IF you are particularly worried about reacting to enemies as they attempt to take their actions then you should hold your action and if they do then act accordingly and if they don't go on the offensive. Simple.

And I already agreed; that's also not the point. The issue is what happens if you don't have a held action.

 

Lemme try it this way. Let's assume you & I are roughly the same SPD, DEX, etc. You stand a couple feet in front of a closed door, holding a stick. I'll stand in front of you. You whack me with a stick as fast and as often as you can. (Okay, I probably wouldn't be making this offer in RL, but still...) In between whacks, I'll try and run past you to open the door behind you. Do you really think I'll be able to get to the door without you at least getting a shot at me? It's not realistic, it's not genre, and it's not good gaming.

 

It's also remarkably easy to fix. A little common sense on everyone's part, and perhaps a broader interpretation of what actions you can abort to in this narrow situation. What's so scary about that?

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

There is another possibility. If it's that bloody important, and your GM will let you have it, there's the power:

 

Attack of Opportunity: 2d6 Killing Attack - Hand-to-hand, Trigger(+1/4) - someone tries to get around me right after I attacked; OIF - bladed weapons of opportunity. (37 active points; 25 real points.)

Not a bad idea, and it might be a nice addition in some games. But it seems silly to make a character pay points for something that he should IMO be able to do anyway.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

[YAWN] Get over yourself' date=' KS. For the record, I'm not some "recent convert" trying to make Hero feel like d20. Hero has been my system of choice for 20 years now; in fact, up until a year ago, I hadn't played a D&D/d20 game since college. And I have already stated that I don't like d20's AoO mechanism either. That's not the point. [/YAWN']

 

Did I respond to you or quote you or in anyway indicate I was directing a comment to you? No I didnt. So why would you seem to assume that I was challenging or otherwise referring to you?

 

Get over yourself.

 

Oh, sorry, I forgot to gratuitously emote...

 

[WHATEVER]Better?[/WHATEVER]

 

If you click on my name there is an "IGNORE" option. Feel free to use it at any time.

 

 

If it's not an issue in your games, that's fine. It has come up in a few (not many) games that I've played, and given that this question seems to come up here every six months or so, obviously I'm not the only one.

 

A) Its not an "issue", its a "concept"

Many things come up on these boards in a reoccurring fashion.

C) I think once every six months or so is a bit of an exaggeration but,

D) Repetition does not equal validity

 

And I already agreed; that's also not the point.

Again, what makes you think I was directing anything whatsoever to you specifically? My comments were to Mike W, the post immediately preceeding my own.

 

The issue is what happens if you don't have a held action.

So in other words, if you used your actions doing other things, the game doesnt give you more free actions.

 

Yah, thats a real issue alright. Its not the game systems issue though.

Lemme try it this way. Let's assume you & I are roughly the same SPD, DEX, etc. You stand a couple feet in front of a closed door, holding a stick. I'll stand in front of you. You whack me with a stick as fast and as often as you can. (Okay, I probably wouldn't be making this offer in RL, but still...) In between whacks, I'll try and run past you to open the door behind you. Do you really think I'll be able to get to the door without you at least getting a shot at me? It's not realistic, it's not genre, and it's not good gaming.

You mean other than all the other shots I already took on you during all of the "whack me with a stick as fast and as often as you can", I should get another freebie whack just because you are moving?

 

Youre right, it is much more realistic for a moving target to be easier to hit and to allow me to swing at it more often than at a similar but stationary target...oh wait, no it isnt.

 

It's actually HARDER to hit a moving target and you typically have to spend some time adjusting stance and shifting aim so you generally actually make FEWER attempts, or at the very least NOT MORE than you would swinging at a stationary target.

 

 

(BTW, in case it slipped your attention that part where I said you were right, that was sarcasm)

 

And actually, not that reality really has much to do with a roleplaying game or vice versa, I know from personal experience that if our positions were reversed -- you were in front of the door holding a stick and I was trying to get past you -- that I very realistically could step in and push past you into the room without you getting a swing on me. I used to do it all the time playing lacrosse.

http://www.lacrosseforums.com/showthread.php?t=30990

 

 

 

It's also remarkably easy to fix. A little common sense on everyone's part, and perhaps a broader interpretation of what actions you can abort to in this narrow situation. What's so scary about that?

"Fix" implies there is something broken, and I dont think there is. Allowing people to Abort to Attacks causes significant game balance problems and basically renders combat into a series of one-up-manships as people Abort to Attack in response to other people's Aborts. Given the option to Abort to a Defense or Abort to an Attack it would almost always be better to Abort to Attack, but since the last Abort resolves first you get a weird situation where the last person to decide to Abort has the most advantage.

 

Weighed against the returns -- allowing people that can't be bothered to decide what is important for them to do in a given action ahead of time to make attacks out of order against people taking their own actions that they paid for -- its not so much "scary" as it is "ill advised".

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

And I already agreed; that's also not the point. The issue is what happens if you don't have a held action.

 

Lemme try it this way. Let's assume you & I are roughly the same SPD, DEX, etc. You stand a couple feet in front of a closed door, holding a stick. I'll stand in front of you. You whack me with a stick as fast and as often as you can. (Okay, I probably wouldn't be making this offer in RL, but still...) In between whacks, I'll try and run past you to open the door behind you. Do you really think I'll be able to get to the door without you at least getting a shot at me? It's not realistic, it's not genre, and it's not good gaming.

 

How does this example illustrate your point? KS clearly will "hold an action" until you come into range so he can whack you with his stick. He's focused on doing only one thing. Similarly, if he is to guard the door, and whack anyone who tries to move past him with his stick, he'll hold his action until someone tries to get past him.

 

A better example may be KS, here's your stick. BDH wants to get past you to get to the door, and he's right in front of you. Whack him with the stick as fast as you can to KO him before he gets to the door. Oh, and if anyone else tries to get past you WHILE you're whacking him with the stick as fast as you can, try and react fast enough to give them a whack with the stick as well. By the way, while you're doing this, BDH will also be trying to whack YOU with a stick.

 

Now, there are two questions here. First, can KS react fast enough when I try to slip past him that I also get whacked with his stick? I'm guessing he likely can. Second, and this is what d20 doesn't address, in reacting to me and whacking me with the stick, does KS let down his guard making it easier for BDH to either slip by him (implying KS didn't have qan AoO, but rather used his phase to whack me), or to whack him with his stick (implying that, perhaps, KS must let his guard down and take a penalty to DCV/AC, in order to take an AoO)?

 

It's also remarkably easy to fix. A little common sense on everyone's part' date=' and perhaps a broader interpretation of what actions you can abort to in this narrow situation. What's so scary about that?[/quote']

 

Expanding the Abort action to allow KS to abort to attack someone trying to slip by seems more reasonable than adding the AoO. He can strike me when I try to get by, but then you'll likely be able to slip past while he's doing so. Or I can wait until he strikes at you, then slip past before he can react (ie on the same segment) so I don't get hit.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

There is another possibility. If it's that bloody important, and your GM will let you have it, there's the power:

 

Attack of Opportunity: 2d6 Killing Attack - Hand-to-hand, Trigger(+1/4) - someone tries to get around me right after I attacked; OIF - bladed weapons of opportunity. (37 active points; 25 real points.)

 

That only nworks once before you have to reset the trigger, though. I suppose you could have a trigger that resets automatically at each of your phases. That would simulate the base D&D mechanic quite nicely, allowing 1 AoO per phase.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Actually a self-resetting Trigger using the new Trigger options in 5er would allow an inifinite number of "AoO"s, but making all characters buy an ability is silly; if every one has it then its just a standard ability.

 

Calculate the cost of such a Trigger, and base it off of more than 2d6 killing to account for HKA's plus high STR, and then pretend that all characters have it's point cost included with their existing point cost....thats how much of a power up you're introducing if you make it a campaign ground rule.

 

Now define a few sample combats with your typical AoO scenarios and run each one a few times with and without the AoO trigger in use by all participants...to determine how much more this advantages the person that stands in one place and fights as opposed to people that move around. Make sure you include a character with some Stretching, either naturally or via their weapons, so that you can also get an idea of how much better Stretching is with such a rule in place.

 

You might also want to consider some abilities that clever players will naturally want to get to either get around or abuse the AoO effect. For instance a Taunt like ability would be very powerful in conjunction with AoO, as would an ability bought as Invisibility only vs Triggered effects.

 

Follow some permutations of how adding such an ability simply so that people don't have to decide ahead of time that they want to hold an action to see if someone is going to try to get past them.

[Talon]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

This discussion is very helpful -- thanks all!

 

I think that the expectation of AoOs is likely to be more of a problem than their actual absence. That is, players will take a while to remember that they don't have to worry about them, which will affect their actions and strategies in combat.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

How does this example illustrate your point? KS clearly will "hold an action" until you come into range so he can whack you with his stick. He's focused on doing only one thing. Similarly, if he is to guard the door, and whack anyone who tries to move past him with his stick, he'll hold his action until someone tries to get past him.

 

A better example may be KS, here's your stick. BDH wants to get past you to get to the door, and he's right in front of you. Whack him with the stick as fast as you can to KO him before he gets to the door. Oh, and if anyone else tries to get past you WHILE you're whacking him with the stick as fast as you can, try and react fast enough to give them a whack with the stick as well. By the way, while you're doing this, BDH will also be trying to whack YOU with a stick.

 

Now, there are two questions here. First, can KS react fast enough when I try to slip past him that I also get whacked with his stick? I'm guessing he likely can. Second, and this is what d20 doesn't address, in reacting to me and whacking me with the stick, does KS let down his guard making it easier for BDH to either slip by him (implying KS didn't have qan AoO, but rather used his phase to whack me), or to whack him with his stick (implying that, perhaps, KS must let his guard down and take a penalty to DCV/AC, in order to take an AoO)?

 

Expanding the Abort action to allow KS to abort to attack someone trying to slip by seems more reasonable than adding the AoO. He can strike me when I try to get by, but then you'll likely be able to slip past while he's doing so. Or I can wait until he strikes at you, then slip past before he can react (ie on the same segment) so I don't get hit.

Thanks Hugh, that's exactly what I was trying to convey, but you explained it much better.

 

To KS and everyone else - sorry if my last few posts have been crankier than usual. I've been in a ****y mood for days (for reasons that I'll spare you) and frankly have no business conversing with other human beings right now. Didn't mean to fan the flames. See you all later.

[Egyptoid]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Opportunity Attacks

=================

 

No such thing in Hero.

If you want an attack you have to go get it.

[Alric]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

I'm running a fantasy hero game in which the characters are allowed to purchase special abilities that work like powers but can represent things like super honed skills. Here's an AoO type effect that I came up with. It represents someone who has been specially trained in defending a person or area.

 

Defend the Path: Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 2d6, Damage Shield (+1/2), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Area Of Effect (Weapon Range; +1/2), Selective (+1/4), Continuous (+1) (112 Active Points); OAF (Readied Weapon; -1), Only useable against targets who are ignoring or trying to pass (-1), Concentration, Must Concentrate throughout use of Constant Power (1/2 DCV; -1/2), Base Damage is equal to weapon damage (-1/2) Cost:28

 

I don't have my books with me so the numbers maybe slightly off.

[SirViss]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

There is something that I noticed that isn't mentionned in HERO, and that is the effect of "terrain" on movement. in D&D 3.5, I think "bad footing" reduces your movement half.

 

What does this have to do with AoO, you ask?

 

Well, you could concider the area around a character to be difficult terrain, where you would have to take even more care than Combat Movement implies not to take damage. Basically, instead of an AoO, you could give the characters a ZoC (either all the hexes around a character or only in th character's hex) in which you would have to spend 2 points of movement for every one. It wouldn't allow the characters to attack when it isn't their turn, but it would reduce the ability of characters to simply move through a defensive line to get to the less-defended character which would be at the rear.

 

Another way of looking at it: all characters have a Susceptibility to moving through a Zoc, if they do not take care. Heck, even allies can take damage if they move too close to a sword swing, but we can ignore that, if we want.

 

What do you guys think?

[Mike W]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

OK, first, I never got much into D&D 3rd. It had some things I liked but the initial AoO rules were awful. So were the stacking rules. Ugh. Bad memories. So I never go to the part where they reduced the turn to six seconds instead of 1 minute. Still, I think my initial point still stands that things move faster in HERO.

 

Also, I would argue that AoO should only go to people who are experienced in combat. After all, you aren't whacking people with sticks so much as swords. It takes serious training to be effective against more than one person. Most of us here know how to pick up a stick(say a baseball bat) and use it to effectively beat someone's brains in who charges at us with no intent other than to run by us(of course, we're civil enough not to do it), but if two people charge, can we get both of them or are we too slow? You have to factor in not just how long it takes to swing the weapon but how long it takes to react to the second person, how long it takes to recover your swing, possibly how long it takes to pull the weapon free of the first body, that's a lot more time than it may first sound like. I'd be more inclined to limit AoO to people who are combat seasoned and then build it as a specific maneuver/power(maybe a damage shield with a one hex radius). So you can, if you choose, guard this door and take one swing at anyone who goes by, or you can concentrate on one foe, but not both.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Damage Shield? If we're going to go that far, why not make a Continuous, Area of Effect attack (with Personal immunity--or make it Selective if you really insist, but that makes it less reliable and fun) that will damage anyone who tries to get by (not just someone who touches you, BTW)!

[Mike W]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Damage Shield? If we're going to go that far' date=' why not make a Continuous, Area of Effect attack (with [i']Personal[/i] immunity--or make it Selective if you really insist, but that makes it less reliable and fun) that will damage anyone who tries to get by (not just someone who touches you, BTW)!

 

The whole point is that we're trying to come up with something that does damage anyone who tries to get by I thought. And you can always put limits on it. Martial artist counterstrikes can be built as damage shields(see Ultimate Martial Artist), so I would argue for variant of that.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

The whole point is that we're trying to come up with something that does damage anyone who tries to get by I thought. And you can always put limits on it. Martial artist counterstrikes can be built as damage shields(see Ultimate Martial Artist)' date=' so I would argue for variant of that.[/quote']

Counterstrikes are different. In their case, the opponent has actually hit you; they aren't merely trying to move past you. Damage Shields can't be used for affecting people who don't actually touch you (or possibly your Force Wall or whatever), at least by the standard rules.

[Mike W]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Counterstrikes are different. In their case' date=' the opponent has actually hit you; they aren't merely trying to move [i']past[/i] you. Damage Shields can't be used for affecting people who don't actually touch you (or possibly your Force Wall or whatever), at least by the standard rules.

 

UMA stretched that a bit as a way to build things like weapon katas/flourishes.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

I was mentioned on page 1, but I've only just gotten here. Good morning! How can I be of assistance? In terms of AoO's, there're two immediate ways to handle this, and I considered them both.

 

The first: use HERO as written. This may or may not get drilled into your head at some point, but the short version I got when I came to the board was "If you're going to play HERO, play HERO. If you're going to play d20, play d20. But don't try playing d20 in HERO." I thumb my nose at those folk, because there ARE good things in d20 that can be imported with minimal effort. To use HERO as written, you hold an action and then put your opponent at 1/2 DCV on the attack. Simple.

 

Rule two. You import the AoO rules. No, seriously. GunBunny A runs past Melee Combatant B. B swings at A as soon as A leaves a Hex B threatens. Voila. That's all it is - it's a rule built expressly to force people to view the field tactically.

 

One of the big disconnects going from d20 (which is prebuilt) to HERO (which is UNbuilt) is trying to model various things. You don't need to make everyone 'buy' an Attack of Opportunity. Oh, sorry. Before I launch into that.

 

Way 3. Individuals purchase Attacks of Opportunity, as such:

 

Attack of Opportunity: Bought as Trigger for up to HKA 4d6, whenever an opponent leaves a hex in your HtH range (+1/4), whenever an opponent in your HtH range is Concentrating (+1/4); OIF Weapons of Opportunity. (-1/2)

 

I'm not sure how to cost out the Trigger correctly, but I'm 99% the actual mechanics behind the build are correct. The things that get you hit (IIRC) are leaving a threatened hex, and standing next to someone and not paying attention to them.

 

The reason I suggest going for Option 1, and simply importing all the handwaves, is that there are bits & pieces to AoOs that people often forget. For example, you can Fight Defensively, and up your AC in d20. It's also important to remember things like 'armed' vs. 'unarmed.' A wizard swinging his noodly arms is worthless in a fight - but when he's using Shocking Grasp he's dealing longsword damage or better.

 

The nice thing about the AoO rules is that in fact you don't need to do much with them - you can literally lift them out of the book and place them directly over the HERO rules, with only a couple of minor tweaks (which I'd be happy to help with).

 

Is that what you're looking for, or is there something more you need assistance with?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

I'd lean with Thia's second option:

 

If you want AoO in Hero just put it there. Don't try and model anything - we get over zealous with that sometimes.

 

If everyone in the game can do this, then everyone can do it. It's like arms - the base assumption is you have them.

 

Everyone leaving your threat zone gets attacked, simple as that.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

And, in Fantasy Games especially, when the Archer is using Set & Brace and taking that delicious extra time, WHACK. Ooh, the Wizard has to concentrate to cast Bone Shatter, does he? WHACK, and then you force a Skill Roll modified by both the AP in Bone Shatter & ... I think in FH it's 2:1 STUN or BODY (every 2 points of STUN is another -1 to the roll, but that may be on the high-side of absurd, I'd have to double check).

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Oh, and as to your second question, the ease of running around or past someone. Two things.

 

First! If you install the Attack of Opportunity system, it's a non-issue; they can't go straight past you without making a Tumbling Check or some such else. So it isn't all that important.

 

Second! One thing people tend to forget in HERO when they first come into it is how movement is structured. In d20, you're given a Round in which to act, which is split across two phases. Your Movement, and your Standard Action, in a 49/51 split. I say that becuase you can use your Standard Action to move, and you can sacrifice your move for a Full Round Action, but you can't sacrifice your move to get a second standard action. With me so far?

 

Okay. HERO tosses that out the window. You get a full Round in which to act, on your turn as designated by your SPD. So, for purposes of argument, we'll assume you have a SPD 3 (average for a hero) and we're on Segment 4. In Segment 4 you have two half-phases. You can move. Or attack. Remember: Attacking ends your turn. Mui importante. DO NOT HAND WAVE THIS RULE AWAY. Not until you understand the tactical implications of doing so. Hero does not equal d20, things move and act and react very differently.

 

We'll assume a game of d20 modern game/Dark Champions (a must-own book), and you're playing a soldier in the field; you happen to be hiding behind a corner of a building, your AR-15 at the ready.

 

"Thia, I glance around the corner before moving - anything?"

"Yep... looks like a pair of terrorists are standing around a parked car. One of them is on the passenger side, which is facing you - he has no cover. The other is standing on the driver's side, opposite from you, and he has about 75% cover. You'd need to make a Hit Location roll to tag him."

 

House Rule; By request, we don't use Hit locations. Yet.

 

"I'm going to move forward two hexes in a low crouch, take cover, pop up and put a burst into the near-side terrorist."

 

"Give me a Stealth roll." At this time, Thia makes the terrorists perception rolls. One of them sees you, and aborts (if necessary) to raise the alarm. The other turns around, now ready for the attack.

 

"You get to cover, one of the thugs starts shouting 'Alarme! Alarme! Cuidado!' The other is looking over at the cover you've taken."

 

"For my second phase action, I pop up and give him three new holes to breathe through."

 

"You target the main body of the terrorist - make your attack roll." I prefer to use the (11+OCV) - 3d6 mechanic - it works really well at keeping things hidden from the players - you don't always want their DCVs noted. Also, don't declare how many points of damage are done, simply mark it off the villains chart.

 

"Ah... so I have a +6 OCV with my AR-15, and I rolled a 9... so I hit a DCV of 8 or less, right?"

 

"Exactly right, and you tattoo that sumbish with a hail of gunfire, even accounting for the penalty for firing a burst. Go ahead and roll damage."

 

Now this gets tricky, because of the way weapons are handled in HERO. Which is to say, they aren't. You can build a burst as three bullets, all of which are counted separately. You can also build it as a burst does additional damage, and full auto (more bullets) more damage still. It's really up to you how you want to handle it, but I tend to use the by-the-book method, which is each round is counted individually against a targets DEF.

 

By the time you're done rolling dice, you're probably looking at 1d6 1/2 per shot - for an average of 4 BODY/12 STUN each. If he's wearing no armor, he's probably already dying (at -BODY). If he's wearing a DEF 3 vest, he's taken a significant amount of STUN, and only 3 BODY.

 

That's a single segment in HERO combat. The board is completely different, and the flow of a fight - the ability to simply DECLARE an intent and then carry it out - is also completely different. One of the hardest things I had to learn. Second hardest thing? BODY does not equal Hit Points. BODY is BODY. STUN is STUN. Hit Points are a totally separate mechanic. In HERO, we can actually model full hit locations, damage dealt and end effects (impairment or disabling). You can also throw them out.

 

I could go on like this for hours (and do, at regular intervals). Let me know how I can be of further assistance. I'll let one of the other board lords correct any mistakes in my above example, they're good for that. But I think I'm fairly close to canon.

[Talon]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

Thanks for the posts, Thia! I myself have plenty of Hero experience, but my players do not. I'm anticipating some transitions pains, most of which I have dealt with in the past. The AoO one is new though, as this is the first time since D&D 3E that I'm converting people to Hero.

 

The example was useful (and entertaining!)...and brings up a question. I had actually been thinking about getting rid of the "Attack ends your Phase" rule, just because I had not seen any reasons against doing so. It sounds like you have experience with the matter...any comments?

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Moving from D&D - rules issues

 

It's hard to describe, really. I'm not saying you can't, or that you shouldn't. I'm saying that HERO is a separate game from d20, and before tossing the rule out, consider what it means on the board. In HERO, one of the things I was getting around to (but somehow didn't!) in the above example is that we only move a TOTAL of Six Hexes in a given round, IF we consume both phases.

 

In d20, that's considered a Full Move, but again, in d20, a Full Move is 12 Hexes, not 6. Your movement phase as an unencumbered medium creature is 6" - once you don heavy armor, 4" (closer to the average 1/2 phase HERO movement). Also, in d20, two people RARELY occupy the same Hex - in HERO, it's common; two people in melee combat can be considered to be in the same Hex (I engage him in hand to hand, in my game, is saying "I step into his hex and make with the roughing").

 

In d20, because movement & action are more limited in scope - you cannot say, "I knock his shield away and stab him through the heart with my gunblade" - you simply say "Er... I attack." This changes the fight dynamics. I myself have seriously considered waiving the 'attack ends turn' rule, but the system flow alters and it looses some of the feel. At the end of the day, I'm advocating play it as written, until & unless you see a need to change it.

 

But that's coming in from the outside - if you're already experienced with HERO, you may in fact have good reason to change it, but if your 5" 1/2 phase Rogue flips out of battle after tagging someone, and no one can reach him because their movement is limited to 3", OR to close distance, don't blame me.