Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

[azato]

A character with a +8 PSL vs Hit locations added to Martial arts feat that adds +5 Damage classes makes for an EXTREMELY leathal character. Such characters are very easy to make when starting out at 150 total points. Every time they shoot or swing something dies or nearly dies. If multiple hits are allowed then the lethality goes up even higher.

 

 

What are your opinoins on this?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

It can. I suggest implementing OCV and DC limits in the campaign, as long as no attacks or combination of attacks exceeds either you should have balance.

[azato]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

It can. I suggest implementing OCV and DC limits in the campaign' date=' as long as no attacks or combination of attacks exceeds either you should have balance.[/quote']

 

 

Do you apply such limits? If so, what?

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

I found them unbalancing in my FH game years ago, when I ran them under 4th.

My two solutions:

 

1) Any penalty skill levels in Hit Locations add to your total OCV for calculating CV max against campaign limits.

 

2) You can have no more than 4 hit location penalty skill levels, and those levels can never do more than halve the location penalty.

 

I used the second primarily. It means that a chest shot is still -1, and a head shot is -4. So the character can go for the head shot and have a decent chance at it, but likely wouldn't every single attack. This lets the character still be the "extremly accurate" type but keeps things a little in balance. And situations where hit location penalties are halved (Out of combat surprise for example) the levels get rid of the penalties completely - so the sniper has no penalty for the surprise head shot.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

I found them unbalancing in my FH game years ago' date=' when I ran them under 4th. [/quote']

 

Considering a PSL to offset one penalty wiyth one attack costs 1.5 points, so you can completely offset head shot penalties for 12 points, yes it can be unbalanced. Of course, spending the same 12 points to make the wizard's to add 4 PD and 4 ED at zero END tothe wizard's force field spell can also be unbalanced.

 

My two solutions:

 

1) Any penalty skill levels in Hit Locations add to your total OCV for calculating CV max against campaign limits.

 

I don't like this, as it seems to strongly discourage any PSL use in this regard. Basically, it prevents any character who has any general accuracy using this approach, where the characters such PSL's would seem most apropriate for are generally accurate characters.

 

2) You can have no more than 4 hit location penalty skill levels' date=' and those levels can never do more than halve the location penalty. [/quote']

 

I don't like the "can't do more than halve" restriction in that this imposes a restriction on these PSL's not shared by other PSL's. Wy shouldn't range levels, for example, be restricted to halving the range penalty?

 

Capping the levels at 4 makes a lot of sense to me. This still leaves a significant penalty against the "choice" locations, but allows the character to choose consistency (chest hits are -3) or target a general area rather than a specific one (such as a head shot) without allowing an automatic head shot every time.

 

If you really want to unbalance the game, however, add hit locations to a game which has very high OCV/DCV spreads. If your Bricks have typical DCV's of 6 or 7, and martial artists or speedsters can access OCV's of 13 or 14, they can go for the head shot (and double damage/5x multiple) every time.

[azato]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

Capping the levels at 4 makes a lot of sense to me. This still leaves a significant penalty against the "choice" locations, but allows the character to choose consistency (chest hits are -3) or target a general area rather than a specific one (such as a head shot) without allowing an automatic head shot every time.

 

 

 

All suggestions given are good, but I think that you may be right on this. When someone mentioned capping OCV's I thougt of something like (Total pts -100/10) Everyone thus would start out with the option of +5 levels. But no one would waste their points on PSL. If you have to wait every 10 pts. to get another level, you would be better off spending it on a normal 3 pt CSL rather than a PSL. I think capping may be the way to go.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

I don't like this' date=' as it seems to strongly discourage any PSL use in this regard. Basically, it prevents any character who has any general accuracy using this approach, where the characters such PSL's would seem most apropriate for are generally accurate characters.[/quote']

Yeah. I didn't use this to much. After a bit of though, I realized that it hosed the entire concept of penalty level for Hit Location, and dropped it.

I don't like the "can't do more than halve" restriction in that this imposes a restriction on these PSL's not shared by other PSL's. Wy shouldn't range levels, for example, be restricted to halving the range penalty?

Well when I came up with the rules, it was back in 4th ed. I just threw that in as an additional limitation on the combat skill level on top of the "location penalty offset" lim that was one there. In 5th, I would require a limitation (likely -1/2) on the penalty skill levels. If I take away some sort of utility, I would give a cost break for it.

Part of the reason for the "half only" was a matter of campaign tone. I didn't want any hit location to have a 0 penalty - even the best trained people had a slightly tougher time hitting specific locations that just taking the shot the presented itself. But I can see your reasoning.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

Do you apply such limits? If so' date=' what?[/quote']

 

We don't actually. But we do tend to cap PSLs around 3-4 not so much as a hard rule but I can't think of anyone in the group who has gone above that.

 

Hugh's suggestion as a Hard Cap of 4 seems good.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

Hugh's suggestion as a Hard Cap of 4 seems good.

Umm... Mine. Hugh just agreed.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

Umm... Mine. Hugh just agreed.

 

Uh yeah... I knew that too. Brain, fingers ... disconnect.

 

sorry 'bout that.

[Rapier]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

My current character could be called a sniper.

 

He's got +7 Telescopic Sight, No Range Penalties on his rifle and +8 PSLs vs Hit Location Mods (did I mention the 17 PER and Discriminatory Hearing?).

 

What's to stop him from taking head shots every single time? Well, head shots are seriously gonna kill people. You don't always wanna kill people.

 

If a character has two powers, 4d6 HKA (60 AP) and 10d6 EB (50 AP), doesn't it make sense that there would be times when he would rather use the EB than RKA?

 

We've only been through about 4 battles so far, and I have YET to actually call a shot.

 

Although, a way to better manage some of the PSLs (especially Hit Location) is to require them to be 1/2 phase actions to use. There can be a case made for the fact that it does take a bit more aiming to hit someone accurately in the head, than it would in the torso.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

Uh yeah... I knew that too. Brain, fingers ... disconnect.

 

sorry 'bout that.

 

:D

 

's okay.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

My current character could be called a sniper.

 

He's got +7 Telescopic Sight, No Range Penalties on his rifle and +8 PSLs vs Hit Location Mods (did I mention the 17 PER and Discriminatory Hearing?).

 

What's to stop him from taking head shots every single time? Well, head shots are seriously gonna kill people. You don't always wanna kill people.

 

This depends a lot on genre and game tone. If I'm playing a fantasy game, killing the orcs/goblins/etc. is the prefered approach. If I'm playing a Supers game, my targets likely have the rDEF to take limited or no BOD from tghe head hit, buit x5 STUN ends a fight pretty quickly.

 

And what prevents the character using a Stun only attack against the head?

[azato]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

This depends a lot on genre and game tone. If I'm playing a fantasy game, killing the orcs/goblins/etc. is the prefered approach. If I'm playing a Supers game, my targets likely have the rDEF to take limited or no BOD from tghe head hit, buit x5 STUN ends a fight pretty quickly.

 

And what prevents the character using a Stun only attack against the head?

 

I did post it under System Discussion but I was actually thinking more along the lines of Fantasy Hero. Having a Super Scope isn't so bad IF it is truely a sniper situation. However I made up an archer that it INSANELY powerful - with MA with a bow he can do 4d6 killing attacks to the head - every time. That is just way too powerful - especially coming right out of the box.

 

BUT... Making the high PSL take on some limitation - like a 1 turn "sight in" and/or "opponent may not move more than X inches" might not be that bad. It would still allow for snipering buy limit it to a more real-world approach.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

My current character could be called a sniper.

 

He's got +7 Telescopic Sight, No Range Penalties on his rifle and +8 PSLs vs Hit Location Mods (did I mention the 17 PER and Discriminatory Hearing?).

 

What's to stop him from taking head shots every single time? Well, head shots are seriously gonna kill people. You don't always wanna kill people.

 

If a character has two powers, 4d6 HKA (60 AP) and 10d6 EB (50 AP), doesn't it make sense that there would be times when he would rather use the EB than RKA?

 

We've only been through about 4 battles so far, and I have YET to actually call a shot.

 

Although, a way to better manage some of the PSLs (especially Hit Location) is to require them to be 1/2 phase actions to use. There can be a case made for the fact that it does take a bit more aiming to hit someone accurately in the head, than it would in the torso.

 

If I were to have this in my High Powered game with my Invisible character (already putting everyone at 1/2 DCV vs my sniper) I'd clean house because half the time the object IS to kill the target.

 

It all depends on genre. For genre's where death is the intent PSL vs Hit Locations can overbalance.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

I did post it under System Discussion but I was actually thinking more along the lines of Fantasy Hero. Having a Super Scope isn't so bad IF it is truely a sniper situation. However I made up an archer that it INSANELY powerful - with MA with a bow he can do 4d6 killing attacks to the head - every time. That is just way too powerful - especially coming right out of the box.

 

BUT... Making the high PSL take on some limitation - like a 1 turn "sight in" and/or "opponent may not move more than X inches" might not be that bad. It would still allow for snipering buy limit it to a more real-world approach.

 

I've played a LOT of FH, most rather high power (250 point starting characters) and we adjusted the power caps to fit various individual games. In general, however, we avoided certain things in order to hold to a certain power level. PSL's (tho they weren't called such) could replace regular levels at a 2 for 1 exchange (we generally had a max CV cap of 13, so you could take enough levels to get yourself to an 11 OCV and still take 4 PSLs, thus allowing you to breach the CV Cap in slightly more controlled circumstances)

 

That said... I don't think we ever allowed a character with more than +4 PSL's vs targeting.

 

What I suspect you'll find is more unbalancing is the +5 martial arts DC's. Thats huge. Like Champions huge. We made extra DC's a stopsign, with no more that 2 extra MA DC's allowed, ever. Otherwise, Martial Arts become a requirement to keep up... nothing else is as efficient in a Heroic level game.

 

ESPECIALLY RANGED MARTIAL ARTS.

 

You think your archer is nasty?

Ponder if you'd allow the exact same character, but with some of the skills and stats rearrainged to be a mage. For 5-8 points you can build a pretty nasty RKA "Blast" spell... In the 3d6 range, if you're triicky. Add in +8 Targeting PSL's so it always hits the head and Ranged Martial Arts with +5 DC's and you get a killing machine that is possibly worse that your archer.

I can't stress enough how that is gonna effet your overall balance. None of the critters in any of the published materials will be able to stand up to your characters. You'll be dropping dragons and dinosaurs with stunning regularity, unless the GM reworks everything to include lots of Damage Reduction.

 

Oh, yeah... I'm not big on allowing Combat Luck in FH either. We managed a very dramtic campaign for a decade that mostly avoided heavy armor without ever touching the stuff. Its a shortcut, and a good one to simulate certain genres, but none of the fantasy I like involves that degree of invunerability. Limited DCV levels can accomplish the same feel without breaking the genre.

 

Just my 2 clacks.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

We've only been through about 4 battles so far, and I have YET to actually call a shot.

 

Although, a way to better manage some of the PSLs (especially Hit Location) is to require them to be 1/2 phase actions to use. There can be a case made for the fact that it does take a bit more aiming to hit someone accurately in the head, than it would in the torso.

 

I'm guessing you're playing a mostly superheroic game? Or have you just avoided headshots for some reason? In a genre where the object is to make the bad guys dead, there would be little incentive to leave the PSL's unused unless you were trying to avoid getting the chaaracter forcibly rewritten by the GM for lopping off everyones head.

I had a DI character who was almost this good, but that was his schtick, and everyone in the game was as nasty... it was our "Zombie Squad" game where we played a black ops team who had all been recovered from supposedly fatal situations ("Snake Pliskin...I've heard of you. I heard you were dead."). I kept most of my Targeting levels for my pistols only, So I wasn't tempted to go super sniper on everyone. In an actual close action gunfight, I was the John Woo style Gunman. I got to be the guy who'd, say, hgold the rear while we were opulling out at the end of a mission, because I pretty much pulled the 1 shot-1 kill moves in close firefights.

[Kelcyron]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

One thing we did in our supers game, and this can be applied to just about any tactic, is "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". If the PC's can do it, the monsters/villains/etc can do it too. The first time it came up in-game, the GM said that he would only have the villains use it if the PC's used it, and only against the PC that did it..

 

Something we always consider before trying something new/crazy/super-effective is "Do we want them to be able to do it too?" and if the answer is no we come up with something else.

 

Kelcyron

[Rapier]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

Yes, we're SuperHeroic.

 

I would think that in a regularly heroic game, it should be very odd that someone should be able to come up with the many levels to begin with.

 

I guess that was my assumption. In my mind, playing heroic games involve more caps/guidelines etc. In SuperHeroic I'm all for dumping any kind of Rule of X, AP Caps, etc, but in a Heroic game I guess they come in more.

 

I don't even know what I'm really saying anymore...thank you Benadryl!

 

Definately time for a nap.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

Yes, we're SuperHeroic.

 

I would think that in a regularly heroic game, it should be very odd that someone should be able to come up with the many levels to begin with.

 

I guess that was my assumption. In my mind, playing heroic games involve more caps/guidelines etc. In SuperHeroic I'm all for dumping any kind of Rule of X, AP Caps, etc, but in a Heroic game I guess they come in more.

 

I don't even know what I'm really saying anymore...thank you Benadryl!

 

Definately time for a nap.

 

Right there with ya.

I'm running on about 30% brainpower right now myself.

 

Yeah...in a Supers game, especially a dark gritty one, all bets are off.

 

In a 150 point heroic level FH game, however, +8 PSl's vs targeting, and +5 Martial Arts DC's is HUGE.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

That's the thing though - the bulk of all of the questions asked should really open with a synopsis.

 

- Here's my genre

- Here are my current campaign limits (or averages)

- Here's the SFX I want

 

Would make things much easier.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

One thing we did in our supers game, and this can be applied to just about any tactic, is "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". If the PC's can do it, the monsters/villains/etc can do it too. The first time it came up in-game, the GM said that he would only have the villains use it if the PC's used it, and only against the PC that did it..

 

Something we always consider before trying something new/crazy/super-effective is "Do we want them to be able to do it too?" and if the answer is no we come up with something else.

 

I use a similar approach, but I remove "and only against the PC that did it." Either the rule/construct/tactic applies to the whole game, or it's removed entirely.

[atlascott]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

I agree that a GM needs to conceptualize and publish some limits on virtually everything in EVERY HERO based game they run, not just FH, but especially FH, because the need for certain guidelines are required both for game balance as well as genre-adherence reasons.

 

In my FH group, I have a modified character maxima. Up to 15 in normal characteristics are statd price. 16-20 are double; 21-25 are 3x stated price, and on it goes. This allows someone to re-create Hercules, if they want to, but a very expensive, unskilled-in-other-areas Hercules.

 

For figured characteristics, they progress in price as characters buy them past the base characteristics' limits.

 

As for skill levels, the first 2 are stated price, and they double in cost every two addtl levels. This is a game mechanic that prevents pissy players from whining about my 'not letting them run the character they want to" It allowed "Lord of the Archers" to buy himself into that role, but not also "Lord of Swordsmen" too.

 

I use the "nothing allows more than a doubling of damage classes" rule, but it is extremely unpopular with a power gamer in my group. I essentially modified the weapons chart. He bought himself a 30 str and then wanted a Giant's Sword. Literally, like a 10 or 15 foot sword. With the speed modifiers (almost guaranteeing him not moving any but last in a phase), the space requirements (1 hex clear on either side, and a 1/2" above), the OCV penalty (no matter how strong you are, you cannot wave a 15 foot sword around as nimbly as a 2 1/2 foot sword), and the high strength requirements, he decided a extra large sword was sufficient.

 

I am surrently toying with the idea that certain races have access to exclusive racial bonuses. Like Dwarves with damage reduction (25%) Normal Damage, or Elven and halfling invisibility, only in the forrest, only when remaining still, normal sight group only.

 

 

The paradox is this: everyone wants their PC to be very highly effective in their chosen realm. This leads to spending points to become as good an archer as Legolas, as strong as Hercules, et.al., but past a certain point, it really harms the game. Too many skill levels to counteract the -8 headshot penalty, and suddenly tyou got a serious headhunting problem.

 

Try to set the limits exhaustively BEFORE you start making characters...or you may face a mutiny.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

Funny thing is, I set down limits and my PCs promtply break them. I think I've had enough playing the nice, understanding guy. I'm going to start being a prick. Might not make me popular as a DM, but if it'll make my game run smoothly, then that's all I'm looking for right now.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Do PSL vs Hit Locations Unablance the Game?

 

If I'm playing a Supers game' date=' my targets likely have the rDEF to take limited or no BOD from the head hit, buit x5 STUN ends a fight pretty quickly.[/quote']

 

Im not sure what you mean by this...

 

a) Hit Locations are an OPTIONAL rule.

Even if a GM does use Hit Location rules in a superheroic game the recommended approach is to just use it for extra color regarding where the target was hit, but to still apply generalized damage.

 

So unless you are deliberately using the optional Hit Location rules in your superheroic games as they are typically used for heroic games (i.e with damage multiples applied by location), calling shots to the head in a supers game wouldn't have any extra effect than the rolled damage of the attack