Killing Damage

[Doc Democracy]

I didn't want to derail Lord Winter's thread but I had a sudden thought about killing attacks and thought I should get it down on electrons before it disappeared in the quantum mist.

 

Does there have to be a link between attacks doing STUN and attacks doing BODY? In the system you build the components of an attack except for the BODY and STUN delivery systems.

 

Would it be a good thing to have a killing attack that essentially only does as much STUN as BODY (and limits the maximum STUN total until healed) and a second style of attack that does STUN and 1 BODY per die.

 

You could build the attacks together to approximate what we have or have them seperate.

 

It would provide you with more control of the kind of damage you expect the attack to do and would eliminate the STUN lotto and people taking killing attacks for the chance of big STUN windfalls.

 

Killing attack: 15 points per 1D6 of STUN and BODY damage. Only resistant defences apply versus the damage and each die beyond the first reduces the resistant defence by 1 point.

 

Stunning attack: 5 points per 1D6 of STUN damage and 1 point of BODY damage. All appropriate defences apply against the STUN and BODY of the attack.

 

The damage types could be stacked within a single power.

 

For example, a physical attack power could stack killing and stunning damage within it - so buy 2D6 killing damage and 6D6 stunning. On average the attack does 13 BODY and 28 STUN versus PD-1

 

For the same price you would get 4D6 killing to do 14 BODY and 14 STUN that would apply versus PD-3, or 12D6 stunning damage that would do 42 STUN and 12 BODY versus PD.

 

The defence reduction thing seems fine to me as larger and larger attacks will do more and more BODY above and beyond the dice roll until the defence means nothing at all.

 

Anyway - an idle thought - I should go and work now.

 

 

Doc

[Tanir]

Re: Killing Damage

 

 

Would it be a good thing to have a killing attack that essentially only does as much STUN as BODY (and limits the maximum STUN total until healed) and a second style of attack that does STUN and 1 BODY per die.

 

Doc

 

 

I also support this idea. Banishing the STUN damage lottery for Killing Attacks is definitely something I will do for more playability.

 

At first I thought I might even decree that Normal Attacks do only STUN damage and that Killing Attacks do only BODY damage, but this is not the way it works in real life, since a blow to the head delivered to stun someone may well inflict a severe injury. So I suppose I'll go for this idea of 1 BODY per die...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Killing Damage

 

Why not just sever Stun and BOD entirely? Each attack could be purchased as xd6 STUN + yd6 BOD. You might simulate a 12d6 normal attack as 12d6 Stun + 3 1/2d6 BOD damage. Average = 42 STUN and 12.5 BOD, just like now. The odds of max BOD (or min BOD) go up a lot, though, so you will see more BOD damage inflicted.

 

A 4d6 KA could be simulated as 4d6 BOD (DUH!) and 10 1/2d6 STUN, averaging 14 BOD and 37 STUN. This takes away the STUN lotto admirably.

 

We either divest of resistant defenses entirely, or we rule that applying BOD against resistant defenses, with all defenses counting against Stun unless the target has no rDEF, and adding 1d6 to the knockback roll is a +0 advantage.

 

Here's the catch. To make both of the above cost 60 points, 1d6 STUN costs 2 2/3 points while 1d6 BOD costs 8 points. That means a 60 point "Stun only" attack now generates 22 1/2 Stun damage, while a 60 point "BOD only" attack inflicts 7 1/2 d6 BOD. Slap the two in a Multipower, and kiss entangles, force walls, objects and automotons good bye! This is a problem in any system that increases the spread between STUN and BOD damage in some attacks.

 

You probably need to establish a ground rule that STUN dice must be some range of multiples of BOD dice - say 2.5x to 3x - to keep matters getting out of hand.

 

[ASIDE: Now I'm having Golden Heroes flashbacks - their attacks did xd6, and the player divided these between Stun and Kill dice, with the caveat that they had to be within 2d6 (IIRC) of one another. In that game, characters rolled for Hits to Stun and Hits to Kill, and got equal dice for both.]

[Dust Raven]

Re: Killing Damage

 

I am very much in favor of separating STUN and BODY into two separate mechanics.

 

However, I am very much against the idea of requiring a compound Power just to accomplish something as simple as knife or a baseball bat. What's more, how would you handled STR damage? Would STR automatically have both STUN & BODY, would there be two STR Characterists, or would everyone have to buy the ability to to STUN or BODY (whichever STR no longer does by default) in addition to STR?

[Tech]

Re: Killing Damage

 

I know the Stun lottery on Killing Attacks is not favored by everyone but the suggestions given would probably cause a major rewrite on Hero Games part. Still, house rules override any rules in one's game.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Killing Damage

 

Why not just sever Stun and BOD entirely? Each attack could be purchased as xd6 STUN + yd6 BOD. You might simulate a 12d6 normal attack as 12d6 Stun + 3 1/2d6 BOD damage. Average = 42 STUN and 12.5 BOD' date=' just like now. The odds of max BOD (or min BOD) go up a lot, though, so you will see more BOD damage inflicted.[/Quote']

 

I did initially think about a complete severing but there were so many things that are tied into the damage system (like costs as you point out and STR damage as Ghost Angel pointed out).

 

I think that if I was looking at a sixth edition then I might consider the separation of STUN and BODY damage but this would entail root and branch changes throughout the system and a good deal of playtesting to ensure the costings were right.

 

Here's the catch. To make both of the above cost 60 points' date=' 1d6 STUN costs 2 2/3 points while 1d6 BOD costs 8 points. That means a 60 point "Stun only" attack now generates 22 1/2 Stun damage, while a 60 point "BOD only" attack inflicts 7 1/2 d6 BOD. Slap the two in a Multipower, and kiss entangles, force walls, objects and automotons good bye! This is a problem in any system that increases the spread between STUN and BOD damage in some attacks.[/quote']

 

Well. I severely limited STUN in killing attacks and limited BODY in stunning attacks and then added in some extra utility for killing attacks made the power more deadly and to provide some remuneration for lost STUN.

 

I thought that this would ensure that people bought this power when they wanted something that was designed to kill or destroy and not for any subsidiary ability to produce stun damage.

 

Good points though, rep on its way.

 

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Killing Damage

 

Well. I severely limited STUN in killing attacks and limited BODY in stunning attacks and then added in some extra utility for killing attacks made the power more deadly and to provide some remuneration for lost STUN.

 

I thought that this would ensure that people bought this power when they wanted something that was designed to kill or destroy and not for any subsidiary ability to produce stun damage.

 

My players have historically used KA's in Champs settings as a more effective means of breaking things (walls, automotons, entangles, etc.) then for their ability to inflict Stun. If I could buy a KA doing 1d6 BOD for 10 points per die, I'd certainly slap that in the Multipower along with my 12d6 EB, and only use it against entangles, inanimate objects, etc. 6d6 BOD will tear through any force wall or entangle built on 60 AP pretty quickly - 4d6 already does a pretty good job!

[BNakagawa]

Re: Killing Damage

 

My players have historically used KA's in Champs settings as a more effective means of breaking things (walls' date=' automotons, entangles, etc.) then for their ability to inflict Stun. If I could buy a KA doing 1d6 BOD for 10 points per die, I'd certainly slap that in the Multipower along with my 12d6 EB, and only use it against entangles, inanimate objects, etc. 6d6 BOD will tear through any force wall or entangle built on 60 AP pretty quickly - 4d6 already does a pretty good job![/quote']

 

Then again, in a world where KA only cost 10 points/die, nobody would bother with building automata, force walls or entangles unless they were also reduced in cost...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Killing Damage

 

Then again' date=' in a world where KA only cost 10 points/die, nobody would bother with building automata, force walls or entangles unless they were also reduced in cost...[/quote']

 

Exactly. Of course, if we do that, everyone needs a killing attack, since automata, force walls or entangles will be too effective against targets that lack a killing attack. So now everyone needs to justify a KA so their character won't be ineffective against entangles, and they also need higher resistant defenses, BOD and/or Regen so they can survive if they're targeted with these KA's that everyone now needs.

 

The ripple effects seem pretty significant...

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Killing Damage

 

The ripples are significant if the KA costs 10 points per 1D6. If the Killing damage remains at 15 points per 1D6 then there are no ripples in that direction.

 

What you have to do then is add in some killing utility that does not nerf automata and structures....

 

No?

 

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Killing Damage

 

The ripples are significant if the KA costs 10 points per 1D6. If the Killing damage remains at 15 points per 1D6 then there are no ripples in that direction.

 

What you have to do then is add in some killing utility that does not nerf automata and structures....

 

And also does not have its own ripple effect. So what added utility would you suggest?

 

For me, an easy answer is requiring all KA's to have Decreased Stun Multiple, -2, for a -1/2 limitation. The cost is 10 points per die, but 1d6 KA is still 15 AP and 3 Damage Classes. They're useful only for killing now, but they won't have any more dice than they would under the normal rules. Of course, putting one in a Multipower saves very little, but then adding a multipower slot was very inexpensive to begin with.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Killing Damage

 

And also does not have its own ripple effect. So what added utility would you suggest?

 

For me, an easy answer is requiring all KA's to have Decreased Stun Multiple, -2, for a -1/2 limitation. The cost is 10 points per die, but 1d6 KA is still 15 AP and 3 Damage Classes. They're useful only for killing now, but they won't have any more dice than they would under the normal rules. Of course, putting one in a Multipower saves very little, but then adding a multipower slot was very inexpensive to begin with.

 

In the first post I suggested some kind of cumulative reduction of defences but this has the same problem against automatons - increases effectiveness beyond the cost.

 

Your suggestion mirrors that made for hand attacks and so retains some consistency within the system - that's good. I would consider giving killing attacks that do more than 1/4 of the BODY of a target have the possibility of preventing the victim taking a recovery. Perhaps a CON roll modified by the total BODY damage of the victim? This would represent the failing body function of the victim.

 

That would give some colour to killing attacks that is not currently there and make them more deadly against living opponents without impacting automatons and structures.

 

May think longer on this (and possibly look at the impairment etc rules) and come back to you.

 

 

Doc

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Killing Damage

 

I would consider giving killing attacks that do more than 1/4 of the BODY of a target have the possibility of preventing the victim taking a recovery. Perhaps a CON roll modified by the total BODY damage of the victim? This would represent the failing body function of the victim.

 

That would give some colour to killing attacks that is not currently there and make them more deadly against living opponents without impacting automatons and structures.

 

May think longer on this (and possibly look at the impairment etc rules) and come back to you.

 

Actually, why not give KA's an advantage under the Impairment/Disabling rules - making an impairing hit more likely with a KA could be an adequate compromise. Of course, this assumes the game uses the impairment and disabling rules to begin with.