Ultimate Brick Error?

[Acroyear II]

Not sure if this has been covered before, but I noticed during my last Champions session that the listing for the DEF and BODY of objects, specifically Walls, were greater in the Ultimate Brick than what has been listed previously in the Hero System 5th Edition Revised.

 

Example:

A Brick Wall in the Hero System 5th Edition Revised is listed as DEF 5 BODY 3 (Page 448).

A Thin/Small Brick Wall in the Ultimate Brick is listed as DEF 5 BODY 8. Heck, even an Average Brick Wall is listed as DEF 5, BODY 9 (Page 146).

 

This is much different that what our campaign has been using previously. Are the numbers in the Ultimate Brick correct? If so, then we will begin using them in our campaign asap, but we want to be sure before we make the change.

 

Thanks in advance.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Ultimate Brick Error?

 

Whichever one is correct would be the one that you want to use to give the feel of your world (easily breakable, nearly unbreakable, realistic).

 

I would say the "thin" wall in TUB should be BODY 3, but that's me.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Ultimate Brick Error?

 

Eh, it depends. Do you want a normal to be able to punch a hole in the wall? What level of 'super strength' is required? One of the great things about the Marvel Videogames is that they have a power called Might. It's pretty much what it sounds like - high enough levels of Might allow you to lift larger, and break tougher objects. It may help you to get a mental gauge and say "Okay, at Strength 30, we're talking low-level super strength - what does that mean to me?" and build from there.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Ultimate Brick Error?

 

Eh' date=' it depends. Do you want a normal to be able to punch a hole in the wall?[/quote']

 

At 20 STR, maximum for a normal, they have only a remote chance of breaking a brick wall even at 5DEF/3BODY. On the other hand I know people who can break bricks with their fists, and in one case his head.

[SpydirShellX]

Re: Ultimate Brick Error?

 

At 20 STR' date=' maximum for a normal, they have only a remote chance of breaking a brick wall even at 5DEF/3BODY. On the other hand I know people who can break bricks with their fists, and in one case his head.[/quote']

 

Wouldn't that also be people using martial arts and getting bonuses from that?

[keithcurtis]

Re: Ultimate Brick Error?

 

Wouldn't that also be people using martial arts and getting bonuses from that?

Usually, they are set and braced as well. And the poor bricks are not mortared into a wall, but strung across an open gap.

I had a friend who was convinced that given enough time, he could kick down a cinderblock wall. I gave up and eventually resorted to smiling and nodding.

 

Keith There's a reason prisons are built of bricks" Curtis

[Sean Waters]

Re: Ultimate Brick Error?

 

Breaking stuff is something that pretty much every game system gets wrong, at least if you resort to real world experience.

 

Superhero games have the rather odd perspective that there IS no real world experience to resort to.

 

Whilst it is, of course, a matter for you to set your own parameters for your world, this sort of game inconsistency really bugs me as there is no excuse for it. None at all.

 

On the question of MA, it has always bugged me that martial artists can punch and kick down stone walls, or mature trees, or whatever, without any superpowers beyond superior training. I do appreciate that it is up to me to fix that in my game (we usually say only half the added dice contribute to damage against objects). Mind you Batman Year One has Bruce kicking a thick tree down on page one, or somewhere neear the front, if memory serves, so what do I know?

 

It is a long time since I read the system, but Chaosium's SuperWorld had the concept of 'hardness' which applied both to characters and objects. If your 'hardness' was exceeded by that of the object you punched, then you would take damage. I quite liked that, although it is a relatively complex thing to model in Hero.

 

Perhaps if you hit an object and do no BODY damage (i.e. do not exceed defence) then, assuming the object is 'hard' perhaps the attacker should take damage, in much the same way as they would from an unsuccessful move through?