Grond, underpowered pansy?

[MitchellS]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

Arrgh.

Yet another size/scale issue.

So now a 20d6 Megascale Nuke, ala TUV, won'rt take out a skyscraper?

And if you can throw 91 body in a single attack, its easier to destroy the planet the building sits on rather than targeting the building?

I obviously don't have TUB, but adding a whole 'nother set of breaking things rules sounds like it's just making already muddy waters even more polluted.

Those rules were published in the Champions genre book long before getting reprinted in the Ultimate Brick. And no one can can really believe it takes only 91 body to destroy the planet when it takes 40 body to destroy a tank.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

Those rules were published in the Champions genre book long before getting reprinted in the Ultimate Brick. And no one can can really believe it takes only 91 body to destroy the planet when it takes 40 body to destroy a tank.

 

*Shrug* I don't really do supers much anymore, and am on my "I'm self employed" budget, which means I don't have any of the supers genre books. The 91 body thing is straight from 5th & the sidebar in Star Hero. I don't agree with it, but it's one system valid build, and the only way the Planetary level threats like the Engine of Destruction (a Berserker homage) in the Bestiary could possibly work. Even then the EoD's "Planet-Destroying Cannon" is only a 10d6 AP RKA. Not only will it NOT destroy a Planet, now it won't even knock down a building.

 

Someday I'll figure out the fix for this issue.

[Watchdog]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

As I said' date=' they only need to keep him from hitting 2-3 times before Sapphire and Defender take him out [and with a 4 dcv he's all but impossible to hit'].

 

And they're preventing him from attacking Sapphire or Defender first how, exactly? Neither Ironclad nor Nighthawk are going to be able to do much damage to Grond, and while the big lug may not be a tactical genius, he should still be able to go after who hurts him the most.

 

I'm just saying that if one Champion goes down - and the odds are, they will - your "KO GRond in one turn or less" breakdown goes right out the window.

 

 

I think the point of the thread was to complain about why Grond doesn't perform the same way in 5e that he did in 1e-4e. In early editions Grond was a group threat unless you had fire or mental. In 5e he's a pushover who's been surplanted by other villains who he used to be superior to.

 

I think baseline character inflation may account for this, at least in part. Earlier Champions editions had starting PCs at 200-250 points, depending on the ed.

[MitchellS]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

And they're preventing him from attacking Sapphire or Defender first how' date=' exactly? Neither Ironclad nor Nighthawk are going to be able to do much damage to Grond, and while the big lug may not be a tactical genius, he should still be able to go after who hurts him the most. [/quote']

They're going to be flying.

 

And as for him being any type of tactician, I'd just point out that he has less intelligence then most of the animals in the Bestiary and leave it a that. If you've got 2 people tormenting a bear it's not thinking about how it's getting hit. It's thinking the thing in front of it is doing the hitting.

 

Of course if Grond had been built in a way that made him tough enough to outlast the Champions the point of tactics would be moot.

 

I think baseline character inflation may account for this, at least in part. Earlier Champions editions had starting PCs at 200-250 points, depending on the ed.

Again, the point was that many villains who were weaker then Grond got rebuilds that accounted for the point inflation. Grond didn't.

[Watchdog]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

They're going to be flying.

 

If they're out of range of his superleap, even they're going to have trouble hitting Grond with the range penalties. And this assumes there's nothing big and heavy he can throw at them. At this point we would have to start stipulating what environment they're fighting in.

 

 

 

And as for him being any type of tactician, I'd just point out that he has less intelligence then most of the animals in the Bestiary and leave it a that. If you've got 2 people tormenting a bear it's not thinking about how it's getting hit. It's thinking the thing in front of it is doing the hitting.

 

If he has the mental capacity to form a coherent sentence in his quote, he'd have the mental capacity to to determine who was hurting him more - at least in my campaign. It would take more an ineffective PC dancing in front of him to keep him from attacking the PC hitting him with a 6d6 NND stun each phase. YMMV.

[MeteorMan]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

I hafta say I haven't used Grond in 5th Ed yet. As I have used him in my 4th Ed and previouse Champions games I hafta make sure that he lives up to his rep from previous editions.

I know he's not a master villain or even intellectually close to being a rocket scientist but I have always used him as a cunning foe who learns from his mistakes and experiences like some wild animals do.

In my 4th ed game my super team came across Grond on the New York docks and had a quick fight that almost got the team all a quick ride to the hospital as Grond has 4 arms i gave him autofire and area affect 1 hex as strength tricks. also if the big man can grab an unsuspecting hero he still has 3 arms free.

Also in 4th edition game my heroes couldn't fight grond underwater very well.

Water breathing and swimming gave him an edge in there first fight, and take it they all learned and round 2 several weeks later the trumiphed over grond but they had a healthy respect for him.

[Mike W]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

On the other hand, Grond is child like enough that if someone ineffectual did a good enough job of taunting, Grond might ignore more effective combatants(at least for a while) to try and stomp the obnoxious character first.

[MitchellS]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

If he has the mental capacity to form a coherent sentence in his quote' date=' he'd have the mental capacity to to determine who was hurting him more - at least in my campaign. It would take more an ineffective PC dancing in front of him to keep him from attacking the PC hitting him with a 6d6 NND stun each phase. YMMV.[/quote']

Character sheets don't always agree with write ups. We saw that in the Dr. Destroyer versus Takofanes thread. I can only say that Grond's write up gives him less intelligence then most of the animals in the game and he's 2 points lower then a small child. Now you can play him like a normal human intellect if you want but I choose to play him as someone with the intellect of a 5 year old [and someone of that age group certainly doesn't grasp everything around him, especially when getting injured].

[Andrew Cermak]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

Character sheets don't always agree with write ups. We saw that in the Dr. Destroyer versus Takofanes thread. I can only say that Grond's write up gives him less intelligence then most of the animals in the game and he's 2 points lower then a small child.

 

The low intelligence of animals is in part represented by a Physical Limitation that Grond doesn't have. Some animals may process information faster than Grond, but that doesn't necessarily make them more cunning.

[MitchellS]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

The low intelligence of animals is in part represented by a Physical Limitation that Grond doesn't have.

Yeah, and that 7 int small child doesn't have it either. Unfortunately Grond is 2 points lower then the child too.

[Watchdog]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

.Now you can play him like a normal human intellect if you want but I choose to play him as someone with the intellect of a 5 year old [and someone of that age group certainly doesn't grasp everything around him' date= especially when getting injured].

 

I may be wrong, but you're making it sound like you run Grond almost at a default berserk, attacking PC targets at random. If that's the case, it does support your argument that he can be easily taken out in less than a turn.

 

But you really don't have to be a genius, or even "normal human intellect" to determine who's hurting you the most. Pain is a very simple concept, and so is determining who's causing the most pain, unless there's invisible power effects involved.

 

When I was five years old and roughhousing with other kids, I certainly knew who was doing the most damage to me (usually my older sister) and would takes steps to avoid it. You can credit me with being an exceptionally intelligent child if you want to, but...

 

So if Grond can't evaluate the difference between Nighthawk's getting 2 STUN past his defenses, and Sapphire's 6d6 NND attack, then yes. He's definitely an underpowered pansy. If he has a fully functioning nervous system and the intelligence of a five year old, then not so much, imo. As I said, YMMV.

 

I think I'm done on this subject. Last word's yours if you want it.

[MitchellS]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

So if Grond can't evaluate the difference between Nighthawk's getting 2 STUN past his defenses' date=' and Sapphire's 6d6 NND attack, then yes. He's definitely an underpowered pansy. If he has a fully functioning nervous system and the intelligence of a five year old, then not so much, imo. As I said, YMMV.[/quote']

I'd only point out here that nowhere in my example did I say Sapphire was using NND. She's using the same 12d6 attack everyone is using. If I'd had allowed both Sapphire and Witchcraft to act in character they'd have both used their most effective attacks and wasted Grond from the beginning.

[massey]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

Not much to say here, except:

 

1) Grond is less powerful than he used to be.

 

2) I believe the size of the hole doubles for every *2* Body above the destruction of the original hex now (meaning Grond will only do an 8 hex hole on a punch, or a 32 hex hole on a haymaker).

 

and

 

3) Some skyscrapers actually DO rely on their outer walls for support. The WTC was a prime example. Something like the Empire State Building is a heck of a lot more sturdy - it's a million tons of concrete and steel, and can take a pounding.

 

I've always felt that Grond needed damage reduction, at least on his ED side. Perhaps give him 50% damage reduction that lasts only for the first turn, that way he'll fall down later in the fight, but he doesn't get punked early on.

[Squall]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

And this assumes there's nothing big and heavy he can throw at them.

I bet Ironclad would work...

[proditor]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

Ultimate Cap is tougher and stronger than 616 Cap.

Ultimate Hulk is weaker and more vulnerable than 616 Hulk.

I base this on something I saw in Wizard magazine a while back, where the Ultimate writers were comparing the power levels of various charcaters in the Ultimate Universe, and comparing what they said to the OHOTMU.

That said, Cap taking down Hulk, even for a few seconds, impressive. Ultimate Cap rocks!

While I agree with the above based on reading the comics, I have a knee-jerk frothing reaction whenever someone mentions Wizard, which published Ultimate Hulk as having an 11 ton lift capacity.

 

Morons.

[Publius]

Re: Grond, underpowered pansy?

 

3) Some skyscrapers actually DO rely on their outer walls for support. The WTC was a prime example. Something like the Empire State Building is a heck of a lot more sturdy - it's a million tons of concrete and steel' date=' and can take a pounding.[/quote']Absolutely, which was why I said...

...any building that has "Hardened glass" as an exterior wall is a "Curtain Wall" style building...

Because the post I was responding to was about the mountain of damage done to a 2/2 wall. I still think the visual would be cool and the flying glass and whatnot to be a real headache (and heartache) for the PCs. Curtain walls btw were very popular after Lever House in the early 1950s up to the present and are seen worldwide, but you are absolutely right that they are not all skyscrapers.

 

The rest of the comment about Skyscrapers didn't rely on that either btw, those were the rules straight out of the book.