Haymaker out of combat

[TaxiMan]

A recent rules reply by Steve indicated haymakers aren't appropriate out of combat. So who has let PCs use haymaker to break out of a jail cell or other non-combat applications? I'm not dissin' Steve, he had the "dramatic sense" disclaimer on his answer as usual - just interested because I hadn't considered it "illegal".

[TaxiMan]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

Reread Steve's post, and actually it didn't have the disclaimer - he said

 

"As usual, performing a Haymaker has to actually subject a character to some potential drawback; if he’s in a situation where having a lowered DCV and taking extra time to use Healing aren’t any inconvenience, he absolutely can’t Haymaker his Healing (or anything else, for that matter)."

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

This is reasonable, IMO. It's basically an extension of standard concept that things that don't limit you aren't worth bonuses. As a GM, I would probably allow you to have the same general effect as a Haymaker out of combat, but with some other appropriate drawback attached instead of DCV penalties and an extra Segment of time.

[TaxiMan]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

Cool! This makes it a lot easier to imprison super villains.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

This works until we apply common and dramatic sense. Ogre is imprisoned in a cell. He is alone. He cannot use a Haymaker to attack the wall of the cell, to enhance his punch by 4DC, because he is not disadvantaged by the delay and loss of DCV.

 

But, if a guard locks himself in the cell with Ogre, and pulls out a handgun, Orge is now in combat, so a haymaker is a legitimate option. So Ogre Haymakers the wall, the bullets bounce off him, and he then thumps the guard and leaves.

 

Or does the fact that the guard's not really a threat mean the Cosmic Balance prohibits Ogre from haymakering, just like it did when he was alone? How powerful does the other person in the cell need to be in order to permit Ogre to use a haymaker? If Ogre thinks the guard's gun is loaded with 4d6 AP RKA CapeKiller bullets, can he Haymaker now? Does that apply if he's incorrect and the bullets can't really hurt him? What if he thinks they are normal bullets, but they're really CapeKillers?

 

How far does this logic extend? Can a Variable Limitation not be switched to Extra Time, 2x END when I have lots of time to wait and subsequenty recover my END? Does my Susceptibility to High Heat drop in value in the wintertime?

[lemming]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

I've never had a problem with them doing a haymaker out of combat. Takes extra time sure, but then there's extra effort.

 

"Hey, throw something at me so I can do a haymaker!"

[tesuji]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

can i do a move thru and gain bonuses to damage if i cannot be harmed by the damage it does to me? Should i get less bonus in that case? what if the relative ocv's make the ocv penalties meaningless AND i cannot really hurt myself?

 

i would assume this "abuse" is likewise c\"caught" by this ruling?

[schir1964]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

I agree with Hugh and tesuji.

 

This ruling make no sense Dramatic or otherwise. Just one more thing to ignore.

 

I tried to rep you Hugh, but alas, I'm not permitted to. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

It makes just as much sense as Haymakering Healing...

[SuperGuy]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

I suppose if you need a reason or a penalty to throw a haymaker out of combat, then I guess the closest thing to compare it to would be extra effort or "pushing". Make the pc do an ego roll or something else to motivate them to throw caution to the wind. Haymakering a wall would be a little less tempting if you treat it like an uncontrolled move through (giving the possibility of serious backlash damage)

 

Really, the GM should discourage pushing and haymakers whenever possible. It's just the PC trying to get extra points they didn't pay for, but I'm all for it for dramatic effect and when it counts.

 

Speaking of which and on a side note: Passing Strike = broken; Flying Dodge = broken; MPA w/MA = broken (though not realized by most). Imagine the passing strike, KS, Nerve Strike and Martial Throw all in one attack... eww. Honestly, most PCs are affraid to try it and GMs have to go the book when it's done.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

I'm thinking of ditching Haymaker altogether. I mean it hardly ever gets used as an offensive power as it is so easy to get around, so it is only ever used to attack stuff that won't be getting out of the way.

 

I might consider allowing a more impressive push in superhero games: 10 points automatically and +1 STR per point an EGO roll is made by.

 

Or maybe not.

 

Anyway, can anyone muster an argument for keeping it?

[TheJudge]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

I'm thinking of ditching Haymaker altogether. I mean it hardly ever gets used as an offensive power as it is so easy to get around, so it is only ever used to attack stuff that won't be getting out of the way.

 

I might consider allowing a more impressive push in superhero games: 10 points automatically and +1 STR per point an EGO roll is made by.

 

Or maybe not.

 

Anyway, can anyone muster an argument for keeping it?

 

In comic there have been dramatic effects where it took the team (team attack) just to harm or stun the villian and the brick does the double handed over the head pound/bash to finish them off. Or even a tough villian gets grabbed by a team mate long enough to catch the devestating uppercut.

 

These are perfect dramatic occurances of a haymaker but ultimately you could build other mechanics that work out the dramatics better if you really wanted to but it you dont have extra time on you hands to ammend rules they have something that works why not use it!

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

I suppose if you need a reason or a penalty to throw a haymaker out of combat' date=' then I guess the closest thing to compare it to would be extra effort or "pushing". Make the pc do an ego roll or something else to motivate them to throw caution to the wind. Haymakering a wall would be a little less tempting if you treat it like an uncontrolled move through (giving the possibility of serious backlash damage)[/quote']

 

Once again, why would these effects only happpen out of combat? A haymaker reflects the character focusing all his effort on maximizing the power of his strike, and sacrificing both speed (end of next segment) and evasion (-5 DCV) in order to do so. Why would I need an Ego roll to "throw caution to the wind" and sacrifice my ability to avoid an attack when I'm alone, but not when there are people shooting at me? It seems to me the Ego roll would more properly be required if I face risk of serious retaliation while I'm exposed to attack.

 

As for the "uncontrolled move through", would you also apply this in combat? If not, why is a noncombat use of the maneuver somehow more dangerous to the user?

 

Really' date=' the GM should discourage pushing and haymakers whenever possible. It's just the PC trying to get extra points they didn't pay for, but I'm all for it for dramatic effect and when it counts.[/quote']

 

Really? It costs 25 points (5 DCV levels) to enhance your DCV by 5. That's what you lose when you Haymaker. You gain +4 DC at 0 END (30 AP) Extra Time (extra segment; -3/4) which would cost 17 points. That looks like the player giving up 8 points.

 

Pushing is another matter. That's making a truly heroic effort, and already requires both special circumstances and an ego rule by the rules as written. Logically, nothing would prevent the Brick doubling up his fists and putting all his mass behind one strike (Haymaker) while putting every ounce of effort and will into his STR (Pushing) at the same time.

 

For those posters really worried about Haymakers being abused, do you see them used a lot in your games? In mine, the combination of extra time and loss of DCV restricts them pretty heavily, and a "maximum power hit" to break a wall seems perfectly reasonable to me. Really, does any GM not consider the maximum damage the players can inflict when building an "unbreakable wall" or a "really tough to break wall"? That's a plot device, not a character point issue.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

I'm going to put this ruling in the small file of "What was Steve smoking when he answered this?!?!"

 

I can see his reasoning, but I agree completley with Hugh on this one.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

In comic there have been dramatic effects where it took the team (team attack) just to harm or stun the villian and the brick does the double handed over the head pound/bash to finish them off. Or even a tough villian gets grabbed by a team mate long enough to catch the devestating uppercut.

 

These are perfect dramatic occurances of a haymaker but ultimately you could build other mechanics that work out the dramatics better if you really wanted to but it you dont have extra time on you hands to ammend rules they have something that works why not use it!

 

...or perfect examples of pushed coordinated attacks: no haymaker necessary.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

...........................For those posters really worried about Haymakers being abused' date=' do you see them used a lot in your games? In mine, the combination of extra time and loss of DCV restricts them pretty heavily, and a "maximum power hit" to break a wall seems perfectly reasonable to me. Really, does any GM not consider the maximum damage the players can inflict when building an "unbreakable wall" or a "really tough to break wall"? That's a plot device, not a character point issue.[/quote']

 

Well, quite: even quite modest bricks/blasters with 10d6 damage can push for +2d6 and haymaker for +4d6, or 16d6 damage, and damage dice variation means plus or minus 4 Body damage is not out of the question, so to lock up a character you probably need (at least) a 21 DEF prison, which seems a little excessive.

 

Punching a wall is rarely 'dramatic', and making all the 'really touch walls' out of the stuff they make bank vaults from seems unnecessary and unrealistic.

 

Of course HIGH POWERED supers, with 14 DC+ of damage can expect to damage that vault-armour wall over time....I suppose it is a matter of what you want out of the game. If you want the characters to be able to tear apart virtually anything out of combat, just allow them to do max damage hits.

 

Haymaker just seems unnecessary.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

Well' date=' quite: even quite modest bricks/blasters with 10d6 damage can push for +2d6 and haymaker for +4d6, or 16d6 damage, and damage dice variation means plus or minus 4 Body damage is not out of the question, so to lock up a character you probably need (at least) a 21 DEF prison, which seems a little excessive.[/quote']

 

While Haymaker is a standard combat maneuver, my view is that Pushing is not routine, but requires a significant motivation to Push. Not wanting to be locked up any more doesn't cut it. Needing to rescue your DNPC, who you can see the villain menacing on closed circuit TV, would allow the Ego roll.

 

Punching a wall is rarely 'dramatic'

 

Meaning that pushing should rarely be considered or allowed for this purpose. Use of a combat maneuver, however, seems fine. If he wanted to Dodge, would you also prohibit that?

 

and making all the 'really touch walls' out of the stuff they make bank vaults from seems unnecessary and unrealistic.

 

Perhaps the true "unrealism" is that there would be a lot of barriers tough enough to stop a Super with a 10d6 attack for any length of time. They aren't really Super if the world just gets tougher to compensate for their supposedly superhuman abilities.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

While Haymaker is a standard combat maneuver' date=' my view is that Pushing is not routine, but requires a significant motivation to Push. Not wanting to be locked up any more doesn't cut it. Needing to rescue your DNPC, who you can see the villain menacing on closed circuit TV, would allow the Ego roll.[/quote']

 

It would be easy enough to modify the pushing rules to reflect this: In combat no roll needed (as at present for superheroes) but out of combat you can push by 2 points for each +1 on your EGO roll, up to a max of 10 points.

 

Actually, even better, change pushing entirely to EGO roll required, 2 points per +1 you succed by to a maximum of +10 and, if you feel you should, give a bonus to the EGO roll in combat, and a repeated use penalty out of combat.

 

 

Meaning that pushing should rarely be considered or allowed for this purpose. Use of a combat maneuver' date=' however, seems fine. If he wanted to Dodge, would you also prohibit that?[/quote']

 

Dodging a wall seems pointless

 

Part of the problem is the utility/penalty: out of combat there really is no lasting penalty for haymakering, so long as you are not attacked in the same segment you deliver the blow - at least with pushing you are going to be tired out: don't forget you lose END equal to the points you push by. If it has taken you 4 phases to bust out then you will be 40 END down, or, if you've paced yourself - 1 blow per turn then recover, you've given time for reinforcements to be waiting outside the hole you've made.

 

I suppose the ability to push AND to haymaker is part of the problem: a character with 10 STR can manage an 8d6 punch, without any kind of martial arts training at all. Just doesn't seem right.

 

 

Perhaps the true "unrealism" is that there would be a lot of barriers tough enough to stop a Super with a 10d6 attack for any length of time. They aren't really Super if the world just gets tougher to compensate for their supposedly superhuman abilities.

 

This is a very good point: I often try and get 'brick' players into character by describing how they live in a papier-mache world, and have to be careful not to shatter anything they touch. Whilst in a superpowered world we can expect materials to have received an upgrade, it is probably a question not of right and wrong, but of where you strike the balance: my feeling is that 10d6 is the top end of low powered superheroes running into the low end of medium powered ones, and so, whilst extraordinary, the characters are not that far beyond human, although I could easily be persuaded otherwise.

 

Bear in mind that a 20 strength 'normal human' character, pushing and haymakering can do 10d6 damage. That's why I feel that is a sort of cut off point. I wouldn't expect anyone described as a normal human to be punching through concrete walls, and the sad fact is that with haymaker in the system, even a 10 STR 'normal human' character can punch through concrete walls, which is DEF 6.

 

I know I can use GM fiat to make it right ('Yes the concrete cracks, but you've broken every bone in your hand...') or change the DEF values of everything in the game but I'd rather just remove the cause of the problem - haymaker.

 

Yes you can do the same damage with an offensive strike, but I don't let just anyone buy that manouvre, and I'm slightly happier about letting a trained martial artist punch through a wall than I am Average Joe.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

Dodging a wall seems pointless

 

Why should I be allowed to use some maneuvers out of combat and not others? Will we preclude the Martial Artist using his Defensive Strike or Marial Strike? Bonus OCV and DCV are also pretty pointless against a wall.

 

Part of the problem is the utility/penalty: out of combat there really is no lasting penalty for haymakering' date=' so long as you are not attacked in the same segment you deliver the blow - at least with pushing you are going to be tired out: don't forget you lose END equal to the points you push by. If it has taken you 4 phases to bust out then you will be 40 END down, or, if you've paced yourself - 1 blow per turn then recover, you've given time for reinforcements to be waiting outside the hole you've made.[/quote']

 

Can't those reinforcements fire on you with your -5 DCV? Can't I take cover behind the cell wall and take a REC or two (or take them before I strike the wall again, so I'll only be down END from one puished shot, and get that back on PS 12)?

 

If I time my Haymaker right (start at, say, 3 DEX on phase 10 and get ready to Abort in ph 12), I can also mitigate that DCV penalty. Should that be prohibited unless an opponent has a phase reserved to take advantage of my reduced DCV?

 

I suppose the ability to push AND to haymaker is part of the problem: a character with 10 STR can manage an 8d6 punch' date=' without any kind of martial arts training at all. Just doesn't seem right.[/quote']

 

Pushing is for notable characters only, if you read the rules.

 

Bear in mind that a 20 strength 'normal human' character' date=' pushing and haymakering can do 10d6 damage. That's why I feel that is a sort of cut off point. I wouldn't expect anyone described as a normal human to be punching through concrete walls, and the sad fact is that with haymaker in the system, even a 10 STR 'normal human' character can punch through concrete walls, which is DEF 6.[/quote']

 

Normal humans can't push, so that drops him down to 6d6. That's not enough damage to kill a typical human being.

 

Yes you can do the same damage with an offensive strike' date=' but I don't let just anyone buy that manouvre, and I'm slightly happier about letting a trained martial artist punch through a wall than I am Average Joe.[/quote']

 

Average Joe with 10 STR and Offensive Strike (a part of many standard MA packages) kisdoing 6d6. Let him push and its 8d6. Give him that 20 STR and it's 10d6. How is this any less problematic? Because a smaller section of the polulace has it? Why not just rule that normals lacking combat training or experience don't get the Haymaker maneuver. A rule that it cannot more than double the DC's of the attack it's used with wouldn't hurt either.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

Why should I be allowed to use some maneuvers out of combat and not others? Will we preclude the Martial Artist using his Defensive Strike or Marial Strike? Bonus OCV and DCV are also pretty pointless against a wall.

 

 

 

Can't those reinforcements fire on you with your -5 DCV? Can't I take cover behind the cell wall and take a REC or two (or take them before I strike the wall again, so I'll only be down END from one puished shot, and get that back on PS 12)?

 

The dodge won't get you out of the cell and enither will the defensive strike, if a normal punch wouldn't. A Martial or Offensive Strike might, fair enough, but that is stuff you have paid for. Everyman manouvres shouldn't be adding that kind of damage. It is an anacronism.

 

If I time my Haymaker right (start at' date=' say, 3 DEX on phase 10 and get ready to Abort in ph 12), I can also mitigate that DCV penalty. Should that be prohibited unless an opponent has a phase reserved to take advantage of my reduced DCV?[/quote']

 

No. If the opponent doesn't take advantage of your penalties, that is not your problem, and yes the END loss can be mitigated, but only at the cost of extra time. If haymaker did not exist then the 'timing it right' bit would never occur.

 

 

 

Pushing is for notable characters only, if you read the rules.

 

 

 

Normal humans can't push, so that drops him down to 6d6. That's not enough damage to kill a typical human being.

 

I'd be happier with them being able to push than haymaker, and a 6d6 can kill, certainaly in heroic games where an opponent might have a (normal) 2pd and 8 Body, if you are using the impairing/disabling rules, it will kill quite often. Even just using the bleeding rules it is pretty nasty. And not at all realistic.

 

Anyway, I was talking about characters, and I meant 'non-background types' including PCs. I just don't see a PC with a 'normal guy' concept (perhaps all his points are in magic spells?) should be able to punch through walls as a matter of course. Cuts the wires supending my disbelief.

 

 

 

Average Joe with 10 STR and Offensive Strike (a part of many standard MA packages) kisdoing 6d6. Let him push and its 8d6. Give him that 20 STR and it's 10d6. How is this any less problematic? Because a smaller section of the polulace has it? Why not just rule that normals lacking combat training or experience don't get the Haymaker maneuver. A rule that it cannot more than double the DC's of the attack it's used with wouldn't hurt either.

 

 

I did point out that I don't consider offensive strike a 'standard' MA manouvre - I am careful who I let have it, purely because it is not realistic in most cases, but even ignoring my campaign guidance, I can live with a trained martial artist doing amazing feats, like breaking bricks, or even walls. +4d6 is a LOT of damage. It is the difference between the punch of a normal adult and a superhero who can lift a small car.

 

If we are changing the rules about haymaker anyway, why keep it? Who ever uses it in combat anyway, other than possibly in a 'I'll hold him, you hit him' scenario, and if you are double teaming you are almost certainly as well or better off coordinating.

 

NB I have been inadvertantly exaggerating the problem: because of the damage adding rules a normal human can only add 2d6 to 10 STR with a haymaker, which is moe realistic, but as soon as that normal human becomes a PC (as above with powers elsewhere than strength, obviously) they can push their strength to 20 and haymaker for 8d6. Another layer of unreality bursting my bubble: 2d6 to 8d6 is a MASSIVE increase, practically a minor superpower in itself.

 

Ditch Haymaker.

 

You know it makes sense.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

One of my pet peeves with Haymaker is that it essentially doesn't work for Martial Artists. Since Haymaker is a Maneuver, an MA can't Haymaker a Martial Strike or Offensive Strike. Sure, they can Haymaker a normal Strike, but in most cases that'll actually do less damage (since they can't add Damage Classes) as well as reduce their Combat Value.

[JmOz]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

Funny thing, in my games most characters who want to use "Haymakers" will buy a MA package including an Offencive Strike caleed Haymaker...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

The dodge won't get you out of the cell and enither will the defensive strike' date=' if a normal punch wouldn't. A Martial or Offensive Strike might, fair enough, but that is stuff you have paid for. Everyman manouvres shouldn't be adding that kind of damage. It is an anacronism.[/quote']

 

If we went to UMA and built a Haymaker, what would it cost? I'm guessing about 1, and only because it would have a minimum cost of 1 point. If Haymaker is unbalanced as a free maneuver, I can only suggest all the martial maneuvers are also underpriced, since they start with the belief that the standard maneuvers are appropriately free.

 

No. If the opponent doesn't take advantage of your penalties' date=' that is not your problem, and yes the END loss can be mitigated, but only at the cost of extra time. If haymaker did not exist then the 'timing it right' bit would never occur.[/quote']

 

The END loss is mitigated at the cost of extra time. The Haymaker is only available if you use extra time. I'm seeing a similarity here.

 

Also, differentiating between "the opponent does not take advantage of the penalty" [the maneuver can be used] and "circumstances prevent the opponent taking advantage of the penalty" [the maneuver can't be used] seems pretty difficult in many cases. That line's not so easy to draw, so making that the arbiter of whether the maneuver can be used is, IMO, not a good idea. What impact is the penalty realluy having if my opponent has already moved this phase, and won't get to move next segment, and his OCV is such that he already hits my normal DCV with ease? This also renders the penalty meaningless.

 

I'd be happier with them being able to push than haymaker' date=' and a 6d6 can kill, certainaly in heroic games where an opponent might have a (normal) 2pd and 8 Body, if you are using the impairing/disabling rules, it will kill quite often. Even just using the bleeding rules it is pretty nasty. And not at all realistic.[/quote']

 

Kicking a person who's down (an easy example of a "max damage when the opponent can't defend himself") maneuver can kill.

 

Anyway' date=' I was talking about characters, and I meant 'non-background types' including PCs. I just don't see a PC with a 'normal guy' concept (perhaps all his points are in magic spells?) should be able to punch through walls as a matter of course. Cuts the wires supending my disbelief.[/quote']

 

But the magic doesn't? Anyway, he has a 4d6 Haymaker. A typical person giving it his best effort can break wood panelling or drywall (ie "interior wall"). In fact, it happens accidentally on occasion, which hardly seems like a Haymaker situation.

 

I did point out that I don't consider offensive strike a 'standard' MA manouvre - I am careful who I let have it' date=' purely because it is not realistic in most cases, but even ignoring my campaign guidance, I can live with a trained martial artist doing amazing feats, like breaking bricks, or even walls. +4d6 is a LOT of damage. It is the difference between the punch of a normal adult and a superhero who can lift a small car.[/quote']

 

If you're going to establish rigorous limitations on what are normally pretty standard martial maneuvers, it probably makes sense to restrict standard maneuvers in similar fashion.

 

NB I have been inadvertantly exaggerating the problem: because of the damage adding rules a normal human can only add 2d6 to 10 STR with a haymaker' date=' which is more realistic, but as soon as that normal human becomes a PC (as above with powers elsewhere than strength, obviously) they can push their strength to 20 and haymaker for 8d6. Another layer of unreality bursting my bubble: 2d6 to 8d6 is a MASSIVE increase, practically a minor superpower in itself.[/quote']

 

I thought there was a "can't more than double" rule. And you only jump from 2d6 to 8d6 if you are casually allowing Pushing. Why would you expect the other rules to mesh perfectly with your more liberal rule about Pushing? In my games, at least, just being a PC doesn't mean Pushing can be done as a routine matter of course. "Well, combat starts in Ph 12, so I'll get a recovery. Guess I'll Push my attack to do some extra damage. Ho Hum." doesn't seem overly heroic to me.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

My typical gaming caveat:

 

It's not realistic, but it's not supposed to be. It's supposed to be playable. HERO is a little flaky at the low power levels in some cases (such as the 'Haymakering Normal Can Demolish A Car In Less Than A Minute'), but no game system is perfect, not even HERO.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Haymaker out of combat

 

If we went to UMA and built a Haymaker' date=' what would it cost?[/quote']You can't build Haymaker using the UMA rules, because they allow a max of -2 DCV on a maneuver. However, if you used the same costs as in UMA, but allowed the maneuver to take the needed -5 DCV, then the cost would come out to exactly 0.