KA Vs Energy Blast

[Rapier]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

Spreading is more a matter of SFX and not Power.

 

If you have some kind of beam attack (eg laser, water cannon, electric or flame blast) you can spread that attack over a larger area. Spreading allows you to hit a larger area (thus making it easier to strike an opponent) at the cost of lessening the power of the attack.

 

If you have some kind of solid attack (eg fist, sword, knife, bullet) you cannot spread it. Even saying it sounds kind of silly. "I'm going to spread my sword." "You're gonna WHAT?"

[GAZZA]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

Spreading is more a matter of SFX and not Power.

 

If you have some kind of beam attack (eg laser, water cannon, electric or flame blast) you can spread that attack over a larger area. Spreading allows you to hit a larger area (thus making it easier to strike an opponent) at the cost of lessening the power of the attack.

 

If you have some kind of solid attack (eg fist, sword, knife, bullet) you cannot spread it. Even saying it sounds kind of silly. "I'm going to spread my sword." "You're gonna WHAT?"

Oh, I don't know. You're basically reducing damage to get either a bonus to hit or a chance to hit more than one person - don't get too hung up on the word "spread" - I can see that working with many non-beam attacks.

[Dust Raven]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

If you have some kind of solid attack (eg fist' date=' sword, knife, bullet) you cannot spread it. Even saying it sounds kind of silly. "I'm going to spread my sword." "You're gonna WHAT?"[/quote']

 

I can believe spreading a sword just as much as I can spreading a laser. It's a pity the rules don't.

[Tom Carman]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

Spreading is more a matter of SFX and not Power.

 

If you have some kind of beam attack (eg laser, water cannon, electric or flame blast) you can spread that attack over a larger area. Spreading allows you to hit a larger area (thus making it easier to strike an opponent) at the cost of lessening the power of the attack.

 

If you have some kind of solid attack (eg fist, sword, knife, bullet) you cannot spread it. Even saying it sounds kind of silly. "I'm going to spread my sword." "You're gonna WHAT?"

 

On the subject of spreading attacks... (Note: I am at work and don't access to my FREd, only a PDF of the 4th edition rules. If 5th changed 1d6 to Damage Class for calculating spread, please ignore this.)

 

Spreading involves reducing the attack by 1d6 for each bit of spread. This is not too great a handicap for attacks with lots of dice, but the different way that KA's are handled would hose the effectiveness pretty quick. "Spreading" a sword does sound silly; it should be a Sweep (although that only reduces accuracy, retaining full damage).

[Comic]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

A 4d6 RKA against typical defences can be dangerous, but it's a crap shoot (as you point out).

 

However, lower dice are more effective as KAs than NAs. For example: assume a DEF of 20 (some of which is resistant); a 6d6 normal attack averages 2.22 STUN while a 2d6 RKA averages 4.73 STUN (more than double). Make the defences "brick level" at 30 DEF and the NA drops to 1.09 average STUN while the KA drops to 4.22 - in other words, the bricks 50% greater defences barely mean anything at all. Switching to a KA is more effective than switching to Armour Piercing or Penetrating for a low DC attack (4d6 AP NA does 4.19 STUN to 10 DEF and 0.93 STUN to 15 DEF; about 4 STUN for 4d6 Pen regardless of DEF).

 

A typical fight might be 4 agents per superhero (assuming no superpowered assistance on the villains side). Arm them all with 6d6 normal attacks and you really don't have to worry very much; arm them all with 2d6 RKAs and they can quite feasibly take out the slower moving so-called "bullet proof" targets.

 

This makes some very good points. It's not a 'fair' comparison, 20 DEF (good on the scale of 40+ AP attacks) is pretty high on the scale of 30 AP of attacks -- but who said killer villains fight fair? (In effect, you've coincidentally hit the DEF level that makes over half of all normal 6d6 attacks *plink* while still including some of the commoner KA damage outcomes. Drop that DEF a little, and the normal attack suddenly dominates the KA for average Stun damage.)

 

It does represent a good factor to keep heroes on their toes against mere agents and thugs.

 

It's easier to be someone who hurts than to be someone immune to harm.

 

Killing Attacks are dangerous and frightening. While their point is to kill normal people and seriously injure those without resistance, if their game mechanical efficiencies make them scarier, and support the sort of player respect for the danger of the situation that roleplay ought to have anyway, how is that bad for the game?

 

You could get rid of KAs entirely, and have the same impact with swinglines.

 

Four agents with 15 Str and 30 AP of swinging can pick up and drop an awful lot of hostages from a great height before the hero can get to them. Or they can swing along and break windows, dropping sharp glass onto the heroes from the skyscrapers above, for example. It takes a lot of time to set up combats where this goes on; on the whole, I'd rather my GM just roll the KA's, as they're mechanically faster than other contrivances which are just as cheap and just as dangerous. This is not to mention coordinated attacks, surprise attacks, agents who've been instructed in the hero's disadvantages, using vehicles, agents using deception or circumstances in their own favor or employing innocents as agents by mind control or misleading them.

 

Isn't the point to model situations that challenge players? Isn't a group of gunmen a standard, classic, element of the genre?

 

KA's are more frightening, but ultimately less versatile and in some senses less efficient, than normal attacks. They're less predictable, and have associations with villainous motives and morals. In other words, they model well what they are -- the preferred attacks of bad guys who in the end are hurting their own cause.

 

The presence of KA's in a campaign tend to darken the mood of the game. In a game with more than one character in five having a KA, you're likely into the grim and gritty genres because of it. In a dark enough setting, almost everyone could have KA's.. but then, how do the heroes know they're the good guys?

[Lucius]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

. but then' date=' how do the heroes know they're the good guys?[/quote']

 

Well, let's see....answering for Quetzelcoatl, who fights with a bo-ken (wooden sword - killing attack with extra stun multiples) (if you must know, it's 2d6 killing with his STR, and he uses martial manuevers for accuracy and seldom for added damage.)

 

.

I know I'm the good guy because I've never struck an innocent person with my sword. And even if I did, it might hospitalize a bystander but probably wouldn't kill them.

 

On the other hand, I'm not the one flinging cars about the city streets, doing a lot of property damage at best, crushing someone to death at worst if some citizen is in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm not the person emitting mysterious beams of energy that are demonstrably destructive enough to shatter a lamp-post, or total a car in two or three hits, and would quite possibly kill an unprotected average person instantly if one those beams missed its target and hit a bystander - or maybe just collapsed a wall on somebody. Those are my team-mates, and they are also generally regarded as good-guys.

 

If they count as good guys, then as long as I'm not doing anything more recklessly dangerous to life, limb, or property than they are, I don't see any reason you would even ask how I know that I am a good guy.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

And a good palindromedary

[Comic]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

My own old boken isn't more than a dozen feet away from me at the moment. So, for the moment I'm talking only about boken like mine.

 

Of course, I don't pretend to be a Super, so the fact that I don't believe anyone could really chop down an oak tree or demolish a concrete wall with one in the six or seven swings of a 2d6 KA the Object Body and DEF tables suggests is irrelevant.

 

2d6 KA with extra Stun multiples, high CV, high SPD, built as a blunt bit of wood weighing under a couple of pounds.

 

As a GM, I'd likely strongly steer a player bringing this to me toward a different attack power or a different special effect, because I frankly don't find the justification convincing on its face.

 

It looks to me so much like a near-munchkin trying to abuse the game mechanics that I'd worry it would sour the fun for myself and other players if I didn't take extraordinary steps to dispel that -- I'm sure -- misperception.

 

OTOH, if he had a magic boken, special boken chi skills, a vibro-boken or some such that integrated well with his background.. sure, why not? Nothing seriously game unbalancing about the power itself.

 

He's still a guy walking around with a weapon purposely made specifically for killing people, however game-mechanically he's reduced his chances of actually achieving that result.

 

He'll be perceived that way by everyone who sees him, in my campaigns. He'll be treated that way by the police and the courts. His personal views, his own moral justifications, notwithstanding, he's the one carrying the _killing weapon_ and trained to use it to kill wilfully.

 

His teammates are merely people with potentially lethal powers, however he sees them.

[GAZZA]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

This makes some very good points. It's not a 'fair' comparison' date=' 20 DEF (good on the scale of 40+ AP attacks) is pretty high on the scale of 30 AP of attacks -- but who said killer villains fight fair?[/quote']

I'm all for killer villains cheating. But giving them access to special mechanics that support that cheating - and not restricting said mechanics to killer villains - less of a fan.

 

(snip!)

 

Isn't the point to model situations that challenge players? Isn't a group of gunmen a standard, classic, element of the genre?

Sure - and the classically, the genre rates these as "no threat to a super". Doesn't it? Classically, superheroes are cautious around supervillains, and wade into mobs of gunmen knowing that there's no risk.

 

YMMV - if you disagree with that, I can see where we have a disconnect (and for what it's worth this is not something even all of the "KAs are broken" group agree on - infinite diversity in infinite combinations, as Spock would say).

 

I guess here's my basic point: if I want a villain to have a scarier attack than the heroes, I'll build it on more Active Points. I don't think I should be able to switch to an attack of the same Active Points but just use a different mechanic that is innately more dangerous. But that's just my opinion - for those who think KAs are fine in your games, good for you (they're just not in mine - I've all but given up using Killing Attacks for my agent level villains because they just dominate far more than they're supposed to - and it's not the type of game I'm trying to play).

[Comic]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

When did people who post to discussion boards get so much cleverer?

 

When I GM'd, I didn't restrict KA's to killer villains. Only to killers. As, well, that's what the K stands for.

 

My mileage does vary on the scale of wading into mobs of gunmen, but perhaps not by so much as I seem to indicate. A mob of gunmen with 1d6 to 1.5d6 KA's, my tough heroes would be well-justified wading into confidently.

 

However, I'm not playing the Last Son of Krypton, or the Green Goliath, on the scale of summer blockbuster movies. If I were, I'd give them DEF enough to handle KA's at higher levels.

 

And even at the much lower levels of the heroes I play, the chances of coping with four normal agents with 2d6 KA's favors me, not them, unless I'm tactically incompetent.

[GAZZA]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

When did people who post to discussion boards get so much cleverer?

I was wondering the same thing (your post on KAs was spot on, and one that I've never seen before from "the other side" - good job!)

 

When I GM'd, I didn't restrict KA's to killer villains. Only to killers. As, well, that's what the K stands for.

Ah, but KAs don't kill - they only hurt - that's part of the problem. Enough resistant defence to ignore BODY? Trivial. Enough defences to ignore the STUN? Much harder.

 

If KAs were just better at delivering BODY than NAs, then I'd have no problem with them whatsoever ("working as designed").

 

However, I'm not playing the Last Son of Krypton, or the Green Goliath, on the scale of summer blockbuster movies. If I were, I'd give them DEF enough to handle KA's at higher levels.

Every game is different, of course. Certainly if Spiderman got tagged by a gun he would be in serious danger, but I'd argue that's because of BODY rather than STUN (at least IMHO).

 

And even at the much lower levels of the heroes I play, the chances of coping with four normal agents with 2d6 KA's favors me, not them, unless I'm tactically incompetent.

I have tended to find that heroes with high DCV do better against such agents than heroes with high defences - in other words, the best defence against a killing attack seems to be not being hit (OK, that's always the best defence, but you take my point, I expect).

[Comic]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

I was wondering the same thing (your post on KAs was spot on' date=' and one that I've never seen before from "the other side" - good job!)[/quote']

 

Enough with the mutual respect, or people may start thinking we're weakening.

 

Ah, but KAs don't kill - they only hurt - that's part of the problem. Enough resistant defence to ignore BODY? Trivial. Enough defences to ignore the STUN? Much harder.

 

The game universe is generally somewhat less lethal than the real world. Jumping out of tall buildings, being hit by speeding vehicles, exposure to radiation .. these all don't come across quite as deadly in the game mechanics as they do in real life. That's where the roleplay challenge comes in -- to treat game dangers with the degree of fear appropriate to people who _don't _ know that they're unlikely to really kill.

 

Resistance to KA's? Not trivial in my experience. It has to be bought and paid for with reasonable justifications in the character's concept. That's not trivial for me. It's the same section where the character comes from and what they are. The fabric of their being and their reason to exist are treated with similar seriousness, so I don't discount the price. KA's 'kill' in the minds of the people who reside in my campaign worlds and in the roleplay reactions of the best players I've seen.

 

And yes, I will repeat it once again -- KA's *plink* very often, and even when the average damage taken per attack is higher, the number of attacks expected before damage is taken at all is also higher. Betting you hit a high damage roll before you get taken down is the price of using a KA, and that bet is far more costly than most Stun Lotto discussions I've seen recognize.

 

If KAs were just better at delivering BODY than NAs, then I'd have no problem with them whatsoever ("working as designed").

 

I have no answer for this. It's a religious argument. I've played this game for a quarter century and run simulations and done math and never been able to present the -- to me -- clear evidence-based results in a way to shake the faith of True Believers that KAs do too much Stun. It's a matter of the attitudes people hold dear, and I don't expect it will change. The attitude has some basis, and some merit, but not strongly enough to convince me to meddle with a mechanic that -- if it were broken -- still doesn't work terribly overall.

 

Every game is different, of course. Certainly if Spiderman got tagged by a gun he would be in serious danger, but I'd argue that's because of BODY rather than STUN (at least IMHO).

 

BODY and STUN are game mechanics. In reality, they model but do not equate to what really happens when a bullet enters, transmits its energy to, travels through and otherwise interacts aggressively with human flesh and bone. Calling direct destruction BODY, and disruption to living systems STUN, is as close as I can get. And that disruption - trauma - is what endangers most people who die of injuries, not the direct destruction. If Spiderman got tagged by a gun he would be in serious danger, but I'd argue that's because of the bullet tearing his innards to shreds (BODY?) and his system going into shock and trauma (Stun?).

 

I have tended to find that heroes with high DCV do better against such agents than heroes with high defences - in other words, the best defence against a killing attack seems to be not being hit (OK, that's always the best defence, but you take my point, I expect).

 

I've found that not letting the bad guys get off a shot in the first place works pretty well, too.

 

Sure, KA isn't perfect. But for me, to paraphrase Churchill, KA is the worst way to do killing damage, except for all the others.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

And yes' date=' I will repeat it once again -- KA's *plink* very often, and even when the average damage taken per attack is higher, the number of attacks expected before damage is taken at all is also higher. Betting you hit a high damage roll before you get taken down is the price of using a KA, and that bet is far more costly than most Stun Lotto discussions I've seen recognize.[/quote']

 

The other issue which is commonly not considered is WHEN the KA is superior, even on average, at delivering STUN. Against targets with relatively low defenses, the normal attack is superior. It is only against relatively high defense targets that the KA shines at delivering STUN.

 

But it's those relative high defense targets that are likely to most damage the game when they're one punched by the guy with the KA and the lucky roll. It's the master villain, not one of several dozen agents, so taking him with one hit is anticlimactic.

 

It's a problem my group hasn't experienced because the players tend to restrict themselves to normal attacks, reserving KA's for targets they want to destroy, not KO. But it can certainly be a problem.

 

The secondary problem is that KA's aren't all that much more effective at inflicting killing damage (that is, BOD) than normal attacks. However, expanding the average BOD damage of a KA will render entangles, force walls and automotons useless, so there's no easy fix.

 

One way to level the playing field is to use hit locations - not just for KA's, but also for normal attacks, where key locations will enhance the damage done by non-KA's as well as KA's. Now the "average damage" for all attacks are up, but master villains need damage reduction for "head and vitals shots only".

[Lucius]

KA Vs Energy Blast

 

His teammates are merely people with potentially lethal powers, however he sees them.

 

This being the only relevant point. Although I would not have said “merely” in the same context with “potentially lethal powers.”

 

And to address the justification – yes, he has chi powers, and yes, his bo-ken (despite the name) is made of an exceptional materiel. Or I should say “had” and “was.” The character is dead now.

 

When I GM'd, I didn't restrict KA's to killer villains. Only to killers. As, well, that's what the K stands for.

 

Do you restrict Invisibility only to people who can’t be seen – as that’s what “Invisibility” stands for?

 

Do you restrict Flash to people who cause blindness with a sudden intense light – as that’s what “Flash” stands for?

 

Do you restrict Darkness to – oh, never mind.

 

The secondary problem is that KA's aren't all that much more effective at inflicting killing damage (that is, BOD) than normal attacks. However, expanding the average BOD damage of a KA will render entangles, force walls and automotons useless, so there's no easy fix.

 

One could try fixing it the other way – reducing the amount of BOD done by Normal Attacks, as by allowing a 6 on the damage die to only do 1 BOD instead of 2. Of course, then it becomes even more advisable to define Normal Damage as inherently Limited, as per Amadan Ni Briona’s suggestion. (Although I note that doing no BODy at all is traditionally considered a “-0” Limitation – but I’ve never quite agreed with that.)

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Putting a +0 Advantage on a palindromedary

[Comic]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

Long ago, in a gaming convention far, far away, there was a Champions session with two brilliant GM's, a half dozen outstanding roleplayers, an elegant and delightful original tournament module, and, sadly, yours truly.

 

I say sadly because about a third of the way through the module my character, the brick, displayed his frustration at being caught in a deathtrap by taking out some petty aggression on a little floating mechanical drone 'monitorbot'.

 

The GM's looked at each other, rolled up the combat maps, and began packing up without a word. As I had taken the last action, I assumed I'd somehow offended them, and we all spoke up, asking what had happened?

 

"Nothing. You've won," they explained. "When you threw the villain's monitorbot into the sound amplifying deathtrap room and slammed the door, you won. We never counted on anyone doing that, and it hit the master villain's vulnerabilities and susceptibilities. He was listening to the monitorbot from his master control room; he's at deep negative stun. You win."

 

So, yes, believe me I understand the disappointment of the big bad getting taken out too soon. It doesn't take a KA to do it, but KA's do present that possibility.

 

I'm sure the big bads also would be disappointed at being captured 'easily'. And, having Int scores above 6, > they also generally have fallback plans, or their bases present interesting perils that can't be solved by lucky shots, or the bad guys suck it up, go to prison, and plot their revenge like grownups.

 

KA's highlight the factors of risk and uncertainty in conflict.

 

Most people are able to cope with risks if they know the odds at the outset.

 

Many people, however, are terribly averse to uncertainty.

 

Sooner or later the Stun Lotto will hit, representing the deep and profound forces of trauma on a living system which deadly force can generate, if you roll KA damage often enough.

 

That's risk.

 

But will it happen before the slightly more efficient normal attack takes out the killer character? You never know for sure, or even how likely it is to happen.

 

That's uncertainty.

 

The 'uncertainty averse' may not even like it when it works in their own favor. I believe this is the real root of most objections to the mechanic. KA's force players to recognise that random factors can change everything, and no matter what you do you can't get powerful enough to control it all. All you can do is stand by your own values and hope for the best in the face of an unknowable destiny.

 

But, seriously... disappointed to win? What's that about?

[Comic]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

This being the only relevant point. Although I would not have said “merely” in the same context with “potentially lethal powers.”

 

...

 

Do you restrict Invisibility only to people who can’t be seen – as that’s what “Invisibility” stands for?

 

*snip*

 

 

A killing weapon is a thing purposefully, wilfully created with the specific end of taking a human life. Philosophy and religion aside, it is a fundamentally antisocial artifact and in comic book emblemology, intrinsically anti-heroic.

 

Various elements can partially expunge this moral stain on a hero's character: Wolverine was implanted with his KA's against his will. The Punisher learned his gun skills as a legitimate soldier doing his patriotic duty. The Lone Wolf was the official state executioner. These angst-dipped dark antiheroes, for all the BG and psych. lim. balancing factors of their stories and personae, remain killers, not heroes in the four-color mode.

 

Even if you proudly practice precision use of your killing weapon to exploit its power to also induce incapacitating trauma, you remain to the objective observer who cannot look into your heart or mind, a person who has chosen to take up the tools of a killer.

 

Even if they can generate quite lethal effects incidentally, by happenstance instead of design, your teammates and their accidental radiation exposure-induced bodywide mutagenic changes, their alien physiologies, their versatile power suits with normal rays remain clearly set apart forever from you and your grisly image of a determined killer.

 

That's what the K stands for, in my opinion.

 

It's a perfectly acceptable way for a dark antihero, or a grim and serious hero, to be, to my way of thinking. If it's what you enjoy, go for it.

 

Separating these factors from the mechanics is like separating the lung disease from cigarettes. Sure, you can leave that part out of your advertising, but then you're not looking at the whole story.

[GAZZA]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

KA is a mechanic.

 

To the average bystander, any attack that is capable of killing is a "killing attack". This is as true of a 12d6 Energy Blast as it is of a 2d6 RKA bullet. Both will reliably deliver potentially fatal damage to a normal target. Neither will do so to your average superhero. To assume a prejudice against how dice are rolled is silly (IMHO).

 

You mention Wolverine - Cyclops' attack, though probably modelled as an Energy Blast, is at least as deadly as Logan's. You mention Punisher, but Spiderman is more than strong enough to kill as well. What Wolverine and Punisher have that Cyke and Spidey lack is the intent to kill; this is something that shows up mechanically as Reputation and Psychological Limitations, not KA or Energy Blast.

[Lucius]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

That's what the K stands for, in my opinion.

 

You're welcome to your opinion.

 

But what "KA" stands for is "Killing Attack" either ranged or hand to hand, which refers to two specific Powers in the rulebook with those names. Just as "EB" stands for "Energy Blast" another specific listed Power.

 

If you like, you are also welcome to the opinion that since the "E" stands for "Energy" that means a character with an Energy Blast can't possibly do "physical" damage that goes against "Physical Defense."

 

Or the opinion that there can be no such thing as "Flash Vs. Hearing" because Flash, after all, means a blinding burst of light doesn't it?

 

 

 

Oh, and one more point: I've said it before and I'll say it again

 

HERO SYSTEM IS NOT JUST CHAMPIONS

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary thinks that sounds familiar....

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

One could try fixing it the other way – reducing the amount of BOD done by Normal Attacks' date=' as by allowing a 6 on the damage die to only do 1 BOD instead of 2. Of course, then it becomes even more advisable to define Normal Damage as inherently Limited, as per Amadan Ni Briona’s suggestion. (Although I note that doing no BODy at all is traditionally considered a “-0” Limitation – but I’ve never quite agreed with that.)[/quote']

 

This could be done, although it would make Force Walls, auomotons and Entangles a bit more effective against characters lacking a KA. It would be much less extreme than boosting KA average BOD, but this would reduce that 12d6 normal attack from an average of 12 BOD to an average of 10, and impossible to do more than 12. A Force Wall of 12 DEF (pretty much the same AP) then becomes impenetrable.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

A killing weapon is a thing purposefully' date=' wilfully created with the specific end of taking a human life. Philosophy and religion aside, it is a fundamentally antisocial artifact and in comic book emblemology, intrinsically anti-heroic.[/quote']

 

So Batman's Batarang (1/2 d6 RKA - it's consistently shown sticking out of hands and other body parts, so it sure looks oike a throwing knife variation) is a Killing Attack (vile, evil killer), but Blockbuster's 75 STR is more socially acceptable, since he uses a 15d6 Normal Attack to rip off the heads of those who disagree with him.

 

Even if they can generate quite lethal effects incidentally' date=' by happenstance instead of design, your teammates and their accidental radiation exposure-induced bodywide mutagenic changes, their alien physiologies, their versatile power suits with normal rays remain clearly set apart forever from you and your grisly image of a determined killer.[/quote']

 

How does the general public tell whether Firestorm's radiation bursts, Black Lightning's lightning bolts or Fire's green flames are 12d6 Energy Blasts or 4d6 Killing Attacks? I find it difficult to believe they are so clearly labelled.

 

It's a perfectly acceptable way for a dark antihero' date=' or a grim and serious hero, to be, to my way of thinking. If it's what you enjoy, go for it.[/quote']

 

You mean like Green Arrow? He uses arrows, which I would suggest are also Killing Attacks.

[bwdemon]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

KAs highlight the factors of risk and uncertainty in conflict. Most people are able to cope with risks if they know the odds at the outset. Many people, however, are terribly averse to uncertainty.

 

Sooner or later the Stun Lotto will hit, representing the deep and profound forces of trauma on a living system which deadly force can generate, if you roll KA damage often enough (risk). But will it happen before the slightly more efficient normal attack takes out the killer character? You never know for sure, or even how likely it is to happen (uncertainty).

 

The 'uncertainty averse' may not even like it when it works in their own favor. I believe this is the real root of most objections to the mechanic. KA's force players to recognise that random factors can change everything, and no matter what you do you can't get powerful enough to control it all. All you can do is stand by your own values and hope for the best in the face of an unknowable destiny.

 

Forgive the edit, but I wanted to keep the quote block smallish.

 

All dice represent uncertainty and risk. It doesn't matter whether it's a KA or an EB. You could roll 12 STUN and 0 BODY on a 12d6 attack. You could roll 72 STUN and 24 BODY on a 12d6 attack. Anything in between is also a possibility and that represents a broad range of possibility plotted out along a standard bell curve. Due to the quantity of dice involved, this creates a very smooth curve with tiny steps between each result.

 

The problem is that the uncertainty in KAs makes much larger leaps between each step. You begin with much fewer dice, which is a problem in itself. Outlier results are more likely to occur (24 on 4d6 is more likely than 72 on 12d6). Then you have another die that multiplies that result. When you multiply something that already has a problem, that problem is also multiplied.

 

Disliking KAs has nothing to do with being risk averse. It has to do with consolidating system mechanics and not compounding problems through multiplication.

[Comic]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

Here's the trade-off, as I see it, of KA's:

o Non-mechanically -- other attacks may be associated with a bad reputation depending mainly on how they are used; KA's will always have a bad reputation with many populations based on their intentional nature.

o Mechanically -- other attacks are more certain in their effects, but for the same cost their long-term trauma to living systems is less spectacular; KA's are much more traumatic to their targets some of the time, but they are unreliable in any one instance.

 

Everything after that, up to your personal opinion. Are you part of the population that finds guns and swords in the hands of masked vigilantes a bad idea? Up to you. Do you think the chance to hurt someone _really_ badly in one shot is worth the risk of them being able to ignore the damage you're trying to do them, perhaps forever? That's your call.

 

Do you think giving people these choices, in these ways, is wrong? That, too, is up to you. Me, I don't see it that way.

 

All dice represent uncertainty and risk.

 

Well, no. Dice represent risk. If you roll 3d6 and are at all familiar with math, or good at estimation, you have a clear sense of the risks of that one roll. There's no uncertainty in a single roll -- the odds are certain. In Game Theory, the value of the wager can be calculated. You can establish statistics, expect equilibrium outcomes, and manage expectations, where there is risk without uncertainty.

 

Repeated random, dependent, cumulative intermediate steps with unknowns are what creates uncertainty. After enough steps, outcomes are truly unpredictable, and the value of wagers cannot be determined by any formula. Your system can be broadly parameterized, but is -- or may be (even that is unpredictable) -- truly chaotic.

 

People are generally much more tolerant of risk than of uncertainty. It's not for me to read the minds or second-guess the motives of everyone discussing KA's vs. EB's, but it is a remarkable coincidence that the arguments so broadly and closely mirror the relative ratio of uncertainty and risk in each game mechanic. At least, to me.

 

If you go back to the first edition of Champions, (and yes, I know not all Heroes is Champions.. just the Heroes that includes the most aspects of Powers in the game, and therefore is the most convenient for broad discussions of the game mechanics of Powers, to my mind) you may find the rationale for KAs stated in the Powers section, explained better and more clearly than I can. That original definition of KA's is the basis of my views on KA's, and why I refuse to treat them as a pure mechanic.

 

Sure, Cyclops can punch a hole through a mountain with a single Optic Blast, while Wolverine can barely erode a bit of cliff face in the course of a morning workout. But metaphorically, Cyclops represents control, discipline, minimal use of available force to achieve an effect and the Boy Scout aspect of the four color hero, while Wolverine struggled with berserk, murderous, uncontrollable rages, blood-vengeance, mayhem, pain and angst. (Personally, always thought Logan was better written.)

 

Do I build batarangs as low-damage KA's? No. Can you? Sure, and I have no problem with that. Batman's original appearances and many of his most outstanding stories have depicted him as more than a little murderous. If you want to tell the story of the Dark Knight who terrifies the superstitious, cowardly lot of criminals he hunts, then his penchant for flinging animal-shaped razors is not among his most fearsome aspects. The guy appears out of nowhere. He _knows_ things. He finds you no matter where you are. You can't escape him. You can't scare him. You hurt him, he just comes back stronger. The cops can't stop him. The crime bosses can't stop him. He hits like a ton of bricks. He disappears into thin air without a trace. The things he says -- they go right to the bottom of your soul, and chill you. And oh, yeah, he leaves paper cuts, too.

[GAZZA]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

Here's the trade-off, as I see it, of KA's:

o Non-mechanically -- other attacks may be associated with a bad reputation depending mainly on how they are used; KA's will always have a bad reputation with many populations based on their intentional nature.

See, the problem with this approach is that KA is a mechanic, "killing attack" is "an attack that has the potential to kill".

 

The two really don't have very much to do with each other in Champions (perhaps in other genres; I don't play Hero in other genres, so very much YMMV). KAs are not "attacks that have a potential to kill" against your typical super. And Energy Blasts are "attacks that have a potential to kill" against your average normal person.

 

In the RAW the difference in average BODY rolled for a 12DC attack is 2 in favour of the 4d6 RKA vs the 12d6 Energy Blast. "Most" supers have resistant defences of 15-20 or higher. Therefore no real risk of BODY damage from either. Why use a 4d6 RKA against a villain instead of a 12d6 Energy Blast? Not because you're trying to kill him, but because you have the chance of exploiting a favourable mechanic that might knock him out in a single blow, and over the course of many fights will do more average STUN damage against typical opponents. If you want to kill people in Champions then a pure RKA isn't going to cut it; you're going to want to look at Armour Piercing or Penetrating.

 

A case in point: how does one build a fire attack in Champions? How about a laser attack? In 4th edition, at least, Firewing (the archetypical Fire Using Energy Blaster) had a Multipower entirely composed of Fire Attacks, almost all of which were built with Energy Blast. Some GMs would view Fire (or a Laser) as something that screams "RKA"; others will use "Energy Blast". There's nothing that says you even have to build guns or knives with KA - if you felt that Energy Blast fit your needs there, then it's absolutely OK to build them that way. Granted that you'd be going against published examples if you did so, but technically you'd be going against published examples if you built a fire blast as an RKA (and I know at least 2 GMs that rule that way - they've altered Firewing so that most of his attacks are "heat attacks" instead).

 

To the person on the street, a knife or a gun is dangerous because someone using such a thing can kill you. I submit that someone able to throw a 12d6 Energy Blast (which will average more BODY to Joe Average, even after defences, than anything less than a 10 DC KA - which includes most guns and virtually all bladed weapons - and will do more Knockback than even a 12DC KA, which is not insignificant to a 2 PD normal) is going to be subject to the same prejudice. Indeed, people aren't exactly crazy about guys that walk around with baseball bats or bicycle chains in the real world.

 

Does this mean that we should only allow heroes to take STUN-only Energy Blasts?

 

I think most people get used to the idea of armed police in countries that have them. Do you not think they'd get used to the idea of "armed" superheroes? Even if you don't, I bet your concerns are along the lines of concerns about vigilantism rather than the fact that they're "armed" per se.

[Lucius]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

And here is yet another attempt to balance the two damage mechanics: to make the mechanically superior option less desireable by attaching the equivalent of a limitation to it.

 

Limitation: Side Effects, Moral Taint

 

I wonder what it would be worth if I wanted to attach it to some power other than Killing Attack? To Darkness maybe?

 

 

Or can I take an Advantage to take it off of Killing Attack? Say if my character is a mutant who was born with retractable claws? Or even someone like Wolverine who had them imposed on him, but who is more restrained and responsible in their use?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Fitting the palindromedary with a Killing Attack but only at one end.

[Vestnik]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

Jumping out of tall buildings' date=' being hit by speeding vehicles, exposure to radiation .. these all don't come across quite as deadly in the game mechanics as they do in real life. [/quote']

 

The nonlethality of terminal velocity falls to non-brick characters has always annoyed me. It's 30d6 of damage, average 30 Body. If I have a 15 Body and a 15 PD, I have a roughly 50% chance of walking away from it.

 

If I were ever to GM, I think I would house-rule it that martial artists who fall out of airplanes DIE.

[bwdemon]

Re: KA Vs Energy Blast

 

Well, no. Dice represent risk. If you roll 3d6 and are at all familiar with math, or good at estimation, you have a clear sense of the risks of that one roll. There's no uncertainty in a single roll -- the odds are certain. In Game Theory, the value of the wager can be calculated. You can establish statistics, expect equilibrium outcomes, and manage expectations, where there is risk without uncertainty.

 

Repeated random, dependent, cumulative intermediate steps with unknowns are what creates uncertainty. After enough steps, outcomes are truly unpredictable, and the value of wagers cannot be determined by any formula. Your system can be broadly parameterized, but is -- or may be (even that is unpredictable) -- truly chaotic.

 

Risk is the probability of failure. Where there is risk, there is uncertainty. Where there is no risk, there is no uncertainty. Barring cheating, nobody can be certain of the outcome on any given roll, so risk exists in every roll. Every roll is independent from those that came before and will come after (a person rolling the dice is never "due"). Probability just expresses the theoretical likelihood of any given result, it is not a mandate. Still, the bell curve is the foundation of HERO. Killing damage bucks the system and introduces an aberrant mechanic to what would otherwise be a coherent system.

 

You appearing to be viewing this in terms of the damage being separated into two rolls (BODY & STUN Lotto) and trying to apply the nebulous distinction between risk and uncertainty to the two. You're focusing too much on the STUN Lotto (focusing on the one die and how it interprets the BODY roll) and not on the whole picture (a "can't see the forest for the trees" problem). It doesn't matter whether I roll the STUN Multiplier die before, during, or after the time when I roll the Killing dice. The Killing dice and STUN Multiplier die are interpreted together to get the STUN total.

 

It is possible to express both killing damage and normal damage in terms of probability. Assuming 2d6K, there is a 10.72% probability of causing greater than 36 STUN (maximum for a 6d6N attack). This pairs with a 9.72% probability of causing less than 6 STUN (minimum for a 6d6N attack). Considering that the former extends damage up to 60 (167% of 6d6N maximum), while the latter drops down to 2 (33% of 6d6N minimum), the tradeoff is more than worthwhile.

 

For a game designed around the bell curve, the distribution is nothing like anything else in the system. It starts off with a steep climb, peaks for a bit at a result of 8 (6.47%) and then begins a wild roller coaster of aberrant results. The last spike hits at 40 STUN (4.70%), before jittering along between 0.00% and 1.85% until the end at 60 (0.46%). Where everything else in HERO conforms to the bell curve, killing damage bucks the trend - introducing an unnecessary complication with broken results.

 

Also, It is impossible to cause STUN amounts of {13,17,19,23,26,29,31,34,37-39,41-43,46,47,49,51-54,56-59} with the 2d6K attack (25 out of the 59 numbers ranging from 2 to 60 - 42.4% of the range). If you stick to the range of 6d6N damage, then 8 of the 31 possible results - 25.8% of the range - are missing. Gaps aren't good.

 

If HERO wasn't based on the bell curve and probability meant nothing to conflict resolution, then the killing mechanic would be just another meaningless way to have fun with dice. Instead, it represents an aberration in the system that can (and nearly always is) used as an exploit. The game would be far better off without it.