House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

[Flames]

I tried to search the forums for any mention of this house rule I'm considering, but the search system didn't seem to be working.

 

I'll be amazed if anyone hasn't already proposed this.

 

I was thinking of a house rule for a Heroic Level campaign where PCs can use the overage on their hit rolls on a one-to-one basis to modify their roll for Hit Location.

 

So, example, Dick Dashingford, Private Eye, is punching at an assassin who is rushing at him with a machete. He needs to hit, so he doesn't call a location. He hits on a 13- and rolls a 8, succeeding by five.

 

The GM calls for Dick for roll Hit Location, and Dick rolls a 10, hitting the guy in the Chest location. Not that helpful.

 

But the GM rules that he can adjust his Hit Location roll up or down by up to five, the amount by which he made the roll.

 

Dick adjusts it down to Hit Location 5, which the GM says is the attacker's chin.

 

Would this rule be rankly abused all the time, or would this be a good way to introduce a more heroic tone?

 

It's not often that a strong-jawed hero in a pulp novel punches a bad guy in the shoulder.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

You might want to take a look at this old thread:

House Rules for Hit Location

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=303639#post303639

[Killer Shrike]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

Yes, I instituted that exact rule years ago. It's currently in print in, IIRC, Dark Champions.

 

It will make your game much more lethal, but it does make a good to-hit roll mean something.

[Diamond Spear]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

I have to disagree. It has the effect of making every shot a called shot. Why bother calling a shot when you can modify the hit location after the fact?

[BNakagawa]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

broken.

 

Take a fighter who already has the ability to hit his target most of the time. Add 5 2 point levels and now the fighter does double damage most of the time.

 

This house rule would nerf defenses and make dodging mandatory.

 

this house rule makes bricks cry.

[archermoo]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

I have to disagree. It has the effect of making every shot a called shot. Why bother calling a shot when you can modify the hit location after the fact?

 

Because hitting the head is "only" a -8. Hitting someone by 8 doesn't guarantee hitting them in the head. In fact it gives you a 13- to do so.

 

On the other hand, hitting the vitals is much easier to guarantee.

[archermoo]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

broken.

 

Take a fighter who already has the ability to hit his target most of the time. Add 5 2 point levels and now the fighter does double damage most of the time.

 

This house rule would nerf defenses and make dodging mandatory.

 

this house rule makes bricks cry.

 

That something can be abused doesn't mean that it is broken. The solution to "it is broken if someone with a high OCV buys an extra 5 cheap levels" being a problem is not letting them do it.

[Diamond Spear]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

Because hitting the head is "only" a -8. Hitting someone by 8 doesn't guarantee hitting them in the head. In fact it gives you a 13- to do so.

 

On the other hand, hitting the vitals is much easier to guarantee.

 

People make called shots accepting the reduced chance to hit in return for a possible benefit. This house rule changes the system by making it a "lower is better" system which moves it more towards being like d20. No thank you.

[archermoo]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

People make called shots accepting the reduced chance to hit in return for a possible benefit. This house rule changes the system by making it a "lower is better" system which moves it more towards being like d20. No thank you.

 

Ur? Lower is already better in Hero, at least where rolling to see if you hit is involved. Were you meaning that it would give the to-hit roll too much input into things other than simply whether or not the attack hit?

 

And I'm well aware of why people make called shots. To make it somewhat less general than you phrased it, it is to hit a specific hit location with a specific shot. A called shot guarantees that you hit that specific location if you hit at all. This house rule would give you a better chance of hitting the location you want, but with no guarantees, even if you hit. Though I'll say that were I to use this house rule (doubtful) I would probably do away with called shots.

[Nolgroth]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

What about moving the hit location by every two you rolled by? In the above example, Dick would have been able to move the hit location to the Stomach, but not the head. It would have taken one heck of a roll for that, but still allows for the same kind of flavor. YMMV.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

People make called shots accepting the reduced chance to hit in return for a possible benefit.

The problem w/ called shots is that the fact that you either completely hit or you completely miss. This makes little realistic sense. In real life if I aim at a target's head, even if I miss the head I might still hit them somewhere else. IME few players want to take that chance and instead just take "high" and "low" shots.

 

This house rule changes the system by making it a "lower is better" system which moves it more towards being like d20. No thank you.

 

Im sorry, but in the politest way possible, this makes no sense at all.

 

The HERO System already is generally a "lower is better" system. In most of the other 3d6 roll under scenarios in the system degree of success is determined by how much lower you rolled than what you needed for basic success. This basically just extends the same thinking into to-hit rolls.

 

 

 

The default Hit Loc rules work OK, but they favor randomness. Highly expert shots hit more consistently than bad shots, but where they hit is equally as random. To overcome the randomness requires the risk of total misses which can have the odd effect (which I've witnessed) of a good shot that "pushes the envelope" and makes a lot of called shots to actually hit less than a mediocre shot that just takes what they get on the Hit Loc chart because they know they can't reasonably make called shots.

 

This houserule favors high skilled characters, extending consistency by decreasing the randomness of where they hit, and giving them more control / accuracy without the risk of a total miss.

 

You may not like it. It is lethal. It is abusable if the GM doesn't exert some control over levels (but thats true of levels vs Called Shots as well). That doesnt make it broken, it just makes it really gritty. YMMV, etc.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

What about moving the hit location by every two you rolled by? In the above example' date=' Dick would have been able to move the hit location to the Stomach, but not the head. It would have taken one heck of a roll for that, but still allows for the same kind of flavor. YMMV.[/quote']

 

Yeah, Ive done that too, and even recently tried out you can push the hit locations DOWN 1 for every 2 the roll was made (so you could push a 6 to a 7 but not to a 5). There are lots of ways to fine tune a rule like this.

[nexus]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

What about moving the hit location by every two you rolled by? In the above example' date=' Dick would have been able to move the hit location to the Stomach, but not the head. It would have taken one heck of a roll for that, but still allows for the same kind of flavor. YMMV.[/quote']

 

I think that this keeps the same flavor but makes it more reasonable. One question though is how would this rule interact with Autofire?

[archermoo]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

The problem w/ called shots is that the fact that you either completely hit or you completely miss. This makes little realistic sense. In real life if I aim at a target's head' date=' even if I miss the head I might still hit them somewhere else. IME few players want to take that chance and instead just take "high" and "low" shots. [/quote']

 

Just as a note, the reason most shooting training teaches you to shoot for "center mass" (i.e. chest) is that you are much more likely to miss someone entirely if you aim for the head.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

Just as a note' date=' the reason most shooting training teaches you to shoot for "center mass" (i.e. chest) is that you are much more likely to miss someone entirely if you aim for the head.[/quote']

 

I'm a former Marine. I know a thing or two about shooting, thanks.

 

I understand that there is a chance to miss entirely if you aim for the head and don't get it-- but is it the 100% chance that the HERO System models? No, it isn't.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

I'm a former Marine. I know a thing or two about shooting, thanks.

 

I understand that there is a chance to miss entirely if you aim for the head and don't get it-- but is it the 100% chance that the HERO System models? No, it isn't.

 

Etherio's proposal that I posted a link to earlier addresses this situation fairly well.

 

For more details go to http://www.realschluss.org/disavowed/house_rules/ and scroll to the bottom of the page.

[Greywind]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

Just as a note' date=' the reason most shooting training teaches you to shoot for "center mass" (i.e. chest) is that you are much more likely to miss someone entirely if you aim for the head.[/quote']

Go to full auto. What you lack in accuracy is made up by sheer volume of rounds fired...

[ghost-angel]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

Yes, I instituted that exact rule years ago. It's currently in print in, IIRC, Dark Champions.

 

It will make your game much more lethal, but it does make a good to-hit roll mean something.

 

Dark Champions p185

"Adjustable Hit Locations"

 

It notes characters cannot adjust to hit locations they can't see.

 

I would imagine that in Heroic Games where CVs are not that far apart this isn't as abusing as it first appears. OCV8 vs DCV4 and you start adjusting at anything under a 15 on the Attack Roll. But OCV5 vs DCV4 and it's only a 12- where you can start to adjust. I would hazard a guess you're adjusting an average of 1-3 points most of the time. Since Killer Shrike has tried it in game he could probably say whether or not it's greatly abusing.

 

It's a CAUTION Rule in DC, not a STOP SIGN, so I'd imagine it's not all that bad.

 

Of course, anyone using PSLs to offset Called Shots will consistantly be a better shot, but they paid points for the ability.

[archermoo]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

I'm a former Marine. I know a thing or two about shooting' date=' thanks. [/quote']

 

Cool. As you don't post as "Killer Shrike - Former Marine" I didn't know that.

 

I understand that there is a chance to miss entirely if you aim for the head and don't get it-- but is it the 100% chance that the HERO System models? No' date=' it isn't. [/quote']

 

True it isn't. But it is more than the no additional penalty when trying to hit someone in the head that this house rule/optional rule models. Neither is 100% realistic. As you know, in reality if you aim for the head you miss more often, you hit the head more often, and sometimes you hit something else.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

The problem w/ called shots is that the fact that you either completely hit or you completely miss. This makes little realistic sense. In real life if I aim at a target's head' date=' even if I miss the head I might still hit them somewhere else. IME few players want to take that chance and instead just take "high" and "low" shots. [/quote']

 

A lesser penalty for an improved chance at specific locations, rather than a greater penalty for a hit on the precise location, seems a reasonable happy medium.

 

To me, there's a realism/game balance trade off. If the penalty for blowing a called shot is that you still hit, but don't get the benefit of the called shot, it's not much of a penalty.

 

This houserule favors high skilled characters' date=' extending consistency by decreasing the randomness of where they hit, and giving them more control / accuracy without the risk of a total miss.[/quote']

 

This house rule provides that extra benefit for free, however. If I can generally hit by 4, I can pretty much guarantee either a head shot or a vitals shot every time. That's a little too common for my liking. Increasing the number of "hit by's" to shift the location by 1, or perhaps requiring a roll of (say) 1/2 what you needed to hit to shift by 1, and a further 1 for every number below that 1/2 requirement would make this less common.

 

Another option would be to say that, if you barely hit (ie rolled exactly what you needed), the defender can move the hit location 4 places. Every point you hit by reduces the defender's shift by 1. If you hit by 4, the location roll governs. If you hit by more than 4, you get to shift the location by 1 for every point you hit by.

 

However, one must remember that this approach reduces the value of damage and defenses in favour of OCV and DCV. Let's say I have a choice of bumping my attack from 6d6 to 12d6, and my defenses from 10 to 20, or bumping my OCV and DCV. The first costs 50 points. 50 points can add 25 to my DEX (assuming a Speed rebate), so +8 OCV and +8 DCV. Alternatively, it's +7 DCV levels and +7 OCV with one attack.

 

It is lethal. It is abusable if the GM doesn't exert some control over levels (but thats true of levels vs Called Shots as well). That doesnt make it broken' date=' it just makes it really gritty. YMMV, etc.[/quote']

 

I don't know that it makes anything gritty, but I'd agree with the rest of your comments. It will be more lethal. It will make levels more powerful, and more subject to abuse. Knowing those ramifications, you can assess whether this would be the worst thing for your game, or the best, or where it falls in between.

[casualplayer]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

It's not a bad rule and I've tried it way back in 4th Ed. It's as lethal as Killer Shrike mentions and it really diminishes the usefulness of Cover and Sectional Armor. IMO I prefer penalty levels vs. hit locations.

[ghost-angel]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

Would, or has, anyone combined this with the Optional Hit Locations for many Martial Maneuvers which might take a 2D6+1 or 2D6+7 Hit Location roll instead of a generic 3D6?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

Dark Champions p185

"Adjustable Hit Locations"

 

It notes characters cannot adjust to hit locations they can't see.

I knew that briefcase full of rules of yours was good for something. Thanks for looking it up

 

I would imagine that in Heroic Games where CVs are not that far apart this isn't as abusing as it first appears. OCV8 vs DCV4 and you start adjusting at anything under a 15 on the Attack Roll. But OCV5 vs DCV4 and it's only a 12- where you can start to adjust. I would hazard a guess you're adjusting an average of 1-3 points most of the time.

 

Since Killer Shrike has tried it in game he could probably say whether or not it's greatly abusing.

 

Yeah, in the campaign we used it in (Demon Hunter: FBI, which we later published in the HERO Fanzine Haymaker and was later reprinted in EZ HERO), it worked really well. However, that was a brutal, highly lethal campaign, with fast action and very dangerous combats. The rule wasn't used by mooks / minions, but it was used by significant NPC's and of course PC's, so "boss fights" were that much more tense.

 

Characters were allowed levels, but there was a soft cap in place on the upper ends of CV's.

 

I'd say it works best for truly Heroic (capital H) campaigns in the 75 to 250 range with an emphasis on "realistic" over "cinematic".

[BNakagawa]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

What concerns me:

 

This houserule makes things that contribute to lowering people's DCVs incredibly powerful. Invisibility, entangle, flash, darkness etc. etc. etc.

 

It devalues defenses in that it makes it too easy to get a 150% or 200% damage result.

 

I got curious so I just had to crunch some numbers.

 

If you hit by one (or two if you use the 1/2 version) then you average 124% damage.

If you hit by two (or four if you use the 1/2 version) then you average 144% damage.

If you hit by three (or six ...) then you average 162% damage.

 

This will severely reduce my enthusiasm for playing a brick with these rules.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: House rule I'm considering, Hit Location

 

What concerns me:

 

This houserule makes things that contribute to lowering people's DCVs incredibly powerful. Invisibility, entangle, flash, darkness etc. etc. etc.

This is also true of called shots.

 

I got curious so I just had to crunch some numbers.

 

If you hit by one (or two if you use the 1/2 version) then you average 124% damage.

If you hit by two (or four if you use the 1/2 version) then you average 144% damage.

If you hit by three (or six ...) then you average 162% damage.

Post your work please...how are you arriving at these numbers?

This will severely reduce my enthusiasm for playing a brick with these rules.

 

...when you say "brick", do you mean in the superheroic archetype sense, or in some more generic "tough but not so fast" sense?