Problem with Missile Deflection

[Zorak1003]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Again, correct in that it seems unfair to make the special effects of the blockable attacks that much of an issue, when the effect of the deflection may not be "batting the missile away", but dodging it, or erecting an instand shield-shaped forcewall or whatever. It would be much more reasonable to consider the active points of the attack than its special effects in the base cost of deflection.

[Zorak1003]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

AND ANOTHER THING- Why does it even matter that the attack you're blocking is ranged? Anyone that's ever hit or caught a baseball is essentially missile deflecting. I'm more and more convinced that the cost of blocks/deflections should just be based on the active points of what they can defend against.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

AND ANOTHER THING- Why does it even matter that the attack you're blocking is ranged? Anyone that's ever hit or caught a baseball is essentially missile deflecting. I'm more and more convinced that the cost of blocks/deflections should just be based on the active points of what they can defend against.

 

In general I agree that a higher power attack ought to be harder to defend against, but only with respect to "normal" defenses. Missile Deflection is the ranged analog to the Block manuever, and logically should be independent of power level. It is just as easy to block the punch of a Brick as it is a normal, yet the Brick will do a lot more damage if he hits. Similarly, if you can block bullets, there shouldn't be a real difference between blocking a Derringer shot and blocking armor piercing rounds from an Magnum, even though they do different damage.

 

For Missile Deflection (and Block too really) the speed of the attack is more important than the power level. The reason even a pro baseball player can't deflect bullets is not because they hurt more than a baseball if you get hit, but because they travel faster than the speed of sound. HERO doesn't make that distinction, however, when you buy a ranged attack. Logically thrown weapons should either have an OCV penalty or bullets should have a bonus, but no one builds them that way. So we are stuck trying to rig Missile Deflection to make logical sense when the logical premise has already been violated. The real question becomes what is a reasonable way to model Missile Deflection realizing that it has to be a compromise solution.

 

__________________________________________________________

One realizes the difficulty of the Middle East situation when one realizes that there is no word in Arabic for "compromise".

[AgentX]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

If I want to be able to redirect an attack back at the attacker, the Missile Reflection is obviously the way to go; there is no other clean mechanic to handle it.

 

But if I only want to be able to block incoming attacks and I don't care where they go, Missile Deflection seems like a ridiculous power to use. For 25 points Captain America can buy Missile Deflection vs. any type of attack. Or he could buy +5 levels DCV with the SFX "I block it with my shield".

 

The extra levels of DCV have the advantage that they are passive so no half PHA action required, they work against both ranged and HTH attacks, and they are generally more effective to boot. Consider Cap is facing an opponent who happens to have the same combat value. This means his foe hits on 11- and Cap can Missile Deflect on 11-. Or Cap could have +5 DCV and his opponent would only hit on a 6-. Clearly the high DCV "missile deflection" is superior. (Okay, if you want to get picky, limit the DCV only to ranged attacks, but it is still better).

 

Has anyone else addressed this issue in their games? Beyond violating possible DCV limits, I don't see why the high DCV option wouldn't be the preferred choice here. Comments?

 

Except Cap (may he rest in peace, or better yet, be discoverred that the one killed was actually a leftover of a bad Spiderman script, where they cloned Steve Rogers instead of Peter Parker, and the real Steve shows up to save the day) probably has both.

[schir1964]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Perhaps the solution requires a bit more complexity in order for it to be flexible enough to handle the different kinds of Block/Deflection/Reflection seen in the source material.

 

Such a solution might break down the concept into the mechanics that each affect the ability to affect incoming attacks but must be combined in order to have a functional ability.

 

It seems that that the two major concepts from the source material affect the ability to Block/Deflect attacks.

1) The Skill of the character in Block/Deflecting an attack.

2) The Substance/Material used to Block/Deflect the attack.

 

Based on this, we can create a single unified Skill which can reflect the various levels of abilities seen the source material by requiring an additional defense component.

 

Thus the new skill could be defined as follows:

Deflection

This skill allows the character to attempt to Deflect Attacks so that they cause no damage to the character. However, to deflect an attack requires some type of defense. The defense can be purchased as an adder or the skill can use the character's other defenses by applying advantages to the skill. This skill is a raw skill, it is not characteristic based. GM Permission is required to make skill characteristic based.

 

The Defense purchased for the skill applies to any attack that can logically be deflected. Some attacks by their definition and build can not be deflected (Certain NND attacks, AVLD Attacks, and so forth).

If the character chooses to use their other Defenses via advantages, then those defenses only apply to attacks they are defined for.

 

The Defense value is compared to the Attacks Body Damage.

Defense is equal to or greater than the Body Damage then no penalties to skill roll.

Defense is less than Body Damage then each point below is a -1 Penalty to skill roll.

 

A failed deflection roll means the character takes the damage normally. The GM may optionally choose to use the Hit Locations Chart instead if it makes more sense to do so for his game. (Example: Character is using his bare hands to try to deflect an arrow and fails. The GM might decide that the failure results in the character's hand being the Hit Location for determining final damage taken).

 

Cost

Deflection Skill: 3 Points (11- Roll)

+1 to Skill: 2 Points

+1 Defense: 3 Points

 

+1/4 Per Each Defense (PD, ED, Armor, and so forth)

 

This is just a skeleton of an idea with many gaps and guesses as to cost and balance. Change it, Fix it, or kick it to curb as necessary to make it work.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Perhaps the solution requires a bit more complexity in order for it to be flexible enough to handle the different kinds of Block/Deflection/Reflection seen in the source material.

 

Such a solution might break down the concept into the mechanics that each affect the ability to affect incoming attacks but must be combined in order to have a functional ability.

 

It seems that that the two major concepts from the source material affect the ability to Block/Deflect attacks.

1) The Skill of the character in Block/Deflecting an attack.

2) The Substance/Material used to Block/Deflect the attack.

 

Based on this, we can create a single unified Skill which can reflect the various levels of abilities seen the source material by requiring an additional defense component.

 

Thus the new skill could be defined as follows:

Deflection

This skill allows the character to attempt to Deflect Attacks so that they cause no damage to the character. However, to deflect an attack requires some type of defense. The defense can be purchased as an adder or the skill can use the character's other defenses by applying advantages to the skill. This skill is a raw skill, it is not characteristic based. GM Permission is required to make skill characteristic based.

 

The Defense purchased for the skill applies to any attack that can logically be deflected. Some attacks by their definition and build can not be deflected (Certain NND attacks, AVLD Attacks, and so forth).

If the character chooses to use their other Defenses via advantages, then those defenses only apply to attacks they are defined for.

 

The Defense value is compared to the Attacks Body Damage.

Defense is equal to or greater than the Body Damage then no penalties to skill roll.

Defense is less than Body Damage then each point below is a -1 Penalty to skill roll.

 

A failed deflection roll means the character takes the damage normally. The GM may optionally choose to use the Hit Locations Chart instead if it makes more sense to do so for his game. (Example: Character is using his bare hands to try to deflect an arrow and fails. The GM might decide that the failure results in the character's hand being the Hit Location for determining final damage taken).

 

Cost

Deflection Skill: 3 Points (11- Roll)

+1 to Skill: 2 Points

+1 Defense: 3 Points

 

+1/4 Per Each Defense (PD, ED, Armor, and so forth)

 

This is just a skeleton of an idea with many gaps and guesses as to cost and balance. Change it, Fix it, or kick it to curb as necessary to make it work.

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

I kind of like the idea of making Missile Deflection a skill, in part because it seems closer akin to something like Acrobatics than to Energy Blast, and in part because it would give a good rationale for making it an Everyman skill which I think would be appropriate.

 

Mechanically there is good reason to tie the skill roll to attack power, but I disagree with the idea that it should be based on type of defense though, especially if the SFX of the MD is just ducking out of the way. And even if it isn't, I don't see where batting aside an arrow or a chunk of ice from an EB are fundamentally different.

 

Again, I think the big problem is that the attack powers aren't representative; the wind up time to throw a knife gives the defender a lot more time to prepare to deflect than simply pulling the trigger on a gun. There should be OCV bonuses or penalties at work there, which would dovetail with a MD block roll, but there aren't. Maybe something like a gun should have built in DEX to represent how much faster it is and correspondingly more difficult to block. That would be a major rewrite though...

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

I kind of like the idea of making Missile Deflection a skill, in part because it seems closer akin to something like Acrobatics than to Energy Blast, and in part because it would give a good rationale for making it an Everyman skill which I think would be appropriate.

 

Mechanically there is good reason to tie the skill roll to attack power, but I disagree with the idea that it should be based on type of defense though, especially if the SFX of the MD is just ducking out of the way. And even if it isn't, I don't see where batting aside an arrow or a chunk of ice from an EB are fundamentally different.

 

Again, I think the big problem is that the attack powers aren't representative; the wind up time to throw a knife gives the defender a lot more time to prepare to deflect than simply pulling the trigger on a gun. There should be OCV bonuses or penalties at work there, which would dovetail with a MD block roll, but there aren't. Maybe something like a gun should have built in DEX to represent how much faster it is and correspondingly more difficult to block. That would be a major rewrite though...

 

The problem with Missile Deflection vs. Guns/Bullets is not really a problem with Missile Deflection at all. It's really a problem with the commonly accepted builds for Guns. Bullets are effectively invisible to sight once fired but no published builds give them IPE vs. Sight. Once this is done then you just give a character like Wonder Woman a way to perceive the bullets in flight via her magic bracelets. Problem solved.

[schir1964]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

I kind of like the idea of making Missile Deflection a skill' date=' in part because it seems closer akin to something like Acrobatics than to Energy Blast, and in part because it would give a good rationale for making it an Everyman skill which I think would be appropriate.[/quote']

Yes, which is why I proposed the idea.

 

Mechanically there is good reason to tie the skill roll to attack power' date=' but I disagree with the idea that it should be based on type of defense though, especially if the SFX of the MD is just ducking out of the way. And even if it isn't, I don't see where batting aside an arrow or a chunk of ice from an EB are fundamentally different.[/quote']

First, if the SFX is "Ducking Out Of The Way" then there is no reason to use Missile Deflection in the first place. It would be more appropriate to buy DCV for that SFX, since you are basically allowing the Attack to Miss you and aren't changing the trajectory of the attack, which I think is a key difference between Missile Deflection and DCV.

 

Second, the whole point of using Defense Type is to ignore the Attack Mechanic Type so that appropriate attacks of appropriate SFX will be affected regardless of build. Thus, the attacks you state, Arrow and Chunk Of Ice, if built based on those SFX should both be vs Physical Defense and as far as the damage SFX they cause they are identical even though they are built with two different mechanics. However, if two Energy Blasts (Rubber Bullets and Flame Thrower) where one is built vs Physical Defense and the other vs Energy Defense, one might be deflectable while the other might not.

 

Again, this is just a skeleton of an idea, fix it to work the way you think it should.

 

Again' date=' I think the big problem is that the attack powers aren't representative; the wind up time to throw a knife gives the defender a lot more time to prepare to deflect than simply pulling the trigger on a gun. There should be OCV bonuses or penalties at work there, which would dovetail with a MD block roll, but there aren't. Maybe something like a gun should have built in DEX to represent how much faster it is and correspondingly more difficult to block. That would be a major rewrite though...[/quote']

Actually, a more accurate build of "Ducking In The Nick Of Time" would be DCV with Required Skill Roll. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Thaingar]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

I don't have a problem with any of the solutions presented here (Missile Deflection, DCV levels, Desolid, etc.) ... though I would probably not allow the Extra-Dimensional Movement option except in rare cases (and then probably only for "plot-device" NPCs like Captain Chronos).

 

Another good limitation for +DCV shields is Limited Coverage: Front Arc Only.

 

My "Rule of X" for defenses takes into account DCV, PD, ED, and Stun ... so having a high DCV is okay if your other stats are reasonable.

 

I'll pretty much allow anything in my campaign so long as it is, in my estimation, reasonable ... several characters have a single "mega-attack" that exceed the DC + Speed + OCV limitations I've set, however these attacks are extraordinarily limited. Extra endurance and limited charges (which cost endurance) are a must ... extra time, concentration, activation / skill rolls, are also popular. Of course, the more the attack exceeds the "rule of X," the more limited it needs to be, and, even then, there are limits.

 

One thing that I wanted to add about Missile Deflection is that I require OCV levels with it (and any other power, like Mind Scan) be bought at the 5 point level or higher if they are limited or placed in a framework.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

The problem with Missile Deflection vs. Guns/Bullets is not really a problem with Missile Deflection at all. It's really a problem with the commonly accepted builds for Guns. Bullets are effectively invisible to sight once fired but no published builds give them IPE vs. Sight. Once this is done then you just give a character like Wonder Woman a way to perceive the bullets in flight via her magic bracelets. Problem solved.

 

To a large extent I agree with you, and I have always kind of thought that guns should have IPE because it isn't really obvious where the shot comes from in many cases, but I still think that the speed of the "missile" is a determining factor. Suppose instead of a Colt 45 I have a laser pistol. The laser may very well be visible, but will still be hard to deflect because it travels at the speed of light, much faster than the "invisible" bullet.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

First' date=' if the SFX is "Ducking Out Of The Way" then there is not reason to use Missile Deflection in the first place. It would be more appropriate to buy DCV for that SFX, since you are basically allowing the Attack to Miss you and aren't changing the trajectory of the attack, which I think is a key difference between Missile Deflection and DCV.[/quote']

 

Doh! I opened this thread with that idea. If it had been a snake it would have bit me.

 

Second, the whole point of using Defense Type is to ignore the Attack Mechanic Type so that appropriate attacks of appropriate SFX will be affected regardless of build. Thus, the attacks you state, Arrow and Chunk Of Ice, if built based on those SFX should both be vs Physical Defense and as far as the damage SFX they cause they are identical even though they are built with two different mechanics. However, if two Energy Blasts (Rubber Bullets and Flame Thrower) where one is built vs Physical Defense and the other vs Energy Defense, one might be deflectable while the other might not.

 

Bad example on my part; you are right that an ice EB and an arrow would be dealt with in the same fashion based on your MD build. Maybe a better example would be the flame thrower and a laser; both would be energy RKA, but the flame travels at a comparably slow pace compared to the laser. I could believe that a talented normal could (with a shield or something) deflect a bolt of flame, but it would be sheer luck to deflect something traveling at the speed of light.

 

Perhaps the trick of missile deflection is not so much seeing the incoming attack and blocking it, but anticipating the attacker's action and reacting to it as it happens; how else would you reliably block a laser? But by that logic there should still be a bonus against thrown weapons which have considerably more telegraphing going on that the flick of a finger on a trigger.

[Ganesh]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Hmm...area attack already can't be missile deflected, unless they take a limitation.

 

I can see two ways of making an attack difficult to deflect, or undeflectable:

 

And "undeflectable" advantage (compare to 1-hex area, nonselective, with a limitation that it only hits one target...would this approximately a +1/4 advantage? Mirrors nicely the -1/4 limitation, "can be missile deflected.")

 

OCV levels, "only v. missile deflection," which is probably a fairly huge limitation. -3? So a OAF gun could by +4 OCV v. missile deflection for 5 points, and a real lazer (as opposed to much-slower-than-light sci-fi "lazers") might have +8 or more v. deflection, or just be undeflectable.

[schir1964]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Bad example on my part; you are right that an ice EB and an arrow would be dealt with in the same fashion based on your MD build. Maybe a better example would be the flame thrower and a laser; both would be energy RKA' date=' but the flame travels at a comparably slow pace compared to the laser. I could believe that a talented normal could (with a shield or something) deflect a bolt of flame, but it would be sheer luck to deflect something traveling at the speed of light.[/quote']

Actually, let's compare a standard Rifle with a theoretical Laser rifle (neither have scopes so there is no targeting of specific locations).

 

A Bullet obviously travels slower than a Laser beam. Neither the Bullets trajectory nor the Laser's trajectory can be seen by the target. Both should be considered the same as far as Missile Deflection is concerned.

 

Therefore, the target either is unable to perceive the Bullet or Laser Beam and can't even attempt Missile Deflection, or they can be Missile Deflected with the same chance of success.

 

Why to do I say that they have the same chance of being Missile Deflected?

Because on the Heroic (realism) realm of things, the only way to deflect a Bullet or Laser Beam is to see the person preparing to fire the weapon at you. As long as one possesses a material that is appropriate for deflection of the attack (Bullet Proof Shield For Bullets, Mirror Shield For Laser Beam) then the chance to react and interpose the shield before the attacker can get the shot off should be the same for either attack.

 

Now should there be a bonus for attacks that are so slow that the character could technically react before the damage causing element of the attack reaches them? Possibly.

 

I could see normal thrown weapons as being defined like a Haymaker in that there is a measurable amount of game time between initiating the attack and the final delivering of damage to the target thus giving them time to react and move out of the way or attempting Missile Deflection at a bonus. This would be similar to how characters get a "Set" bonus in that they have time or take time to prepare.

 

Good grief!! Where did all that come from? I better stop before I verge into blathering.

 

Perhaps the trick of missile deflection is not so much seeing the incoming attack and blocking it' date=' but anticipating the attacker's action and reacting to it as it happens; how else would you reliably block a laser? But by that logic there should still be a bonus against thrown weapons which have considerably more telegraphing going on that the flick of a finger on a trigger.[/quote']

In Heroic campaigns where realism and the ordinary circumstances, which is what we've been focusing on, I would agree.

 

For Superheroic games, perceiving incoming bullets and laser beams might not be out of the ordinary but I don't see the difference between a Bullet and Laser Beam being enough to be a problem on that scale.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Ganesh's idea of OCV levels only to stop MD is good, except that it requires rewrites of most published guns; maybe trivial if you just assume it is an automatic +4 OCV or whatever, but it becomes a little more problematic when we are looking at superheroic write-ups which are a lot more varied.

 

Christopher, the idea of giving the Set bonus against thrown weapons inspires me to this thought:

 

Thrown weapons are already built as HKA or HTH attacks with the Advantage "Can Be Thrown". The easiest modification is just to tack on a sentence to the "Can Be Thrown" Advantage which says "attacks built this way give a Missile Deflecting character +3 OCV when deflecting".

 

For arrows and slings, which could potentially be used in HTH (use the sling stones as a fistload) but really are more effective damage-wise when fired (a little handwaving here) you get a +1 OCV bonus when missile deflecting. Here the missile is a lot faster, but still can be perceived.

 

For anything faster than normal human perception (bullets and lasers) there is no OCV bonus, as such attacks can only be "normally" blocked by predicting the attackers action, although the GM may allow a some kinds of Enhanced Senses to act as a Complimentary skill roll.

 

Now take Christopher's Missile Deflection skill. This would be a 3 point skill for 9+DEX/5. Most people will reflexively try to duck if something is thrown at them (Dodge or Dive for Cover), so this is really a skill you would have to buy. Possibly everyone might have this as an Everyman skill (or not depending on the GM), but to have any kind of proficiency you have to buy it.

 

Now if you want to be able to catch missiles, that would be a 5 point adder. If you want to Reflect them, a 20 point adder.

 

Well this makes me happy, but I am open to further comments, especially as to the relative point levels; I may have just made MD too effective or something.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

...

 

Thrown weapons are already built as HKA or HTH attacks with the Advantage "Can Be Thrown". The easiest modification is just to tack on a sentence to the "Can Be Thrown" Advantage which says "attacks built this way give a Missile Deflecting character +3 OCV when deflecting".

 

...

 

There is not a consistent or easy way to implement this with the Killing and normal damage RAW.

 

Thrown Killing Options

[Notes: Damage based on STR 15] - END=

37 1) Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 2d6 (2 1/2d6 w/STR), Range Based On STR (+1/4) (37 Active Points) - END=4

32 2) Killing Attack - Ranged 2 1/2d6 (40 Active Points); Range Based On Strength (-1/4) - END=4

 

Thrown Normal Options

[Notes: Damage based on STR 15] - END=

20 1) Hand-To-Hand Attack +6d6 (30 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2)

[Notes: No form of Ranged Advantage can legally be taken on a Hand-To-Hand Attack.] - END=3

36 2) Energy Blast 9d6 (45 Active Points); Range Based On Strength (-1/4) - END=4

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

There is not a consistent or easy way to implement this with the Killing and normal damage RAW.

 

Thrown Killing Options

[Notes: Damage based on STR 15] - END=

37 1) Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 2d6 (2 1/2d6 w/STR), Range Based On STR (+1/4) (37 Active Points) - END=4

32 2) Killing Attack - Ranged 2 1/2d6 (40 Active Points); Range Based On Strength (-1/4) - END=4

 

Thrown Normal Options

[Notes: Damage based on STR 15] - END=

20 1) Hand-To-Hand Attack +6d6 (30 Active Points); Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/2)

[Notes: No form of Ranged Advantage can legally be taken on a Hand-To-Hand Attack.] - END=3

36 2) Energy Blast 9d6 (45 Active Points); Range Based On Strength (-1/4) - END=4

 

Fair enough, but we could just say that Range Based on STR (limitation or advantage) lends the same OCV bonus that Can Be Thrown does, right?

 

Now, slightly off-topic, maybe I am having a brain-fart here, but if I can't legally buy a HTH attack as Throwable, how do I build say, a sai, which does +3d6 HTH but can be thrown? Do I buy this as EB vs PD, STR can add damage, Range based on STR? That seems a little clunky. The HTH "power" is bought with a mandatory -½ limitation, No Range. Can you buy it with a -¼ limitation Range Based on STR?

 

Back on topic, for the build I detailed above, I would let the thrown weapon OCV penalty be dropped to the same as for arrows provided the thrower made a Fast Draw roll.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Fair enough, but we could just say that Range Based on STR (limitation or advantage) lends the same OCV bonus that Can Be Thrown does, right?

 

Now, slightly off-topic, maybe I am having a brain-fart here, but if I can't legally buy a HTH attack as Throwable, how do I build say, a sai, which does +3d6 HTH but can be thrown? Do I buy this as EB vs PD, STR can add damage, Range based on STR? That seems a little clunky. The HTH "power" is bought with a mandatory -½ limitation, No Range. Can you buy it with a -¼ limitation Range Based on STR?

 

Back on topic, for the build I detailed above, I would let the thrown weapon OCV penalty be dropped to the same as for arrows provided the thrower made a Fast Draw roll.

 

I think any Normal damage HTH weapons that can also be used at range would have to be built with a Multipower.

 

This is probably a good question for Steve Long.

[archermoo]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

I think any Normal damage HTH weapons that can also be used at range would have to be built with a Multipower.

 

This is probably a good question for Steve Long.

 

That is in fact how the Throwing Club was built. p14 of the HSEG. One slot of HA and one of Physical EB.

[schir1964]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Christopher' date=' the idea of giving the Set bonus against thrown weapons inspires me to this thought:...[/quote']

Missile Deflection Skill [Agility Skill] (Ockam's Spoon's Version)

This skill allows a character to deflect attacks that they can see coming at them. Missile Deflection skill gets a bonus vs objects which are thrown or ranged attacks that are based on strength. Missile Deflection gains no bonus for attacks that are normally imperceptible such as bullets and lasers. However, if enhanced senses enable a character to see attacks that are normally imperceptible then the GM may choose to allow some type of bonus or complimentary skill roll.

 

• vs Thrown Objects: +3 OCV
  
• vs Ranged Attacks Based On Strength: +1 OCV
  
• vs Imperceptible Attacks: +0 OCV
  

Cost 3 Points (9+DEX/5), 2 Points Per +1 Skill Level

 

Adders

Can Catch Attack: +5 Points (Only Attacks That May Be Caught via SFX)

Can Reflect Attack: +20 Points (Only Attacks That May Be Reflected via SFX)

 

Did I miss anything?

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

...Well this makes me happy' date=' but I am open to further comments, especially as to the relative point levels; I may have just made MD too effective or something.[/quote']

I suggest that you may have made DEX even more effective.

 

1) You could change the skill into an experience only skill which means it is not based on any characteristic.

2) You could change the skill formula: 9+DEX/10. This cuts the characteristic benefit in half. Those with very high DEX scores will benefit the most which makes sense since their natural SPD will be higher than normal too.

 

Just A Suggestion

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Missile Deflection Skill [Agility Skill] (Ockam's Spoon's Version)

This skill allows a character to deflect attacks that they can see coming at them. Missile Deflection skill gets a bonus vs objects which are thrown or ranged attacks that are based on strength. Missile Deflection gains no bonus for attacks that are normally imperceptible such as bullets and lasers. However, if enhanced senses enable a character to see attacks that are normally imperceptible then the GM may choose to allow some type of bonus or complimentary skill roll.

• vs Thrown Objects: +3 OCV
  
• vs Ranged Attacks Based On Strength: +1 OCV
  
• vs Imperceptible Attacks: +0 OCV

Cost 3 Points (9+DEX/5), 2 Points Per +1 Skill Level

 

Adders

Can Catch Attack: +5 Points (Only Attacks That May Be Caught via SFX)

Can Reflect Attack: +20 Points (Only Attacks That May Be Reflected via SFX)

 

Did I miss anything?

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Is the range of an arrow really considered "Based on STR"? If so, this looks like what I was after.

 

Since you mention that DEX becomes much more effective, perhaps a better way to go would be to require a successful PER roll or penalize the Missile Deflection rather than give bonuses to deflect slower missiles. Throw weapons would either get a PER bonus or the PER roll would be automatic (assuming the attack wasn't from behind or something). Arrows and such would have a normal PER roll, but "imperceptible" attacks could only be perceived with enhanced senses. The enhanced sense might allow you to perceive the missile itself or just the intention of the attacker (empathy or somesuch). If you fail the PER roll, or simply can't see it coming, your MD is at ½OCV, as if you were attacking an invisible opponent in HTH (I think that is the correct penalty). Maybe that is a little more balanced.

 

Chris, thanks for all your help. I so owe you rep as soon at it lets me rep you again.

[schir1964]

Re: Problem with Missile Deflection

 

Is the range of an arrow really considered "Based on STR"? If so' date=' this looks like what I was after. [/quote']

(8^D) You tell me. I've only run Superheroic campaigns so I am unfamiliar with many of the conventions used for Heroic.

 

Having said that, a non-modern bows ranges were affected by ones ability to pull back the string (or so I thought, I could be completely wrong on that). Now whether Hero attempted to simulate that with the mechanics, I'm not sure, but it would make sense.

 

Since you mention that DEX becomes much more effective' date=' perhaps a better way to go would be to require a successful PER roll or penalize the Missile Deflection rather than give bonuses to deflect slower missiles. Throw weapons would either get a PER bonus or the PER roll would be automatic (assuming the attack wasn't from behind or something). Arrows and such would have a normal PER roll, but "imperceptible" attacks could only be perceived with enhanced senses. The enhanced sense might allow you to perceive the missile itself or just the intention of the attacker (empathy or somesuch). If you fail the PER roll, or simply can't see it coming, your MD is at ½OCV, as if you were attacking an invisible opponent in HTH (I think that is the correct penalty). Maybe that is a little more balanced.[/quote']

I was simply expressing the opinion that allowing DEX to affect the actual Missile Deflection roll makes DEX an even better deal than it is and makes it more attractive to sink points into. I simply think that Missile Deflection is a unique skill in that DEX should play little if any part of how effective you are at using it. I simply think that it is more practice and experience based than natural reflexes, which is why I offered the two solutions I did. Again, that is just my opinion on it which doesn't mean a hill of beans as far as your campaign is concerned.

 

You solution above doesn't really change what what I was describing above since it still comes down to two possibilities with someone with a high DEX score... if the attack is perceived, then a near guaranteed deflection, if the attack is not perceived, then no deflection is possible. The invisible application is fine, but when I say perceive the attack, I'm just strictly talking about someone who is unaware that any attack is coming. For that you can change the perception chance all you want, but it doesn't change how much DEX plays a part of Missile Deflection. I could see this solution simply encouraging someone to sink points DEX and INT/Perception to compensate. Which may not be an actual problem for your campaigns.

 

Chris' date=' thanks for all your help. I so owe you rep as soon at it lets me rep you again.[/quote']

No problem. I was simply codifying the idea you trying to conceptualize.

 

- Christopher Mullins