Delaying an opponent

[Sean Waters]

Been playing City of Heroes again, and several of the powers there incapacitate an opponent in some way, stunning them temporarily or knocking them down, so that they cannot attack for a few moments.

 

Struck me that Hero does not have a ‘direct’ way of delaying someone in that way. Sure you can build a power with (+xd6: only for stunning), but that does not feel right.

 

So, here’s a thought:

 

Delay Adder

 

The delay adder comes in three flavours,

 

1. The target hesitates, taking their action at ½ their normal DEX: 5 points

2. The target is distracted, and loses their next ½ phase action: 10 points (MAGNIFYING GLASS)

3. The target is delayed and loses their next full phase action: 20 points (STOP)

 

Each adder is attached to an attack power, and the delay takes place simultaneously with any other result of the attack. The attack must have an actual effect, specified at the time of creation, to cause the delay (for example the delay might occur when a target takes KB, or damage, of a particular level of effect from a mental power. Just hitting is NOT enough).

 

Now we can kinda do that in hero with adjustment powers, but it is a bit convoluted, and this seemed like a neater solution.

 

Maybe there is a better way though, without new rules? Thoughts?

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Sure you can build a power with (+xd6: only for stunning)' date=' [/quote']

That's usually the way I do it; works just fine. Or I suppose you could model it as a SPD Drain with a fast recovery, just enough to cost the target a phase or so.

[caris]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Been playing City of Heroes again, and several of the powers there incapacitate an opponent in some way, stunning them temporarily or knocking them down, so that they cannot attack for a few moments.

 

Struck me that Hero does not have a ‘direct’ way of delaying someone in that way. Sure you can build a power with (+xd6: only for stunning), but that does not feel right.

 

So, here’s a thought:

 

Delay Adder

 

The delay adder comes in three flavours,

 

1. The target hesitates, taking their action at ½ their normal DEX: 5 points

2. The target is distracted, and loses their next ½ phase action: 10 points (MAGNIFYING GLASS)

3. The target is delayed and loses their next full phase action: 20 points (STOP)

 

Each adder is attached to an attack power, and the delay takes place simultaneously with any other result of the attack. The attack must have an actual effect, specified at the time of creation, to cause the delay (for example the delay might occur when a target takes KB, or damage, of a particular level of effect from a mental power. Just hitting is NOT enough).

 

Now we can kinda do that in hero with adjustment powers, but it is a bit convoluted, and this seemed like a neater solution.

 

Maybe there is a better way though, without new rules? Thoughts?

 

Aren't those levels of effect for a PRE Attack?

 

+XD6 only for Stunning/Knockdown/Knockback works.

 

So would a low Def Entangle. (Be a bit expensive with IPE, and Transparent to attacks, though a limitation that would allow the Mental Attacks and physical attacks to damage it would help the cost.)

[tesuji]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

IMX this is one of the effects that clashes with the HERO core principles.

 

COSTS an ACTIOn is a rather variable impact thing, and its value varies greatly with what you are stopping. Delaying a minion... no big deal. Delaying a boss... big deal.

 

Even the MMORPG tend to make this realization and so the control powers tend to have much reduced effects on bosses and bosses often have immunity for a time.

 

So, unless this trait scales drastically in cost depending on the target, then its going to be a serious break in the HERO "cost equates to effectiveness" notion.

 

So, I would not do it as an adder. I would likely go with the "+xd6 only for con stunning" route. That way getting this effect on a tough dr d type is expensive but on a minion is easy.

 

otherwise you can easily wind up with a team where one to two guys are the stunners, pinning down the enemy and the rest bang away at the "actionless" target.

 

Speed drains are another way, depending on how the Gm rules "lowering speed" works. its epensive ayway and has a reasonable cheap defense.

[vagrant winds]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

How much of a Limitation value would "+xd6 only for Stunning/Knockdown/Knockback" or "+xd6 only for Stunning" be?

 

Because I like this idea.

[wylodmayer]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Well, STUN Only is a -0 limitation.

 

But, while this kind of attack can temporarily delay an opponent, it can't drop him - not directly, anyway.

 

I'd suggest -1/2 for "only for Stunning/KD/KB," and -3/4 for "only for Stunning (no KD or KB)" (but only if the power normally would do KD or KB).

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

So, unless this trait scales drastically in cost depending on the target, then its going to be a serious break in the HERO "cost equates to effectiveness" notion.

 

So, I would not do it as an adder. I would likely go with the "+xd6 only for con stunning" route. That way getting this effect on a tough dr d type is expensive but on a minion is easy.

 

otherwise you can easily wind up with a team where one to two guys are the stunners, pinning down the enemy and the rest bang away at the "actionless" target.

Good analysis -- Repped!

 

How much of a Limitation value would "+xd6 only for Stunning/Knockdown/Knockback" or "+xd6 only for Stunning" be?

I've only ever done it as an NPC ability, so I've never really worried about how much it should cost. But I would think "only for Stunning" (no KB/KD) takes away at least 1/2 the power's effect, so I'd give it a -1. Adding KB/KD back in would depend on how important those are in your game. Definitely a :caution: power, requires GM approval, etc.

[caris]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

I still think a PRE attack will do much of what Sean is looking for. Unfortunately, I'm at work, so I can't check my book. Now, just think PRE with the does Knockback advantage.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

I still think a PRE attack will do much of what Sean is looking for. Unfortunately' date=' I'm at work, so I can't check my book. Now, just think PRE with the does Knockback advantage.[/quote']

 

PRE DOES do what I'm looking for, mechanically, PRE attack is an expensive option for this kind of build.

 

Mind you, I can see this, as an advantage for a normal attack:

 

Also acts as a PRE attack, only to delay opponent +1/2

 

So, you roll your damage, and apply that against defences AND as a PRE attack against the oppoennt. Boss types would usually have high PRE and/or EGO so there is an automatic scaling effect, and status protection is bought as PRE defence. You could buy extra dice of damage 'only for PRE damage' at -1.

 

That could work well...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Actually I say that PRE is expensive BUT, in fact, no more expensive than a +1/2 advantage on the attack power. The problem is more one of active power caps, which the advantage solution solves.

[archermoo]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

I think a short duration mental entangle would do a pretty good job of mimicing the power from CoH.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

I think a short duration mental entangle would do a pretty good job of mimicing the power from CoH.

It doesn't even have to be mental. Nor does it need to be IPE. Just because it doesn't have the typical SFX of an Entangle (webs, ice, sticky goo, chains) doesn't mean it's invisible. It just looks like an attack (a "zap", a "bonk", a "fwoosh", etc.), which doesn't appear to do any lasting damage, but throws the target off for a little while - he stands there "shaking it off" for some period of time (which by default would be dependent on his STR). You might want to add "Does not Stop Attacks," but you could also take "No DEF".

 

You can also achieve similar results with Flash. Is he really going to be running around and attacking when he can't see? You could even add Does Knockback, if you like.

 

An EB (or HA) with "Only for Stunning" would be a -1/2 at most IMO. And "Only for Stunning/KD/KB" would be -1/4 at most.

 

If "Only for Stunning" is -1, then I'll take 24d6 of it for 60 points, then dispatch the guy with ease.

[gojira]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

You can also achieve similar results with Flash. Is he really going to be running around and attacking when he can't see? You could even add Does Knockback, if you like.

 

I like this. Could work for a lot of things, depending how you bought the Flash.

 

An EB (or HA) with "Only for Stunning" would be a -1/2 at most IMO. And "Only for Stunning/KD/KB" would be -1/4 at most.

 

If "Only for Stunning" is -1, then I'll take 24d6 of it for 60 points, then dispatch the guy with ease.

 

Although 24d6 is 120 Active Points no matter what Lim you slap on it, I agree that -1/2 is probably about right for "Stunning only." Being able to stun someone might just as often be an advantage as a liability. Maybe even -0 for "Stunning only," just to keep people from abusing it.

 

Stunning Only + KB ... maybe buy Extra Knockback on the original attack...

[TheQuestionMan]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Presence Attack with Limitation (Only to cause opponent to loose phase)

 

or

 

Knockdown Rules

 

 

QM

[tesuji]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Actually I say that PRE is expensive BUT' date=' in fact, no more expensive than a +1/2 advantage on the attack power. The problem is more one of active power caps, which the advantage solution solves.[/quote']

 

a difference in style and perspective.

 

imo...

 

if the power cap serves a valuable purpose in the campaign, any mechanism for costing which manages to "solve" it and get you around the cap for the same effect, is innappropriate.

 

getting around a useful and meaningful limit by inventive acaccounting is not good.

 

on the other hand, if the cap put in place by the gm isn't good and isn't serving a purpose, then get rid of the cap ir refine it so that normal up front straight up accounting is fine and you dont reward inventive accounting and trying to get around the gm limits.

 

the goal is getting fair and reasonable value for price within the campaign guidelines, not to figure out ow to get around those things and get the most you can any way possible.

 

it would seem to me that a pre attacj going off at the same time as a specific power attack is indeed much like an MPA... two distinct "powers" both attacks going off at the same target.

 

if your game would not allow an MPA of 10d6 eb plus 10d6 flash due to campaign caps, would you agree for someone in that game to take 10d6 EB +1/2 for "also a 10d6 flash"?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

a difference in style and perspective.

 

imo...

 

if the power cap serves a valuable purpose in the campaign, any mechanism for costing which manages to "solve" it and get you around the cap for the same effect, is innappropriate.

 

getting around a useful and meaningful limit by inventive acaccounting is not good.

 

on the other hand, if the cap put in place by the gm isn't good and isn't serving a purpose, then get rid of the cap ir refine it so that normal up front straight up accounting is fine and you dont reward inventive accounting and trying to get around the gm limits.

 

the goal is getting fair and reasonable value for price within the campaign guidelines, not to figure out ow to get around those things and get the most you can any way possible.

 

it would seem to me that a pre attacj going off at the same time as a specific power attack is indeed much like an MPA... two distinct "powers" both attacks going off at the same target.

 

if your game would not allow an MPA of 10d6 eb plus 10d6 flash due to campaign caps, would you agree for someone in that game to take 10d6 EB +1/2 for "also a 10d6 flash"?

 

 

The MPA point is a good one, although this is more like a linked attack, IMO as they will always go off together.

 

Moreover, if you run a 60 AP game, you get 12d6 EB and (potentially) a 12d6 MPS/linked PRE attack.

 

If you do it with an advantage, you can manage an 8d6 EB, that also works as a PRE attack. This seems a moer balanced approach.

 

I like the idea of the 'also works as' - there is Hero precendent for this approach and it leads to a cleaner construction.

[mattingly]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Dispel STUN 20d6, for 60 Active Points. It can only momentarily remove STUN, just long enough to exceed the target's CON to Stun them. As soon as the Stunning / not Stunning is determined, all the STUN comes back, leaving the target none the worse for wear, except for losing an action.

[Zorak1003]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Quote- "Been playing City of Heroes again, and several of the powers there incapacitate an opponent in some way, stunning them temporarily or knocking them down, so that they cannot attack for a few moments"...

 

Call me crazy, but HERO can, indeed, STUN characters and knock them down. Far as I know, it was the first system to do those things. So what's wrong with just using that?

 

City of Heroes does some things that really don't NEED to be adapted directly to work in the HERO System- A brick doesn't need 5 different versions of punch with various advantages and limitations on them like a CoH tanker, because he has STRENGTH and combat manuevers. No real need to give him a low damage attack that can stun someone when he can stun someone already with his normal blow. And you can bother to buy a power like Hand Clap, that knocks foes back- Seems to have about a one hex AofE in CoH- OR you can use the old Shockwave manuever.

 

You just plain don't NEED to adapt every little thing. Capturing the spirit of the character is far more inmportant.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Actually I say that PRE is expensive BUT' date=' in fact, no more expensive than a +1/2 advantage on the attack power. The problem is more one of active power caps, which the advantage solution solves.[/quote']

 

 

If you were using PRE for this it could be limited in its attack from - currently PRE attacks are area effect by default - such an attack would be one target only would it not - worth +1/2 limitation? More?

 

 

Doc

[Sean Waters]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Dispel STUN 20d6' date=' for 60 Active Points. It can only momentarily remove STUN, just long enough to exceed the target's CON to Stun them. As soon as the Stunning / not Stunning is determined, all the STUN comes back, leaving the target none the worse for wear, except for losing an action.[/quote']

 

I don't think that the 'dispel' mechanic allows you to stun a target, just as it does not let you take advantage of the rule that says once you hit 0 stun, your END goes to zero too. No reference for you other than memeory...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

If you were using PRE for this it could be limited in its attack from - currently PRE attacks are area effect by default - such an attack would be one target only would it not - worth +1/2 limitation? More?

 

 

Doc

 

Yes indeed, you'd (if you built the PRE atatck seperately) be able to take advantage of limitations for 'attack only, 'single target' and 'limited effect'.

 

As an advantage on an attack it might only be worth a +1/4.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

The MPA point is a good one' date=' although this is more like a linked attack, IMO as they will always go off together.[/quote']

 

Perhaps the hero might take +X PRE, offensive only, only when using [attack in question], only affects target of attack, only if attack hits. He can use the extra PRE when he attacks, but can also choose not to.

 

Moreover, if you run a 60 AP game, you get 12d6 EB and (potentially) a 12d6 MPS/linked PRE attack.

 

If you do it with an advantage, you can manage an 8d6 EB, that also works as a PRE attack. This seems a more balanced approach.

 

Is it? You could always attack and PRE attack at the same time, since a PRE attack is a 0 phase action, so just firing off your EB (and demonstrating a superpower) would, in itself, allow for a PRE attack.

 

One issue not addressed above is the fact that PRE attacks used repeatedly in combat tend to decline in effectiveness with multiple uses.

 

I'm inclined to agree with Zorak - stunning a target momentarily sounds a lot like "stunning a target", and knocking him down seems a lot like Knockback. If the attacks in question are less effective at inflicting Stun damage, a Stun suppress, or extra damage only to Stun, seems appropriate to momentarily Stun a target, and some form of extra knockback (perhaps "only to knock down") would deal with the "knocking down the enemy" issue.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Quote- "Been playing City of Heroes again, and several of the powers there incapacitate an opponent in some way, stunning them temporarily or knocking them down, so that they cannot attack for a few moments"...

 

Call me crazy, but HERO can, indeed, STUN characters and knock them down. Far as I know, it was the first system to do those things. So what's wrong with just using that?

 

City of Heroes does some things that really don't NEED to be adapted directly to work in the HERO System- A brick doesn't need 5 different versions of punch with various advantages and limitations on them like a CoH tanker, because he has STRENGTH and combat manuevers. No real need to give him a low damage attack that can stun someone when he can stun someone already with his normal blow. And you can bother to buy a power like Hand Clap, that knocks foes back- Seems to have about a one hex AofE in CoH- OR you can use the old Shockwave manuever.

 

You just plain don't NEED to adapt every little thing. Capturing the spirit of the character is far more inmportant.

 

The stunning and knockback/down mechanics in Hero don't do what I'm looking for exactly. A stunned character has all their non persistent defences drop, and they are half DCV. Moreover if they are damaged in the phjase in whuich they attaempt a recovery, that recovery is wasted.

 

KB can make a target prone, but, given that acrobatiocs and breakfall are very common in many Hero games, this can often be avoided, and they do not have any effect on the target's action at all, except, maybe, requiring a half phase to stand up.

 

I've said it before, but if Hero is going to be a true toolkit then the mechanics and not just the powers need to be tweakable.

 

As for your comments about 'no meed to give the tanker a low level attack that stuns...' - why not?

 

I mean, yes, his main attack can stun just as effectively, but therein lies another weakness of Hero, or at least a pitfall that a lot of people using Hero fall into: many characters have no use for multiple attacks: a single doozy is almost always more effective than a range of slightly less powerful effects.

 

Before anyone points out that MPs are ubiquitous, I know - but most MPs contain attacks at the campaign limit anyway. If we built MPs limited to the campaign AP limit for the TOTAL COST we would see less MPs.

[Comic]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Dispel STUN 20d6' date=' for 60 Active Points. [/quote']

 

I'd go with this, or enough Suppress to on average exceed the CON of the intended range of targets.

 

An alternative: XDM with UAA, to literally send the target a few phases into the future, with the special effect that they stop moving until they 'get back'.

 

The fact that the dimension they travel to happens to have all the nasty things going on in it that go on in ours for the duration doesn't seem unbalancing to me. Though I admit, I'd hate to be subject to this attack, without the defense.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Delaying an opponent

 

Perhaps the hero might take +X PRE' date=' offensive only, only when using [attack in question'], only affects target of attack, only if attack hits. He can use the extra PRE when he attacks, but can also choose not to.

 

 

 

Is it? You could always attack and PRE attack at the same time, since a PRE attack is a 0 phase action, so just firing off your EB (and demonstrating a superpower) would, in itself, allow for a PRE attack.

 

One issue not addressed above is the fact that PRE attacks used repeatedly in combat tend to decline in effectiveness with multiple uses.

 

I'm inclined to agree with Zorak - stunning a target momentarily sounds a lot like "stunning a target", and knocking him down seems a lot like Knockback. If the attacks in question are less effective at inflicting Stun damage, a Stun suppress, or extra damage only to Stun, seems appropriate to momentarily Stun a target, and some form of extra knockback (perhaps "only to knock down") would deal with the "knocking down the enemy" issue.

 

 

The problem is, Hugh, that I think that MPAs are a bad idea and that the PRE attack mechanics are seriously broken.

 

Apart from that, doozy.