Are Hero characters too rugged?

[Comic]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

One of my past Bricks, when shot to the head, squeezed out a new one, shook off the residues of the old one, and proceeded to illustrate to the guys with the killing attack and the high OCV what it means when you prove to someone more violent and more imaginative than yourself beyond a shadow of a doubt that you intend to kill them.

 

Five times three is still a *plink*, and six is still a *plink* to a Brick, and those are pretty common rolls on KA's called to the head, and they don't waste the Brick's time standing up from knockback, which would've hurt him more tactically.

[Maur]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

although' date=' does anyone know exactly what Vitals are? this has confused me for sometime now. is it like Heart/Lungs, or Jugular, or is it pretty much anywhere that is usually one shot kill?[/quote']

 

http://www.jsr.com/~fitz/roleplay/hero/hitlocs.pdf

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

Five times three is still a *plink*' date=' and six is still a *plink* to a Brick[/quote']

 

Yes.

 

and those are pretty common rolls on KA's called to the head.

 

Not if their DC's are close to the Brick's DC's. Joe Thug won't win either way. If Wolverine can take a called shot to your head, that's not going to *plink*.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

i played a brick in those conditions. my character Tachyon (bit of a misnomer' date=' as his powers were radioactive, not light, and deinately not time, but what ever) was a flying brick martial artist with a few blaster levels.[/quote']

 

So, you're refuting our points about playing a brick by bringing up an example with flight, martial arts and energy blasts...

 

well, that makes sense. Obviously, my point is invalid.

[eternal_sage]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

dude, superman has those things, and he is a brick... and i...

 

look. nevermind. i really don't feel like starting a flame war here. fine. my points are all invalidated, and i was a punk, even though i was trying to be civil.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

dude, superman has those things, and he is a brick... and i...

 

look. nevermind. i really don't feel like starting a flame war here. fine. my points are all invalidated, and i was a punk, even though i was trying to be civil.

 

My point is that such a rule makes LOW DCV bricks less than competitive. Superman has super speed. He can move faster than a speeding bullet and he only gets hit when he feels like it.

[eternal_sage]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

as i said, however, i had a low DCV and a low speed, compared to most supers, anyway, with a SPD of 3, and a DCV of 7, and with 40 STR, and most of his maneuvers and powers being of a physical nature, i thought he may be considered a brick.

 

apparently i was wrong. thats fine. i don't mind that my definitions of character types are different that others. i'm fine with that. it makes me feel special .

 

if you are talking only HULK SMASH kind of brick, then yea. but i don't really play that type, nor do any of my players at the moment (my wife doesn't like the archetype, and our other constant player is playing a paladin in DnD right now, so he's sufficiently tanked up right now). so i guess that yes, under those circumstances he would be in trouble, however, i think it is also likely (maybe maybe not) that this type of character is a Thing/Hulk/Colossus type (not really up on DC stuff, so forgive my one sidedness) and that he'd have sfx which would warrent special consideration, such as made of rock/steel, or absorbing physical damage.

 

thats my two coppers, and you can take or leave it as you like. as i said before (though maybe not this thread... i get confused... damn goldfish memory ) i'm a big proponent of sfx in my games (as i think is obvious from my attitude toward GM rulings), so it will obviously not be to taste for those who like concrete rules examples and definitions. cool deal. i'd likely pass on your games, because i like to take things like this into consideration more, but even then maybe not. i mean i played DnD... well i'm still playing DnD, and there is very little DM wiggle room there, so who knows.

[Maur]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

My point is that such a rule makes LOW DCV bricks less than competitive. Superman has super speed. He can move faster than a speeding bullet and he only gets hit when he feels like it.

 

He seems to get hit a lot more often than just when he lets someone hit him. To be honest, he doesn't seem to have a very high Dex until after he accelerates to a high rate of movement. Of course we're talking about a character that moves and reacts at the speed of plot (L&C:TNAoS, Smallville, JL, JLU, etc...).

[archermoo]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

Uh, he said he used hit locations for killing attacks.

 

Which means:

 

He's coming right at us!

(X5 STUN MOD for headshots.)

 

goodnight brick.

 

This is getting repetative.

 

{Thing I don't like} is broken!

 

I haven't had any problems with it.

 

[Ways that {Thing I don't like} can be broken]

 

I haven't had any problems with it.

 

Is it that you didn't think that you truthfully believed that no one in any game I'd ever played in 20+ years of playing with hit locations ever thought to target someone in the head?

[eternal_sage]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

you also had another character in a game i ran who found that throwing cars is an excellant way of dealing with pesky high DCV quick types (i decided that, logically, its an area of attack hitting a 2x3 area).

 

and called shot head works both ways, and any brick worth the name has a high OCV. i don't think that can be argued with (but maybe it can, i've shown that my games can be wierd). so just punch the lumps in the face, and BAM!

 

ah, and archermoo...that last question makes my head hurt....

[BNakagawa]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

He seems to get hit a lot more often than just when he lets someone hit him. To be honest' date=' he doesn't seem to have a very high Dex until after he accelerates to a high rate of movement. Of course we're talking about a character that moves and reacts at the speed of plot (L&C:TNAoS, Smallville, JL, JLU, etc...).[/quote']

 

My take on it is that anyone who uses Superman to justify their position in an argument about superhero game mechanics has probably lost the argument.

[eternal_sage]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

i am honestly interested in why this is so. is he not, basically, the reason the genre exists? not that i'm saying i agree with all aspects of the character, all stories he's ever been in (hell, i personally don't really even like him, but mostly personality/character reasons), but trying to say that a discussion involving superhero power sets, not just in gaming terms, but in general, and saying to use him as an example is basically a logical fallacy?

 

i just don't see the logic, and would like to get a better understanding for why you say that.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

i am honestly interested in why this is so. is he not, basically, the reason the genre exists? not that i'm saying i agree with all aspects of the character, all stories he's ever been in (hell, i personally don't really even like him, but mostly personality/character reasons), but trying to say that a discussion involving superhero power sets, not just in gaming terms, but in general, and saying to use him as an example is basically a logical fallacy?

 

i just don't see the logic, and would like to get a better understanding for why you say that.

 

Agreed. He is one of the most often copied characters in comics. Each of the original X-Men arguably had one aspect of his powers. Iron-Man and Shazam!(Captain Marvel) are both just clones with differing sfx (magic and tech). The character's power level has certainly hit some absurd extremes but the basic premise put forth in 1938 is still relevant in today's comics.

[archermoo]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

ah, and archermoo...that last question makes my head hurt....

 

Mine too...that's what I get for editing it too much and obviously not taking a final look at it. Here was the intended question:

 

Is it that you truthfully believed that no one in any game I'd ever played in 20+ years of playing with hit locations ever thought to target someone in the head?

[Zed-F]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

For me, it depends on the tone of the game that I am aiming for. Sometimes I will use hit locations for killing attacks, sometimes for all attacks, sometimes none. It's obviously more appropriate for games where the tone is intended to be more lethal.

 

I haven't found that bricks are any more or less advantaged or disadvantaged by hit locations than anyone else... but then I don't generally allow a CV range such that a character can reliably hit another character (PC or NPC) with a called headshot, barring extenuating circumstances such as an ambush situation. Normally speaking, a headshot is a -8 OCV modifier, after all -- if your average PC in a gritty street-level Dark Champs game has a CV of 7-8 to begin with, that's a rather huge modifier.

 

Of course I could smack the PCs down by introducing ambush situations explicitly designed to take them down with headshots... but then I could already do that just by throwing overwhelming opposition at them in the first place, so really, what's the diff? And if the PCs are clever enough to arrange an ambush on the NPC bad guys and head-shot them to oblivion, kudos to them. I can always get more bad guys. Leaving ambushes and similar out, the occasional headshot randomly dispersed amongst the team adds a certain amount of tension to the game which I feel is important for a gritty street-level setting. And if it encourages the PCs to buy up their BODY scores... well that's in-genre for action heroes, too.

 

So, hit locations are something to be used when appropriate, and are certainly not a problem from my PoV when used appropriately.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

This is getting repetative.

 

{Thing I don't like} is broken!

 

I haven't had any problems with it.

 

[Ways that {Thing I don't like} can be broken]

 

I haven't had any problems with it.

 

Is it that you didn't think that you truthfully believed that no one in any game I'd ever played in 20+ years of playing with hit locations ever thought to target someone in the head?

 

 

I have had a problem with it: I built a character in Dark Champions* who SHOULD have been invulnerable, to all intents and purposes. One headshot with a (reasonably) lucky roll on damage and he was out like a light. Mind you, I could have had much the same problem with a lucky killing attack roll, which is why I don't use Hero standard Killing Attacks any more. My own silly fault, of course.

 

My biggest single problem with aimed shots in games where you pay for your damage with points is that you can do more damage - reliably - by buying up your OCV, through DEX, OCV etc, which throws the point value of attack powers right off. In ANY game, in fact, it substantially increases the value of DEX, as DEX not only increases your damage output, but reduces the damage you take. This skews the cost/utility ratio. Of course there is nothing WRONG with that in an individual campaign, but even the core rules recognise different genres where aimed shots are mor, or less appropriate.

 

This is precisely the thinking, I'd imagine, behind the comment that aimed shots are prejudicial to bricks, who tend toward the lower end on OCV and DCV. No one is saying that this is something that is broken in a superhero game, because the default for superhero games is that you don't use hit locations, or allow extra damage for aimed shots. For good reason, in my experience.

 

One final point is that the hit location rules are not really representative of the reality of aiming shots. Yes, for bullets, a head or heart shot is the sure-kill, but that is because you can expect the bullet to penetrate the bone. If, on the other hand, you are using a knife-slash, then, whilst a head wound may be very unpleasant, it is unlikely to be fatal (unless you hit the neck), whereas a cut to the opponent's arm or leg may open an artery and cause rapid bleedout.

 

Hit locations are not an additional layer of reality, they are just an addditonal mechanic that some people like and some people do not like.

 

Now as to the question that this thread relates to, aimed shots can make characters far more vulnerable - DO make them far more vulnerable - and if there is a perception that characters are too rugged, then one way of dealing with it is certainly to do more damage to them, which the Hit Locations rule accomplishes.

 

 

*DC uses hit locations anyway, so I probably should not have been trying to create an invulnerable villain. By bad.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

Agreed. He is one of the most often copied characters in comics. Each of the original X-Men arguably had one aspect of his powers. Iron-Man and Shazam!(Captain Marvel) are both just clones with differing sfx (magic and tech). The character's power level has certainly hit some absurd extremes but the basic premise put forth in 1938 is still relevant in today's comics.

 

 

....that is to say that Superman is one of the most desired characters for those new to superhero roleplay because he is, basically, able to do almost anything, and if a player got their hands on that level of power and ability, nothing would be safe.

 

Superman is great at everything, which makes him a splendid archetype for comics, where the authors can some up with contrived circumstances to challenge him, but a poor archetype for a rpg, at least an rpg where there are a group of players; in the comics Batmean usually beats Superman when they fight. that would never happen if you accurately translated them to Hero.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

why you'll never get anywhere using Superman as a justification for any argument about superhero game mechanics:

 

1: he's so poorly defined. Superman has so many incarnations it's impossible to say for certain what he can and cannot do. Super-hypnosis? Super-hearing? turning desolid? Stopping a planet? Going invisible? Survive a nuke? destroy a star? recover from being killed? sure why not?

 

2: those parts of him that are well defined make for poor game balance. He can pluck bullets out of the air, so he only gets shot when he feels it is to his advantage to get shot. Anyone who can move that fast can evade a punch, so he only gets punched when he feels it is to his advantage. (provided that his opponent cannot punch faster than a bullet, and really, who can?) On top of that, he is one of the toughest around, strongest around, smartest around, etc. etc. etc. I don't know about you, but a character that is better than nearly everyone at everything makes for a bad role model in terms of game balance.

 

3: his weaknesses make for bad gameplay. Many DC characters suffer this sort of all or nothing limitation. Saying to a player, well, you ruled the last two weeks, so this week, you get to be useless makes for bad game balance. Of course, the alternative is to let Superman rule every fight or not to use Kryptonians.

 

4: originating the genre doesn't a role model make. He may have been a good design for a competition-free market. The ability to do anything under the (yellow) sun made him more versatile, which was a good thing in an era where there weren't hundreds of other characters. That was 50 years ago and no longer applicable. In a genre with hundreds of characters, the ability to do everything better than everybody is no longer an asset.

 

5: he's out of balance with anything vaguely reasonable. The only other characters that are on superman's power levels are also role models for uber level campaigns only. The vast majority of the published materials focus on a power level that is well below Superman's weight class. It's like using Elminster to justify a position about D&D mechanics.

[Comic]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

I vote we use Hyperman as the baseline for superhero discussions.

 

He's far more playable and better balanced, by all reports.

 

Plus, no one disputes his character sheet.

 

Of course, we'll have to get him to stop spending XP, so discussion doesn't become obsolete.

[eternal_sage]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

i can accept those points, actually, and say they make sense.

 

however, i'm still not sure why the example character is not elegible for brick status? and i'm also confused as to why bricks are also considered to have low OCV/DCV to begin with. i understand they often have little in the way of DEX, but i would imagine, and it may just be the way that i look at character creation, but they would be the ones with tons of CSLs, as they are the ones doing lots of physical fighting. same for martial arts. i mean, even boxing and pro-wrestling count as martial arts styles, and that is very like what bricks do in comics usually. same for flight. Captain Britain flys, and he is a brick (i would say, at any rate), and there are a few other examples (like the above mentioned Iron Man, who also blasts energy).

 

those are my thoughts on the matter, at least, and it seems it is mostly because of general discrepencies between build styles and philosophies more than anything.

 

and to Sean Waters, i find that i pretty much always disagree with you, so there is nothing new there .

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

I vote we use Hyperman as the baseline for superhero discussions.

 

He's far more playable and better balanced, by all reports.

 

Plus, no one disputes his character sheet.

 

Of course, we'll have to get him to stop spending XP, so discussion doesn't become obsolete.

 

[Sean Waters]

Re: Are Hero characters too rugged?

 

My take on it is that anyone who uses Superman to justify their position in an argument about superhero game mechanics has probably lost the argument.

 

 

Well I asked Superman and he said you were wrong.

 

 

 

er....