An alternative to CSLs?

[archermoo]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

I've seen builds where Indirect is explicitly used to make a martial arts strike that is capable of penetrating any defense that is used to block it' date=' e.g. I punch through the wall and hit the guy on the other side. Usually such an Indirect is defined as a +1/4 indirect "up to 1" away". This would logically also negate a block defined as 'block' -- though a point could be made that someone could use a block defined as 'I get out of the way' to defeat such a strike. Sounds like a GM call to me.[/quote']

 

Using your above logic, I could easily see it extended to say that someone wearing Armor shouldn't get the protection from it. But Indirect specifically mentions the Armor power as one of the personal defenses that Indirect does not get around.

 

Certainly any Ref can allow someone to use an Advantage to do things other than what it was designed to, but I was talking about the standard Hero rules.

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

Yeah, Indirect can allow attacks to go around "obstacles", but I wouldn't consider a Block to be an "obstacle." I mean, it's not just some passive barrier the attacker is trying bypass... it's an active attempt by the target to interfere with the attack. I agree with Gary... it could get you Surprise bonuses (especially against targets unfamiliar with the effect), but I wouldn't allow Indirect to make an attack unBlockable.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

Using your above logic, I could easily see it extended to say that someone wearing Armor shouldn't get the protection from it. But Indirect specifically mentions the Armor power as one of the personal defenses that Indirect does not get around.

 

Certainly any Ref can allow someone to use an Advantage to do things other than what it was designed to, but I was talking about the standard Hero rules.

 

You are are correct if we are only talking about the rules contained within 5er and no other book.

 

I believe that Steve Long has stated on more than one occasion something to the effect that the Ultimate series of books are also considered to be 'standard' rules in the same standing as 5er.

 

Options exist within one or more of those books that define an HTH AOE 1 Hex attack as un-dodgable but blockable and an HTH Indirect attack as un-blockable but dodgable.

[archermoo]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

You are are correct if we are only talking about the rules contained within 5er and no other book.

 

I believe that Steve Long has stated on more than one occasion something to the effect that the Ultimate series of books are also considered to be 'standard' rules in the same standing as 5er.

 

Options exist within one or more of those books that define an HTH AOE 1 Hex attack as un-dodgable but blockable and an HTH Indirect attack as un-blockable but dodgable.

 

Do you know which books and what pages? I'm not doubting they are there, I'd just like to take a look at them. And certainly anything from any of the published books qualifies as "official".

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

UMA, page 132, top of right-hand column.

 

Although it does note that buying Hardened with the Block maneuver negates the Indirect advantage.

 

 

[edit]

 

Also on page 131, under One Hex

[BoneDaddy]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

I must spread some reputation around before repping SCUBA hero for keeping me from looking completely witless. Thanks!

[JmOz]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

You are are correct if we are only talking about the rules contained within 5er and no other book.

 

I believe that Steve Long has stated on more than one occasion something to the effect that the Ultimate series of books are also considered to be 'standard' rules in the same standing as 5er.

 

Options exist within one or more of those books that define an HTH AOE 1 Hex attack as un-dodgable but blockable and an HTH Indirect attack as un-blockable but dodgable.

 

RE: Officialness of the books, I am 98% certain that it is the inverse, that they are considered in there entiredy to be optional rules that a GM should review before permitting in his game

[Hyper-Man]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

RE: Officialness of the books' date=' I am 98% certain that it is the inverse, that they are considered in there entiredy to be optional rules that a GM should review before permitting in his game[/quote']

 

I think the implication is that they are official options with the same standing in the rules as other optional rules like Dive For Cover.

[JmOz]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

I think the implication is that they are official options with the same standing in the rules as other optional rules like Dive For Cover.

 

ohh ok, misunderstood what you were saying, yes they are "Official Optional Rules" probably slightly less accepted than the main rule book ones only because of assumed availability, but yes similar to the rules for Bleeding or something else...

[archermoo]

Re: An alternative to CSLs?

 

UMA, page 132, top of right-hand column.

 

Although it does note that buying Hardened with the Block maneuver negates the Indirect advantage.

 

 

[edit]

 

Also on page 131, under One Hex

 

Interesting. Though I'll note that the AoE One Hex being undodgable doesn't apply to the Accurate version of it. That is explicitely stated in the rules. And Steve has clarified that they can also be Blocked, and even Missile Deflected if they are ranged.

 

Though you are correct that UMA states that Indirect Attacks cannot be blocked. Odd that the rules never directly state it, but just note that it is something that should be watched as it can be unbalancing. Looks like one of those cases that I'll have to disagree with the rules. Indirect has enough of an advantage already, so I don't personally see any reason to make it even more powerful.