Fighting against more speed

[Trebuchet]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

Then on a slightly different note. Why is it so explicitly forbidden to build an offensive maneuver with abort. The way I see it you can only benefit from it once in combat against the same opponent much like any other maneuver. I wouldn't have raised an eyebrow if it had just a warning note attached to it' date=' but the way it's written down makes it seem like it's the ultimate taboo that's not going to happen even should the GM allow it. Why? I must be missing something.[/quote']Because Abort is a defensive maneuver element, and so quite logically cannot be combined with an offensive element in a maneuver. Detailed rules for building custom maneuvers can be found in The Ultimate Martial Artist.

 

You can use the same martial maneuver repeatedly in combat; you just are not supposed to repeat the same one in a single Sweep maneuver. Martial arts wouldn't be very useful if you could never repeat any maneuver in a combat, since typical martial artists in Hero generally only have 3-5 maneuvers.

[Nygenn]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

No I understand the rules (for the most part) and I read parts of the UMA, I just don't see why abort needs to be a defensive element only.

 

Loking at things from a cinematic point of view, you see an attack incomming fo you abort your next move to dodge or dive for cover, but why wouldn't you be able to use your next move to raise your weapon and use this instant where your opponent comes to you to deal some dmg.

[Beast]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

in general the maneuver you are thinking of would be called a stop hit in fencing(raising one's weapon into line with an opponents forward move be it a lunge,ballestra or fleche)

the first thing you need to do is clear the the attackers attack(placing your weapon so his does not strike you a block if you would) then using his momentum he runs up on your blade

it all looks to be 1 action but it is really 2

what you would have is a block with a counter strike

but even this would be a waited move

 

No I understand the rules (for the most part) and I read parts of the UMA, I just don't see why abort needs to be a defensive element only.

 

Loking at things from a cinematic point of view, you see an attack incomming fo you abort your next move to dodge or dive for cover, but why wouldn't you be able to use your next move to raise your weapon and use this instant where your opponent comes to you to deal some dmg.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

....but why wouldn't you be able to use your next move to raise your weapon and use this instant where your opponent comes to you to deal some dmg.

 

Because this type of action requires forethought beyond that of simple self preservation which is what the Abort rules are designed to represent.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

In a 1v1 duel, sometimes it is entertaining to take a number of cards with identical backs (M:tG land cards for example) and write each participants name on as many cards as they have points of SPD.

 

Collect the cards and shuffle them. Turn them over one at a time and play out the actions in that order. At the end of the 'deck' everyone gets a post 12 recovery.

 

Lather rinse repeat.

 

The uncertainty (until the last few cards) makes things a little more fun for those who decry the mechanical nature of the SPD chart while retaining the overall balance of having a SPD advantage/disadvantage.

 

You could, in theory do this for a larger combat, but it might get a little strange...

[Alibear]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

You can interrupt an attack if you have waited and you make a dex roll/ fast draw contest. That is very in keeping with how many dojo fights end up going.

 

If I was doing a write-up of myself I might flatter myself and include a +1 to my dex rolls to interrupt.

[Nygenn]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

Ok that's all fine and dandy, and there are lost of different ways to make sure you get to attack someone before he delivers the finishing blow, but I'm still wondering why it's so forbidden to have an offensive maneuver with the abort function. Is it that good that it unbalances the game so much?

 

Just put aside the fact that abort is supposed to be for defensive purposes only, why isn't it possible to hurry along your next phase so to speak in situations where you know you're about to beaten anyway?

 

Maybe I'm just being an annoying little brat that's just asking silly things, but I really don't see why it should be make so impossible as it currently is.

[archermoo]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

Ok that's all fine and dandy, and there are lost of different ways to make sure you get to attack someone before he delivers the finishing blow, but I'm still wondering why it's so forbidden to have an offensive maneuver with the abort function. Is it that good that it unbalances the game so much?

 

Just put aside the fact that abort is supposed to be for defensive purposes only, why isn't it possible to hurry along your next phase so to speak in situations where you know you're about to beaten anyway?

 

Maybe I'm just being an annoying little brat that's just asking silly things, but I really don't see why it should be make so impossible as it currently is.

 

Because as you say, it is unbalancing. If you don't feel it is unbalancing, feel free to allow offensive actions to be aborted to in games that you run.

[Alibear]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

There is an optional rule allowing you to hurry your dex but not your speed.

 

You could allow someone to push their speed to grant an additional phase I suppose. Never thought of that until now.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

In a 1v1 duel, sometimes it is entertaining to take a number of cards with identical backs (M:tG land cards for example) and write each participants name on as many cards as they have points of SPD.

 

Collect the cards and shuffle them. Turn them over one at a time and play out the actions in that order. At the end of the 'deck' everyone gets a post 12 recovery.

 

Lather rinse repeat.

 

The uncertainty (until the last few cards) makes things a little more fun for those who decry the mechanical nature of the SPD chart while retaining the overall balance of having a SPD advantage/disadvantage.

 

You could, in theory do this for a larger combat, but it might get a little strange...

 

One of these days, I'm going to use the "standard deck" approach that I've seen suggested in the past, as it's the most simple means of randomizing SPD that I've seen. Shuffle the deck and flip the top card. 1 - 10: anyone with an action in 1 - 10 gets an action. J: anyone with an action in 11 gets an action. Q: anyone with an action in 12 gets an action. K: Everyone gets a PS 12 recovery.

 

Alternatively, use 1 - Q as "everyone with that SPD or below gets an action", but this would change the mix of who acts simultaneously.

 

This randomizes SPD a bit, makes it impossible to decide "I'll use lots of END since it's Ph 12 and I get a PS 12 immediately after" and removes holding your action until "just before my next phase". Once you've gone through the whole deck, shuffle and start again (although this should be uncommon - how many combats go over 4 turns?)

[caris]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

Alternatively' date=' use 1 - Q as "everyone with that SPD or below gets an action", but this would change the mix of who acts simultaneously.[/quote']

 

Is this a typo, or is the intent to have people with a lower speed go more often?

[caris]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

Ok that's all fine and dandy, and there are lost of different ways to make sure you get to attack someone before he delivers the finishing blow, but I'm still wondering why it's so forbidden to have an offensive maneuver with the abort function. Is it that good that it unbalances the game so much?

 

Just put aside the fact that abort is supposed to be for defensive purposes only, why isn't it possible to hurry along your next phase so to speak in situations where you know you're about to beaten anyway?

 

Maybe I'm just being an annoying little brat that's just asking silly things, but I really don't see why it should be make so impossible as it currently is.

 

 

The reason that you can not put the Abort element on an offensive action is because Steve and the powers that be decided that they did not want to have that option. Steve does not answer design philosophy questions, which this would be, so you will probably not get a definitive answer on it. Given Steve's mantra, doing so would have violated Steve's sense of balance, dram or common sense (I'm guessing balance).

 

All I can suggest is that you try it in a campaign, and see for yourself if it causes your group problems and what kind of problems they might be.

[Maur]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

You could use a variation on the original Deadlands initiative. Shuffle a deck and deal to the players and the NPCs cards equal to their number of actions. Then just call out the deck in descending order. Ace, King, Queen, Jack, 10... Players with that card get that action, or can choose to hold it. If they do hold, they have to dex off against anyone else when they decide to go. At the end of the turn you reshuffle the deck and deal again.

[sbarron]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

If you can abort to both offensive and defensive moves, everyone would immediately abort to their next phase at the earliest possible opportunity, wouldn't they? There is no penalty in aborting to your next phase, so why not get your phase in as early as possible?

 

However, allowing this would actually solve the problem, I suspect. Because everyone would abort to go as early as possible, no one could abort again to get a jump on things. So all characters would get their phases in the proscribed manner, just a little bit sooner on the chart than was intended.

 

The SPD chart is designed so that everyone's actions could be tracked, and characters that spent more points on DEX and SPD could go first and more often. Characters with a 4 SPD have a distinct advantage over characters with 3 SPDs. If you don't like this fact, then you should probably consider ditching the SPD chart all together, and just have everyone determine initiative based on their DEX.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

I was wondering if there are any tactics one can use to fight against an opponent with a higher speed and dex.

 

let's say you have 4 SPD and 20 dex and your opponent has 5 SPD and 23 dex. The 5 SPD character plays it save and keeps full DCV until he gets his free phase in segment 10 where he goes full OCV only to return to full DCV again in segment 12.

 

I figured that the only way you could actually really fight a battle like this would be with an strike maneuver with the abort function in it, only to discover that that's not allowed. So what's left? besides multiple attackers.

 

Sure, there are lots of tactics. Though using them doesn't guarantee victory. A 1 CV is noticeable, but isn't the main problem in this fight IMO. The fact that they both move first, and move more often is a big advantage.

 

The Block maneuver lets the lower-DEX person move first (presuming his opponent's next Phase doesn't happen before his does). Which means he shouldn't block on Segments 6 and 9, as his opponent would go before his next Phase, eliminating that advantage of the Block.

 

Surprise Maneuvers. Like bouncing an attack off of something. Possibly bouncing it off of something behind him so it strikes him from behind, making it more likely he'll be hit (attacking from behind is either an OCV bonus or a DCV penalty -- but either way it works). Or you could use Acrobatics to move in a manner he finds hard to follow (giving a DCV bonus to you).

 

Use the Envoronment. A handy Car often equates to either an AoE attack or an OCV bonus based upon it's size (depending upon how the GM handles those things). Contaminants like dirt/sand, water/steam, etc. could possibly be used as an impromptu Flash attack (which could also be a Surprise Maneuver). Nets, tapestries, area rugs, and sails could be thrown/dropped on him in a Surprise Maneuver to block his vision (like a Flash Attack) and foul him (Entangle).

 

If you do get him at a disadvantage that lasts more than one Phase (like if you delay Phase 6 to after he goes on 8, you get to go on 9 -- before he does on 10), go for a pushed haymaker! Or work to make the disadvantage (like the Flash/Entangling) more permanent. Or take a targeted shot to the head while the hit location modifiers are significantly reduced.

 

Also, line up your shots so that if he takes knockback, he's likely to be knocked back into something. YOu get bonus points if that something is also hazardous to be in contact with (like power lines, or a lake of magma, or just over the edge of the clif/building).

 

If you're stronger, and can get in range, try for a Grab! Sure, he goes first, but his options to attack you are severely reduced when Held.

 

Try to make him spend his END & Charges faster than you do and wear him out.

 

Thre's also some maneuvers that let one act earlier (Hurry and Snap Shot, IIRC).

[SteveZilla]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

One of these days, I'm going to use the "standard deck" approach that I've seen suggested in the past, as it's the most simple means of randomizing SPD that I've seen. Shuffle the deck and flip the top card. 1 - 10: anyone with an action in 1 - 10 gets an action. J: anyone with an action in 11 gets an action. Q: anyone with an action in 12 gets an action. K: Everyone gets a PS 12 recovery.

 

Alternatively, use 1 - Q as "everyone with that SPD or below gets an action", but this would change the mix of who acts simultaneously.

 

This randomizes SPD a bit, makes it impossible to decide "I'll use lots of END since it's Ph 12 and I get a PS 12 immediately after" and removes holding your action until "just before my next phase". Once you've gone through the whole deck, shuffle and start again (although this should be uncommon - how many combats go over 4 turns?)

 

Is this a typo' date=' or is the intent to have people with a lower speed go more often?[/quote']

 

He means that each card "value" is assigned a comparable Segment in the time chart. If he turns over a 5, it's now Segment 5, and anybody with a Phase in that Segment can act. The next card he turns over is a Jack (which equals 11), so now anybody with a Phase in Segment 11 can act.

 

He's taking the SPD chart and randomizing the sequence of the Segments. That way, it's much less predictable, and would all but eliminate strategies based upon peoples of different speeds (IMO).

[SteveZilla]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

Because as you say' date=' it is unbalancing. If you don't feel it is unbalancing, feel free to allow offensive actions to be aborted to in games that you run. [/quote']

 

"I abort to my KameHameHa attack!" or "I abort to my Crane Kick".

[Alibear]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

"I abort to my Crane Kick".

 

The little karate dude was waiting and interupted, and well you know it.

[caris]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

He means that each card "value" is assigned a comparable Segment in the time chart. If he turns over a 5, it's now Segment 5, and anybody with a Phase in that Segment can act. The next card he turns over is a Jack (which equals 11), so now anybody with a Phase in Segment 11 can act.

 

He's taking the SPD chart and randomizing the sequence of the Segments. That way, it's much less predictable, and would all but eliminate strategies based upon peoples of different speeds (IMO).

 

Steve, I got that is what was meant here.

 

One of these days' date=' I'm going to use the "standard deck" approach that I've seen suggested in the past, as it's the most simple means of randomizing SPD that I've seen. Shuffle the deck and flip the top card. 1 - 10: anyone with an action in 1 - 10 gets an action. J: anyone with an action in 11 gets an action. Q: anyone with an action in 12 gets an action. K: Everyone gets a PS 12 recovery.[/quote']

 

What is confusing me is:

 

Alternatively' date=' use 1 - Q as "everyone with that SPD or below gets an action", but this would change the mix of who acts simultaneously.[/quote']

 

This sounds like that the idea is that if he turns over an Ace that only characters with a SPD of 1 go, which doesn't make any sense. It can not be using the cards to change just the order of Phases, since that wouldn't "change the mix of who acts simultaneously." I think/hope that it was a typo and Hugh meant that "everyone with that SPD or above gets an action." Removes the need for any kind of Speed Chart (a character with a SPD of 5 goes on 1-5), and also randomizes the order.

 

Personally, I'd probablyreduce the cost of SPD if I were to move to any sort of randomization of Phases, but I like tactics based on Speed.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

Is this a typo' date=' or is the intent to have people with a lower speed go more often?[/quote']

 

This sounds like that the idea is that if he turns over an Ace that only characters with a SPD of 1 go' date=' which doesn't make any sense. It can not be using the cards to change just the order of Phases, since that wouldn't "change the mix of who acts simultaneously." I think/hope that it was a typo and Hugh meant that "everyone with that SPD or above gets an action." Removes the need for any kind of Speed Chart (a character with a SPD of 5 goes on 1-5), and also randomizes the order.[/quote']

 

Yeah, it was off the cuff and I didn't think through what I was typing. SPD that # or higher would be the right result.

[Nolgroth]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

I really want to Abort to Haymaker.

 

In many ways, I understand the metagaming concept, but an Abort simply changes the Segment in which you would act, at the cost of your next Phase. The rules already prevent an Abort on Segment 3 (for instance) and another Abort on Segment 5 if the next character Phase is 6.

 

Now, I might require some sort of Fast Draw or Dex roll to successfully Abort to do something offensive. Maybe just give the character OCV/DCV penalties for moving out of sequence. I would not give him a totally free offensive action that could be aborted to.

 

Nor would I allow a Haymaker.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

I really want to Abort to Haymaker.

 

In many ways, I understand the metagaming concept, but an Abort simply changes the Segment in which you would act, at the cost of your next Phase. The rules already prevent an Abort on Segment 3 (for instance) and another Abort on Segment 5 if the next character Phase is 6.

 

Now, I might require some sort of Fast Draw or Dex roll to successfully Abort to do something offensive. Maybe just give the character OCV/DCV penalties for moving out of sequence. I would not give him a totally free offensive action that could be aborted to.

 

Nor would I allow a Haymaker.

 

I don't see an issue allowing Aborts for defensive actions only, but I doubt the world would collapse into chaos if you could abort to offensive actions as well. However, the idea that Phase 1 turns from "no one acts" to "everyone aborts" would be a bit of a pain. When everyone aborts to attack, who goes first? Everyone makes a DEX roll? Great - more die rolls.

 

As to the Haymaker, if you Abort to an action that takes extra time, I believe the action goes off with its usual time delay, so aborting to a haymaker on Seg 1 would mean your Haymaker lands at the end of Seg 2. And leaves you at half DCV until your next action, so longer than before.

[Maur]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

Now' date=' I might require some sort of Fast Draw or Dex roll to [i']successfully[/i] Abort to do something offensive. Maybe just give the character OCV/DCV penalties for moving out of sequence. I would not give him a totally free offensive action that could be aborted to.

 

heheh. The OCV penalty for going first would just be the same, mechanically, as a player who chose to hurry his action to go first

[Paragon]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

I'd say many of the timing games Hero produces because of the Speed chart feel far _more_ realistic than what occurs in most initiative systems; I certainly know that back when I was fencing and doing martial arts they definitely had the equivelents.

[archermoo]

Re: Fighting against more speed

 

I'd say many of the timing games Hero produces because of the Speed chart feel far _more_ realistic than what occurs in most initiative systems; I certainly know that back when I was fencing and doing martial arts they definitely had the equivelents.

 

Yup. I would frequently wait for my opponent to commit to something before acting to counter it. Or pause briefly to marshal myself for a flurry of attacks. Or any number of other similar things.