6E Rules changes confirmed so far

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

By the way: Does anyone know if Sidekick for 6th will have the combat rules, at least minus the optional ones? (I'm assuming yes, but you know what they say about assuming.)

 

I don't think that I'll have the budget for a full game right off the bat, especially with the two book format, but I'm inclined to grab a PDF or printed Sidekick for 6th.

 

Well, first of all there will not be a Sidekick for 6e. There will be a Hero System 6th Edition Basic Rulebook which is the 6e equivalent. It's always been described as equivalent to Sidekick so I assume it will be complete. They have announced Champions Online: The Role-Playing Game as being built around the Basic Rulebook in the same way that PS238 and Lucha Libre Hero are built around Sidekick -- so once again I would suspect it will have combat rules.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I don't understand this thing about using Unified Power to recouple stats. How would that look on paper? Do we know what the UP mechanic actually is yet?

 

 

No not really just that it replaced ECs and is supposedly better and more versatile so I may be completely off.

The idea is you could link up all the ingredients in proportion to recouple characteristics but it just pretty wild speculation mixed with wishful thinking. we don't know yet. I suspect we will have to wait for the rules to get the straight poop.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I think I see what you're getting at, Steamteck, thanks for the reply.

[Trebuchet]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

By the way' date=' there's a rumor going around that buying 6thEd is a legal contract that allows Steve to come to your house and steal all your dice. I thought people should know.[/quote']Fooled Steve! Nowadays I only use the built-n die roller in Hero Designer 3.

[Tasha]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

It has nothing to do with people being grown-up or not' date=' though your penchant for oblique personal attacks is noted. It has to do with a desire to have a reasonable trade off. If one attack is going to do on average more Body damage, it only seems reasonable to me that it should on average do less Stun damage.[/quote']

 

Again the change to KA's don't change supers campaigns that much IMHO as it is quite in Genre for supers to have normal attacks along with their killing attacks.

 

This change pushes normals games into having both Normal attacks as well as their killing attack weapons. This is genre breaking for most fantasy games as well as many Modern games. See Killing Attacks were NOT broken for Normals games. They were only broken for Superhero genre games.

 

I am advocating for a less stringent Nerf to Killing attacks, Hell I wouldn't even complain about a different system for Supers games than for Normals games. A system that allows killing attack to actually do decent stun, so PC's don't have to kill their opponents.

 

In a normals game I find that balance is super critical. Too much Defense or DCV can really make an opponent hard to defeat. With this change, Armor in normal games becomes MUCH more powerful. Which can be an really problem in Moderns game where Kevlar vests are rated rDef 6-9 and Characters run around with 5-8PD. As a GM I will be killing PCs as I won't have a good way not to esp if I use the weapons as published. (If weapons are written up different ie with +1 stun mults where they never had such a thing, then this fix doesn't make Superheros any more bullet proof).

 

Changing Killing attacks is a nasty can of worms. It shows the real difference between the Superheroic Genre and everything else. From this thread and the ones in the 6e discussion. I guess my group is one of the few that plays the other genres.

[NestorDRod]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Sure. You have two attack types. At the same number of Damage Classes, one of them averages more Body damage dealt per attack than the other. It would then make sense to me that for things to be in balance that the other type of attack should average more Stun damage dealt per attack.

 

If they average the same amount of Stun and one averages more Body, then one of those attacks is objectively more effective than the other. Which means that they aren't balanced.

 

And they need to be balanced... why?

[jtelson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Changing Killing attacks is a nasty can of worms. It shows the real difference between the Superheroic Genre and everything else. From this thread and the ones in the 6e discussion. I guess my group is one of the few that plays the other genres.

 

We play other genres using Hero, once I see how Killing attacks work as part of the whole system, I'll decide if I need to change the stun multiplier back (or to some other number, which I've done in the past) based on the individual campaign.

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Again the change to KA's don't change supers campaigns that much IMHO as it is quite in Genre for supers to have normal attacks along with their killing attacks.

 

This change pushes normals games into having both Normal attacks as well as their killing attack weapons. This is genre breaking for most fantasy games as well as many Modern games. See Killing Attacks were NOT broken for Normals games. They were only broken for Superhero genre games.

 

I am advocating for a less stringent Nerf to Killing attacks, Hell I wouldn't even complain about a different system for Supers games than for Normals games. A system that allows killing attack to actually do decent stun, so PC's don't have to kill their opponents.

 

In a normals game I find that balance is super critical. Too much Defense or DCV can really make an opponent hard to defeat. With this change, Armor in normal games becomes MUCH more powerful. Which can be an really problem in Moderns game where Kevlar vests are rated rDef 6-9 and Characters run around with 5-8PD. As a GM I will be killing PCs as I won't have a good way not to esp if I use the weapons as published. (If weapons are written up different ie with +1 stun mults where they never had such a thing, then this fix doesn't make Superheros any more bullet proof).

 

Changing Killing attacks is a nasty can of worms. It shows the real difference between the Superheroic Genre and everything else. From this thread and the ones in the 6e discussion. I guess my group is one of the few that plays the other genres.

 

So, in other words, you're saying that you have no faith in Steve and his technical advisory committee to have considered these things. Why don't we wait and see if there are other changes before we rush to judgment.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Changing Killing attacks is a nasty can of worms. It shows the real difference between the Superheroic Genre and everything else. From this thread and the ones in the 6e discussion. I guess my group is one of the few that plays the other genres.

 

Don't Heroic Games normally use the Hit Location Chart to begin with? Making what the StunX is a completel non-issue....

[James Gillen]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Which makes the point that I and others have been trying to make about the nerf being too harsh.

 

in a normals game ( DC 6 attacks)

5e : 7 Body 17.5 stun

6e : 7 Body 14 stun

 

This means that a person in plate mail (rDef 8. PD6) will take 0 stun on average in 6th edition and still take 0 body at most they will take 7 stun at best on a max roll. which is quite broken IMHO.

 

or lets take a person in Brigandine armor (rDef 5. PD 6) will take 3 stun 2 body on average and 7 stun and 7 body at maximum. In 5th edition the same person would take 24 stun with an average body roll and a x5 location.

 

This is totally fracking broken! This breaks normal games totally! The BEST part of Hero in a normals game was the fact that most of the time you knock out your opposition instead of killing them. Death was still a possiblity, but was rare. Now normal games are much more deadly and their combats take a LOT longer.

 

Perhaps 1/2d6+1 would be better?

 

This is clearly an instance where Champions-centric thought changed a rule. Which is a problem that the system has always had.

 

Which is odd given that I thought the emphasis was on saying "Hero System isn't just Champions." I think this rule is great for not using the STUN Lotto as a Stunning attack on an otherwise bulletproof opponent, but I see the point you're making here.

 

JG

[rjcurrie]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Don't Heroic Games normally use the Hit Location Chart to begin with? Making what the StunX is a completel non-issue....

 

Well, it depends whether the Hit Location Chart changes.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

So we're going to base an argument over an assumption? Odd that.

[Tasha]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

So' date=' in other words, you're saying that you have no faith in Steve and his technical advisory committee to have considered these things. Why don't we wait and see if there are other changes before we rush to judgment.[/quote']

 

I have one word for you.... Regeneration... 'nuff said?

[jtelson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

There will be a single index' date=' printed in both 6E rulebooks, with a letter code before each number to indicate which book it refers to.[/quote']

 

Wait! I have to pay for the same material twice! Outrageous!

[Beast]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

what I showed was that Killing attack were overly NERFED

going to a 1d3 I did not have a problem with

what I had a problem with was that normal def got tossed in there and that sent the meter way over to the other side

The group I play with at Caltech housed ruled full def for KA's long ago

it helped a bit with the problem

I see 1d3 for a stun multiplier working even better but not with normal def vs stun

 

as for the 1 in 6 to see max stun yes that is a bit much but the body rolled is going to average that down

 

and lest we forget while you have a 1 in 6 of maxing stun

you have a 1 in 3 chance of wimping out

 

 

 

I'm sorry, what?

 

Far end of the spectrum....

 

For any given DC, for Killing Attacks under 5er and prior you have a 1 in 6 chance of hitting the maximum. 1 in 3 of hitting a 4 or 5. 1 in 3 chance of doing more STUN than a Normal Attack of the same BODY can possibly do. Edit: 50/50 of doing the max, or more, STUN than a Normal Attack of the same BODY.

 

Cha-ching.

 

The whole point of Normal Attacks, explicitly stated in 3rd edition at least, is to average more STUN and less BODY than Killing Attacks. I still don't see how giving Killing Attacks a 1/3 chance to do more STUN achieves that.

 

Steve has also stated that Normal Defenses protect against the STUN of Killing Attacks, whether or not you have any Resistant Defenses. Not that that matters much for our comparisons.

[Tasha]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

So' date=' in other words, you're saying that you have no faith in Steve and his technical advisory committee to have considered these things. Why don't we wait and see if there are other changes before we rush to judgment.[/quote']

 

I wasn't aware there was a "technical advisory committee" beyond the one in his own head. Seems to me he implied heavily that HE was making the rules decisions.

 

I guess I am hoping that he will see the discussions here and take a hard look at the changes to Killing attacks from the view points of all Genres and not just Champions.

 

PS I don't have an issue with PD and ED (non resistant) applying to stun. It really wouldn't change any games that I have ever been in due to most people having at least 1 rDef. So it's a nice rule change that streamlines how stun is dealt with.

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I'm not pleased; I wanted my house rules used, or to see Killing be made into an advantage on regular attacks. That said, I'm OK with it.

 

Yeah but some people are really good with it and I'm glad this offers them a fix they like for a long standing annoying snag in one of the base components of the Hero System.

[Beast]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

because each in multiples of 3 cost the same amount of points

 

 

 

And they need to be balanced... why?

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

because each in multiples of 3 cost the same amount of points

 

Not just each multiple of 3.

 

Each Damage Class costs 5 Points for both forms of Attack.

 

The Damage Class is the currency of Hero Combat, and you must compare things on a DC: DC level, not D6: D6 level.

[archermoo]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

And they need to be balanced... why?

 

I suppose they don't have to. Heck, if you aren't interested in balance, you could charge one player 3 points per DC for their Energy Blast while charging everyone else 5 points per DC. And one guy you really don't like might have to pay 7 points per DC.

 

Personally I prefer balance. Obviously YMMV.

[Tasha]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Well' date=' it depends whether the Hit Location Chart changes.[/quote']

 

If the Hit Location chart doesn't change for KA's then it will be a mandate that all normals games have to use it. For the simple reason that as we have adequately shown, x1-x3 stun mults don't work for normal games.

 

Also I hope that the Hit Location Chart is scrutinized. It doesn't work very well at all for normal attacks. Also moving some locations around would keep the issues we have with arm and hand shots being most of what the PCs tend to hit.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

If the Hit Location chart doesn't change for KA's then it will be a mandate that all normals games have to use it. For the simple reason that as we have adequately shown, x1-x3 stun mults don't work for normal games.

 

Also I hope that the Hit Location Chart is scrutinized. It doesn't work very well at all for normal attacks. Also moving some locations around would keep the issues we have with arm and hand shots being most of what the PCs tend to hit.

 

Personally as I've mentioned before I'd like to see different modifiers to hit locations for ranged and hand to hand. I feel the dynamics are quite different.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I wasn't aware there was a "technical advisory committee" beyond the one in his own head. Seems to me he implied heavily that HE was making the rules decisions.

 

He mentioned the Sixth Edition Technical Advisory Committee in chat who, apparently, are a group of people who live outside of Steve's head. He's been pretty cagey on exactly who they are, though.

 

I guess I am hoping that he will see the discussions here and take a hard look at the changes to Killing attacks from the view points of all Genres and not just Champions.

 

The discussion here will probably have no bearing on anything Steve does with the final product; there was a 14 month period while the 6e forums were open for that.

[Tasha]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Don't Heroic Games normally use the Hit Location Chart to begin with? Making what the StunX is a completel non-issue....

 

Normals games sometimes use the StunX when the Players and Gm don't want to deal with another roll.

 

Also this is an issue if the hit Location Chart mirrors the new stun mults.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

If the Hit Location chart doesn't change for KA's then it will be a mandate that all normals games have to use it. For the simple reason that as we have adequately shown' date=' x1-x3 stun mults don't work for normal games.[/quote']

 

I've never played in a normal level game that didn't use the hit location chart.