6E Rules changes confirmed so far

[Vondy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I'm just speculating, mind.

 

could be providing bonuses to certain situations.

 

I could imagine you could take a Frightening Countenance 'Striking Appearance' to add Bonuses to situations where Fear, Intimidation and Terror come into play.

 

Personally, while I'm parve on the comeliness issue, and don't mind the current shorthand, the one advantage I see to buying it as a perk is the ability to attach either a descriptor or special effect to it making when modifiers are and aren't apropos much more obvious in terms of adjudication.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

In fairness' date=' a baseball bat will crush your skull pretty effectively, and it has never been suggested that it inflict killing damage. The boundaries really aren't as clear cut as we want to make them out to be.[/quote']

 

I guess this is where the GM description of the campaign needs to come in strongly. Energy blast and killing attack can be used for either baseball bat or warhammer, both of them or neither. It should be for the GM to decide what he wants the mecahnics to be used for and what he does not.

 

In my next Champions game (if I ever get round to one) I intend for all killing attacks with the disad "real weapon" to do an equivalent DC of normal damage against superheroes and villains.

 

Doc

[ajackson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I myself suggested at least a dozen alternatives to the SPD Chart' date=' but none were without problems. No worse than the SPD Chart, but neither so much of an improvement as to be obvious replacements.[/quote']

I kind of liked the shot systems (actions just consume X segments, where X depends on Spd. Possibly modified by an advantage), but it has resolution problems at the high end.

[Alibear]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Wow' date=' looks expensive. Must've cost you somewhere between 38 and 42 K...[/quote']

 

Yeah about 40 ... I suppose.

[Alibear]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

In fairness' date=' a baseball bat will crush your skull pretty effectively, and it has never been suggested that it inflict killing damage. The boundaries really aren't as clear cut as we want to make them out to be.[/quote']

 

Quite often of late actually. Check out the rash of recent 'realistic Hero' threads.

[Trebuchet]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I guess this is where the GM description of the campaign needs to come in strongly. Energy blast and killing attack can be used for either baseball bat or warhammer' date=' both of them or neither. It should be for the GM to decide what he wants the mecahnics to be used for and what he does not.[/quote']I've always viewed Killing Attack as being "things that poke holes in you" and Normal Attacks to be more along the lines of "blunt force trauma".

[Trebuchet]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I think you have a totally weird idea about what a warhammer is.

 

You think this is gonna ring your bell?

 

 

No people would get their skulls crushed not "their bell rung" when smacked by a warhammer.

One weapon having both types is certainly plausible. Why not simply assume the blunt end is a Normal attack and the pointy end is a Killing Attack? The choice of end for the wielder might well depend on the target.

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Crypt said something very interesting:

 

A non-lethal weapon is not a weapon.

 

Then what's a Taser? Tasers are only deadly under certain rare conditions (like using one on somebody who already has heart problems), yet they're certainly used as though they were weapons (police are gradually being trained to use them in preference to their inherently-lethal guns in many situations).

 

A Taser would be an example of a STUN-only Energy Blast in HERO terms, would they not?

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I've always viewed Killing Attack as being "things that poke holes in you" and Normal Attacks to be more along the lines of "blunt force trauma".

 

Me also. I think of pinpoint damage that puts holes in you vs a more spread out attack that smashes the surface but doesn't do deep penetration unless it "crushes " you all the way through..

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

One weapon having both types is certainly plausible. Why not simply assume the blunt end is a Normal attack and the pointy end is a Killing Attack? The choice of end for the wielder might well depend on the target.

 

That's the whole reason for having the two ends designed differently, isn't it?

 

[yes, I was going to say "the whole point", but I caught it in time...]

[Checkmate]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I skipped TONS of pages and the conversation has obviously moved on, but I wanted to comment on something:

 

There were complaints about disengaging CV from DEX. Comments were made that DEX made you a better fighter, so should be coupled. I heartily disagree with this assessment. You put Dominic Dawes and George Foreman in a ring and see who wins that fight.

 

I've always hated that a high DEX makes you better at EVERYTHING you do, when it really shouldn't. I've used this example in the past, but it seems relevant here:

 

In High School I was a VERY good basketball player. I used to practice for HOURS a day every day. Later in life, I grew old, I didn't have hours a day to practice, and train, so obviously I lost a lot of my physical abilities.

 

I have two tremendous athletes as friends, one has more martial arts black belts in his closet than my wife has shoes. He could rip my eyes out and dance on my brain before I even knew I was in a fight. The other was an Olympic Swimmer. Both prime, and at least one, a world class athlete. In a game of 2 on 1, them vs me, we could play basketball to 10 I'd spot them 5 points, and they NEVER beat me. Now granted the Martial Artist is only around 5' 7" and the swimmer is 5' 10" to my 6' 1", but they were both stronger, faster, and had tons more endurance than me.

 

Not sure what all that means, but it seemed like a pretty good argument for decoupling DEX and CV when I thought about it in my head.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Checkmate, the argument someone will through at you any minute is that you have PS: Basketball, probably at least at 11- or higher, while your friends have PS: Basketball at as a familiarity at 8- or perhaps, not at all.

 

EDIT "Through at you"? How the hell do you "through" something at someone. "Throw at you" *sigh*

[nexus]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Checkmate' date=' the argument someone will through at you any minute is that you have PS: Basketball, probably at least at 11- or higher, while your friends have PS: Basketball at as a familiarity at 8- or perhaps, not at all.[/quote']

 

Well it is a good argument.

 

The problem with using the "real world" as an example if that Hero mechanics, any rpgs mechanics are just approximation and representations. They really don't have "real world" equivalents since they're represent many things. You can't look at anyone and objectively rate their "Dex score" in the real world. Strength is the closet characteristic to having an objective real world measure and even that simplifies allot of things. So what designers have to concentrate on (IMO) is fairness, consistency and playability. Theme and mood are also important in games that aim to emulate a specific genre or setting.

[Edsel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I skipped TONS of pages and the conversation has obviously moved on, but I wanted to comment on something:

 

There were complaints about disengaging CV from DEX. Comments were made that DEX made you a better fighter, so should be coupled. I heartily disagree with this assessment. You put Dominic Dawes and George Foreman in a ring and see who wins that fight.

 

I've always hated that a high DEX makes you better at EVERYTHING you do, when it really shouldn't. I've used this example in the past, but it seems relevant here:

 

In High School I was a VERY good basketball player. I used to practice for HOURS a day every day. Later in life, I grew old, I didn't have hours a day to practice, and train, so obviously I lost a lot of my physical abilities.

 

I have two tremendous athletes as friends, one has more martial arts black belts in his closet than my wife has shoes. He could rip my eyes out and dance on my brain before I even knew I was in a fight. The other was an Olympic Swimmer. Both prime, and at least one, a world class athlete. In a game of 2 on 1, them vs me, we could play basketball to 10 I'd spot them 5 points, and they NEVER beat me. Now granted the Martial Artist is only around 5' 7" and the swimmer is 5' 10" to my 6' 1", but they were both stronger, faster, and had tons more endurance than me.

 

Not sure what all that means, but it seemed like a pretty good argument for decoupling DEX and CV when I thought about it in my head.

 

Those individuals who have a high DEX and yet are poor at hitting their target and poor at avoiding attacks are simply saddled with a Physical Limitation. The Frequency depends on how often they are likely to be in combat and the severity is a factor of just how inept a combatant (how much minus they take to OCV and DCV) that they are.

 

In a game, but not necessarily in real life, those individuals are rare. Instead of decoupling it is easier to simply give them a Physical Limitation (or Complication, if you prefer) and be done with it.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Easier is a matter of perspective.

 

 

I wish everyone would stop trying to tell everyone else what "makes sense" and what "is easier" and what "models reality."

 

 

This is a game. It is suppose to provide options to model whatever the heck you want to model. The more options the more you can model to your own personal taste.

[Edsel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

OK I'll amend that to say that to me it is a much more appealing solution. Others may prefer the 6E approach.

[lapsedgamer]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Crypt said something very interesting:

 

 

 

Then what's a Taser? Tasers are only deadly under certain rare conditions (like using one on somebody who already has heart problems), yet they're certainly used as though they were weapons (police are gradually being trained to use them in preference to their inherently-lethal guns in many situations).

 

A Taser would be an example of a STUN-only Energy Blast in HERO terms, would they not?

 

You know, i've though about that in the past. I belive that a Taser is more of a compound power. It would be an Entangle BOECV with a set duration with a medium-sized NND EB attached. They don't actually render you unconscious like you see in movies. They lock all of your large muscle groups up by sending a huge jolt through your nervous system. They do take a little out of you, so there is some stunning effect. I have "ridden the lightning" twice, so that's my frame of reference.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Crypt said something very interesting:

 

 

 

Then what's a Taser? Tasers are only deadly under certain rare conditions (like using one on somebody who already has heart problems), yet they're certainly used as though they were weapons (police are gradually being trained to use them in preference to their inherently-lethal guns in many situations).

 

A Taser would be an example of a STUN-only Energy Blast in HERO terms, would they not?

 

RE: the whole non-lethal weapon is not a weapon - BS.

 

RE: Tazers, I model them as Entangles.

[Edsel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

RE: Tazers' date=' I model them as Entangles.[/quote']

Yep, that is what my most recent write-up is like. Of course I saw a show on TV where a martial arts master was able to defeat the taser by yanking out the wires as he fell and then rolling back up to his feet. So I am a little uncertain how to model the fact that they can be beaten by a person with enough toughness and/or willpower (Strength didn't seem to enter into it).

[lapsedgamer]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

I skipped TONS of pages and the conversation has obviously moved on, but I wanted to comment on something:

 

There were complaints about disengaging CV from DEX. Comments were made that DEX made you a better fighter, so should be coupled. I heartily disagree with this assessment. You put Dominic Dawes and George Foreman in a ring and see who wins that fight.

 

I've always hated that a high DEX makes you better at EVERYTHING you do, when it really shouldn't. I've used this example in the past, but it seems relevant here:

 

In High School I was a VERY good basketball player. I used to practice for HOURS a day every day. Later in life, I grew old, I didn't have hours a day to practice, and train, so obviously I lost a lot of my physical abilities.

 

I have two tremendous athletes as friends, one has more martial arts black belts in his closet than my wife has shoes. He could rip my eyes out and dance on my brain before I even knew I was in a fight. The other was an Olympic Swimmer. Both prime, and at least one, a world class athlete. In a game of 2 on 1, them vs me, we could play basketball to 10 I'd spot them 5 points, and they NEVER beat me. Now granted the Martial Artist is only around 5' 7" and the swimmer is 5' 10" to my 6' 1", but they were both stronger, faster, and had tons more endurance than me.

 

Not sure what all that means, but it seemed like a pretty good argument for decoupling DEX and CV when I thought about it in my head.

 

I would argue that hitting a hoop with a ball while running or jumping has significant minuses attached. You practiced those particular actions obsessively by your own admission, so ypu picked up some levels. You could call them penalty skill levels or OCV levels. It makes very little difference. Your friends didn't have those levels. Let's not even talk about following the rules while playing (dribbling, not walking or traveling with the ball). Again significant penalties attached which you had levels to overcome.

 

The swimmer had extra inches of swimming and buttloads of extra END, possibly even Extended Breathing if you want to got there. The martial artist had numerous martial arts manuvers and CSLs in their use. You wouldn't want to try to outswim the swimmer or pick a fight with the black belt.

 

Nothing here cannot be modeled by the current DEX/CV relationship.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

On the other hand, nothing that can't be modeled with decoupled DEX/CV either.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Yep' date=' that is what my most recent write-up is like. Of course I saw a show on TV where a martial arts master was able to defeat the taser by yanking out the wires as he fell and then rolling back up to his feet. So I am a little uncertain how to model the fact that they can be beaten by a person with enough toughness and/or willpower (Strength didn't seem to enter into it).[/quote']

 

I base the Entangle off a CON instead of STR.

 

You could easily base it off EGO as well.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Those individuals who have a high DEX and yet are poor at hitting their target and poor at avoiding attacks are simply saddled with a Physical Limitation.

 

Or they don't actually have a high DEX, since they don't have all the things a high DEX brings. Maybe they have skills or skill levels instead? (Like lapsedgamer said, and yeah, I'm reading and responding to the thread in reverse order. =p)

[Guest steamteck]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

On the other hand' date=' nothing that can't be modeled with decoupled DEX/CV either. [/quote']

 

 

True, but in my personal case , since I want the connection it means reinventing the wheel with at the absolute minimum extensive campaign guide lines or even templates ( maybe using unified power) to avoid combinations that offend my aesthetics.

 

6e needs to give me something to make up for the extra trouble for me personally. I'll get the first book eventually but probably in PDF. You early buyer will need to spread the word about what is wonderful for us dullards who don't see anything worth switching for yet.

[ghost-angel]

Re: 6E Rules changes confirmed so far

 

Let's see...

 

They could have High DEX + Physical Limitation

The could have High DEX, High DCV, Low OCV

The could have HIGH DEX, Low DCV, Low OCV

The could have Low DEX, Skill Levels in specific areas

The could have Low Dex, Lightning Reflexes and Skill Levels.

They could have High Dex, High OCV, High DCV and their opponent just had way the heck more Skill Levels in Basketball

They could all be real people and thus difficult to model in an abstract system on a piece of paper.