Multipower imbalance

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I'd never heard of anyone using a multi-attack prior to 5th' date=' and found the "we always meant it that way" claim to be a little... odd. It's standard in RPGs that one attack action is one attack, not all the attacks you can use at once, and that there's a serious penalty for trying to use, say, two weapons at once.[/quote']

 

 

I agree: MPAs are somewhat self limiting in that multiple attacks are usually in a MP or VPP so MPAing is not an option, but if you can, well, every hit would be an Alpha Strike, neg?

 

I discourage their use by not using them as a GM. I never felt that MPAs were always part of the intention of the system and wouldn't mind them being dispensed with entirely.

[archermoo]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I like a firmly stated argument:)

 

I think a lot of MPs are questionable but, for instance, a laser with a tunable focus (AP setting, normal RKA setting, AOE setting) does not seem inappropriate to me: as a MP it would cost X + 3x(X/10): 78 points if X is 60.

 

As a VPP it would cost 60 base points PLUS a 30 point control cost, instant reliable change (+2) for 90 points, then 'limited group of powers; 1/2, perhaps -1, so somewhere between 105 and 120 points: cheaper to buy a RKA and naked power advantages with lockout. That is messy though.

 

So I think MP does have clear uses and advantages...although, for the reasons above, I don't like all teh current MP rules. For the right concept realisation though, it is beautifulyl balanced.

 

Used to use MP for movement, quite a lot, but we don't really need to now with the 'second mode' advantage AND also for tunable force fields - but now we have the allocatable advantage.

 

I think the MP is less necessary than it was, but is still a useful structure.

 

VPP...well...that's another story We need something like this because there will always be the problem of powers you can change being VERY difficult to build any other way.

 

OTOH I know just how nasty a VPP can be. You can use it, for instance, to add to your characteristics. Actual VPP builds require really careful thought and monitoring (and I think there is a temptation t use them a bit too freely sometimes - I've seen games where virtually everyone has one) - but it is an enabling power and the cost structure is reasonable for what it does, and, as I said above, it is does start to spoil the game, the GM should be willing to step in.

 

Of note the cost structure of VPPs has changed pretty drastically in 6e.

 

Using your example, and assuming that the Laser in question is a OIF you get:

 

62 Tunable Laser: Variable Power Pool, 31 base + 62 control cost, Powers Can Be Changed As A Zero-Phase Action (+1), No Skill Roll Required (+1) (124 Active Points); Only for Laser Powers (-1); all slots OAF (-1)

1) Killing Attack - Ranged 4d6 (60 Active Points)

2) Killing Attack - Ranged 3d6+1, Armor Piercing (+1/4) (62 Active Points)

3) Killing Attack - Ranged 2 1/2d6, Area Of Effect (8m Radius; +1/2) (60 Active Points)

 

31 Tunable Laser: Multipower, 62-point reserve, (62 Active Points); all slots OAF (-1)

3 Killing Attack - Ranged 4d6 (60 Active Points)

3 Killing Attack - Ranged 3d6+1, Armor Piercing (+1/4) (62 Active Points)

3 Killing Attack - Ranged 2 1/2d6, Area Of Effect (8m Radius; +1/2) (60 Active Points)

 

So the Multipower is certainly cheaper, but the VPP is more versatile. Adding powers to the list of things the laser can do won't cost any more for the VPP, but will for the MP. Granted in this particular example you'd have to have more than 10 slots before the VPP became cheaper.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

APs only really matter if you are putting a power in a framework, and as you can not put a framework in a framework, it doesn't matter much to me.

 

I use '60 point examples' all the time in my posts, but I'm losing any reluctance I once had to dispense with campaign AP limits. If the rule has gone, good. It didn't add to the game experience.

 

AP guidelines I'm fine with. AP limits not so much.

 

And Linked... what happens when you Link your VPP to a Blast? How's that counted? Which is Greater or Lesser?

 

There's a FAQ on that one too, which is where I believe the original answer derives - what's the Active Point Cost of a VPP when you try and Link the Framework to something else?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Nice build

 

The difficulty will remain though, as Utech so amusingly mentioned earlier in the thread, that there is no in-game logical reason why Batman should not be able to hand a Flash Pellet to Aquaman to use while he punches someone with his electro-knux, or why he can not MPA with a batarang and a gas bomb.

 

I'm not sure what is meant by 'in game' here. Is it within the HERO rules or within a campaign setting?

 

Maybe Bruce doesn't have time to explain how the trigger mechanism for the Flash Pellets work and is afraid that Aquaman will Flash himself. Maybe all the combat oriented gadgets are kept on one side of the belt (gas pellets, batarangs etc..) and the more general items on the other (Bat swing-line, lockpicks etc...).

 

On a more general note, both Multipowers and VPP have the unfortunate side effect of tempting players to cram in every possible power that will mechanically fit without considering the effect on team dynamics and schtick preservation. Both my namesake character and my version of Superman* have similar multipowers that could easily accommodate a straight EB. Doing so would step on the schtick of any Energy Projectors on their teams though.

 

 

*Superman's Heat Vision and Super-Breath are minor exceptions to this concept because their stated sfx pretty much demands that certain Advantages be applied to each when built (like No Range Mod, AOE Accurate, Continuous for Heat Vision) which reduces the overall combat power of the abilities.

[archermoo]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I never felt that MPAs were always part of the intention of the system and wouldn't mind them being dispensed with entirely.

 

Whether or not they were intended in the system isn't a matter of opinion, and has been answered by the people who wrote the original system. When they played they used multiple powers in single attack actions. That was one of the original ideas behind the MP, as it was a way for people to get multiple variations on an attack for fewer points than buying them all separately, with the tradeoff that you could only use them one at a time.

 

Whether that intent was a good idea is certainly a matter of opinion, and one that widely varies.

[Kristopher]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Whether or not they were intended in the system isn't a matter of opinion' date=' and has been answered by the people who wrote the original system. When they played they used multiple powers in single attack actions. That was one of the original ideas behind the MP, as it was a way for people to get multiple variations on an attack for fewer points than buying them all separately, with the tradeoff that you could only use them one at a time.[/quote']

 

Of course, it was never in a book until 5th edition, and there were whole HERO communities for whom the thought of doing such a thing never crossed their minds.

 

(Seperate communities because before worldwide communication on a webpage such as this or a Usenet group, large groups of players in an area could be quite isolated from others in other areas.)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

And Linked... what happens when you Link your VPP to a Blast? How's that counted? Which is Greater or Lesser?

 

There's a FAQ on that one too, which is where I believe the original answer derives - what's the Active Point Cost of a VPP when you try and Link the Framework to something else?

 

 

That is a good point: it would come down to how you drain it I guess; with a MP you'd probably link to a particular slot rather than the whole thing. For a VPP, IIRC you can drain the pool (ignore the control cost), so I'd use the pool size.

[archermoo]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Of course, it was never in a book until 5th edition, and there were whole HERO communities for whom the thought of doing such a thing never crossed their minds.

 

(Seperate communities because before worldwide communication on a webpage such as this or a Usenet group, large groups of players in an area could be quite isolated from others in other areas.)

 

All very true. But none of it has any bearing on the intent of the system, which is what I was talking about in response to Sean's post about the intent of the system.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I'm not sure what is meant by 'in game' here. Is it within the HERO rules or within a campaign setting?

 

 

Maybe Bruce doesn't have time to explain how the trigger mechanism for the Flash Pellets work and is afraid that Aquaman will Flash himself. Maybe all the combat oriented gadgets are kept on one side of the belt (gas pellets, batarangs etc..) and the more general items on the other (Bat swing-line, lockpicks etc...).

 

I guess I mean a non-mechanical reason. If the items are meant conceptually to be seperate then they should (game) logically be useable simultaneously, which means that VPP or MP structures do not realise the concept, they just save points.

 

On a more general note, both Multipowers and VPP have the unfortunate side effect of tempting players to cram in every possible power that will mechanically fit without considering the effect on team dynamics and schtick preservation. Both my namesake character and my version of Superman* have similar multipowers that could easily accommodate a straight EB. Doing so would step on the schtick of any Energy Projectors on their teams though.

 

 

*Superman's Heat Vision and Super-Breath are minor exceptions to this concept because their stated sfx pretty much demands that certain Advantages be applied to each when built (like No Range Mod, AOE Accurate, Continuous for Heat Vision) which reduces the overall combat power of the abilities.

 

I agree with this wholeheartedly. Frameworks can encourage metagame thinking, and is something to look out for. Of course VPPs are pretty much by definition 'shtick stealers', certainly the cosmic types, which is why they need to be VERY carefully looked at and only sparingly used when actually needed to fulfil a concept, with appropriate limitations to make sure they stay in-concept.

[Fearghus]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I think Multipowers are one of the best spot-on costing structures

in the game. Not too expensive or cheap.

 

See this old post of mine for further analysis which also includes Variable Advantage.

 

I agree. In fact I have discovered if you either A> do not put enough slots into a multipower, or B> put too many limitations on the slots in your multi-power. it can sometimes be cheaper to buy the slots individually rather than buy them as a multipower.

 

It allows for low point characters to be more than a one trick pony with out making them TOO powerful.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Whether or not they were intended in the system isn't a matter of opinion, and has been answered by the people who wrote the original system. When they played they used multiple powers in single attack actions. That was one of the original ideas behind the MP, as it was a way for people to get multiple variations on an attack for fewer points than buying them all separately, with the tradeoff that you could only use them one at a time.

 

Whether that intent was a good idea is certainly a matter of opinion, and one that widely varies.

 

Oh, absolutely: we never played it that way, so I guess that has informed my prejudices.

 

I suppose I saw the power discount for MPs as working because a 4d6 RKA is damn useful but probably not +60 points of useful if you already have a 12d6 EB...and also some concepts simply could not be realised without an impressive cost break. Even now we have MPAs in the rules it is not too much of a problem: few characters can afford to have several attacks at full cost.

[archermoo]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I guess I mean a non-mechanical reason. If the items are meant conceptually to be seperate then they should (game) logically be useable simultaneously, which means that VPP or MP structures do not realise the concept, they just save points.

 

Which is the difference between game mechanics and play. Game mechanics wise a Multipower of ultra slots for a utility belt means that you can only use them one at a time. Play wise it is up to the play/Ref to justify why they can't use more than one thing in their utility belt at a time. If you want a utility belt that you can use multiple items at the same time you need to purchase it a different way.

 

But the game mechanics POV is the one that the rules need to address. How those mechanics get used in play is up to the people playing.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

"And I did it .... MY .... WAAAAY"

 

...

 

yeah, sorry. I'll be going now.

[tesuji]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Oh, absolutely: we never played it that way, so I guess that has informed my prejudices.

 

I suppose I saw the power discount for MPs as working because a 4d6 RKA is damn useful but probably not +60 points of useful if you already have a 12d6 EB...and also some concepts simply could not be realised without an impressive cost break. Even now we have MPAs in the rules it is not too much of a problem: few characters can afford to have several attacks at full cost.

 

Exactly - there is a tremendous difference between someone who can throw a 12d6eb or a 4d6rka and someone who can throw a 12d6eb and a 4d6 rka.

 

if "alternative attacks" were charged at anything near full price, the structure and pressures of point driven chargen would result in a preponderance of "one use power" characters. There would be no Human Torch with his firebolt, fireball, fire stream, or bright fire pyrotechnics flash or smoke cloud and so on.

 

Tho actually what we would see in such a case IMO is broader use of the power skill. Buy one fire attack power, say 12d6eb, and then buy a cheap skill that lets you do tricks with it like "sweep" it for an aoe, to burn dirty to create a smoke screen, etc.

 

the net result is the same - pay the main price for the main use and then pay a small price to dial up alternatives. Instead of paying per slot you pay for skill.

 

Now personally, i am fodn of that approach. I think it is more intuitively obvious to newbies... buy power then buy a skill for tricks.

 

Its also more forgiving. The multipower makes you think of tricks ahead of time. The skill lets it be done "on the fly"

 

Frankly, i think MP could be dropped if the power skill were more fully fleshed out. The cases mp is good for can be handled with power skill revisited fairly well.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

re: Utility Belt

 

The VPP version I linked to earlier does allow 2 slots to be used simultaneously. Just not 2 that both involve attack actions. If I wanted to build the ability to MPA a batarang and a flash pellet I would probably just build the batarang's separately (outside of the VPP) which would only cost no more than 12 points (less with fewer charges) with the sfx that he keeps these in other parts of his costume (gloves, boots, cowl, etc..).

 

12 Batarangs: Energy Blast 6d6 (vs. PD), 2 clips of 6 Recoverable Charges (-0) (30 Active Points); OIF (-1/2), Restrainable (-1/2), Range Based On Strength (-1/4), Beam (-1/4) - END=[6 rc]

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

..

 

Frankly, i think MP could be dropped if the power skill were more fully fleshed out. The cases mp is good for can be handled with power skill revisited fairly well.

 

I dunno...

 

Sounds kinda Gurpy to me.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Hero can do GURPS better than the other way around

 

I think a greater use of the power skill - as an optional rule - would suit some games nicely, turning all powers into a sort of mini VPP.

 

Thinking out of the box (or out of my box ) you could buy a 'naked control cost' to do just that, attaching it to whatever power you wanted to amend the use of: every change would have an adder, perhaps, to enable it to be changed, and it would make the power skill MUCH more expensive than the absic 3 points: the control cost for 60 point powers starts at 30 points.

 

That's kind of like defining ALL your powers as a VPP pool, with the control cost allowing you to only change up to (say) 60 points at a time.

 

Like I say, not for every game but it fits a sort of freewheeling game quite nicely. You could even put charges on the control cost to stop it being the central focus.

 

It's a thought.

[IKerensky]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I stand corrected about the attacks... but I dont think I will allow it,because that is plain silly IMDNSHO.

 

Let say a brick with 50-60 STR....

 

He buy 6 1D6 HA for less than 30 pts and can strike 6 time in a single phase ? He just have to add ranged, limits by STR throwing range, autofire 5, OAF, limited charges... and buy multiple time the same cheap power and he will blast through the opposition in phase 12.

 

Is there a limit on the number of Gun I can shoot ? after all they are just Ranged Power too ?

 

What is the point in limiting DC if the players can each attack several time in the same phase ? oO Sure a 20-25 DC attack is bad, but 3 to 4 14DC ones aren't especially nice either...

 

This is all plain sillyness...

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I stand corrected about the attacks... but I dont think I will allow it,because that is plain silly IMDNSHO.

 

Let say a brick with 50-60 STR....

 

He buy 6 1D6 HA for less than 30 pts and can strike 6 time in a single phase ? He just have to add ranged, limits by STR throwing range, autofire 5, OAF, limited charges... and buy multiple time the same cheap power and he will blast through the opposition in phase 12.

 

Is there a limit on the number of Gun I can shoot ? after all they are just Ranged Power too ?

 

What is the point in limiting DC if the players can each attack several time in the same phase ? oO Sure a 20-25 DC attack is bad, but 3 to 4 14DC ones aren't especially nice either...

 

This is all plain sillyness...

 

 

Building silliness is easy, which is why you start with concept then realise it in a build, not start with a mad power set then work backwards to try and get it past the GM. The potential for abuse is not the measure of a power.

[phookz]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I stand corrected about the attacks... but I dont think I will allow it,because that is plain silly IMDNSHO.

 

Let say a brick with 50-60 STR....

 

He buy 6 1D6 HA for less than 30 pts and can strike 6 time in a single phase ? He just have to add ranged, limits by STR throwing range, autofire 5, OAF, limited charges... and buy multiple time the same cheap power and he will blast through the opposition in phase 12.

 

Is there a limit on the number of Gun I can shoot ? after all they are just Ranged Power too ?

 

What is the point in limiting DC if the players can each attack several time in the same phase ? oO Sure a 20-25 DC attack is bad, but 3 to 4 14DC ones aren't especially nice either...

 

This is all plain sillyness...

 

I would think it unlikely that anything that can challenge a character with a 50 or 60 STR would be threatened bt a 1d6 attack, 6 separate 1d6 attacks, or even 20 separate 1d6 attacks.

[Rapier]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I stand corrected about the attacks... but I dont think I will allow it,because that is plain silly IMDNSHO.

 

Let say a brick with 50-60 STR....

 

He buy 6 1D6 HA for less than 30 pts and can strike 6 time in a single phase ? He just have to add ranged, limits by STR throwing range, autofire 5, OAF, limited charges... and buy multiple time the same cheap power and he will blast through the opposition in phase 12.

 

Is there a limit on the number of Gun I can shoot ? after all they are just Ranged Power too ?

 

What is the point in limiting DC if the players can each attack several time in the same phase ? oO Sure a 20-25 DC attack is bad, but 3 to 4 14DC ones aren't especially nice either...

 

This is all plain sillyness...

 

Yes, silliness it is. But not quite where you intended.

 

Yes, the 1d6 HA added to a 60 STR brick would give him a sizable 13d6 HA.

 

If it's a Multiple Attack which I would assume is the most likely, each successive attack occurs a cumulative -2 penalty, drastically reducing the likelihood of any attack hitting. It's possible they could be a Combined Attack, but I somehow doubt any sane GM would allow that (although if he's allowed it thus far, he's already rather off his rocker)

 

However, I doubt it would even get that far. AF 5? Assuming the attack and defender are equal (same OCV and DCV) the character would have to roll a 3 for all 5 AF attacks to hit. How many 3s do you believe he would be able to roll?

[IKerensky]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Except thoses will be DC 13 ( 60 STR + 1d6 HA ).... and a hell lot of them... (HA with Ranged).

 

It was just an example why enabling unlimited power attack simultaneously sound weird... ( just remove the AF if you want, you still have 5 or 6 DC 13 attack on the same target )...

 

By the way, I only have the Basic Rules so I cant access the whole detail on combined attacks as they just aren't mentionned in it.

 

Also can I combine multiple Attack mode ? Martial Strike + Martial Push ? Can a combined power attack use something else than the Strike combat action ?

[phookz]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Except thoses will be DC 13 ( 60 STR + 1d6 HA ).... and a hell lot of them... (HA with Ranged).

 

It was just an example why enabling unlimited power attack simultaneously sound weird... ( just remove the AF if you want, you still have 5 or 6 DC 13 attack on the same target )...

 

By the way, I only have the Basic Rules so I cant access the whole detail on combined attacks as they just aren't mentionned in it.

 

Also can I combine multiple Attack mode ? Martial Strike + Martial Push ? Can a combined power attack use something else than the Strike combat action ?

 

So it would, that'll teach me to post in the wee small hours of the morning from my iPod touch

 

I would second what Sean says about silliness. The HERO system gives a lot of power, but with great power comes great responsibility . The potential for abuse is there in this and in many other things as well.

 

Actually, one of the things I like about HERO is that it requires such closer monitoring by the GM; much more so than other systems. While this may seem like a detractor at first, I think it empowers the GM and the players to work together to make the best gaming experience possible. In other systems you are spoon fed the rules and possibilities, in HERO there are well-defined game rules and constructs to use as a springboard for defining your own possibilities.

 

I recall a lot of discussion about multiple attacks on the old boards, pre-5E. Myself, I was never aware that you could combine attacks, and it took a while to accept that this was not a game breaker.

[torchwolf]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Except thoses will be DC 13 ( 60 STR + 1d6 HA ).... and a hell lot of them... (HA with Ranged).

 

It was just an example why enabling unlimited power attack simultaneously sound weird... ( just remove the AF if you want, you still have 5 or 6 DC 13 attack on the same target )...

 

By the way, I only have the Basic Rules so I cant access the whole detail on combined attacks as they just aren't mentionned in it.

 

Also can I combine multiple Attack mode ? Martial Strike + Martial Push ? Can a combined power attack use something else than the Strike combat action ?

 

Multiple Attack allows a character to:

 

• make multiple strikes against a single target with a single attack
  
• make multiple strikes against a single target with multiple forms of attack
  
• make multiple strikes against multiple targets with a single attack
  
• make multiple strikes against multiple targets with multiple forms of attack
  
• freely mix HTH and Ranged, or non-Mental and Mental, attacks as part of the Multiple Attack sequence
  

 

1) Multiple Attack also has a Caution Sign, and the GM is advised to disallow abuse or ill-considered use of this Maneuver. It does give you -2 OCV per additional attack and reduces DCV by half; Area Attacks must be targeted at target's DCV instead of DCV 3 for a target point; all attacks involved use worst OCV modifier - this includes bonuses for Martial Arts Maneuvers used in a Multiple Attack.

I think Steve Long has commented on how this can be used to enable more cinematic action scenes (if used with some GM caution).

An example would be: kick the opponent in front of you, punch the one to your left, and throw your knife to disarm the one to your right.

 

2) Combined Attack can be used for simultaneous attacks with similar attack forms, and this is considered a Strike (unmodified attack). Martial Arts Maneuvers do not qualify for this (you have but one STR).

An example would be: shoot two thugs at the same time, or shoot one twice, using your two guns.

 

3) Previously (edition-wise), a good way to make several attacks at once with the same power/ability was to use the Sweep Maneuver, which originally was applied only in HTH combat - mostly to allow a Martial Artist to take down multiple goons. Multiple Attack is in some ways an extension of this, with similar modifiers, so even if Multiple Attack has not yet been playtested by many people, I think it will work out reasonably.

 

An important value of Multiple Attack and similar abilities is that it mitigates the effects of a SPD advantage, which tends to be very powerful. With MA, slower characters at least get a chance to keep up, but at a significant penalty.

 

All in all, there are good reasons to be extra careful with all the stuff labeled with caution signs, but don't go overboard in the other direction: just consider those before you begin to use them, and by all means playtest it first - even if you just run a mock combat by yourself, the implications and effects with make more sense when you figure it out in practice.

[Fearghus]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

One benefit of MP over VPP is that of AP limits... in a 60 AP campaign, I can have a MP with a bunch of 60 point powers in it... a huge number of 60 point powers if I need to. I have a character with about 30 variations of Aid/Heal powers in her MP.

 

Switching to a VPP might save on book keeping, but a 60 AP VPP cannot have a 60 AP power put in it. For versatility I lose on raw power.

 

Very good point.