Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

[The Main Man]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

and the Stun Only limitation of Blast is worth -0 so i wonder why the Killing Attack Power should be seen as having an hidden inherent "Not Only Stun" limitation different from -0 which would explain the fact that it costs the same per DC as Blast despite the obvious fact that it's more effective because of its lethality versus non-resistant defenses.

 

 

OTOH, once again, sometimes you don't want to kill or maim your opponent or target.

 

Also, don't forget that Resistant defenses mean nothing to Normal Attacks and that Resistant Defenses make you easier to KO (but harder to kill) if you have Active Point caps.

 

This is made more apparent when you use a single mechanic for the two effects as a base.

 

Killing damage is more effective for Killing and nothing else.

 

That being said, if one justifies Killing as a +0 Advantage, then one could also take a page from M&M's book and make Killing attacks into a Combat Maneuver akin to Club Weapon except in reverse.

In this case, one can build a power from such a base and designate whether it is a Killing or a Normal attack, which then determines which maneuver that he can use.

I believe that DC RPG had something similar as well.

[Crypt]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

Yes' date=' that is precisely the point.Buying a Killing Advantage and then making it STUN Only is redundant, because 1) a power must use it's purchased advantages; 2) Killing Attacks no longer require resistant defenses versus STUN damage; and 3) this would thusly mean that a STUN Only Killing Attack is negative - what's the point of the Killing advantage then?[/quote']

 

Paradoxal, not redundant.

Use Pulling a Punch so there is no more trouble.

 

 

OTOH' date=' once again, sometimes you don't want to kill or maim your opponent or target.[/quote']

 

And sometimes you would like to bypass the armor of your foe with a normal attack so it's balanced and, again, it doesn't explain the fact that Killing is worth nothing.

[The Main Man]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

Pulling a Punch on Killing Attacks solves nothing against a target without Resistant Defenses.

[The Main Man]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

Look at it this way:

 

1) Killing Attacks do not require Resistant Defenses versus STUN damage in 6e.

 

2) Killing Attacks currently do less STUN and more BODY on average than Normal Attacks.

 

3) This means that Killing Attacks are only relevant in regards to BODY damage in 6e.

 

4) If Killing damage is only relevant to BODY damage then STUN Only negates the point.

 

5) If you make Killing damage into a Power Advantage, then the BODY and STUN averages become the same.

 

6) Finally, if they are the same, then you choose Killing Attacks solely for the purpose of Killing - it becomes too deadly in many cases for even Pulling a Punch - particularly against targets without or else too little Resistant Defenses to take the hit and just be knocked out.

[Crypt]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

Pulling a Punch on Killing Attacks solves nothing against a target without Resistant Defenses.

 

Pulling a Punch halves Body damages, whatever the defenses.

If you use a Killing attack but don't want to kill that seems to be a logical maneuver choice, doesn't it ?

[Crypt]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

3) This means that Killing Attacks are only relevant in regards to BODY damage in 6e.

 

yes, compared to 5E, the STUN part of Killing Atk is less important for the reason you said and because of the X1/2d.

 

(But don't forget that BODY costs twice as much AP as STUN.)

 

 

4) If Killing damage is only relevant to BODY damage then STUN Only negates the point.

 

5) If you make Killing damage into a Power Advantage, then the BODY and STUN averages become the same.

 

6) Finally, if they are the same, then you choose Killing Attacks solely for the purpose of Killing - it becomes too deadly in many cases for even Pulling a Punch - particularly against targets without or else too little Resistant Defenses to take the hit and just be knocked out.

 

well, maybe i should give it a second tought...

[megaplayboy]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

You could probably redo all the Powers as extensions of a handful of Meta concepts, like Damage, Defend, Alter(self), Alter(others), Manipulate, Sense, Move, Create, etc. Arguably the system is already somewhat oriented that way. Toss in Associates(Contacts, Favors and Followers) and Accessories(Vehicles, Bases and equipment), and you're all set.

[The Main Man]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

You could probably redo all the Powers as extensions of a handful of Meta concepts' date=' like Damage, Defend, Alter(self), Alter(others), Manipulate, Sense, Move, Create, etc. Arguably the system is already somewhat oriented that way. Toss in Associates(Contacts, Favors and Followers) and Accessories(Vehicles, Bases and equipment), and you're all set.[/quote']

Sounds like fodder for a future APG.

[Crypt]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

Look at it this way:

 

1) Killing Attacks do not require Resistant Defenses versus STUN damage in 6e.

 

2) Killing Attacks currently do less STUN and more BODY on average than Normal Attacks.

 

3) This means that Killing Attacks are only relevant in regards to BODY damage in 6e.

 

4) If Killing damage is only relevant to BODY damage then STUN Only negates the point.

 

5) If you make Killing damage into a Power Advantage, then the BODY and STUN averages become the same.

 

6) Finally, if they are the same, then you choose Killing Attacks solely for the purpose of Killing - it becomes too deadly in many cases for even Pulling a Punch - particularly against targets without or else too little Resistant Defenses to take the hit and just be knocked out.

 

 

i'm sorry but i still don't agree...(believe me, i tried)

 

- The Rolling methods = (====> UKM limitation)

N atks do 1.5 more STUN than K atks

N atks do 1.17 less BODY than K atks

But BODY costs twice as much AP as STUN and characters tend to have twice as much STUN as BODY.

So the ratio is 1.5/(1.17X1.17)=1.09 = very close to 1 so the rolling methods don't favor one or another kind of attack when taking AP into account (and i believe we must consider that when dealing with HERO rules. AP are the final referee.)

Score: 0/0

EDIT: BUT if we take CON into account (and i think we should) then the ratio is 1.5/1.17 = 1.3

Score: 1/0

=> so the UKM limitation makes sense.

 

- The defenses (6E2 p 104) = (====> Killing advantage.)

 

Normal and Resistant DEFs work against N Stun and N Body

 

Normal and Resistant DEFs work against K Stun

Only Resistant DEFs work against K Body

 

So K is clearly advantaged here, isn't it ?

Score: 0/1

 

-The intent of the attack:

Sometimes we don't want to kill even with a Killing attack.

Sometimes we want to kill even with a Normal attack.

Score: still 0/1

 

 

0/1 = K wins the match.

OR

1/1 = no winner when taking CON into account.

[The Main Man]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

You're looking at it too coldly and mechanically.

 

I cannot stress enough that sometimes you do not want to kill nor maim your opponent.

 

Saying that Killing attacks should be a Power Advantage valued at more than +0 begs the question, "Advantaged for what?"

 

If I want to knock someone out, not kill them, I use a Normal Attack.

 

If I want to kill them, maybe even maim them, I use a Killing Attack.

 

 

Let's say that we have a 60 AP game and that Killing is in fact a +0 Advantage.

 

12 x 3.5 = 42 STUN, 12 BODY

 

Let's then say that the target has 30 PD / 30 ED and we are trying to knock them out.

 

Normal Damage --> 0 BODY, 12 STUN.

 

Killing Damage --> 12 BODY, 12 STUN.

 

The Killing attack brought me no closer to knocking out my target, but I dealt a deadly blow to them.

 

 

Let's look at it from the other side: 20 rPD / 20 rED.

 

If we use Normal Damage, that's 0 BODY, 22 STUN.

 

If we use Killing Damage, that's 0 BODY, 22 STUN.

 

They are exactly the same in this instance.

 

Now, not only did Killing Damage do nothing to help knock out my target, but it also did nothing to kill them (on average at least).

 

Making Killing Damage worth more than +0 would make it worse than a Normal Attack if they functioned the same way because Killing damage would reduce the possible dice rolled.

[Crypt]

Re: Merging Blast, HTH and Killing (6E)

 

The trouble with your example is that you mix everything: the rolling method + the defense + the intent.

 

I think the reason we don't understand each other comes from the fact i dissociate each parts (rolling , dmg vs def.)

The rolling method and the damage vs def may be evaluated.

The intent is too subjective, for instance you deliberately choose to ignore the fact that sometimes we want to kill while having no killing attack. (and it's also possible the GM choose to use options like Impairing and Disabling which are based on BODY damage and impair/disable before killing.)

So in the end the intent is definitely not a valid factor.

 

 

Remember the goal is to unify HTH, Blast and KA so we must dissociate each parts.

 

But if you want to keep them as three different powers then you are right.

 

(about the rolling method note that i have edited my former post in order to take CON into account.)