Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

[Alcamtar]

Combat Luck has the limitation luck-based, which basically means it doesn't apply when you are unaware of an attack, or unable to do anything to defend yourself. That's fine, but what happens when the character also has something like Defense Manuever IV, spatial awareness, lightsleep (or no sleep), and/or danger sense? Of course you have to look at the overall combination to determine the actual effectiveness, but if a character essentially is never caught by surprise, doesn't that really make the luck-based limitation not limiting?

 

The limitation is worth -1 which is pretty significant, and is the same value as a (9-) activation roll. In theory it should make the talent useless about half the time, though in actual play being surprised is infrequent.

 

Still, if a character is almost impossible to catch unaware, I'm thinking that Combat Luck could be changed to a 9- activation roll in order to preserve the effect of the limitation. Otherwise the character should pay full price for hardened resistant defense. Interestingly, using an activation roll would make it truly luck-based. For characters who are only partially "surprise-proof" but still enough to be significant, you could go with a higher activation, somewhere between 11- and 14-.

 

Thoughts?

[Nevelon]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

Combat Luck has the limitation luck-based' date=' which basically means it doesn't apply when you are unaware of an attack, or unable to do anything to defend yourself. That's fine, but what happens when the character also has something like Defense Manuever IV, spatial awareness, lightsleep (or no sleep), and/or danger sense? Of course you have to look at the overall combination to determine the actual effectiveness, but if a character essentially is never caught by surprise, doesn't that really make the [i']luck-based [/i]limitation not limiting?

 

The limitation is worth -1 which is pretty significant, and is the same value as a (9-) activation roll. In theory it should make the talent useless about half the time, though in actual play being surprised is infrequent.

 

Still, if a character is almost impossible to catch unaware, I'm thinking that Combat Luck could be changed to a 9- activation roll in order to preserve the effect of the limitation. Otherwise the character should pay full price for hardened resistant defense. Interestingly, using an activation roll would make it truly luck-based. For characters who are only partially "surprise-proof" but still enough to be significant, you could go with a higher activation, somewhere between 11- and 14-.

 

Thoughts?

 

IMHO combat luck should also not affect times where you willingly get in the line of fire. If you dive for cover in front of an ally, you should not get it. Also it shouldn't work if you are being crushed by a boa constrictor or something similar. Being fast/lucky won't help in a situation like that. There are more times then just surprised when combat luck isn't effective.

[Naanomi]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

IMHO combat luck should also not affect times where you willingly get in the line of fire.

 

I agree, if you punch someone with an obvious Damage Shield, no Combat Luck for you!

[Panpiper]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

Don't be too hard on combat luck. Rather perhaps just limit the number of levels of it a character can buy. (And in my games, it must be bought with the -1/2 limitation, 'does not stack with armor'.) Remember that for 4 points, a character can buy a couple of Penalty Skill Levels to counter DCV penalties from wearing armor. They can then don def 6-8 armor that works whether they know an attack is coming or not. And that is a lot less expensive than buying 6PD/6ED combat luck. Yes, there will be times when combat luck won't apply. But those should be quite a bit rarer than catching the character out of their armor. Just my opinion.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

Combat Luck does not apply when a character willingly puts themselves into a position to "take the hit".

 

FAQ->Combat Luck

 

Would Combat Luck apply to protect a character from the damage he takes when performing a Move By or Move Through?

 

No; that involves the character “deliberately” putting himself in the path of danger in such a way that Combat Luck should not apply.

 

 

Would Combat Luck apply to protect a character from the damage he takes when attacking someone with a Damage Shield?

 

Typically, yes it would — if the character knew he was attacking someone with a Damage Shield. But that depends largely on how the GM chooses to interpret the concept of “deliberately” putting one’s self in harm’s way; sometimes it might not be appropriate to apply Combat Luck. If the character didn’t know about the Damage Shield, maybe his Combat Luck would protect him... once.

 

 

What does the Luck-Based Limitation on Combat Luck entail?

 

It’s a shorthand way of indicating all the restrictions described in the text of the Talent.

 

 

Does Combat Luck “stack” with other defenses? For example, if a character with standard Combat Luck wore 6 PD/6 ED armor, would he have 6 rPD and rED, or 9?

 

It stacks with other defenses. He’d have 9 rPD/rED.

 

 

Would Combat Luck apply to protect a character from the damage he takes when attacking someone with a Damage Shield?

 

Typically, yes it would — if the character knew he was attacking someone with a Damage Shield. But that depends largely on how the GM chooses to interpret the concept of "deliberately" putting one’s self in harm’s way; sometimes it might not be appropriate to apply Combat Luck. If the character didn’t know about the Damage Shield, maybe his Combat Luck would protect him... once.

 

 

Does any level of Defense Maneuver make Combat Luck Persistent?

 

No. No level of Defense Maneuver makes Combat Luck Persistent.

 

 

Could a character have a single Focus that is in some ways Obvious, and in some cases Inobvious (as with a magic sword [OAF] that also provides Combat Luck-like Armor to the character [iAF]), or in some ways Personal, in some ways Universal (as with a magic sword whose standard sword abilities are Universal, but magic powers are Personal)?

 

The determination of what to allow regarding a Focus should be made by the GM, of course, and should depend on special effects, game balance considerations, common sense, and dramatic sense. The sword HKA/Armor is also a good example; most GMs would allow that, since it shows clever, creative thinking, and a willingness to sacrifice points to define an ability properly. Some GMs might prefer that the Armor also be OAF, on the grounds that since the sword is clearly something a foe would desire to deprive the character of, it’s always “Obvious” even though one of the powers it provides is not readily apparent.

 

As for switching between Universal/Personal on a given Focus, the example offered in the question also seems to make sense; it’s a clever way to define an item commonly found in fantasy fiction — a blade whose powers only “the chosen one” can use (to anyone else, it’s a normal sword). In this case, the GM’s decision is likely to turn on game balance considerations. If the character is just trying to stop NPCs from using his Nifty Widget, without having any real justification for switching from Universal to Personal, the GM shouldn’t allow it — but if it’s a genuinely clever way to define an interesting ability that contributes to the game, he should.

 

 

Do Automatons with the Takes No STUN Power, who have to divide their base PD and ED by 3, and pay triple cost for Defenses, automatically have Resistant Defenses?

 

No. Their PD and ED are Nonresistant, just like any other characters. To make them Resistant, the automaton could buy Damage Resistance, but the rule on tripling the cost applies. The tripling rule also applies to Defense Powers the Automaton buys, like Damage Reduction, Armor, or Force Field. This includes exotic things like Flash Defense and Power Defense, and it includes the Talent Combat Luck, though a GM could, in his discretion, change this back to the regular cost since the primary game balance concern (Automatons becoming too hard to hurt with regular attacks) isn’t there.

 

 

Does a Force Wall count as a power an Automaton with Takes No STUN must pay triple cost for?

 

Yes. The same applies to all Defense Powers, including Missile Deflection/Reflection and Knockback Resistance, and things like Combat Luck.

 

 

Does Combat Luck count as a “Defense Power,” and thus cost triple, when bought by an Automaton with the Takes No STUN Power?

 

Yes.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

Surely 'luck based' means, well, based on luck?

 

So if you hit someone with a damage shield, well, you normally take damage, but if something LUCKY happens, you don't (or do not take as much damage).

 

You might well be completely unable to be surprised (as defined as a combat modifier in Hero), and more than able to move out of the way of an attack but if you are UNLUCKY, you take the damage, or more damage.

 

I thought 'luck based' was -1/2, but even if it is, somewhere between 1 in 2 and 1 in 5 hits should hurt you and, being LUCK based, it shouldn't matter too much even if you are strapped, helpless to a steel table with your power armour sitting in a corner: Doctor Flay's knife might slip, or he might miss the vein despite being the world's most skilled plastic surgeon.

 

Hero has this thing that labels do not matter, and with powers, up to a point, I can see that. You need SOME label. However, with normal language, it has to mean what it means if you look it up in the dictionary. I've looked and it does not mention anything about being unable to avoid the consequences under 'luck'. In fact that is pretty much the essence of luck - something happening that is not expected, that is not likely, that you didn't think of.

 

That is why, as a GM I HATE 'luck based' powers - too much work for my imagination.

 

So, I'd say this: if you have powers that are luck based you are in for a few surprises, even if you didn't think you could be surprised. At least, that is how I'd play it.

[Ice9]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

A minor point, BTW - a 9- activation roll is more than -1; -1 is an 11- activation roll.

I don't see it as an exploit, more just a combination of powers (which each had to be bought) synergizing. For instance, slow Levitation-only Flight isn't very useful by itself - but when combined with Teleportation, it becomes quite effective.

[Alcamtar]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

Thanks everyone for your comments, that is very helpful.

 

A minor point' date=' BTW - a 9- activation roll is more than -1; -1 is an 11- activation roll.[/quote']

 

Because it would have to be rolled each phase? Good catch! I did think 9- was rather low.

[Lucius]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

Combat Luck has the limitation luck-based' date=' which basically means it doesn't apply when you are unaware of an attack, or unable to do anything to defend yourself. That's fine, but what happens when the character also has something like Defense Manuever IV, spatial awareness, lightsleep (or no sleep), and/or danger sense? Of course you have to look at the overall combination to determine the actual effectiveness, but if a character essentially is never caught by surprise, doesn't that really make the [i']luck-based [/i]limitation not limiting?

 

The limitation is worth -1 which is pretty significant, and is the same value as a (9-) activation roll. In theory it should make the talent useless about half the time, though in actual play being surprised is infrequent.

 

Still, if a character is almost impossible to catch unaware, I'm thinking that Combat Luck could be changed to a 9- activation roll in order to preserve the effect of the limitation. Otherwise the character should pay full price for hardened resistant defense. Interestingly, using an activation roll would make it truly luck-based. For characters who are only partially "surprise-proof" but still enough to be significant, you could go with a higher activation, somewhere between 11- and 14-.

 

Thoughts?

 

So, because I spent a ton of points on these other abilities, now you want me to spend even more than the going rate on this one ability?

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

 

Surprise! It's a palindromedary!

[Trebuchet]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

Seems to me if the character has "Combat Luck" but it isn't possible to catch him in an "unlucky" situation then it should simply be bought as raw defense of the same level and appropriate Hardening.

 

OTOH, you could just rule that the reason he has Combat Luck is precisely because he has all those other abilities making him very hard to catch off guard and just use the Talent as written. There will still be occasions it doesn't work; both Danger SEnse and Spatial Awareness still require rolls.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Combat Luck when you cannot be surprised

 

I created a PC for a player once who had a 'luck' basis. I bought him armour that was built as hardened rPD and rPD plus an equal amount of mental defence and PowD, and (IIRC) some 'lack of weakness' and KBR. The player did not know he had this power: it was just recorded as 'Luck - 30 points' (or whatever it came to) but every time he was attacked I'd subtract the defences befroe declaring damage against him. It worked ALL THE TIME unless the PC was under the impression that he could not avoid the damage - so actual interaction matetred a lot - if the player had the PC say something like 'Oh this is going to hurt' the defences did not apply.

 

OK that is not something you can generally do for all kinds of reasons - but it worked well in that context (it was a Dark Champions game so the PCs generally had no 'overt' superpowers)