How would I do this?

[jcoggins]

I require all powers to have a skill roll. What I want to do is have the affect of the power be directly connected to the degree of success at the skill roll.

 

For Example: Suppose two players purchase 4d6 points of affect in Blast. Both characters also need an 11 or less to succeed. Character 1 rolls a 10 and succeeds by a small margin while character 2 rolls a 5 and succeeds by a larger margin. Instead of both players rolling 4d6 (with the possibility of character 1 rolling higher then character 2 despite the fact that character 2 had a higher degree of success) I want the character 2 to have a more powerful blast affect then character 1.

 

In other words, I want the results of powers to be directly connected to the players skill rolls. In addition to this I also want the same affect to happen in combat when using melee and ranged weapons.

 

I have thought of 2 options:

 

1. Instead of purchasing dice in powers a character purchases a multiplier (instead of the players above purchasing 4d6 in affect they would have purchased a multiplier of 4). The multiplier purchased is multiplied by the degree of success to determine the final result. In the above example character 1 would have had a result of 4 (1*4) while character 2 would have had a result of 24 (6*4). I do not know if this would unbalance the game and the only way I can figure out how to make weapons work with this is to assign each weapon a damage multiplier instead of damage dice.

 

2. The other way is to have the characters roll the affect (4d6 in the above example) and add it to their degree of success to the rolled total. This would still allow someone with a low skill success margin to roll a high enough power affect to have a more powerful final affect then the person with a higher degree of success.

 

Between the two options I like option 1 the best but would it unbalance the game? I am also wanting a more realistic - deadly game.

 

Does anyone else have any other options on how this could be done?

 

Jason

[Steve Long]

Re: How would I do this?

 

Since this is a request for discussion rather than a rules issue, I've moved it to the Discussion board.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: How would I do this?

 

My first comment would be to take care not to introduce more bureaucracy to the game. HERO is a detail game and is already bursting with detail (which can slow down gameplay). Make sure that whatever you do works to streamline rather than to add to the bureaucracy.

 

My second would be that you have the potential for doing that - you are removing a dice roll and counting scenario that takes some people a lot of time - replacing that with multiplication (if that would have to be done on the fly) might take even more. I would think that a handy reference sheet might take away that risk.

 

You have to be careful in such fundamental changes to the way things work because it changes the balance of costs. In your change you would make the purchase of OCV and DCV more important than they are at the moment as they would then become more valuable in the delivery and resistance of damage as well as its avoidance. This might mean that they would need to cost more points.

 

You need to think carefull about the combat sequence and what you want.

 

Currently it goes

 

Hero decides to use a power

If it is an offensive power the HERO determines whether he hits (use OCV versus DCV)

If the power hits the opponent the HERO determines damage (rolls and adds up xD6)

The defender subtracts defences from the damage and applies it to STUN and BODY (defences)

 

See if you can provide a similar sequence before thinking about the detail of how you would do it, then you can see if it makes sense or puts too much emphasis on any one skill or characteristic.

 

 

Doc

[Hyper-Man]

Re: How would I do this?

 

It sounds as though you are wanting to combine RSR and the Limited Power* Limitations.

Just buy the base power at the maximum achievable effect (I rolled a 3!) and then apply the Limitations.

 

*Pick a number, if they make their RSR by less than that number they lose 10 active points/interval from the power.

Worth (-1/4 to -1) depending on how big a number you pick.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How would I do this?

 

I like HyperMan's approach. I also think the first step is to assess the maximum and typical power levels you want to see. You mention you want a deadly game - how deadly? [nb: "realistic" and "deadly" are not synonymous].

 

Let's assume this is a heroic fantasy game, with typical characters having 4 - 6 defenses, and wearing armor providing 4 - 6 rDEF as well. As an average, the typical target will have 5 defenses naturally, +5 rDEF from armor.

 

Let's assume baseline damage is 6 DC's, and look at a 2d6 Killing Attack. A typical hit under the standard rules, using hit locations, is 7 BOD, 21 STUN, so the average target takes 2 BOD and 13 STUN. Let's assume that result is obtained, in your system, on a skill roll of 10- (that is, half the time the powewr will do its normal damage or better). If every reduction of 1 point on the roll is a multiplier, then an 8 skill roll (8 or less comes up a bit more than 25% of the time) will do triple damage, so 21 BOD (16 after defenses) and 63 STUN (53 after defenses). That would leave most characters unconscious and bleeding to death. Is that, or worse, a result you want from 25% of attacks?

 

You could water it down - maybe the multiple only impacts damage after defenses, so that 3x means he takes 6 BOD and 39 STUN. Not quite so deadly.

 

"Multiply" strikes me as an approach that assumes characters have fast growing abilities to soak up damage, which is consistent with most d20 games, but isn't how Hero tends to work, so you need to playtest your model within the Hero environment to see how it will mesh.

 

Of course, a roll of 3 (one chance in 216 - but they come up sooner or later) is another 5 multiples, so 8x. That means 56 BOD (and 50 past defenses) and 168 STUN (155 past defenses), an instant kill I'd expect. Under evcen the watered down approach, it's 16 BOD, 104 STUN, so the victim is likely bleeding to death. And that assumes he starts unwounded.

 

Another option someone presented some time ago was using the to hit roll to assess damage as well. This might be an option in your case as well. Perhaps if the skill roll barely succeeds, the damage is about half the average roll (and "barely fail" might still work, but with even lower damage). Better rolls would get a greater percentage of max damage, capping at the attack's maximum damage.

 

I think your multiplier approach will stack too quickly, and make 2 points spent on +1 to the skill roll far too valuable (adds one multiple of damage) compared to buying a bigger spell to have more base damage, but you'll need to work out how your system will work, and compare that to the effects you are looking for, to really evaluate it.

[Nevenall]

Re: How would I do this?

 

Also, in the Advanced Players Guide there is an optional rule for Requires a Skill Roll for just this sort of power.

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: How would I do this?

 

Also' date=' in the Advanced Players Guide there is an optional rule for Requires a Skill Roll for just this sort of power.[/quote']

 

Beat me to it -- that'll teach me to work overtime.

 

Anyway, I rather like the rules in the APG for this, but as another poster pointed earlier, it adds a few extra steps to every use of the power. Requiring this for every power in the campaign might seriously bog things down. I'd suggest making the skill roll for extra dice a standard option, to be used when a character really needs it. But then it may be too similar to 'pushing' a power or using a haymaker.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: How would I do this?

 

One way I've seen is to buy the maximum level of the power with the most difficult roll (usually 8-), and weaker levels of the power with easier rolls. When the player uses the power, he makes one roll, and uses the level of effect that it gives him.

 

I agree with other posters this would slow the game down. ("I hit him, and I rolled an 11 on my Power roll. How much damage is that again?")

[dmjalund]

Re: How would I do this?

 

if you make the damage strictly related to by how much you hit him, there would be no extra roll (the player would be well served to have a table in front of him at all times however)

[BeZurKur]

Re: How would I do this?

 

How about having damage done be standard effect so the damage roll is eliminated? To throw the variable back in, use the margin of success to add to the damage. You replace a damage roll with some simple math. Every point of MoS adds one point of damage. KA would need to be scaled proportionately to normal damage. It is capped at the max damage. It still gives CV an added bonus, but everyone benefits from it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: How would I do this?

 

How about having damage done be standard effect so the damage roll is eliminated? To throw the variable back in' date=' use the margin of success to add to the damage. You replace a damage roll with some simple math. Every point of MoS adds one point of damage. KA would need to be scaled proportionately to normal damage. It is capped at the max damage. It still gives CV an added bonus, but everyone benefits from it.[/quote']

 

The big issue is the size of the bonus. Taking your approach, let's assume that characters typically have 6 DC's and an OCV of 5, to keep it low powered. That typical character with a normal attack will, we'll assume, hit with an 11-, so he gets 18 damage on a typical hit.

 

A second character decides he will only have 3 DC's. He has a group of related attacks, so he spends the 15 points saved (likely more, actually, if he has multiple attacks) on 5 3 point skill levels. With the same roll of 11, he inflicts 9 + 5 = 14 damage, four less, and he hits much more often. As well, he spends less END, since skill levels cost no END, and he can alternatively put his levels in DCV, reducing the likelihood of damage, and taking less if he is hit due to margin of success. Of course, if he puts 4 levels into DC's, he'll get 6 damage from that (plus one from his one extra margin of success).

 

If he only has one attack, leave it at 2 DC's and spend 20 points on +10 OCV for that attack. Now you get 6 + 10 = 16 damage on that same 11- roll, and you should hit every time for at least something. And, again, you spend less END.

 

Maybe that's the result you want in your game. At the least, you get more damage from straight DC's than from extra OCV, so it's not a complete no brainer to buy OCV and forget damage.

 

One other consideration is balancing this with different types of attacks. Adding 1 point per MoS is more valuable if the attack costs more than 5 points per DC, so presumably the bonus would be pro rated.

 

Probably the toughest attacks to deal with under a "MoS enhances damage" structure would be area effect attacks, or any other attack that targets something other than DCV.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: How would I do this?

 

I began to answer this and work got in the way! Neil has raised the basic points but it gets worse at bigger DC levels.

 

I was thinking of a 10D6 attack. With everything even, a roll of 11 gets you 30 STUN; a roll of 10 gets you 40 STUN. Rolling 3 or more under your target number gives you maximum damage. This makes OCV rather valuable as it does with skill levels.

 

You need about 18D6 to average 60 STUN (an additional 40 points on the 10D6 attack) or +3 OCV (an additional 15 points on the standard CV).

 

I think you need to think about the costs or the numbers for your MoS. One additional damage per 2 MoS puts the costs at +6 OCV or an additional 30 points - more equitable.

 

 

Doc

[BeZurKur]

Re: How would I do this?

 

I can't speak for the OP, but Hugh's scenario doesn't seem so bad providing the campaign has firm guidelines, or even better yet, guidelines plus statted equipment/weapons. In the case of the latter, the DC 3 or 6 weapon may already be bought to zero Endurance or charges, leveling the advantages between both. I don't know. We'd need the OP to confirm that.

 

Maybe that's the result you want in your game. At the least' date=' you get more damage from straight DC's than from extra OCV, so it's not a complete no brainer to buy OCV and forget damage.[/quote']

Exactly. We need to find out.

 

Neil has raised the basic points but it gets worse at bigger DC levels.

Doc, I don't think Hugh was saying "nay" to the idea, so much as pointing out the implications, which as he said, maybe the desired effect. Also, your example I think assumes +1 per DC of the attack. (Was that 4th edition?) Based on the OP, I was figuring very low DCs, so the plus one was to the final result -- not a multiplier.

 

Regardless of all that, a new player to the game has a vision of what he is looking HERO to do. There is a lot of know-how on these boards, but before we all pile on him saying it's, "It's not the HERO way," lets use that know-how to have the system flex a little and let it be the toolbox it is. Personally, I don't think what the OP is looking for is all that hard. It will require some tweaking, but as long as we're aware of the pitfalls and avoid them, it's possible.

 

If the OP is still around, we'd just need some more info. Right now my primary question is: how much control do the players have in designing powers? I'd also like to know what the campaign guidelines are.

[Utech]

Re: How would I do this?

 

First, I'd like to congratulate you on doing an interesting bit of tinkering. Sounds like a very interesting experiment.

 

Instead of purchasing dice in powers a character purchases a multiplier (instead of the players above purchasing 4d6 in affect they would have purchased a multiplier of 4). The multiplier purchased is multiplied by the degree of success to determine the final result. In the above example character 1 would have had a result of 4 (1*4) while character 2 would have had a result of 24 (6*4). I do not know if this would unbalance the game and the only way I can figure out how to make weapons work with this is to assign each weapon a damage multiplier instead of damage dice.

 

As your example suggests, multipliers can produce wildly different results. That lends itself well to certain kinds of campaigns and less well to others. Certainly they can make a game more deadly. I think you should run a couple of trial combats with your players and ask them what they think. If people like what you've set up, you're golden. If not...

 

 

• Consider your option 2 and remember that you don't need to add just one point for each degree of success. You might add two points. Three. Ten. 1d6. 3d6. Etc.
  
• Use the Hit Location Chart and allow players to change the results of their location roll by 1 for every X degree of success. (Making X = 1 will result in lots of head shots.)
  
• Rather than just doing extra damage, consider other things that degrees of success might result in. They might
  
  • lower opponent's CV or DEX
    
  • ignore points of defenses
    
  • knock an opponent backward (or down)
    
  • damage opponent's armor or weapon
    
  • etc.