1d6x2 attack

[Ice9]

Re: 1d6x2 attack

 

Let us look at a 6d6 Drain (averages 21) against an opponent with 20 Power Defence.

The only case where multiplying like this would be a significant advantage is powers where the average roll has relatively poor effect' date=' and a high roll could have a much better effect. For instance, Blast 10d6 vs 25 ED. In cases like that, I would call this an advantage.[/quote']No argument there. But that's an extreme case - the defense is very high compared to the offense, a situation that favors volatility the most. Now let's look at someone using a typical attack against typical defenses (according to the 6E Superheroic guidelines):

 

Blast 12d6 vs ED 20:

No Volatility (42) => 22 / attack

Max Volatility (1d6 * 12) => 23.3 / attack

The "No Volatility" attack actually has a higher chance to Stun against 20 CON, although less against 25+ CON.

 

Blast 12d6 vs ED 25:

No Volatility (42) => 17 / attack

Max Volatility (1d6 * 12) => 19.3 / attack

The "Max Volatility" attack does have the advantage in Stunning here.

 

Damage wise, that's not even a +1/4 advantage. Stunning-wise, it could be. Against minions with low DEF? Probably worse - you've got a much bigger chance to leave them standing.

So I'm not saying that volatility is never an advantage - in the right circumstances, it certainly is. But in a lot of situations, it isn't, and it's not some kind of super-potent doomsday device.

[Sean Waters]

Re: 1d6x2 attack

 

No argument there. But that's an extreme case - the defense is very high compared to the offense, a situation that favors volatility the most. Now let's look at someone using a typical attack against typical defenses (according to the 6E Superheroic guidelines):

 

Blast 12d6 vs ED 20:

No Volatility (42) => 22 / attack

Max Volatility (1d6 * 12) => 23.3 / attack

The "No Volatility" attack actually has a higher chance to Stun against 20 CON, although less against 25+ CON.

 

Blast 12d6 vs ED 25:

No Volatility (42) => 17 / attack

Max Volatility (1d6 * 12) => 19.3 / attack

The "Max Volatility" attack does have the advantage in Stunning here.

 

Damage wise, that's not even a +1/4 advantage. Stunning-wise, it could be. Against minions with low DEF? Probably worse - you've got a much bigger chance to leave them standing.

So I'm not saying that volatility is never an advantage - in the right circumstances, it certainly is. But in a lot of situations, it isn't, and it's not some kind of super-potent doomsday device.

 

12d6 v 20 def

No volatility = 22 per hit

 

12x1d6 v 20 def

Over 6 hits: 0,4,16,28,40,52 = 140/6 = 23 1/3 mean hit BUT half the hits are likely to be stunning. Yes all your rolls could be '1', but we can't assume that.

 

Against 20 CON the 12d6 non volatile stuns every time BUT looking at the sample supers in 6e, only one has a 20 CON, the others have 23,30,30: so volatility wins against the majority of characters. Stunning an opponent shoutld generally end the fight,unless your timing is really bad or they have a significant SPD advantage.

 

Volatility is not something I like: the KA mechanics always got under my skin - but it is a significant advantage in 100 fights against an otherwise matched opponent. The stun average is up a little bit, but the ability to stun your opponent every 2 to 3 hits should win you the fightmost of the time.