Knockback Attack

[Martin2]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

The whole Jedi thing is connected to Telekenesis so it should be a strength based grab / throw etc. It would be a lot more precise than the blast double knockback no damage as I would rule that KB would be directly away in that case. The Jedi hand wave is multidirectional and puts the target more towards the direction the jedi wants them to put them. So in a game effect that is telekenetic. You could make it cheaper by other routes but the game effect would be telekenetic and then throw in a direction of your choosing which is what telekenesis is all about. If they have this power they should have other telekenetic powers (light saber to hand after dropping, radar sense for original star wars etc) so I would allow this effect in a MP with various limitations to make is as cheap as possible for a specific character.

 

But this is only what I would do.

[Christopher]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

But sometimes they used it as a cone attack (Like Qui-Gon in EP 1, during the escape from naboo), so the blast with AOE Cone would be better to simulate this. Of course, one could always Multiattack.

 

On the other hand, if they already have relevant TK-STR (or buy it with a limitation), a 08/15 Shove is the easiest way to go. Has the short distance build in, and doesn't uses KB (wich may not be used in the game in the first place).

[Martin2]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Sure it is. It's cosmetic because I said so. This is comic-book physics' date=' not real-world physics. I could also define a Fire Blast in Hero to be Stun Only, notwithstanding the real-world observation that "fire attacks burn things".[/quote']

 

But Cosmetic means appearance. You do not look lighter you are lighter and are physically different so not a cosmetic alteration. All the examples from 6E1 give appearance differences. Changing colours, changing letters on signs, making a $1 bill look like a $100 etc (are they the same size as I would judge the size would not change).

 

Are you the GM in your game? If so its your game and you can decide what rules you should have but the interpretation of your rule on cosmetic changes would not be suitable for most games.

 

I will leave it at that then.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

How does it matter what the Cosmetic Transform actually does? The purpose was to create an attack whose only real impact is to do Knockback. If it makes you hapy, the Transform changes the target from a person with neat hair to a person with ruffled hair, healed by applying a comb. Oh, and it does huge knockback, which was the purpose.

 

Or it adds 1 level of Striking Appearance to cause laughter at the target being so easily hurled away.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

And for my two cents,

Just buy eb (physical) does double knockback, no damage (-1/2), and be done with it.

 

Other than -1/2 seeming remarkably stingy for removing the main purpose of the power and leaving only an ancillary effect.

 

How about we take that Cosmetic Transform - 0 Mass or Knocked over, and add "does not cause a transformation" for -1/2? Would that make the naysayyers happier?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Oh I can think of 2 dozen or so SFX that could fit the bill, even without getting into silly ones like "ruffles hair, and then throw you 200 meters".

 

The point is, if you're going to pick SFX model it correctly. Either way, I think I'm just walking away from this conversation.

[Martin2]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

But sometimes they used it as a cone attack (Like Qui-Gon in EP 1, during the escape from naboo), so the blast with AOE Cone would be better to simulate this. Of course, one could always Multiattack.

 

On the other hand, if they already have relevant TK-STR (or buy it with a limitation), a 08/15 Shove is the easiest way to go. Has the short distance build in, and doesn't uses KB (wich may not be used in the game in the first place).

 

How about an AOE cone flight, usable as an attack, only you control it, only to move them anywhere in the cone area, dropping them from a small hight after swirling them through the air to simulate jedi ability knock back, leaved prone but no damage, (possible cosmetic tranform linked to have a really scared look on their face (+2 striking appearance only for fear effects on allies, heals when they next act)). Slap it in a MP and use for great effect .

 

I will let you do the math(s) and see if it would be cheap but the AOE flight may be complicated.

[Christopher]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

How about an AOE cone flight' date=' usable as an attack, only you control it[/quote']

I would say: That is not what you want. You want to push them back not let them fly und your controll, so use the mechanics that are already there for it.

Simple TK-STR let's you do 99% of the Active Force Tricks, so why should we go for such a non-intuitive power when we have half a dozen well thought and balanced ways to do it allready (and that even work with normal STR).

Nobody says you can't use a 16d6, Does Knockback Transform, minus actual Transform effect. It's the same efficiency as using a similar Blast or RKA, with Double Knockback, minus actual damage from the attack. I think a -1 Limitation should be fitting (it does no regular damage, but depending in how you use it it can even do more damage than a normal blast).

 

The problem is the double KB-variant. That this one is so effective is certainly just on of those slips in the rulse/GM discretion chases. Heck, even the normal double KB is already a STOP-sign advantage, and this one is way mor efficient. I would even say too efficient.

Plus the fact that KB is not a core rule. It's an optional rule mostly used in superhero games.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Since I said the change in mass has no combat effect' date=' [i']it has no combat effect[/i]. Targets cannot increase their leap. They are not blown away by breezes. They can't be carried by 0 STR beings.

 

Then they're hardly at zero mass, are they?

[Xavier Onassiss]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

I thought Cosmetic Transforms couldn't have combat effects.

 

Hmmm....

 

Good point. For game-balance purposes, it might be better to buy this as a minor transform, starting off at 5pts/d6. (8.75pts per d6 with advantages).

[Christopher]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Good point. For game-balance purposes' date=' it might be better to buy this as a minor transform, starting off at 5pts/d6. (8.75pts per d6 with advantages).[/quote']

That would defeat the point of making a very cost effective KB power. In fact it would then simply fail against Blasts and RKA who get "Does KB" for Free.

 

But then again, the real combat effect is in the Advantages. And as long as the power can affect the target, the advantages affect it too. And like I said: You can always re-apply the Transform, so another healing peroid starts (APG I).

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

I would just make sure that any Knockback power you put together matches up in AP to a similar blast; a power that does only KB should be about the same active points as a blast or any attack power that does the same approximate total dice of effect.

 

I ran into this on my last Champs game; was having NPC's knocked into next week and taking 30d6+ damage for less AP than the standard 20d6 attacks of the campaign.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

I would just make sure that any Knockback power you put together matches up in AP to a similar blast; a power that does only KB should be about the same active points as a blast or any attack power that does the same approximate total dice of effect.

 

I ran into this on my last Champs game; was having NPC's knocked into next week and taking 30d6+ damage for less AP than the standard 20d6 attacks of the campaign.

 

"next week" has a 30 PD?

[Christopher]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

"next week" has a 30 PD?

Or Body + PD equal of 30. Did they kicked him into questionite, or what?

 

Also, this attack is a potential violation of a CvK. On average the enemy can take 30 Body from the attack.

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

It was high-powered Champs, and not silver age - the hulk clone frequently (and, in most cases, rightfully) smashed mooks into grease spots.

 

And yes, the 30d6 was basically "questionite." Had to give one of the enemy bases 40 DEF walls

 

Regardless of the power level, a lot of these KB builds can be potentially unbalancing. Doesn't mean not to use them, just something to be aware of.

[Christopher]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

It was high-powered Champs, and not silver age - the hulk clone frequently (and, in most cases, rightfully) smashed mooks into grease spots.

 

And yes, the 30d6 was basically "questionite." Had to give one of the enemy bases 40 DEF walls

"Always remember: When you build superstrong outer walls for your fotress, for good's sake keep some weaker walls in your back when facing some heroes" - Viliany 101

[Lucius]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Beyond the hyper-cheese factor of the power construct to begin with, I'd still never ever let that pass. 0-Mass is not Cosmetic IMO.

 

I'll keep this in mind though, when someone next brings up the question of Munchkin Powers.

 

There's a question about munchkin powers?

 

Munchkin Power: short: +2 DCV, Inherent (+1/4) (12 Active Points); Perceivable (-1/2), Limited Power Not vs non-ranged attacks by characters the same size or smaller. (-1/2)

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary Power

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Other than -1/2 seeming remarkably stingy for removing the main purpose of the power and leaving only an ancillary effect.

 

How about we take that Cosmetic Transform - 0 Mass or Knocked over, and add "does not cause a transformation" for -1/2? Would that make the naysayyers happier?

I think that I saw -1/2 for something like this in the old Gadgets book. Plus, usually I'll post a -1/2 when I'm not sure 'cause it seems most people don't question it. So were what value were you thinking btw?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Considring No Knockback is -1/4, "only knockback" would seem to be a much more significant limitation.

 

6e suggests "does no STUN is a -3/4 limitation (which in itself seems stingy for a Blast or KA), which seems less limited than "only does knockback".

[dmjalund]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

sounds like Knockback Only would be a -1 limitation

[Ice9]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Balance wise, my feeling is that an "Only knockback" attack should do DC x 2m of knockback. My reasoning for this is that hitting a wall will then do the normal DCs of damage. At that, point, compared to a normal blast, you have:

- Only does half damage if they don't hit a wall

+ Sends them flying significantly farther

- Less effect against KB-resistant targets

+ More effect against flying targets

 

Which seems about balanced. So by that metric, Blast, x2 KB is not quite up to par. 3-Point Power, Does Knockback isn't either, but 3-Point Power, x2 KB goes a bit too high.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Balance wise, my feeling is that an "Only knockback" attack should do DC x 2m of knockback. My reasoning for this is that hitting a wall will then do the normal DCs of damage. At that, point, compared to a normal blast, you have:

- Only does half damage if they don't hit a wall

+ Sends them flying significantly farther

- Less effect against KB-resistant targets

+ More effect against flying targets

 

Which seems about balanced. So by that metric, Blast, x2 KB is not quite up to par. 3-Point Power, Does Knockback isn't either, but 3-Point Power, x2 KB goes a bit too high.

 

So with a typical 60 active point power what is the 'sweet spot' of KB before defense in your opinion?

[Christopher]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

6e suggests "does no STUN is a -3/4 limitation (which in itself seems stingy for a Blast or KA)' date=' which seems less limited than "only does knockback".[/quote']

I am not so certain this is meant for KA's. For blast, it seems fair. Their main effect is to do STUN, and not BODY and that way you still get KB. On average a Blast/HTH attack vs. Standart defenses won't do any BODY at all. And the limitation to let them never do body or KB is a -0, since it only reinforces it's main effect.

For KA's on the other hand STUN is the secondary effect, BODY the primary (you even get less defenses against it's BODY), so here no STUN might be less worth (-1/2 perhaps?).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

I am not so certain this is meant for KA's. For blast, it seems fair. Their main effect is to do STUN, and not BODY and that way you still get KB. On average a Blast/HTH attack vs. Standart defenses won't do any BODY at all. And the limitation to let them never do body or KB is a -0, since it only reinforces it's main effect.

For KA's on the other hand STUN is the secondary effect, BODY the primary (you even get less defenses against it's BODY), so here no STUN might be less worth (-1/2 perhaps?).

 

The "Does No Stun" was under limited power, and noted it was only for powers that did Stun (no kidding!)

 

Reduced Stun Multiplier can be taken at -1/2 to reduce the multiplier by two. Shouldn't doing no STUN be a greater limitation?

 

So, by the book a Blast which does no STUN, no BOD and no Knockback is a total -3/4 limitation. I wonder what the limitation should be for "only does STUN, BOD and Knockback..."

[Christopher]

Re: Knockback Attack

 

Reduced Stun Multiplier can be taken at -1/2 to reduce the multiplier by two. Shouldn't doing no STUN be a greater limitation?

Nope. That is only for Killing attacks and their main purpose is to do Killing Body Damage. They already do a lot less STUN than Blasts on average(after taking Standart Defenses into account) and their main pupose stays intact.

 

I wonder what the limitation should be for "only does STUN' date=' BOD and Knockback...[/quote']

Isn't that a blast? Or are you talking about a power that normaly does neither, but get's advantages for it?