Revisiting Surprise Move.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Hey guys!

 

I'm still digesting the 6th edition books and decided to look up Surprise move. To my disappointment, it had only two short paragraphs about the GM assigning a bonus with no significant examples of it used "in play" or guidelines on what kind of bonuses to give in what circumstances.

 

I've been thinking about revisiting and re-tooling the Surprise Move rules for years now. I would like to discuss some of my ideas here.

 

Here's what I've come up with so far:

 

I really like what White Wolf came up with for their Anime Martial Arts action game: Exalted. It works pretty much like HERO's Surprise Move but is more versatile. In Hero, a Surprise Move only works to give a +1 to +3 bonus to a characters OCV when they do something the GM considers to be interesting or surprising in combat. In Exalted, the Storyteller assigns the character a +1 to +3 bonus to pretty much any action/roll where the Storyteller decides that the player has given a good or better description of his characters action. This can potentially apply to any roll as opposed to HERO's Surprise Move only applying to OCV in combat. This is where I find Exalted "Stunts" to be superior.

 

Now granted, HERO already has many rules in place where one can get a bonus from a players excellent description of his characters action in the game. Presence Attacks being an obvious one and mundane skill usage another, however I believe there is merit in unifying all of these bonus generating devices under a single rules subset called "Stunts" that allow a descriptive and/or imaginative player to use their powers of prose and imagination to gain advantage for their characters in play.

 

STUNTS:

 

In heroic fiction, characters oftentimes perform wild and crazy stunts in the middle of the action, and while these stunts don't always make the most sense in a realistic manner, they can often enhance the drama and excitement of a scene. Heroes are known for swinging across rooms on chandeliers, leaping across large chasms, diving forward and sliding beneath cover on their bellies while simultaneously firing at enemy agents converging on their position and performing nether-world kung fu moves that defy the imagination.

 

In order to simulate this during gameplay, the player merely needs to describe his action to the GM and other players. He/she doesn't need to say "I want to perform a stunt!", when the GM tells them it's their turn, they describe what they want their character to do. The GM will then determine if the description is worthy of a Stunt bonus. Stunt bonuses range from +1 to +3. Each +1 is a corresponding level of detail in the description of the Stunt.

 

Description examples:

 

No Stunt: "I hit the orc with my sword!"

 

+1 Stunt: "I swing my sword in a wide arc, powering through the orc's shield to cut it from shoulder to groin!"

 

+2 Stunt: "Faster than the eye can follow, I spin in 360 degrees to add velocity to my strike. As the razor edge of my sword leaves a silvery streak in the air, it slices through my opponent as if a hot knife through butter."

 

+3 Stunt: "Diving forward, I thrust my sword toward my opponent. As he moves to parry, my sword will catch his as I glide forward and my blade slides along his showering the combatants in a halo of sparks. I impail my enemy, thrusting my weapon into his stomach to the hilt. Time stops as I stare into my opponents eyes that his slayer shall be the last thing he ever sees and as the light of life begins to fade from his eyes, I twist my blade, spin and yank the sword from his belly spilling his entrails at his feet. Gracefully spinning away to avoid the blood and guts, my character finishes by removing the blood from his sword with a flourish of his blade."

 

As you can see, each "level" of Stunt was correspondingly more verbose and detailed than the one before it. While this isn't strictly necessary, it should be the baseline for how much of a bonus a GM will give to a particular Stunt. Other factors can be involved in this besides the description including if the Stunt surprised the opponent (the PC pulled some move outta nowhere), or if the PC interacts with the surrounding environment (such as leaping off of a wall or table to gain air to attack an opponent) or (most especially) if the move was dramatically appropriate at the right time and adds to the atmosphere of the game. The biggest factor in whether or not a move by a PC is a Stunt is if it makes at least someone at the gaming table say "wow, that was pretty cool!" If multiple players at the table make a comment on the coolness of the move, it is probably worth at least +2 if not +3.

 

Now on to what the Stunt bonus can affect. In the standard Surprise Move rules, the bonus can only affect OCV. However in these optional Stunt rules, the bonus can affect just about any 3D6 roll and can even enhance damage rolls if the GM deems it appropriate.

Stunts are easiest to implement in combat and in social situations (such as PRE attacks and Interaction skills) but they can apply to a host of other rolls as long as the player can describe his characters actions to the satisfaction of the GM.

 

Stunts can have a special relation in regards to Presence Attacks. A player could perform a Stunt to enhance their PRE Attack of course, but in addition to this, a character could perform a Stunt for some other reason (attacking etc) and if the Stunt action is successful, they can instantly perform a PRE Attack gaining a bonus to said PRE Attack equal to the Stunt bonus they got for performing the Stunt! Stunts are impressive and should affect any PRE Attacks that follow them.

 

The most common use of Stunts will of course be in combat, and these Stunts can affect OCV, DCV and DC. It's generally a GM's call if a Stunt affect Damage Class. In some cases the GM may simply want to add a bonus to the damage (+1 to +3 Body) if they feel that full Damage Classes are too much. A character can perform a Stunt to parry or dodge an attack just as easily as they can to enhance an attack.

 

The biggest problem when one uses the Stunt rules is that players may be tempted to overuse it. For some GM's this may be a major issue, with other's it may be encouraged. If a GM feels that a player is abusing the Stunt rules simply to make his character perform better on a regular basis, then that GM should feel free to reduce or eliminate the bonus he gives that player. This system is designed to encourage descriptive license in roleplaying rather than abusive power-gaming, but as with nearly all things in HERO, power-gaming is always a possibility.

 

A problem that may occur with the players is that when they use Stunts too often, they begin to run out of ideas on how to describe attacks. These players will oftentimes begin to repeat previous descriptions of Stunts as they will not be able to think of new Stunts. I will suggest that GM's not completely eliminate the Stunt bonus for players that do this, because they are at least attempting to add to the fun of the game through descriptive license. However I do suggest reducing the bonus they get for repeat usage of the same description (to a minimum of +1)

Sometimes a character can become known for a Signature Move. This is oftentimes a Stunt that the character performs on a semi-regular basis. It is a distinct part of the characters style. In this case, such moves should usually only generate a +1 Stunt bonus unless the character uses it in an unusual fashion or at a dramatically appropriate moment, in which case, the Stunt can generate a higher bonus.

 

Stunts and Experience Points:

Optionally, a GM may decide to hand out bonus experience points for those characters who performed Stunts during the session. It is suggested that 0 bonus Exp be given to those who performed +1 level Stunts, +1 bonus Exp be given to those who performed +2 level Stunts and +2 bonus Exp be given to those who performed +3 level Stunts. These are not cumulative of course, only the highest level of Stunt is considered in this calculation. This is for those GM's who want to give out additional incentive for their players to begin using Stunts.

 

Let me know what you guys think.

[Christopher]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

I think you looked up the wrong rules.

What you cited are the rules in a sidebar on 6E2 39.

 

The real rules for Suprise are on 6E2 50 and are roughly:

The target normally can't abort (6E2 22). Block does not work.

The targest DCV is halved.

Most CSL to DCV don't apply (unless he has defense Maneuver at a high level).

When out of combat the target takes double STUN and the Hit Location penalties are halved (classical sniper situation).

 

Msot of teh stuff above: That is simply using the CSL you have on OCV. I think it would only allow thsoe with RL-knowledge and descriptive skills to get a bonus while those who aren't that good in describing (like me) would be penalized.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

You sort of touched on this already, but the first thing to jump out at me: Your +3 Stunt example is very wordy. What if he misses anyway? What if he hits but gets a crap Damage Roll? Then he just wasted half a minute describing something that didn't happen, and the GM still has to describe what did happen. I could see this turning into a one-up of contest of power gaming by description if introduced to the wrong group. And what about the quieter player who doesn't think on his feet as fast or just isn't as good with vivid desription? Will he simply always suffer? And tying Exp into performing Stunts? Now he's just being punished.

 

I'm not against good description, but good description isn't always wordy and good RPing isn't always about who is the most gifted storyteller/BSer.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

5

I think you looked up the wrong rules.

What you cited are the rules in a sidebar on 6E2 39.

 

The real rules for Suprise are on 6E2 50 and are roughly:

The target normally can't abort (6E2 22). Block does not work.

The targest DCV is halved.

Most CSL to DCV don't apply (unless he has defense Maneuver at a high level).

When out of combat the target takes double STUN and the Hit Location penalties are halved (classical sniper situation).

 

Nope, I am not mistaken. I have it right here in front of me on page 51 of the 2cnd volume of the 6th edition rules. What you are talking about is "Surprised", not Surprise Move. Two completely different things.

It's on the same page as the rules for Target Size, Target Area and Unfamiliar Weapon.

 

Msot of teh stuff above: That is simply using the CSL you have on OCV. I think it would only allow thsoe with RL-knowledge and descriptive skills to get a bonus while those who aren't that good in describing (like me) would be penalized.

 

No, it's just a variation on the Surprise Move rules on page 51 of 6th ed book 2.

 

As far as those who aren't that good at describing, each GM should take that into consideration and apply the bonus accordingly.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

You sort of touched on this already, but the first thing to jump out at me: Your +3 Stunt example is very wordy. What if he misses anyway? What if he hits but gets a crap Damage Roll? Then he just wasted half a minute describing something that didn't happen, and the GM still has to describe what did happen. I could see this turning into a one-up of contest of power gaming by description if introduced to the wrong group. And what about the quieter player who doesn't think on his feet as fast or just isn't as good with vivid desription? Will he simply always suffer? And tying Exp into performing Stunts? Now he's just being punished.

 

I'm not against good description, but good description isn't always wordy and good RPing isn't always about who is the most gifted storyteller/BSer.

 

You are correct. Good description isn't always wordy. I would actually like a balance in between verbose and imaginative, and if I had to lean one way or the other, I would choose imaginative any day of the week over verbose. My description, as long as it was, was simply an example of the type of detail one would look for to give out a +3 bonus. As mentioned in the original text, other factors can weigh in, the biggest two being dramatic appropriateness and sheer coolness/wow factor.

 

As for missing, yes that's still possible, but with a +3 bonus, unlikely unless there is a significant disparity in the power level of the combatants in question. There is always the possibility of a miss though and that's a part of the deal. Of course, the GM has to be on his toes to describe the effects as they happen in compliment to what his players were going for.

 

As a GM what I have found myself doing over the years was taking people's basic descriptions "I hit him with my sword!" and turning it into a more verbose description of what happened based on the to-hit roll and hit location and damage results. This is of course our job as a GM, but I have also run into players who like to have some control over that themselves and I believe the Surprise Move rules could be adapted to facilitate such desire. In fact I want to foster such a desire in all my players if possible.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

You sort of touched on this already' date=' but the first thing to jump out at me: Your +3 Stunt example is very wordy. What if he misses anyway? What if he hits but gets a crap Damage Roll? Then he just wasted half a minute describing something that didn't happen, and the GM still has to describe what did happen. I could see this turning into a one-up of contest of power gaming by description if introduced to the wrong group. And what about the quieter player who doesn't think on his feet as fast or just isn't as good with vivid desription? Will he simply always suffer? And tying Exp into performing Stunts? Now he's just being punished.[/quote']

 

You have a point - any manouevre should be couched in terms of attempt rather than accomplishment. Hmmm. Let me attempt that with the text to hand....

 

+3 Stunt: "Diving forward, I thrust my sword toward my opponent. If he moves to parry, I will attempt to catch his with mine as I glide forward and slide my blade along his. I want to impale my enemy, to thrust my weapon into his stomach to the hilt. I want to stare into my opponents eyes knowing that his slayer shall be the last thing he ever sees. And, as the light of life begins to fade from his eyes, I will twist my blade, spin and yank the sword from his belly allowing his entrails to spill at his feet, gracefully spinning away to avoid the blood and guts. My character finishes by removing the blood from his sword with a flourish of his blade."

 

I know I will never get to that point in a game.

 

In a game situation the best I will get to is:

 

I want to lunge at him, trying to coax a parry. If he does parry, I will be ready with a new manouevre I have been practising, I want to use my blade to keep his away from me and open him up to a gut shot. This is important to me - I want to be up close and personal when he dies and if I do get in, I want to drive the shot home and allow him the privilege of knowing I killed him. What others think is important too so I will need to be ready to leap away from the gore and to clean my sword ready for anyone else who thinks they can impugn my honour....

 

I'm not sure what this means to me as a GM or whether a +3 to hit covers it. I might provide some kind of roll for fencing/swordsmanship to guage the practice and whether it is implemented perfectly. I would have a combination attack of strike and pin (possibly offset by +3 bonus) and allow the possibility of a free haymaker to a called location....

 

Hmm. Still not sure.

 

I like the idea that there should be more guidance to Surprise Move but I think that should be on what you do to warrant a surprise move rather than the description behind it...

 

Diving across the floor to pull the curtain your opponent has inadvertantly tread upon, to yank him off his feet and provide you with a prone opponent - is a surprise move.

 

Using a combat fencing manoeuvre in a sword fight should not really be a surprise move...

 

IMO.

 

Doc

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

First off, nice combat descriptions. Very colorful.

 

I have to agree with Doc D though, that fancy fencing is not Surprise-worthy. If a character wants that kind of bonus he should buy extra skill levels with the sfx "Tricky moves".

 

A few examples in the text would have helped I admit. In my games Surprise Moves are mostly doing things that the opponent wouldn't consider because they aren't very effective, or not immediately so. This could be as simple as stabbing with the dagger in the fencer's offhand instead of using the higher damage sword, or more complicated like flinging a bottle of alcohol at him which in itself won't do much damage but can be ignited in a later phase. This encourages players to not rely solely on their most powerful attack over and over.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

Why not just buy a few Skill Levels with Incantations and a note that, rather than the character, the player must "incant" (by describing his surprise move).

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

Why not just buy a few Skill Levels with Incantations and a note that' date=' rather than the character, the [i']player[/i] must "incant" (by describing his surprise move).

 

Because I like the mechanics of Surprise Move and I really liked the way it worked in Exalted. It's not something you must use, but it's there for when the inspiration hits.

[Greywind]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

A surprise move also would depend on the character. The Scarlet Witch, who's main thing is "strike a pose and point" would get a surprise modifier for anyone that new her and her attack paradigm when she hauled back and belted them.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

So, if I can improve my OCV by a detailed description of my attack, can I enhance my DCV through a detailed description of my defense style? "I will raise my shield a bit higher than it should be, hoping to entice an attack on my lower legs, prepared all the while to spring up, and jump over his blade, thereby throwing him off-balance and making him vulnerable to a downward stroke from my axe in my next phase." That should get me a DCV bonus now and an OCV bonus for my next attack, right?

 

And yet, if I keep repeating the same thing against different opponents, while it should logically continue to be equally surprising to them, my bonus will likely erode as it will be less surprising to the GM and players.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

So' date=' if I can improve my OCV by a detailed description of my attack, can I enhance my DCV through a detailed description of my defense style? "I will raise my shield a bit higher than it should be, hoping to entice an attack on my lower legs, prepared all the while to spring up, and jump over his blade, thereby throwing him off-balance and making him vulnerable to a downward stroke from my axe in my next phase." That should get me a DCV bonus now and an OCV bonus for my next attack, right?[/quote']

 

Yes, absolutely. I would definitely give a bonus to DCV for a description like that. (probably just +1). I probably wouldn't allow for a bonus to carry over to the next phase, however I wouldn't have a problem with a player who could continue with a description of his move during his next phase to make them seem one smooth motion. Thus, the enemy being thrown off balance for the downward strike would be the description for the characters attack in the next phase if the situation doesn't change to negate the opportunity.

 

And yet, if I keep repeating the same thing against different opponents, while it should logically continue to be equally surprising to them, my bonus will likely erode as it will be less surprising to the GM and players.

 

Essentially, yes. Each individual situation would be taken into consideration of course, and if the action would truly be surprising to the enemy at hand, a decent bonus could be generated, but using this method the main point is to add color to combat and adventuring so varying one's descriptions is essential. Otherwise I would just use Surprise Move as stated in the main books.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Revisiting Surprise Move.

 

Essentially' date=' yes. Each individual situation would be taken into consideration of course, and if the action would truly be surprising to the enemy at hand, a decent bonus could be generated, but using this method the main point is to add color to combat and adventuring so varying one's descriptions is essential. Otherwise I would just use Surprise Move as stated in the main books.[/quote']

 

This seems, then, to be less of a "surprise maneuver" bonus (ie a bonus for a maneuver that surprises the enemy) and more a bonus for the player making the game more entertaining (and a bonus for those with tons of free time to make up and write down these descriptions). To me, that would not logically replace the surprise maneuver bonus (bouncing your attack off the wall seems like it would surprise opponents on an ongoing basis, not just the first time) but replace the xp bonuses and penalties for good role playing.

 

It seems like a variant on the "good/great/awesome soliloquy" bonuses for PRE attacks, actually. It also seems a freebie for the PC's - put a little effort into your descriptions and get a steady +1 bonus. The NPC's can't reasonably do the same without cries of GM favortism (as the GM must assess the appropriate bonus).