Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

 

It could be ruled as just the sfx of using a haymaker.

 

Elegant. And repped.

[Kirby]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Would that motivate a player to take this action? If not' date=' why should it motivate anyone else? It happens too universally to be a character or two valuing "cool" over "effective", especially when its use increases in the toughest fights.[/quote']Well, you're quoting a response where you asked about Hulk and the Thing, so it's not about players, it's about comic books and cartoons and movies where the author gets to decide why. As for players, I've gamed with a guy whose character was a clown-themed martial artist. In one plot's climax, he was face to face with the villain who had captured his parents and held them hostage. When he got to do his first attack, he declined to use any of his weapons or martial arts and instead chose 3d6 Strength attack to the face. :shrug:

This is the more logical aspect - there must be some reason' date=' mechanically, to do this. It can't logically be range - they're already fighting HTH. It doesn't seem like it improves the odds of hitting - they're having no difficulty hitting with their fists. They are, however, having a tough time taking the target down, so doing more damage seems the most likely reason.[/quote']This was talking about using sticks and baseball bats in a fight. Do you honestly think if anyone is fighting for their life and they have a choice between their fists and/or baseball bats that they aren't going to choose a baseball bat? That's like saying "No, I'm going to fight this knight with my hands, because why use a sword/mace/dagger at this range?"

Here we get to the limitations of using the object as a weapon. With the damage bonus being available only if the object's combined DEF + BOD exceeds your STR DC's' date=' a large tree has 5 PD + 11 BOD = 18. A 75+ STR attacker will gain no damage bonus from using a tree (STR over 80 loses damage). How strong must an attacker be to be a credible foe for Superman? If he has, say, a 60 STR, so he could get a 3d6 damage bonus from a large tree, maybe it's worth the phase it would take to grab and uproot it before attacking. Is it worthwhile for a 1d6 bonus?[/quote']Would you rather do 12d6 or 13d6?

Except that the agile opponents tend to avoid those big objects....

Not if they've already attacked that phase.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Well' date=' you're quoting a response where you asked about Hulk and the Thing, so it's not about players, it's about comic books and cartoons and movies where the author gets to decide why.[/quote']

 

It's about source material from the genre the game is striving to emulate. If the characters do this all the time in the source material, it seems reasonable to expect they'll do it all the time in the game. An advantage encourages this to happen frequently in the game, and a disadvantage discourages it.

 

This was talking about using sticks and baseball bats in a fight. Do you honestly think if anyone is fighting for their life and they have a choice between their fists and/or baseball bats that they aren't going to choose a baseball bat? That's like saying "No' date=' I'm going to fight this knight with my hands, because why use a sword/mace/dagger at this range?"[/quote']

 

And why do we find that such an obvious choice? It's not because it looks cool. It's because it is more effective - it does more damage.

 

Would you rather do 12d6 or 13d6?

 

All other things being equal, 13d6. But, all other things being equal, all other things are rarely, if ever, equal. If I spend one phase to grab the object so I can attack in the second for 13d6, perhaps two attacks for 12d6 each would have been more effective. If I have a 13- to hit for 12d6, and that bus will drop me down to 9- to hit for 13d6, 12d6 is looking pretty good. Of course, that preference could also be changed by my opponent's defenses.

 

Let's not forget that I could also have Haymaker'd (extra segment + DCV penalty) to add 4d6. Would you rather do 12d6 or 16d6? And you Haymaker how often?

 

Not if they've already attacked that phase.

 

It's pretty hit & miss in the comics whether the target of that attack, who nimbly avoids it, has been appreciably slowed in doing so. Seems to me guys like Spider-Man and the Beast often leap onto that huge object hurled at them (avoiding any damage), then launch themselves off the object to counterattack. Seems like one phase to dodge/dive for cover and a second to attack weren't required.

[Kirby]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

It's about source material from the genre the game is striving to emulate. If the characters do this all the time in the source material' date=' it seems reasonable to expect they'll do it all the time in the game. An advantage encourages this to happen frequently in the game, and a disadvantage discourages it.[/quote']And an advantage with a disadvantage makes it player's preference. No big mystery there.

And why do we find that such an obvious choice? It's not because it looks cool. It's because it is more effective - it does more damage.

You're assuming that it doesn't look cool for everyone then? You're making more assumptions. You're stating that people wouldn't use a bat over fists because of A) range' date=' or accuracy, thus they would only use for C) Damage. That's a fallacy. If one person is swinging a baseball bat, he has all three of those advantages. The bat has a longer reach, the bat is as accurate or moreso and quicker, as well as the bat doing more damage. The downside is a swing-and-a-miss can leave you exposed. You're changing the topic again. Your original point that I was responding to was about the Hulk and Thing using cars. Yes, that looks cool to most of the [i']target audience[/i]. The laws of physics aren't really adhered to in this genre.

All other things being equal' date=' 13d6. But, all other things being equal, all other things are rarely, if ever, equal. If I spend one phase to grab the object so I can attack in the second for 13d6, perhaps two attacks for 12d6 each would have been more effective.[/quote']Why end there? If you go four phases, you can have: obtain, 13d6AoE, 13d6AoE, 13d6AoE, or 12d6, 12d6, 12d6, 12d6. If you're fighting granny, the extra 1d6 doesn't matter. A rationale deduction would state that if a PC can do 12d6, but chooses to spend one extra phase to do 13d6, then they're facing a tougher opponent or opponents where that extra d6 (or AoE) will be more useful. (And we can "assume" that an extra phase is worthwhile considering that's an already written limitation for Extra Time.)

 

On the flip side, how many PCs look at a bus and say "with my strength I can only do 1d6 extra with that"? Unless the PC has Skill associated with bus combat, he shouldn't know the pluses and minuses ahead of time. Not all buses and automobiles are created equally.

If I have a 13- to hit for 12d6' date=' and that bus will drop me down to 9- to hit for 13d6, 12d6 is looking pretty good. Of course, that preference could also be changed by my opponent's defenses.[/quote']Ah, the infinite "what if" scenario. What if you have three opponents in range of said bus? What if you have 10? A 13d6AoE is looking a lot more impressive. What if I have half a car on my off-hand already? It's like sword and shield time, just bulkier.

Let's not forget that I could also have Haymaker'd (extra segment + DCV penalty) to add 4d6. Would you rather do 12d6 or 16d6? And you Haymaker how often?

My personal haymaker ratio is irrelevant, especially considered that I haven't HERO'd any dice in 4+ years. I could easily use an old roommate of mine as an example. He used to haymaker at least once per combat. (We called him an idiot savant because he had seemingly perfect timing to succeed at the nigh-impossible.) His brick character was having a difficult time hitting Green Dragon in a fight once. Green Dragon was mocking him. My roommate opted for a Haymaker. Green Dragon saw it coming and opted to Dodge. My roommate needed a 3 to hit. He hit and KO'd Green Dragon.

It's pretty hit & miss in the comics whether the target of that attack' date=' who nimbly avoids it, has been appreciably slowed in doing so. Seems to me guys like Spider-Man and the Beast often leap onto that huge object hurled at them (avoiding any damage), then launch themselves off the object to counterattack. Seems like one phase to dodge/dive for cover and a second to attack weren't required.[/quote']

You're changing subjects again to either make or "win" your point. The rest of your paragraph was about game mechanics here, so why you're now back to talking about how it works in a comic is strange, especially when you were asking about why would the Hulk and Thing do this to hit each other and then respond that Spiderman latches on. For comics/cartoons/movies, it's what the author wants to happen. Logic need not apply.

 

If we're going back to game mechanics, there are always multiple possibilities. We've already discussed AoE and potential OCV bonuses, but if John Doe's brick uses a bus to smash Master Evil (working on his doctorate, I swear!), maybe he's also thinking that M. Evil will have to use a full phase to get the bus off of him; he can't rightly roll to his feet with Breakfall while a bus is on him.

 

Back onto topic: A rule I didn't know until 5E (I don't have any 6E) is that Find Weakness is susceptible to range modifiers and cannot be used with auto-fire.

[griffinman01]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

I've always felt that using an object should give you a few benefits at the cost of some penalties.

Benefits:

1) Chance for AoE on big objects.

2) Added damage. This is one where I disagree with the book because dense objects hurt more than fists alone. Otherwise brass knuckles would be worthless. If we're talking a normal fight between two guys in a park, are you telling me that one of them isn't going to try and pick up a rock to hit someone with it? If it doesn't do any extra damage, then why would you bother? Obviously you keep the maximum as written (ie, max DC is Def+Body of the object) but I figure you add the def of the object to the damage of an attack.

3) As Kirby mentioned above, the chance of incapacitating someone by forcing them to get back on their feet or lift a large object off of them.

 

Penalties:

1) DCV penalty. If you've got a big bulky object in your hands there's no way you can move nimbly, regardless of weight. Try picking up an empty cardboard box the size of a washing machine and tell me that you have the same capacity to dodge an attack as you just standing there.

2) OCV penalty. You get it for using unbalanced objects being thrown and, as far as I can remember, using them as melee attacks. Even if it's not the RAW I think it should be since, once again, using something that doesn't have any places to grip it is going to make it harder to hit with it. Any OCV boosts on these kind of objects should be granted by the fact that you typically get an AoE effect on them. It doesn't matter if you can't get a firm grip on a bus to throw it since it'll smear anything underneath it anyways.

3) Extra time. Not even the hulk can uproot a building instantly so you should have to take some time to rip something out of the ground (or pick it up if it's heavy/bulky) before using it to attack.

 

The idea of it is you should get more benefit from the object than penalties and I think using these ideas make for a better balance. You use up some extra time and might lower your chance to hit, as well as leave yourself open (no worse than you'd see when using a haymaker) for some extra damage, a chance for some AoE, and maybe even trap the guy underneath the object.

 

Keep in mind that not everyone is capable of doing this kind of maneuver and it's also highly dependent on the objects around the characters so it's very restrictive. It's not like a haymaker that anyone can use with any attack, only the strong (40+ STR) characters could probably pull it off and only if something happens to be nearby. So, having it be less useful than a haymaker kind of ruins the whole point of adding it in the game in the first place.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Part of my issue with this is that, if it's too useful, the characters will do it by default; they will ALWAYS want to smash their opponents with something. Yes, it happens with some frequency in the comics, but I don't recall anybody ever seriously thinking 'I could just beat this guy if I had a car to swing'.

 

I rank Game Balance as more important than realism or genre simulation. Just the way I am.

[mallet]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

I agree with a lot of what has been said already about using cars, trees, etc... to make it easier to hit a target and have other situational advantages (range, etc...), but the mention of "the Hulk ripping a car in two and using it as boxing gloves to fight the abomination" got me thinking about an optional rule I toyed around with a while back but never got to work and never used, but it might explain the "why?" in this situation.

 

In the real world or a realistic setting if a you punched a brick wall you would break your hand. Heck, people break knuckles and fingers, etc... quiet often in hand to hand combat. Hitting things with your hands can and does also hurt your hands in return. Hulk punching a wooden wall might not hurt his hands, hulk punching the rocky and super hard Thing might hurt himself in the process.

 

There are no rules for this in Hero (as far as I know), and to be honest it would be a crazy thing to simulate in combat (imagine using rules like this in a martial arts campaign?) but that can be a reason for using other objects in combat rather then your fists.

 

If Superman is as hard as steel (or harder), then me punching him full strength would result in me breaking my hand, just as if I had punched the side of a tank full strength.

It also always slightly irked me that bare-fisted a "monk" might fights a "Knight" in full steel armour, punching him and not hurting his hands.

 

So how to simulate this? Back in the day I was thinking something like:

 

Character A lands a Punch in hand to hand against Character B.

Character A Rolls damage.

If the damage rolled is more then Character B's defences play as normal.

If the damage rolled is less then Characters B's armour/resistant defences then...

Character A applies the damage rolled against his himself.

If Character A's own defences are enough to negate the damage then nothing happens and the fight continues.

If Character A's defences are not enough to negate the damage, then he takes damage as normal to his character.

 

This means if a normal guy is stupid enough to punch a guy in full, metal armour then he is going to hurt himself.

This also means it is smart to use improvised weapons when possible because it is the weapons that break, not your hands.

This type of rule also makes using Trips, Throws, Shoves, Choke Holds, etc... more useful if you are fighting someone you cant straight out punch with your fist without hurting yourself in return.

 

In the Hulk vs Thing example above, the Hulk used the car as "boxing gloves" for himself, adding their DEF+BOD to his own, only to avoid taking damage to his own hands when he hit the Thing.

 

Again, maybe getting a little too detailed, but it might have its uses in some realistic genres and settings.

[Greywind]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Part of my issue with this is that, if it's too useful, the characters will do it by default; they will ALWAYS want to smash their opponents with something. Yes, it happens with some frequency in the comics, but I don't recall anybody ever seriously thinking 'I could just beat this guy if I had a car to swing'.

 

I rank Game Balance as more important than realism or genre simulation. Just the way I am.

 

Define "Game Balance".

 

In a game like Champions, the only balance required is between the GM and the players, and even that scale usually swings to the players if they come up with something.

[griffinman01]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Part of my issue with this is that, if it's too useful, the characters will do it by default; they will ALWAYS want to smash their opponents with something. Yes, it happens with some frequency in the comics, but I don't recall anybody ever seriously thinking 'I could just beat this guy if I had a car to swing'.

 

I rank Game Balance as more important than realism or genre simulation. Just the way I am.

 

There are plenty of ways to balance things if it really becomes an issue. Extra time, DCV penalties, etc, like I mentioned. It works for haymakers and it would work here as well. Or the other way to balance it is by not having a hundred cars for people to use. Give them one or two in an area and make them single-use objects. Most improvised weapons probably wouldn't last more than one good hit in reality and in the game so it's not unreasonable to rule that once you use it for an attack, the object gets wrecked. You could still have it leave rubble that could cause movement issues, but otherwise you assume that there aren't enough solid chunks to provide any real bonus.

 

Game balance is important but it shouldn't overshadow the fun of it. If throwing trucks around becomes more trouble than it's worth in a superhero game then I think you lose the point of it. Doing that kind of absurd stuff is fun and I don't want to rob that because the players throwing a few extra damage dice might cause a fight to end a phase or two faster. In the end, if everyone had fun, then that's all that really matters.

[MrAgdesh]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Except that the agile opponents tend to avoid those big objects' date=' indicating AoE is too generous compared to the source material. [/quote']Dive for Cover rather than Dodge? This also provides for the SFX of Spidey clinging to the actual object and spending a panel of the action doing so.

It's pretty hit & miss in the comics whether the target of that attack' date=' who nimbly avoids it, has been appreciably slowed in doing so. Seems to me guys like Spider-Man and the Beast often leap onto that huge object hurled at them (avoiding any damage), then launch themselves off the object to counterattack. Seems like one phase to dodge/dive for cover and a second to attack weren't required.[/quote']The nimble character probably isn't usually appreciably slowed, but in the dramatic sense - the actual run of panels - you could at least argue that he is. So, Hulk stoops and picks up an adjacent car in one panel, brings it down on Spidey in the next. He looks for the remains of the Wall Crawler in the next, where we see Spidey clinging to the remains of the object in the next panel. I don't ever recall a Dive for Cover + counterattack in the same panel. I've allowed AoE attacks with improvised weapons for years, and a boost to damage. Bricks use AoE weapons against more nimble opponents to stand a far better chance of hitting them, forcing them to DfC. They use them against other bricks to get more damage through. I have no problem emphasising this and use the old Flextiles product to positively encourage it. :)If you are concerned that this unbalances Bricks in my game against nimble characters, it never has. Nimble characters will almost always be 1-2 SPD higher and thus can afford to abort to DfC maneuvers and so on.

[MrAgdesh]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

In the real world or a realistic setting if a you punched a brick wall you would break your hand. Heck' date=' people break knuckles and fingers, etc... quiet often in hand to hand combat. Hitting things with your hands can and does also hurt your hands in return. Hulk punching a wooden wall might not hurt his hands, hulk punching the rocky and super hard Thing might hurt himself in the process.[/quote']Amazing Spider-Man, #141, where Mysterio causes Spider-Man to attack a brick wall thinking that he is being attacked by his Rogues Gallery. This causes problems for him in this and the following issue.

There are no rules for this in Hero (as far as I know)' date=' and to be honest it would be a crazy thing to simulate in combat (imagine using rules like this in a martial arts campaign?) but that can be a reason for using other objects in combat rather then your fists. [/quote']5th Ed Ultimate Brick pgs; 27-28 6th Ed APG pg; 12 Typically this consists of strength thresholds - your PD vs STR and how accustomed your body is to using high strength.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

And an advantage with a disadvantage makes it player's preference. No big mystery there.

 

Yes and no. It depends on the nature of each advantage and disadvantage, and the specific situation. If I can hit on a 15-, but my average damage falls 3 points short of my target's defenses, a -4 penalty to OCV in exchange for +3d6 damage is an excellent trade. If I can hit on an 8-, and my average damage past defenses will be 25+ and stun the target, even a small OCV penalty to add any amount of damage is likely a poor trade.

 

More common in older editions, if I take pretty much any OCV penalty the book provided for, it was typically worth it to convert my attack to AoE and target a high DEC low defense opponent, even if I lost a few dice of damage. It was a no-brainer to throw a car at Spider-Man.

 

You're assuming that it doesn't look cool for everyone then?

 

I'm assuming looking cool is not top priority for most people in a fight for their lives (and the use of weapons of opportunity in the comics tends to rise as the combat becomes more dangerous, where it's easier combats that invite one to take a disadvantage to look cool - I'll win anyway, so why not look good doing it?)

 

You're making more assumptions. You're stating that people wouldn't use a bat over fists because of A) range' date=' or accuracy, thus they would only use for C) Damage. That's a fallacy. If one person is swinging a baseball bat, he has all three of those advantages. The bat has a longer reach, the bat is as accurate or moreso and quicker, as well as the bat doing more damage. The downside is a swing-and-a-miss can leave you exposed. You're changing the topic again. Your original point that I was responding to was about the Hulk and Thing using cars. Yes, that looks cool to most of the [i']target audience[/i]. The laws of physics aren't really adhered to in this genre.

 

I don't necessarily concur that the bat has all the advantages you attribute to it. However, I note you include "extra damage" as one advantage. This supports the assertion that swinging a car, a bus, a tree likely also enhancs damage. Remove that, and we remove verissimilitude. If we call the bat a "club", it does extra damage in Hero (depending on one's base damage, but certainly for a normal). It adds neither OCV nor reach. If we make it an improvised weapon instead, it still adds damage, but neither OCV nor reach. As such, if I accept your presumption, the game still fails to provide the advantages an improvised weapon should provide. I'm OK with the game simplifier that the added range and accuracy, and the offsetting loss of DCV on a miss (or overall) are low enough that they are not quantified. Quantifying them would certainly be another option.

 

Why end there? If you go four phases' date=' you can have: obtain, 13d6AoE, 13d6AoE, 13d6AoE, or 12d6, 12d6, 12d6, 12d6. If you're fighting granny, the extra 1d6 doesn't matter. A rationale deduction would state that if a PC can do 12d6, but chooses to spend one extra phase to do 13d6, then they're facing a tougher opponent or opponents where that extra d6 (or AoE) will be more useful. (And we can "assume" that an extra phase is worthwhile considering that's an already written limitation for Extra Time.)[/quote']

 

First off, because I'm not trying to assess a situation where the extra OCV or AoE is relevant - the Hulk and the Thing have no trouble hitting each other with fists, so that is not the logical reason they would choose to use the bus. Is a 1d6 bonus sufficient? Maybe. If my average damage past defenses is 2, and the bus moves that up to 5, getting one hit with the bus is better than two hits with my fists. If average damage from my fists is 10 past defenses, adding 3 from the bus isn't worth losing a phase. I need to get 4 attacks in with the bus.

 

Why not 4 attacks? Because a bus as 4 defenses and 17 BOD. The first hit will add damage (more than 1d6 if I had a 60 STR, actually). The bus will take 13 BOD on that first 13d6 attack, 9 of which get through. It now has 4 DEF and 8 BOD, and can inflict a maximum of 12d6. Now, if we apply the 6e rules, my 60 STR character adds 4d6, so 14 damage past defenses. The bus loses 12 BOD so it's useless after that first hit, but an extra 14 past defenses may well be more worthwhile than an extra 12d6 attack.

 

On the flip side' date=' how many PCs look at a bus and say "with my strength I can only do 1d6 extra with that"? Unless the PC has Skill associated with bus combat, he shouldn't know the pluses and minuses ahead of time. Not all buses and automobiles are created equally.[/quote']

 

If you follow the rules and the player is conversant with them, he knows what the bonuses are. That's an aspect of the game having rules that real life lacks. However, as you note, the guy choosing between the baseball bat and his bare hands knows there is an advantage, despite not having the same quantification. He also knows using a pillow instead would not be prudent, but a big rock likely would be. Characters, like real people, should have some understanding of the physics of their environment. The big difference is that game rules quantify that knowledge.

 

Ah' date=' the infinite "what if" scenario. What if you have three opponents in range of said bus? What if you have 10? A 13d6AoE is looking a lot more impressive. What if I have half a car on my off-hand already? It's like sword and shield time, just bulkier.[/quote']

 

And that changes the balance, making the bus more desirable, even if it adds no damage. That's why weapons of opportunity have historically been used more against big groups of agents (though often not for that maximum 12d6 damage, for fear of seriously injuring them), and against high DCV targets. It is my opinion that large objects have too great an advantage if allowed to be used as full AoE attacks, and should be Non-Selective, barring extreme situations, with size providing a potential OCV advantage, but not full "target DCV 3" benefits. If damage is enhanced, and OCV/AoE less enhanced, then there are reasons to hit the Hulk (more damage), Spider-Man (better OCV) and 15 agents (hit most or all of them) with the bus. That's what happens in the comics. If damage is not enhanced, but I get full AoE, then there's no reason to waste time with a bus to hit the Hulk, and it's an autowin against Spider-Man, neither of which is consistent with the source material. Agenst? Well, they're getting crushed either way - sucks to be an agent!

 

My personal haymaker ratio is irrelevant' date=' especially considered that I haven't HERO'd any dice in 4+ years. I could easily use an old roommate of mine as an example. He used to haymaker at least once per combat. (We called him an idiot savant because he had seemingly perfect timing to succeed at the nigh-impossible.) His brick character was having a difficult time hitting Green Dragon in a fight once. Green Dragon was mocking him. My roommate opted for a Haymaker. Green Dragon saw it coming and opted to Dodge. My roommate needed a 3 to hit. He hit and KO'd Green Dragon.[/quote']

 

No accounting for luck (though GD exercised pretty poor tactics dodging rather than moving a couple of meters away). The ratio is relevant in that players conversant with the math recognize the haymaker is extremely situational, and most often not the best choice.

 

You're changing subjects again to either make or "win" your point. The rest of your paragraph was about game mechanics here' date=' so why you're now back to talking about how it works in a comic is strange, especially when you were asking about why would the Hulk and Thing do this to hit each other and then respond that Spiderman latches on. For comics/cartoons/movies, it's what the author wants to happen. Logic need not apply.[/quote']

 

The purpose of the game mechanics, in my view, is to emulate the source material. In the source material, the Hulk and the Thing bash each other wth objects of opportunity. Either this carries some advantage to offset any disadvantages, or there are no advanatges or drawbacks and they just do it to look cool. I don't think Ben Grimm causes property damage just to look cool, so I think there must be an advantage. If the game fails to import some advantage, it fails to properly emulate the source material. If it provides no drawbacks, this becomes a game balance issue. Both are important. When the game makes smashing the Hulk with a bus lack any advantage, it fails to emulate the source material. When it makes throwing a car at Spidey an autowin, that also fails to emulate the source material.

 

The 6e approach that adds damage makes the Hulk/Thing matchup better emulate th source material. The use of OCV bonuses, not AoE, makes the thrown car at Spidey better emulate the source material. To me, both are wins.

 

If we're going back to game mechanics' date=' there are always multiple possibilities. We've already discussed AoE and potential OCV bonuses, but if John Doe's brick uses a bus to smash Master Evil (working on his doctorate, I swear!), maybe he's also thinking that M. Evil will have to use a full phase to get the bus off of him; he can't rightly roll to his feet with Breakfall while a bus is on him.[/quote']

 

Other possible uses, none of which explain the Hulk/Thing scenario. That very common brick vs brick source material mandates an advantage in that kind of combat. And if slamming a bus on any opponent with under, say, 35 STR means he can't get back up, so autowin, I'd consider that an excessive advantage because, again [chorus]that's not what happens in the source material[/chorus]

 

Back onto topic: A rule I didn't know until 5E (I don't have any 6E) is that Find Weakness is susceptible to range modifiers and cannot be used with auto-fire.

 

Not much of a rule for CC (or 6e) given 6e got rid of FW. That rule does make it that much tougher to build an accurate FW replacement in 6e, though.

 

Keep in mind that not everyone is capable of doing this kind of maneuver and it's also highly dependent on the objects around the characters so it's very restrictive. It's not like a haymaker that anyone can use with any attack' date=' only the strong (40+ STR) characters could probably pull it off and only if something happens to be nearby. So, having it be less useful than a haymaker kind of ruins the whole point of adding it in the game in the first place.[/quote']

 

That's a two edged sword. If it's overly useful, then it enhances the value of strong (40+) STR characters over other archetypes. Allowing it to convert STR into a ranged AoE provides a substantial advantage to a slow Brick over a speedy Martial Artist, since the MA's advantages are easily negated by the Brick. And a DCV penalty to the Brick is of little note - the MA will pretty much always hit him anyway..

 

Part of my issue with this is that, if it's too useful, the characters will do it by default; they will ALWAYS want to smash their opponents with something. Yes, it happens with some frequency in the comics, but I don't recall anybody ever seriously thinking 'I could just beat this guy if I had a car to swing'.

 

I rank Game Balance as more important than realism or genre simulation. Just the way I am.

 

It's a tradeoff. There should be some reason to use the object of opportunity, as we otherwise fail to emulate the comics. It should not be so powerful as to override game balance.

 

As I see it, however, it's much MORE balanced if it provides a "brick vs brick" advantage. Either the Hulk or the Thing can heft that bus and slam it into his opponent. The old model, where it provided no real advantage against a tough, easily struck opponent (like most Bricks) but was a game-ender against a high DCV, low defense opponent (martial artist, Spidey) or even one who could better fight from range (flying EP, for example) means that the Brick gets all his advantages against other Bricks, and gets to use objects of opportunity against non-bricks. That, to me, is a far worse crime against game balance.

[ayinde]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

I use the improvised weapon rule but in my game you need to make a dirty fighter skill roll to use one this is a everyman skill 8- but some of my players have sunk points into it if there concept calls for it

[Kirby]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Yes and no.

 

I'm assuming....

 

I don't necessarily concur....

 

...no trouble hitting each other with fists, so that is not the logical....

 

...the rules and the player is conversant with them....

 

No accounting....

Okay, to sum everything up you're stating:

1) Player preferences don't matter if you have one example where it doesn't make sense to you.

2) You don't understand why a lone author would write a story for a comic, cartoon or movie about bricks using vehicles because the HERO system doesn't always make it beneficial.

3) Any assumption you make is a talking point, regardless of real examples disproving it.

4) You use player knowledge over character knowledge and assume everyone would to.

5) You'll argue against any response, even if you initially agree with it.

 

Things that make you go, "Hmm."

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Okay' date=' to sum everything up you're stating:[/quote']

 

OK, to sum up your lack of comprehension:

 

1) Player preferences don't matter if you have one example where it doesn't make sense to you.

 

High strength Supers striking each other with large weapons of opportunity is not an isolated corner case in the source material. It is nigh on universal. In my view, such common tropes should be handled by the game.

 

2) You don't understand why a lone author would write a story for a comic' date=' cartoon or movie about bricks using vehicles because the HERO system doesn't always make it beneficial.[/quote']

 

Again, I feel there should be a reason that common tropes in the source material would make their way to the game. That reason is typically that they will be, in some way, advantageous. In the absence of an advantage, these tactics would not be so widely adopted, especially by skilled and experienced characters. That it is advantageous when the target is out of HTH range, is difficult to hit and/or there are multiple targets provides many reasons for using improvised weapons. None of those reasons explain why they would be used in HTH against a single target who is not difficult to hit. Such uses are common in the source material, so the game system would do well to provide a reason. The one which seems most likely is "it does more damage", but I'd be open to other advantages.

 

"Blazing Away" is a simple example of a maneuver which provides an explanation for a seemingly foolish common trope. Is it universally beneficial? Far from it. But it provides a reason for this strange, but pretty common, tactic to be adopted. An old Dark Champions edition incorporated a trenchcoat as being a focus for Lack of Weakness, stating that's why so many of these characters wear trenchcoats. An in-game reason for a genre trope.

 

The game mechanics have to serve two objectives here, however. They also need to maintain an appropriate level of game balance. There should be a reason to use these weapons of opportunity - they get used in the source material, so that should translate into the game. The advantages should not be so great that use of a weapon of opportunity is a game-ender. That makes this maneuver too powerful.

 

3) Any assumption you make is a talking point' date=' regardless of real examples disproving it.[/quote']

 

As assumption is not disproven solely due to your statement it has been disproven.

 

4) You use player knowledge over character knowledge and assume everyone would to.

 

Do your players with a 12d6 Blast and a 10 STR commonly engage in hand to hand combat, or use their player knowledge that the Blast is more powerful? You pointed to the fact that no one would engage in combat bare handed if they could use a baseball bat instead because they know it does more damage. How do they know this? Characters have some reasonable grasp of how their world works. Presumably, for all those comic book Bricks to keep using big objects to smash other comic book Bricks, after many years of experience, that experience must show these tactics are more effective. Or do you assume players ignore their experience and keep using tactics that historically fail?

 

5) You'll argue against any response' date=' even if you initially agree with it.[/quote']

 

I'll assess and discuss most, if not all, points under discussion.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

I've allowed AoE attacks with improvised weapons for years' date=' and a boost to damage. Bricks use AoE weapons against more nimble opponents to stand a far better chance of hitting them, forcing them to DfC. They use them against other bricks to get more damage through. I have no problem emphasising this and use the old Flextiles product to positively encourage it. :)If you are concerned that this unbalances Bricks in my game against nimble characters, it never has. Nimble characters will almost always be 1-2 SPD higher and thus can afford to abort to DfC maneuvers and so on.[/quote']

 

It's obviously working for you, so that's the real test.

 

To me, being able to routinely force those nimble characters to DFC, leaving them prone and thus at 1/2 DCV until their next phase, means a nimble character has no hope if his opposition use any teamwork whatsoever. One thrown car + another character delaying until Mr. Nimble is prone = Mr. Nimble KO'd.

[Kirby]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

If Superman is as hard as steel (or harder), then me punching him full strength would result in me breaking my hand, just as if I had punched the side of a tank full strength.

It also always slightly irked me that bare-fisted a "monk" might fights a "Knight" in full steel armour, punching him and not hurting his hands.

As a side note, bare-fisting a knight in armor is actually in the realm of possibility if one is committed enough and willing to live with ugly calcium deposits on your hands. When I was younger, I used to bare knuckle train on punching bags in the gym until I bled. My co-worker (who worked out there as well) always thought I was crazy to not protect them with wrappings or gloves, but it toughened them enough that by the time I was able to consistently throw 100 punches in a minute, I was also able to tear the stitching of the bags. I was told to stop after that and alas, I didn't continue elsewhere, but had I done so and followed the proper routine, punching steel would have eventually been on my "hit list."

 

Another side note: Electricity doesn't do extra damage to knights in full armor; in fact, it protects them.

 

/end side topic derail

[MrAgdesh]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

It's obviously working for you, so that's the real test.

 

To me, being able to routinely force those nimble characters to DFC, leaving them prone and thus at 1/2 DCV until their next phase, means a nimble character has no hope if his opposition use any teamwork whatsoever. One thrown car + another character delaying until Mr. Nimble is prone = Mr. Nimble KO'd.

 

I wouldn't call it routine. There will be a finite number of "weapons of opportunity" on a battlemap, whether you apply flextiles or draw the scenery on yourself. The items are almost certainly spread out across the map so that at least a half-move, maybe a full one is required to pick them up.

[psyber624]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

My issues with allowing extra damage from "Large objects of opportunity" such as buses and such is that it makes high strength even more powerful than normal. Especially as a generic rule that theoretically anyone can use (but only High Strength characters can actually take advantage of). It biases the game towards that archetype. A 60 Str character can then easily do more damage than a 12d6 energy blaster, without paying anything for it.

 

This is why I feel that using it either as A. the special effect for a haymaker (which everyone can do), or B. requiring the character to buy the extra damage with an appropriate limitation (as a "Brick Trick") should be required. Both of these options make it easy to emulate the comic feel of Brick fighting without giving Brick's extra power over everyone else for free. And honestly its the "for free" issues that is my main sticking point. No archetype gets any of its "standard comic book" abilities for free just because they choose that archetype. Why should bricks be any different? If they want extra damage they should have to pay for it just like anyone else, or use one of the standard available options to do so (again, just like anyone else.)

[Tasha]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

My issues with allowing extra damage from "Large objects of opportunity" such as buses and such is that it makes high strength even more powerful than normal. Especially as a generic rule that theoretically anyone can use (but only High Strength characters can actually take advantage of). It biases the game towards that archetype. A 60 Str character can then easily do more damage than a 12d6 energy blaster, without paying anything for it.

 

This is why I feel that using it either as A. the special effect for a haymaker (which everyone can do), or B. requiring the character to buy the extra damage with an appropriate limitation (as a "Brick Trick") should be required. Both of these options make it easy to emulate the comic feel of Brick fighting without giving Brick's extra power over everyone else for free. And honestly its the "for free" issues that is my main sticking point. No archetype gets any of its "standard comic book" abilities for free just because they choose that archetype. Why should bricks be any different? If they want extra damage they should have to pay for it just like anyone else, or use one of the standard available options to do so (again, just like anyone else.)

 

One way to balance that is to require the use of the Power Skill to properly pick up massive things like Cars and busses. With a bad roll you rip off the bumper or the door and waste your phase (which is also genre appropriate). It balances against other archetypes, because they are required to make Power skill rolls to do unusual things with their powers.

 

in the Long run if the Brick continues to pick up objects to use as extra damage and or AOE attacks, you should require them to purchase that extra damage or Advantages as part of a "Brick Tricks" power set.

[Kirby]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

One way to balance that is to require the use of the Power Skill to properly pick up massive things like Cars and busses. With a bad roll you rip off the bumper or the door and waste your phase (which is also genre appropriate). It balances against other archetypes, because they are required to make Power skill rolls to do unusual things with their powers.

 

in the Long run if the Brick continues to pick up objects to use as extra damage and or AOE attacks, you should require them to purchase that extra damage or Advantages as part of a "Brick Tricks" power set.

Isn't this essentially what the rules state, as opposed to this being a House Rule?

 

Using a Bulky Focus puts your character at a 1/2 DCV (p. 245, 5E), using an Unfamiliar Weapon is -3 OCV (p. 247, 5E, Heroic). If you're throwing an item, it's OCV will have penalties if it's not aerodynamic and/or unbalanced (p. 247, 5E). While I cannot currently find it, I'm certain there's a rule about the objects of opportunity as well.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

My issues with allowing extra damage from "Large objects of opportunity" such as buses and such is that it makes high strength even more powerful than normal. Especially as a generic rule that theoretically anyone can use (but only High Strength characters can actually take advantage of). It biases the game towards that archetype. A 60 Str character can then easily do more damage than a 12d6 energy blaster' date=' without paying anything for it. [/quote']

 

Under RAW he can just as easily convert his STR into an AoE attack. I find that more unbalancing. "The Brick can do 12d6 and hit a half dozen targets, all as DCV 3" seems less balanced than "the Brick can get an extra die or two of damage, maybe even three" with both having the same level of frequency and drawbacks. And that OCV penalty actually means something if you can't just convert to targeting DCV 3.

 

Blasters can spread for minor selective AOE or added OCV at the cost of damage. Allowing Bricks access to a few extra dice or a minor non-selective AoE, or even a small OCV bonus (size of object less OCV penalties for improvised weapon) once in a while from objects of opportunity doesn't seem a completely unbalanced comparable, at least from where I sit.

 

This is why I feel that using it either as A. the special effect for a haymaker (which everyone can do)' date=' or B. requiring the character to buy the extra damage with an appropriate limitation (as a "Brick Trick") should be required. Both of these options make it easy to emulate the comic feel of Brick fighting without giving Brick's extra power over everyone else for free. And honestly its the "for free" issues that is my main sticking point. No archetype gets any of its "standard comic book" abilities for free just because they choose that archetype. Why should bricks be any different? If they want extra damage they should have to pay for it just like anyone else, or use one of the standard available options to do so (again, just like anyone else.)[/quote']

 

Why should the Brick need an object of opportunity to use a Haymaker? No one else has to. Of course, if it's just SFX, he should be allowed to use a double handed smash instead, with no penalties for using the bus (other than the Haymaker penalties, of course) and blasting the bus out of his hands should not avoid the Haymaker landing.

 

Unlike the Blaster, the Brick doesn't double the cost of his STR to add four more attack options (say a KA, a Flash, a Drain and an AoE) by converting it to a 5 slot multipower. "Balanced" need not, and should not IMO, mean "identical"

 

Using a Bulky Focus puts your character at a 1/2 DCV (p. 245' date=' 5E), using an Unfamiliar Weapon is -3 OCV (p. 247, 5E, Heroic). If you're throwing an item, it's OCV will have penalties if it's not aerodynamic and/or unbalanced (p. 247, 5E). While I cannot currently find it, I'm certain there's a rule about the objects of opportunity as well.[/quote']

 

I think the typical argument is that the Unfamiliar Weapon penalty does not apply as it's a "club". Those OCV penalties don't have much impact if you get to treat the attack as AoE and target DCV 3. If our Brick takes a -7 to OCV, but reduces the target from DCV 10 to DCV 3, he's just as likely to hit as he was before.

 

Paying points for these abilities generally guaranteed objects would frequently be available (no limitation means they're always around and can't be taken away). If the player spends 10 points for "+3d6, OIF Weapon of Opportunity", that weapon of opportunity had better be just as common, with just as many repeat uses, as any other OIF in the game.

[mallet]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Maybe the reason not to use cars, buses, lampposts as weapons is more story based then rule based.

If you start pick up cars and destroying them, the owners and insurance companies will hate you and maybe even try and bill you for the damages.

The same with the city. if every time your character gets in a fight he is destroying a $100,000+ city bus just to smack around a villain rather then just punching him then the city might come after the hero.

There is "understandable" collateral damage from fight a super villain, and in a "super hero setting" citizen and city officials probably understand that, but unnecessary vehicle and city property damage would be frowned upon and should only be used as a last resort by the heroes.

[Kirby]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Maybe the reason not to use cars, buses, lampposts as weapons is more story based then rule based.

If you start pick up cars and destroying them, the owners and insurance companies will hate you and maybe even try and bill you for the damages.

The same with the city. if every time your character gets in a fight he is destroying a $100,000+ city bus just to smack around a villain rather then just punching him then the city might come after the hero.

There is "understandable" collateral damage from fight a super villain, and in a "super hero setting" citizen and city officials probably understand that, but unnecessary vehicle and city property damage would be frowned upon and should only be used as a last resort by the heroes.

I heartily agree. Unfortunately, that's not a rule we aren't aware of.

[Tasha]

Re: Rules You Didn't Know Until Champions Complete

 

Isn't this essentially what the rules state, as opposed to this being a House Rule?

 

Using a Bulky Focus puts your character at a 1/2 DCV (p. 245, 5E), using an Unfamiliar Weapon is -3 OCV (p. 247, 5E, Heroic). If you're throwing an item, it's OCV will have penalties if it's not aerodynamic and/or unbalanced (p. 247, 5E). While I cannot currently find it, I'm certain there's a rule about the objects of opportunity as well.

 

Never said it WAS a house rule. You just assumed that.