HKA and Strength -- pricing issue?

[Greywind]

It's overpriced because players don't opt to use it? That's piss poor reasoning, in my opinion.

[Hyper-Man]

Nah...

 

Here's a 20 STR TK build with the +1 Level of Indirect that would be devastating.

 

VAL    CHA    Cost    Roll    Notes
20    STR    10    13-    HTH Damage 4d6  END [2]

 

*Having the character's base STR equal to their TK STR makes using the HTH MA Maneuvers easier.

112 The Unseen Reach: Telekinesis (20 STR), Fine Manipulation, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Indirect (Source Point can vary from use to use, path can change with every use; +1), Invisible Power Effects (Fully Invisible; +1) (140 Active Points); Limited Range (-1/4) - END=0

Way of the Unseen Fist (List)
1    1)  Weapon Element:  Default Element, Empty Hand
16    2)  +4 HTH Damage Class(es)
4    3)  Choke Hold:  1/2 Phase, -2 OCV, +0 DCV, Grab One Limb; 4d6 NND
4    4)  Fast Strike:  1/2 Phase, +2 OCV, +0 DCV, 10d6 Strike
4    5)  Killing Strike:  1/2 Phase, -2 OCV, +0 DCV, HKA 3d6 +1
4    6)  Shove:  1/2 Phase, +0 OCV, +0 DCV, 55 STR to Shove
5    7)  Takeaway:  1/2 Phase, +0 OCV, +0 DCV, Grab Weapon, 50 STR to take weapon away

Martial Arts Total: 38

Total Character Cost: 160

[NuSoardGraphite]

I just finished looking at Indirect in the 6th edition rulesbook.  It looks like they've made some gains in adding enough detail to Indirect to give it some actual utility.  Of course, it doesn't specifically say that Indirect can bypass Block or Missile Deflection.  (those rules appeared in specific supplements in the 4th and 5th editions)  It does mention being able to bypass the DCV bonus of cover and can bypass barriers.  Not bad, but still needs some work.

 

Then of course, I read Invisible Power Effects and the goddam book still doesn't detail what the bonuses or penalties are when a character is attacked by, or attempting to block or missile deflect an invisible power.  What the hell Hero?  That question has been asked on these message boards multiple times to my knowledge.  You don't think it's a good idea to provide at least some guidelines on it?

 

And I made an error when I detailed my version of Indirect.  It breaks down like this:

 

(I use 5th Ed, so it follows that pricing structure)

+1/4: can bypass the DCV bonus of cover

+1/2: as +1/4 but may also bypass Block and Missile Deflection.

+3/4: as +1/2 but may also routinely gain the bonus for attacking from the flank/rear in combat unless the target has a targeting sense that can perceive in 360 degrees (Finally!  A mechanical reason for 360 degree targeting sense!)

[Greywind]

Use the modifiers for invisible attackers? Character is at 0 OCV in regards to them. Apply the effect to defensive maneuvers with that in mind.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Use the modifiers for invisible attackers? Character is at 0 OCV in regards to them. Apply the effect to defensive maneuvers with that in mind.

This is what I do already.  The rules for attacking someone you can't see (0 OCV at range, 1/2 OCV in melee) I just transfer over (0 OCV to missile deflect, 1/2 OCV to block).  I just apply a straight 1/2 DCV penalty against an attack you can't perceive.  If the target can make a non-targeting Perception Roll to perceive the attack (and it's valid) the the DCV penalty is just -1.

 

I came up with that years ago. But a lot of new players wouldn't know to apply those modifiers.  I've seen that question asked here on the message boards several times.  I figured 6th edition would have been the time to address it.

[massey]

Nah...

 

Here's a 20 STR TK build with the +1 Level of Indirect that would be devastating.

 

VAL    CHA    Cost    Roll    Notes

20    STR    10    13-    HTH Damage 4d6  END [2]

 

*Having the character's base STR equal to their TK STR makes using the HTH MA Maneuvers easier.

 

112 The Unseen Reach: Telekinesis (20 STR), Fine Manipulation, Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Indirect (Source Point can vary from use to use, path can change with every use; +1), Invisible Power Effects (Fully Invisible; +1) (140 Active Points); Limited Range (-1/4) - END=0

 

Way of the Unseen Fist (List)

1    1)  Weapon Element:  Default Element, Empty Hand

16    2)  +4 HTH Damage Class(es)

4    3)  Choke Hold:  1/2 Phase, -2 OCV, +0 DCV, Grab One Limb; 4d6 NND

4    4)  Fast Strike:  1/2 Phase, +2 OCV, +0 DCV, 10d6 Strike

4    5)  Killing Strike:  1/2 Phase, -2 OCV, +0 DCV, HKA 3d6 +1

4    6)  Shove:  1/2 Phase, +0 OCV, +0 DCV, 55 STR to Shove

5    7)  Takeaway:  1/2 Phase, +0 OCV, +0 DCV, Grab Weapon, 50 STR to take weapon away

 

Martial Arts Total: 38

 

Total Character Cost: 160

 

So what?  All you've proven Indirect is really powerful if it's a 15 point adder and not a +1 advantage.  Yeah, that'd be great.  You're not paying the advantage on your damage classes or the martial art maneuvers.  That's indicative of a weakness with the martial arts rules (which have been totally abusable since 5th edition), and has nothing to do with Indirect being worth a crap.

 

Let's look at that 10D6 TK Fast Strike and look at it like it's an actual power -- a 10D6 Energy Blast, which is what it really functions as.  I'd be willing to give you that a 10D6 EB fully indirect would be worth 65 points (which is what you're functionally paying for it).  That's only 3 points more than the +1/4 level that several people have already said is "about the max that it's worth".  Now compare that 10D6 Energy Blast Indirect with a 20D6 EB.  I know which one I'd pick.

 

The fact that when you are trying to prove the advantage's worth, you resort to a complicated power construct that avoids paying the full price for the advantage and relies upon everything else in the build to be effective just proves that it's overpriced.  It's like "hey guys, Indirect is really good, look here -- 2" Flight, Usable as Attack (+1), Ranged (+1/2), Indirect (+1), Megascale 1" = 100,000 km (+1 1/2).  20 points.  See, Indirect is really powerful."  

 

And really, I fail to see that Indirect adds much of anything to the build you posted above. The power would be good even without Indirect.

 

 

 

Edit:  I'm going to amend my earlier statement.  I'm leaving it up because I think my point is valid.  But I just noticed the total cost of this.  You spent 150 points on this power, and you end up with a collection of moves that basically knock someone down.  I'll take my 30D6 Energy Blast, thank you very much.  You actually only spent 1/10th of the total points of that power on making it Indirect.

[massey]

It's overpriced because players don't opt to use it? That's piss poor reasoning, in my opinion.

 

Players tend to gravitate towards the most efficient power constructs.

 

Choose one:

 

12D6 Energy Blast

6D6 Energy Blast, Fully Indirect (+1)

 

Which do you think will be more useful in a game?

[NuSoardGraphite]

Players tend to gravitate towards the most efficient power constructs.

 

Choose one:

 

12D6 Energy Blast

6D6 Energy Blast, Fully Indirect (+1)

 

Which do you think will be more useful in a game?

That 12D6 will do you no good if you meet an opponent who can consistently Missile Deflect or erect a barrier to block your attack.

 

This is why I prefer Multi-power constructs.  If I had a ranged specialist I would have a slot that was pure damage and an Indirect slot to handle the more exotic situations I find myself in.  In my experience, most players who play Energy Projector type characters who would use these types of power constructs prefer a number of variable attacks for multiple situations rather than just rely on one big attack that is easily defeated.

[massey]

That 12D6 will do you no good if you meet an opponent who can consistently Missile Deflect or erect a barrier to block your attack.

 

This is why I prefer Multi-power constructs.  If I had a ranged specialist I would have a slot that was pure damage and an Indirect slot to handle the more exotic situations I find myself in.  In my experience, most players who play Energy Projector type characters who would use these types of power constructs prefer a number of variable attacks for multiple situations rather than just rely on one big attack that is easily defeated.

 

That 6D6 Indirect will do you no good if you meet an opponent who has 21 ED.  Which is more common in a 60 active point campaign?  The 12D6 attack can spread for +6 to hit, which will make it much more difficult to missile deflect.  That leaves only a Force Wall / Barrier.

 

And yeah, I'm fine with multipowers and multiple attack slots.  But generally two powers of the same active points should be roughly equivalent to one another in utility.  These two are not.

[NuSoardGraphite]

That 6D6 Indirect will do you no good if you meet an opponent who has 21 ED. Which is more common in a 60 active point campaign? The 12D6 attack can spread for +6 to hit, which will make it much more difficult to missile deflect. That leaves only a Force Wall / Barrier.

 

And yeah, I'm fine with multipowers and multiple attack slots. But generally two powers of the same active points should be roughly equivalent to one another in utility. These two are not.

The same can be said of area of effect attacks, invisible power effects, etc. any advantage which does not somehow modify the damage/defense ratio in some way (armor piercing, penetrating, +1 stunX etc) looses much of its effectiveness at the +1 level of effect or higher. for example, what good is a 6d6 area of effect radius attack power if the average defense in the campaign is defense 20 or higher, essentially rendering the attack useless on the average? by that logic, one should only ever purchase attack powers at their full level of effect with no advantages, or only low cost advantages that help mitigate enemy defenses.

 

In my opinion, most groups play with far too many characters with defenses far higher than they should. but if everyone is running with powers near the active point limit, i guess thats where the game has to go to be balanced. my games dont run that way, but then again, i think a little differently than the average Champions player.

[massey]

So you see how it's overpriced, right?

[NuSoardGraphite]

So you see how it's overpriced, right?

No. i've never had a problem with it. personally i think some defenses are too cheap and that causes players to pile it on by the droves which necessitates higher damage levels to defeat the defense, thus negating the effectiveness of heavily advantaged writeups.

 

If defenses were kept reasonable for the character types at hand, even heavily advantaged writeups would still provide some utility.

[massey]

Sorry, I woke up way earlier than normal and my response was a bit snarky.

 

The issue with a non-damaging +1 advantage is that it doesn't matter whether defenses are low or high.  There will rarely be any sort of balance point where a +1 advantage is worthwhile.  If you're in a 60 AP campaign, and you're given a choice between a 12D6 EB and a 6D6 (+1 non-damaging advantage) EB, the 12D6 EB will be significantly more useful most of the time.

 

Let's look at 5 campaigns, with average defenses ranging from very low to very high.  #1 - average defenses of 12/12.  #2 - average defenses of 15/15.  #3 - average defenses of 20/20.  #4 - average defenses of 25/25.  #5 - average defenses of 30/30.

 

If average defenses are 12/12, then the 12D6 EB will have a good chance to do BODY damage, and will average 30 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 Indirect EB will not do any BODY, and will average 9 STUN past defenses.

If average defenses are 15/15, then the 12D6 EB will average 27 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 Indirect EB will average 6 STUN past defenses.

If average defenses are 20/20, then the 12D6 EB will average 22 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 Indirect EB will average 1 STUN past defenses.

If average defenses are 25/25, then the 12D6 EB will average 17 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 Indirect EB will average 0 STUN past defenses.

If average defenses are 30/30, then the 12D6 EB will average 12 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 Indirect EB will average 0 STUN past defenses.

 

At no point does the Indirect attack ever come close to matching the effect of the basic EB.  Some non-damaging advantages may be worth the cost (even at a +1).  Area Effect attacks can hit a lot of people, so they are good for targeting lots of agents.  But even then you have to be careful because it's really easy to Advantage yourself into doing no damage.

 

The solution to players who just stack on defenses?  NNDs and AVLDs.

 

If average defenses are 12/12, then the 12D6 EB will average 30 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 NND EB will average 21 STUN past defenses.

If average defenses are 15/15, then the 12D6 EB will average 27 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 NND EB will average 21 STUN past defenses.

If average defenses are 20/20, then the 12D6 EB will average 22 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 NND EB will average 21 STUN past defenses.

If average defenses are 25/25, then the 12D6 EB will average 17 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 NND EB will average 21 STUN past defenses.

If average defenses are 30/30, then the 12D6 EB will average 12 STUN past defenses.  A 6D6 NND EB will average 21 STUN past defenses.

 

The only time that a non-damaging +1 advantage (on an attack) is regularly worth its cost is when it's part of a heavily advantaged power.  If you have a 2D6 Energy Blast, Area Effect Zero End Continuous Uncontrolled Indirect Invisible NND (total advantage +6) then I'm sure it's fine.  But most GMs frown on that.

[Ndreare]

Indirect can also be useful for presence attacks when you want the mooks to surrender.

After all if you shoot his gun out of his hand by bouncing it around a corner and off a wall he well be impressed, thinking you have enough CV to perform the bounce maneuver.

 

Indirect normally goes in a multi power so the cost is only 6 points, but it allows options. Trapped in a cell and need the key? The knock back from your indirect attack will be useful. Your 12d6 blast will not even scratch the steel.

[Greywind]

Indirect can also be a combat lead-off maneuver, in which the target is not yet in combat and unaware.

[massey]

Indirect can also be a combat lead-off maneuver, in which the target is not yet in combat and unaware.

In which case it does double damage, as much as a normal attack.

[Greywind]

Yeah, but the difference there is, they, and their associates, might not know where it is coming from, so the element of surprise is maintained.

 

Element of surprise, you know, the primary reason for taking something like indirect to begin with?

[Hyper-Man]

Yeah, but the difference there is, they, and their associates, might not know where it is coming from, so the element of surprise is maintained.

 

Element of surprise, you know, the primary reason for taking something like indirect to begin with?

 

Yep,

 

No one ever expects a Force Choke from Darth Vader.

[Greywind]

[dmjalund]

fullIndirect + n-ray vision allows you to attack someone who's in a different room

[L. Marcus]

I expected that.

[massey]

fullIndirect + n-ray vision allows you to attack someone who's in a different room

So does ego attack. The question is, is fully indirect worth a +1 advantage?

[dmjalund]

So does ego attack. The question is, is fully indirect worth a +1 advantage?

you mean ego attack + mind scan (otherwise you need line-of-sight)

[Hyper-Man]

Full Indirect is what allowed Darth Vader to Force Choke someone on a different ship via a video communication.

 

[massey]

you mean ego attack + mind scan (otherwise you need line-of-sight)

 

Nope.  Maybe it's changed in 6th, but in 5ER, N-Ray was enough.

 

pg 116:

"Conventional barriers don't stop mental powers.  For example, a mentalist with N-Ray perception could use his Ego Attack to attack a target through a wall, as long as he could establish LOS to the target."