Why is the DCV of a hex 3?

[zslane]

I'm not sure that matters in this particular line of analysis. The claim was that hexes were intrinsically difficult to locate with ordinary (even Targeting) senses because they are intangible conceptual constructs (or simply empty, unidentifiable space). Locating a piece of space is locating a piece of space. Why you are locating it is immaterial.

[Ndreare]

If I have ever seen an 'agree to disagree' this is it.

It is obvious everyone understand both points of view, but disagree on implementation.

 

Personally I think I am in favour of a hybrid approach.

If a player wants to target a hex irrelevant to moving targets (say that wall over there or the center of the playground) I will go with auto hit (DCV 0).

If the player is trying to target a hex relative to a moving target (I hit the hex Speeddemon is in our I hit the hex the space ship is flying through) I will go rules as written to represent they are targeting the abstracted space the target is in at the time of the attack.

[Scott Baker]

If I have ever seen an 'agree to disagree' this is it.

It is obvious everyone understand both points of view, but disagree on implementation.

 

Personally I think I am in favour of a hybrid approach.

If a player wants to target a hex irrelevant to moving targets (say that wall over there or the center of the playground) I will go with auto hit (DCV 0).

If the player is trying to target a hex relative to a moving target (I hit the hex Speeddemon is in our I hit the hex the space ship is flying through) I will go rules as written to represent they are targeting the abstracted space the target is in at the time of the attack.

I was just about to post something similar when I saw your post. No one is looking to be persuaded to do things differently. So everyone can continue to play by the RAW, or house-rule it as they see fit. The change in rules is 32 years old, so it's highly unlikely we'll ever know what the impetus for the change was.

[Matt Holck]

It's an even odds rule champions started with

player's start with 3 OCV

chance is 11- 60% for joe average

as DCV and OCV only count the difference between the setting of the line is somewhat abitrary

but based on the the measure of a human being

[ghost-angel]

Consider this:

 

Perhaps the DCV 3 is the center of the volume of space that is a whole hex. After all, it has been pointed out that a hex is a large volume of space, and generally speaking you're trying to place your attack somewhere in the middle of that volume, generally without a point of reference to where that specific center you're aiming for is...

[schir1964]

Frankly, there can be justification to handle base DCV/OCV bonuses on a case by case basis depending on SFX (even with Area Effect).

 

First, with an example of impact grenades, the HEX's base DCV should change depending on SFX. For normal use, the DCV should be based on the sliver of ground that can be seen. For vertical structures that base DCV should be different. And for empty mid-air HEX's, the DCV approaches infinity so that no matter how good someone is, they aren't going to be able to hit the Hex, because nothing is there to hit (presuming one is not attempting to hit an obstacle that will be passing through that hex). 

 

Second, with an example of Flame Man who shoots massive blasts of Fire in straight lines, filling a specific hex with fire should be as straight forward as target practice with DCV not really playing a part.

 

However, the rules for base DCV/OCV weren't designed to handle many of these subtleties based on SFX. There was an attempt to separate SFX from these mechanics.

 

And it really doesn't matter what the rational was for the rules, unless one is wanting to use that rational as a basis to extend or expand on the design officially. Then it makes sense to get an idea of why a certain baseline was chosen. And as others have said, that rational is probably beyond our reach anyway.

 

zlane has made some solid points as to why the current baseline values might work better if they were changed for his game.

 

I hope he comes up with something that works well for him and his campaigns.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[zslane]

And for empty mid-air HEX's, the DCV approaches infinity so that no matter how good someone is, they aren't going to be able to hit the Hex, because nothing is there to hit (presuming one is not attempting to hit an obstacle that will be passing through that hex). 

If empty mid-air hexes had infinite DCV that nobody could possibly target accurately, then Teleportation would never work as written. Ergo, the assertion is not valid.

[schir1964]

If empty mid-air hexes had infinite DCV that nobody could possibly target accurately, then Teleportation would never work as written. Ergo, the assertion is not valid.

Please keep in mind that I'm going off 5th Edtions rules for this specific response, so if this is no longer true for 6th Edition please enlighten me.

 

Teleportation only requires Line-of-Sight (LOS) to make a Point-to-Point movement. 

In layman terms, all I need to do is perceive the distance and direction I want to move (not specific location) and I can move that distance and direction from my current location.

 

To me, this is vastly different than trying to get an attack to hit (by aiming) something at a distance accurately.

 

If teleporation movement and attacks worked the same way (even mechanically) then why do the rules let you apply a LOS modifer to an attack. They aren't mechanically the same.

 

Thus, from this my assertion is valid. But I doubt you'll agree and that's okay.

 

Addendum: Teleportation and how it worked (5th Edition) definitely had some 'magic smoke' built into it. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[zslane]

Sure, the mechanics are different, but only because they had to shoehorn the idea of hitting a hex into the opposed-action mechanics of combat (hexes don't offer opposition, but they must be treated as if they do to avoid adding another mechanic just for that purpose). Nevertheless, if you think about it from the character's point of view, the ability to identify a volume of space at a distance, within LOS, is the same whether you intend to teleport yourself there or direct an attack at it. The only reason the mechanics are different is because the outcome is a different kind of outcome, but the innate, in-game ability that makes them even possible would logically be the same. The point being that hexes can't conceptually be infinitesimally small points in space that are "nearly impossible" to locate with normal senses because Teleport wouldn't work at all, with its mechanics written as they are, if that were so.

 

Given Teleportation's mechanics, I'm now convinced that I don't even need special OCV modifiers/rules to deal with this. The logical ramifications are that hexes have a DCV of 0 and attacks that target them are at normal OCV (I say normal instead of full because other factors can still reduce OCV, like range mods). Hexes, like any other completely static hex-sized target, could conceivably receive DCV bonuses for things like concealment, but the base DCV would always start at 0.

[Scott Baker]

Sure, the mechanics are different, but only because they had to shoehorn the idea of hitting a hex into the opposed-action mechanics of combat (hexes don't offer opposition, but they must be treated as if they do to avoid adding another mechanic just for that purpose). Nevertheless, if you think about it from the character's point of view, the ability to identify a volume of space at a distance, within LOS, is the same whether you intend to teleport yourself there or direct an attack at it. The only reason the mechanics are different is because the outcome is a different kind of outcome, but the innate, in-game ability that makes them even possible would logically be the same. The point being that hexes can't conceptually be infinitesimally small points in space that are "nearly impossible" to locate with normal senses because Teleport wouldn't work at all, with its mechanics written as they are, if that were so.

 

Given Teleportation's mechanics, I'm now convinced that I don't even need special OCV modifiers/rules to deal with this. The logical ramifications are that hexes have a DCV of 0 and attacks that target them are at normal OCV (I say normal instead of full because other factors can still reduce OCV, like range mods). Hexes, like any other completely static hex-sized target, could conceivably receive DCV bonuses for things like concealment, but the base DCV would always start at 0.

This worked in 1st edition. No reason it won't work now.

[schir1964]

Given Teleportation's mechanics, I'm now convinced that I don't even need special OCV modifiers/rules to deal with this. The logical ramifications are that hexes have a DCV of 0 and attacks that target them are at normal OCV (I say normal instead of full because other factors can still reduce OCV, like range mods). Hexes, like any other completely static hex-sized target, could conceivably receive DCV bonuses for things like concealment, but the base DCV would always start at 0.

And this is all that really matters. That you find a solution that works and makes sense to you for your games. Good gaming! (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Jazzidemus]

I always took a Hex as the ground and not what occupies it. I want to fire a EB and target the Hex but not necessarily the individual in it. DCV 3. to simulate dropping a grenade at the targets feet (or similar effect) or to blow a hole in the floor to drop a character through. you're not attacking the individual but the environment.

[kjandreano]

In my game group, we have people miss hexes from time-to-time (we joke that the hex 'dodged'). 

I understand what it's supposed to simulate (you can miss in targeting a certain location) and that's fine, but I do agree that DCV 3 is too high.

A normal has an OCV of 3, so they only have a 50% chance of hitting the ground directly in front of them? Really? It's one of those things in Hero that's just silly.

[L. Marcus]

Psst. Adjacent hexes have a DCV of 0.

[kjandreano]

That inconsistency is very inconsistent! 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Probably range modifiers are sufficient for hexes on the ground and 3 for hexes in the air (i.e. aiming at an area of nothing) for many games.  The problem is for superheroic, it makes area effect games a bit too attractive.

[zslane]

Again, "aiming at nothing" is not something the system regards as intrinsically difficult, as demonstrated by Teleport. As far as I can tell, there is no logical reason for hexes to have a DCV of 3. At best, it is a game balance hack that assumes giving hexes a DCV of 0 is unbalancing (despite making more sense logically).

 

The house rule I want to try is this: the hex you are in is auto-hit (don't even bother rolling to hit). All other hexes are DCV 0. All OCV mods apply normally, including Range mods. This makes a lot more sense to me, and my instincts tell me there wouldn't be any noticible balance issues. But, of course, it needs to be tested in the field, so to speak.

[bigbywolfe]

Also, with equal CV you need to roll an 11 or less to hit so it's not 50%, it's 62%.

[bigbywolfe]

The house rule I want to try is this: the hex you are in is auto-hit (don't even bother rolling to hit). All other hexes are DCV 0. All OCV mods apply normally, including Range mods. This makes a lot more sense to me, and my instincts tell me there wouldn't be any noticible balance issues. But, of course, it needs to be tested in the field, so to speak.

So try it.  As far as I can tell no one is arguing that you shouldn't.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah give it a shot.  I know personally that trying to throw an object to hit a space in the air without any reference point or backstop is very difficult, but I can easily envision where teleporting to a point you have fixed in your head would be no problem.  Its the difference between conceptualizing and carrying out a complex physical motion.  Throwing something at a space in the sky is lot harder than seeing it and recognizing it.

[Old Man]

For teleport exactly, I see it as similar to a jump--it's easier to aim your own body at a target than a thrown object.  If I were to jump to a location more than a hex away, even with the running start that would be necessary, I feel like I'd be unlikely to miss what I was trying to land on my more than a few inches.  Conversely if I was throwing something the same distance I could easily miss by more than that.

[Greywind]

...and yet when you're running and jumping from rooftop to rooftop, misses seem to happen.

[L. Marcus]

http://i.imgur.com/UVbALQs.gif

 

[Christopher R Taylor]

And there's an interesting twist to this: leaping with superleap requires hitting DCV 3 also, which I find even less defensible.  The concerns with Area Effect attacks don't apply to superleap, so probably only range modifiers should apply.  With range modifiers, a normal person with a running jump is extremely unlikely to miss a jump (they just can't go far enough) but the Hulk can't hit a target jumping from Chicago to Detroit.

 

And people don't miss jumping from roof to rooftop because they rolled bad, but because its further than they though it was.  Its not like they aim wrong and fall into the alley to the side.

 

Frankly what is more troubling to me is that Defense Maneuver seems to cost way more than its worth.

[Greywind]

So, what you're saying is that people can misjudge distances, but they can't misjudge distances.