Tracking pools, Stun, and house rules my group is kicking around

[Altair]

In the course of poking around at the system, I found a couple things that my group liked/didn't like. (Explained in more detail here) Since my group contains a lot of game designers and tinkerers, we were always going to hack the system into a more pleasing shape, once we understood it more. Assuming roughly equal quality, a specific solution will outperform a general one; hence the tinkering.

 

Anyway! Some of the things we haven't liked as much are tracking multiple pools, being stunned, and the length of combat (influenced by these, and other things). One of the ideas that we came up with was some consolidation.

 

Specifically, dropping the whole "getting Stunned" bit, and in fact getting rid of STUN altogether and folding its concept into END.

 

Conceptually, the two constructs are really close - Endurance is pretty clear, but what's Stun? Pain tolerance? What is this thing measuring? In game terms, it's an action limiter, and that's cool, but the implementation didn't really work for us. But combining the two, and specifically merging STUN into END, seems pretty attractive for our purposes. It removes one pool to track, recovery actions are still a thing, and consolidates a concept. 

 

This'll change some things! What I could use some advice on, is what exactly. Off the top of my head:

 

• END reserves will be the same - your giant batteries do not provide you with extra HP. Moving on.
• Nixing the "stunned" condition will have an interesting effect on CON, if that's its primary contribution. Is CON routinely used for "saving throw" type effects? Because otherwise, the things it might usually model are represented by END, BODY and the like, and it might be a tad redundant. Regardless, that's unlikely to be a huge difference-maker in terms of CP. 
• Characters will have much higher END scores, as you'd basically dump their points from STUN into END. I'm not sure that I want to change the cost on END though. Yes, people will likely have higher scores, but they're also going to go through the resource faster. I want to see it in play before I make up my mind, but I'm open to ideas

Anyway. That's about where we are. Feedback is super welcome! Objections to the existence of house rules are less so - if you never change things, that's cool! Glad it works for you! I'm more curious as to what effects people see from this - you introduce something new, and you get bugs. Happens. 

 

Anyway, thanks for reading.

[Ndreare]

I suggest getting rid of taking endurance, you are right it is obnoxious. We only use it for abstracting how long characters can do things, but never track it in detail.

 

Combat will speed up as players become more comfortable with their huge amount of options compared to other games. Also games that use scenery take the or for times as long than those that use theatre of the mind IMHO.

[Ndreare]

But I live the whole Stunned aspect of Hero, the idea a guy can get knocked down to 0 Sun and not be dead is awesome.

[massey]

Stun is basically your Hit Points.  When you run out of Stun, you fall down unconscious.  That's what it measures.  Endurance measures your ability to keep acting before you are too tired to do anything.  Body measures your ability to keep being alive.

[Hyper-Man]

As house rules go that's the first time I've seen a suggestion for merging STUN and END. 

 

The more common idea is that folks just get rid of END.  The consequence there is that it effectively removes PUSHING as an option (unless you want it to do STUN to characters who want to PUSH). 

 

The major issues I see with your idea is tracking all the other effects of such a change since the costs of STUN and END are so different.  How does REC work now?  Does it meant that characters get their REC X2 when they take a Recovery or the Post Phase 12 FREE Recovery?  How do you deal with published NPC's with Drains vs. STUN or END now?  Etc....

 

There are so many other things affected by what seems like such a simple change that I strongly suggest that everyone try the default rules and make sure they truly understand them before committing to such a house rule. The reason is that all the edge cases will eventually cause you to spend precious game-time figuring out how the house rule works in "this situation" for stuff you and your group did not predict and therefore did not work out ahead of time in the same thorough manner that the default rules already have. 

 

Regardless of which way you decide, good luck and happy gaming.

 

HM

[Grailknight]

If you feel the need to drop a characteristic, then CON is the one to go.

 

Move the few rolls it is used for to BODY. Have the Stunned mechanic work when you take more than 1/2 our current STUN.

[Altair]

But I live the whole Stunned aspect of Hero, the idea a guy can get knocked down to 0 Sun and not be dead is awesome.

 

Oh yeah, for sure. Love that, I just don't love that when you take more damage than your CON, you lose an action. Being Stunned out? Yep. That. Awesome. 

 

 

Stun is basically your Hit Points.  When you run out of Stun, you fall down unconscious.  That's what it measures.  Endurance measures your ability to keep acting before you are too tired to do anything.  Body measures your ability to keep being alive.

 

Yeah, I should have clarified a bit. I totally get it from a game mechanics standpoint - it's quite clear. But from a representational standpoint, like if I am describing a person? I know what someone with high STR, DEX, whatever. But what STUN & END represent are kind of blurry. Maybe it's because I play a couple games that track damage as physical and stress/strain/stun (most notably Shadowrun 5 & Fantasy Flight Star Wars), which often fills the same role as END.

 

As house rules go that's the first time I've seen a suggestion for merging STUN and END. 

 

The more common idea is that folks just get rid of END.  The consequence there is that it effectively removes PUSHING as an option (unless you want it to do STUN to characters who want to PUSH). 

 

The major issues I see with your idea is tracking all the other effects of such a change since the costs of STUN and END are so different.  How does REC work now?  Does it meant that characters get their REC X2 when they take a Recovery or the Post Phase 12 FREE Recovery?  How do you deal with published NPC's with Drains vs. STUN or END now?  Etc....

 

There are so many other things affected by what seems like such a simple change that I strongly suggest that everyone try the default rules and make sure they truly understand them before committing to such a house rule. The reason is that all the edge cases will eventually cause you to spend precious game-time figuring out how the house rule works in "this situation" for stuff you and your group did not predict and therefore did not work out ahead of time in the same thorough manner that the default rules already have. 

 

Regardless of which way you decide, good luck and happy gaming.

 

HM

 

Yeah, we considered just dropping END, but really liked pushing, and wanted to keep it. The idea was, and we haven't tried this yet, but the idea was just to merge the pools and change nothing else. 1x recovery. I've never seen a published NPC with those, and don't really use such resources, so it's unlikely to come up. If it did, then I'd probably just have it work on either, like classes of minds. 

 

Really, this is coming off of our ongoing game in Fantasy Flight Star Wars, which has two damage types; wounds and strain. Characters take strain from physical exertion, and can spend it to get a maneuver (essentially a non-attack 1/2 phase action), so the concept is one we've worked with an awful lot, and are comfortable with. 

 

It's possible that it's going to be more complicated than just dropping END altogether. We'll play with it and see, as right now, we're doing little casual wargaming things, with the intent to learn the system; there's no ongoing game occurring. 

 

Regardless, thanks for the feedback!

[Nolgroth]

I got rid of the Stunned rules myself and for much of the same reasons you did. That said, if I got rid of Stun as well, then I would actually revert to a modified Stunned rules that uses Con*X to make it harder to be Stunned. I might even have Stunned not be an "action denier" so much as an "action penalty" by imposing a flat -x to Combat, Skill, and other rolls. I think there is enough precedent in most story formats (comics, novels, movies, etc.) to justify the concept of taking a concentrated amount of damage and being debilitated by it.

 

Come to think of it, I'd rather do that than use the Stun characteristic. Of course, that necessitates other changes such as non-Resistant Defenses (PD/ED). Without Stun as a Characteristic, what good would they be? Also, why roll Normal attacks anyway? No Stun means that everything will become, for simplicity if nothing else, a Killing Attack. Maybe your solution of merging Stun and END is the better response to stay closer to Hero mechanical roots. Need to note this down for my Fuzion variant rules though.

 

Removing Stunned altogether removes the need for Con except as where you mentioned; Saving Throw like rolls. As those can easily be modeled with a General roll or using another Characteristic, I'd say drop Con altogether.

[Altair]

Yeah, I've also toyed with the idea of recovering from stunned taking a 1/2 phase, instead of a full one. I do like the negative modifier, though I myself tend to be hesitant to add negative modifiers when I'm still this new to the system. Like, what's a good amount? -2? Is that a lot? I guess it depends.

[Hyper-Man]

Yeah, I've also toyed with the idea of recovering from stunned taking a 1/2 phase, instead of a full one. I do like the negative modifier, though I myself tend to be hesitant to add negative modifiers when I'm still this new to the system. Like, what's a good amount? -2? Is that a lot? I guess it depends.

 

A character with an OCV = to the DCV of the target they are trying to attack hits on 11-.  That translates to a 62.5% chance of hitting.  Give the attacker +3 Combat Skill Levels and their chances improve to 90.74%.  Due to the Bell Curve like probabilities of using 3d6 modifiers of any amount can mean a LOT.

 

Here are a couple of 3d6 probability tables:

http://www.thedarkfortress.co.uk/tech_reports/3_dice_rolls.htm#.UvbNm7SGdlE

http://gamesandgadgets.org/theblogs/perrol/dice-odds-for-3d6/

[Netzilla]

Stun represents things like getting the wind knocked out of you, banging your shin on the coffee table, minor scrapes and bruises and the like. It's a combination of minor, quickly healed damage and pain. Enough of it will ring your bell (Stunned) or make you pass out (KO).

 

Body is serious physical trauma: broken bones, concussion, serious bleeding and so forth. These are injuries that can kill you and take weeks or months to heal.

 

Think of a pro fighter. They can take hits for several rounds before finally getting KOed, but will recover fairly quickly (a few days or a week). However, if that same fighter get's an arm broken, that arm is useless and will take weeks to heal. Same for a good concussion.

 

As for removing the Stunned condition, you're right that it will make Con pretty much worthless. At that point you may as well drop Con and just use Body for any case that calls for a Con Roll.

 

If you combine END and Stun into a single stat, it could work but may make certain Drains even more powerfull. You might consider, instead just removing END and allow Pushing by burning Stun (probably at less than 1 Stun per AP).

[Hyper-Man]

I know that Champions/HERO combat can go into wargame-like detail (which I love).  It reminds me a LOT of Starfleet Battles even.

 

That doesn't mean that combat in Champions has to be long.  Several posters on this board have mentioned various ways to speed it up considerably while still keeping all the options open.  The number one thing is to put a timer on Players when their PC has an action.  If they can't decide an action in under a minute the GM declares "Ok, he's holding his action, NEXT!". Another concept is to get everyone to think of the TURN as the default "Round of combat" in HERO instead of the PHASE.  There are many others that can be found via a search but just those 2 changes in perspective can go a LONG way.

[Nolgroth]

I would suggest that -2 would be a perfect amount to represent somebody "getting their bell rung." It is certainly a negative but it still allows for action. I would even further suggest that somebody who is Stunned (at penalty) has a choice to either spend a Phase Recovering or the penalty lasts until the next Post 12. My thoughts on the matter, which do not necessarily reflect fun gameplay as I have not tested them. 

[Altair]

@Hyper-Man: Most definitely, yeah. The normal distribution (or close to it) in HERO is one of the things that drew me in - probability was a big part of my graduate program, and I love the stuff. And that's the thing - even a 1-point modifier can be huge, depending on skill level. Like, -11 to -12? That's a full standard deviation. That's massive. That's one point. 

 

It's also only one point, which isn't that big of a deal, considering that many characters will be much farther apart in CV. 

 

Highly Related: what are people's experiences with Change Environment? That's got some negative modifiers going for it. We haven't used it in play yet, so I can't say for certain, but it'd be a good way to get a feel for how much a given negative modifier affects gameplay.

 

Also, I've tried the "chess timer" thing, and it didn't really work super great - some people got agitated, or felt that the timer was passive-aggressive. Interestingly enough, they didn't think that I was, just the timer. Anyway, I think I shall try that perspective shift - as I hadn't thought of things that way before - and see what that does. 

 

@ Netzilla: yeah, the idea is one of consolidation. In other games I've played, there's your physical pool, and your "other " pool - stress, strain, mental stress, whatever it's called in the system. Getting rid of END, and allowing for STUN pushing is actually closer to games I've got experience with, so it might be the way to go. As far as the representational aspects, I totally agree - I just think there's conceptual overlap. The MMA fighter who can endure an awful lot of physical toil, but can shake it off pretty quickly? That's either STUN or BOD, depending on how the strain arrives. It feels like measuring the same thing two different ways, little redundant. Hence this whole experiment. 

 

@ Nolgroth: yeah, that's probably worth trying, just to see what it's like.

[Lucius]

I've had the same thought myself, that STUN and END should have been combined. I think Hero has too many Characteristics, honestly. Keep us posted on how you do it and how it works for your group.

 

 

I started a thread once on the very topic of dropping the Stunned mechanic. The only thing to watch for seems to be, it may make combats longer, because taking away a target's phase and leaving them vulnerable tends to shorten combat. And yes, it makes CON pretty much a vestigial Characteristic - another one we can drop.

 

Look at the Wounding optional mechanic if you want to consider a "replacement" for stunning. If you want to try replacing it with a temporary -2 penalty or something, may I suggest basing it not on damage, but on the to-hit roll? If the roll to hit meets some criterion (make by half, any roll of 3 to 5, any roll made by 10, etc) the target is off-balance, befuddled and blocking on the wrong side, wincing from a blow that may not do much damage but hit a sensitive spot, etc.

 

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary buys Cannot be Stunned, Usable by Others, Megascale....

[dsatow]

Just some notes:

 

1) The combining END and STUN is similar to the POWER concept in V&V (Villains and Vigilantes).  When you run out of POWER in V&V, you become fatigued and things become harder to do.  Personally, I always find it easy to manage stun and end as a PC but not as a GM.  I tend to calculate the average amount of end a villain would use and extrapolate how many turns of combat they would be able to do before running.  This usually turns out to be about 18 - 20 phases or never if they have a high enough recovery.

 

2) I've thought about merging BODY and CON, but haven't tried it.  I like the idea that as you take real physical damage you are less able to take more damage.  The bedraggled body syndrome as it were.

[mhd]

I generally like the idea of lulls in combat, even if losing a turn is never an enjoyable activity. It adds a flair of both danger and realism and helps with big groups. And being stunned, aborting to defense or taking recoveries all make that happen, so I don't think I'd want to get rid of that. Or at least I'd want a somewhat serious stun penalty where you could act, but defense/moving away is the better choice (similar to how GURPS does it).

 

As for easing tracking, I do agree that this gets cumbersome a bit. I ditched the free recovery, so taking a breath is something that I actively encouraged, but still, if END use isn't a big part of your setup (i.e. powers), then it's either a drag or people forget it. I see lots of retroactive END accounting, where people guesstimate the amount of phases/turns they can keep up their routine and occasionally do a quick END audit. At which point I'm not quite sure whether it's really worth it. Of course you also take a breather to regain STUN, but that would often mean that the heavy armored, heavy weapons guy could keep swinging without pause.

Not sure what to do about that, so I didn't institute any house rules about that, but I'm not enforcing it all too much (and currently our magic doesn't use END anyway).

 

I did think about combining STUN and BODY once, though. Using a / + X tracking mechanic. No dual damage types for weapons, then of course. Stun would mostly come from damage conversion.

But that's too much rejiggering for now.

[Greywind]

Just some notes:

 

1) The combining END and STUN is similar to the POWER concept in V&V (Villains and Vigilantes).  When you run out of POWER in V&V, you become fatigued and things become harder to do.  Personally, I always find it easy to manage stun and end as a PC but not as a GM.  I tend to calculate the average amount of end a villain would use and extrapolate how many turns of combat they would be able to do before running.  This usually turns out to be about 18 - 20 phases or never if they have a high enough recovery.

 

2) I've thought about merging BODY and CON, but haven't tried it.  I like the idea that as you take real physical damage you are less able to take more damage.  The bedraggled body syndrome as it were.

 

The separation of Body/Con and Stun reminded me of SPI's DragonQuest with their Endurance (a measure of the punishment a character's body can absorb before he becomes unconscious, sustains mortal wounds, or dies) and Fatigue (a measure of the length of time that a character can sustain activities requiring a great deal of physical or mental exertion).

 

It makes sense, to me at least, that they would be separate constructs.

 

As for "losing a phase" when a character is stunned, it stands to reason that it gives the other characters a chance to cover their downed friend until he can get back on his feet, which in game-time is about 3-5 seconds. Damn that seems such a looooooooooooooooooooong time to some.

[Nolgroth]

As for "losing a phase" when a character is stunned, it stands to reason that it gives the other characters a chance to cover their downed friend until he can get back on his feet, which in game-time is about 3-5 seconds. Damn that seems such a looooooooooooooooooooong time to some.

 

The "in game" time isn't really the issue. Depending on the size of the group, how familiar they are with the system, how much a driving force the GM is, etc, combat turns can take a long time. Even one Segment/Phase can be tortuous if it takes a while. Losing the ability to act and having to wait even longer before you get to engage often makes players frustrated and bored. I'd rather keep each player personally engaged. The more I think about the Stunned versus depleting Stun stat, I realize that there has to be a way to represent when a body has sustained enough shock that it needs to truly shut down. I'm less interested in losing a Stun stat than I was yesterday. I'm curious if there is a better way to do it than keeping track of three stats.

 

Ultimately, for me, none of tedium of combat stat tracking really matters. I mostly play using MapTool and there are ways to auto-calculate Stun, Body and END loss. At the tabletop is where I noticed more issues with Stun and END tracking. Especially END. I am liking the idea of rolling END/Stun into one stat more and more. I probably would not change Hero too much but there are systems close to Hero (Fuzion and Action!) that might benefit from divorcing themselves a little from their Hero roots. 

[Hugh Neilson]

Some random thoughts:

 

Losing Stunned, as noted above, loses that "cover for my teammate while he is at a disadvantage" issue. It also removes the most significant benefit of coordinating attacks against a single powerful opponent. It seems like it reduces the impetus for teamwork, although there's still the "one opponent down is better than five lightly wounded" aspect.

 

Merging STUN and END? It removes the "last ditch effort" - I can't take another hit, so what do I do? At present, that may be a last-ditch effort, pulling out all the stops, using that high END cost power, Pushing, etc. But with the two merged, it means doing nothing, since using your powers will just knock you out all the sooner, and you don't have enough "STEND" remaining to make a regular effort, much less a herculean effort. Characters will go out with a whimper, not a bang. That, or we let characters spend into negative "STEND", so "I hit him with all I've got, then pass out" becomes a routine combat occurrence.

 

Makes "reduced/0 END" a lot more desirable, too. Reducing the price of STUN, END and REC in 6e went a long way to balancing the buyup of those stats against buying reduced END, which I consider a significant improvement.

[Altair]

The whole "cover for my teammate" thing, is that common? It seemed to be something that the rules didn't really support, though this may be a Heroic v. Superheroic scale question. In something like Pathfinder, mobility denial is more of a thing, due to AoEs, and the comparatively limited movement options. In Hero, let's say my homie's stunned, and I need to back them up until such a point as they're ok again. What do I do?

 

I can stand in front of them, but unless the opposition has precisely enough movement to get in attack range, but no more, they just go around me. Unless I have a particular build for it, I don't really have any options to assist them, do I? I think one of the APGs has a maneuver that lets you take hits for someone else, but even that is diminishing returns. Narratively, in terms of the story, I 100% agree with the thought. I'm just not sure how it plays out within the rules. 

 

Still new. Maybe missing something?

 

@Hugh Neilson: Losing the "last ditch" options is certainly a cost. I just haven't seen the scenario where someone is down a lot of stun, but has lots of END. Really, because END is so cheap, there's really no reason to not buy it to characteristic maxima. I haven't seen people using lower END versions of their powers, or any of that, because it's very plentiful. 

 

And I really, really like END conceptually. Think of fencers. This video shows how END is a real-world thing, you can see the Olympic fencers trying to buy time for recovery actions, because they're so drained by the end. It's conceptually one of the things that I like. In practice, it just hasn't translated well. It'd be awesome in a video game, or any scenario where a computer is tracking things. Or I guess if my brain worked in a way where bookeeping wasn't distracting to the game, or was a fun, immersive part of the experience. 

 

But basically, it feels like a "keep playing the game" tax to me. Like in a free-to-play mobile game. 

[Hugh Neilson]

Options vary by character, as always.

 

Simply attracting the opponent's attention - unless played as cardboard cut-outs, characters can be distracted from "the best tactical option the player perceives".

 

Reserving a phase to take a shot on anyone drawing a bead on my downed teammate - if I can Knock him back, that may change his focus.

 

Grabbing the opponent works pretty well too (entangles, barriers, etc. being character-specific options).

 

Push a bus in front of him using SuperSpeed sometimes backfires, I hear.

 

Some games accept a Dive for Cover to Block that attack with your body. I've done that for a teammate.

 

[And I always remember the old Avengers issue where Iron Man realizes Ultron is targeting Thor. "We can't afford to lose Thor" thought bubble as he blocks the attack himself, and staggers back. Thor starts to say something archaic; Ultron interrupts with something like "dead - just as you would have been" to get the response "Shove it, Ultie - this armor's not just built for show."]

 

I recall an Interpose maneuver some editions back which allowed you to reduce your DCV for a specific opponent. If he attacked the person you were protecting instead, you got an OCV bonus to attack him equal to the DCV penalty you chose.

[Altair]

Yeah, I think I saw the interpose maneuver somewhere in the 6e world, but yeah. 

 

But yeah, I do suppose you're correct - I was thinking in different terms. Supers have so many freakin' options. It's lovely.

[Greywind]

If the enemy works HtH, half-move and hold. They try to go around, hit them.

[Altair]

If the enemy works HtH, half-move and hold. They try to go around, hit them.

 

Ad-hoc AoO. I dig it!