House Rule: Three Strikes

[Christougher]

For those who find their combats a little too vanilla, a little too repetitive, here's a rule idea that might help:

 

Three Strikes Rule: A character taking the same actions against the same opponent more than twice in succession receives a -1 OCV and -1 DCV penalty.  (Still undecided if this penalty should be cumulative.)

 

 

It's to encourage more than 'I hit him again'.  Take a half move, try another maneuver, another power, or another opponent.  Make it dynamic!

 

The idea is partly emergent from LARP fighting, wherein the second or third time a particular swing was used, I could recognize it, and take advantage when they tried it again.

 

Opinions?  Playtests?

[Hyper-Man]

Interesting idea.  Seems like it's making Analyze Combat an Everyman ability that everyone gets with No Roll required.  I would probably limit it to HTH combat. 

[Nolgroth]

I see where you are going with this. I would love to see combat become mechanically more than just a slug fest between CV values. I want to see movement a'la Star Wars lightsaber duels where the two (or more) opponents are all over the damn place. John Woo choreographed gun fights include all sorts of movement. 

 

A cumulative penalty would get old real quick. The question I have is how descriptive do you want your players to be. Can it be as simple as Phase 3: I slash at him with my sword.  Phase 6: I stab at him with my sword.  Phase 9: I try to bash him with my shield.  Phase 12: I try to strike him with the pommel of my sword. None of them are terribly exciting but technically, would they count as alternative attacks? I imagine that you are going for something with a little more panache to it. I wonder if a "cool" bonus could not be applied instead of a penalty. If the player dynamically describes what he is doing, provide a small (+1 or +2 (rarely) ) bonus to either OCV or DC. I tend to prefer positive reinforcement whenever possible. 

 

Hmmm. Another option is to assume a character that is trading blows is effectively "standing still" and provide a bonus to enemy OCV. In other words, they only get their full DCV score when they are actively moving at least one meter/hex during their Phase. You could also maneuver NPCs so that they can use terrain to their advantage. Imagine a sharp piece of terrain to the PC's right. The NPC circles the PC and then springs forward, using some sort of Push maneuver to impale the PC on the sharp object. It might encourage the players to look for the same sorts of advantages. 

[Altair]

Nolgroth's got a solid idea there, with the terrain. I think that's a big, big part of the dynamism of HERO combat, interaction with the environment. Also, maybe consider something like Exalted's stunt system? In that system you get a 1-3 die bonus based on your description, interacting with the terrain, things like that. As for the bonuses, ones are quite easy to get, and threes are pretty rare, about one per-combat maybe. The same conceit could work in HERO, maybe using Damage Classes instead of extra dice?

 

As for the original idea, I've seen something very similar work quite well in Robin Laws' excellent Ashen Stars. It's a GUMSHOE game, so the focus is on investigation, and combat is usually an afterthought - but - it has a nifty starship combat system, that is based on varying one's approach. Their options are basically firing, outmaneuvering, hacking and what they call "Trickbag" which is where your Crazy Ivans, Picard Maneuvers and Ackbar Slashes come in.

 

If you don't vary your approaches, you become predictable, which gives the opponent a +3 on showdowns (the opposed rolls that make up space combat) and an extra skirmish point (what you need to end the scenario) if they win. Considering that their system is 1d6+skill, three points is a heck of a lot. 

 

Anyway! That's what I thought of when you mentioned your proposed house rule. in Ashen Stars, it keeps everybody involved, and keeps things feeling dynamic. In Exalted, it keeps combat varied and cinematic. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but are systems that have stood up to a lot of use. Hope that's useful.

[mhd]

Believe me, I'd like to get my players to narrate combat a bit more, but I don't think mere penalties for repetition would work for my campaign at the moment. We simply don't have that many different attack powers and special abilities, so mechanically, keeping an even CSL split and just doing Strikes seems like a good idea quite often. That doesn't mean that this would result in the same exact physical movement, so the narration could (and should) differ. Regarding the verisimilitude, attacking the same way doesn't necessarily correspond to the exact same strike. I mean, simply doing a left/right switch (or a different angle) isn't a whole lot different.

 

For more swashbuckly campaigns this might be a good idea, but probably not a good solution, as a one point penalty still doesn't tempt players to e.g. try a Disarm or Grab all of a sudden. Nor would that necessarily make the combat more exciting, personally I'd get more out of the exact same mechanical approach, but with a different flourish in the description than just switch from Fast Strike to Martial Strike...

 

 

Also, why a penalty? Wouldn't something like the Exalted stunt bonus be better psychologically? Were you give a +1 - +3 bonus to CSL just for a great description? Probably wouldn't work for serious attempts at realism, but we're not GURPS.

[dsatow]

This reminds me of a villain I had in Champions.  The villain had absorbtion into DCV.  Each time you hit him, he would learn your attacks and dodge better. The absorbtion had limitations that it was effective only versus the attacking person.  The next thing he had was Aid to OCV on a trigger.  Each time he hit, his OCV would go up against that character.

 

 The flaw in my design is that the combat went too quick for it to really get usable, that and my really poor to hit rolls.  After 3 hits, his DCV had gone up by 2 but he was KO'd.  After 6 attacks, only one hit and he never did get any OCV.

[Ndreare]

We have tried a rule almost exactly like this. The players found it really, really frustrating. It took a lot of the fun out of the game for them. As the gm I wanted more descriptions and thought this would do it, but the players dealt like they were on the spot every time and it slowed combat to a crawl taking as much as 20+ minutes per turn.

[Christopher]

I see where you are going with this. I would love to see combat become mechanically more than just a slug fest between CV values. I want to see movement a'la Star Wars lightsaber duels where the two (or more) opponents are all over the damn place. John Woo choreographed gun fights include all sorts of movement. 

 

Believe me, I'd like to get my players to narrate combat a bit more, but I don't think mere penalties for repetition would work for my campaign at the moment. We simply don't have that many different attack powers and special abilities, so mechanically, keeping an even CSL split and just doing Strikes seems like a good idea quite often. That doesn't mean that this would result in the same exact physical movement, so the narration could (and should) differ. Regarding the verisimilitude, attacking the same way doesn't necessarily correspond to the exact same strike. I mean, simply doing a left/right switch (or a different angle) isn't a whole lot different.

This is the good old D&D misconception. Game effect vs special effect.

A single "Strike" action can include Feints and otherwise be very different maneuvers from the previous or the next strike action.

Strike Action is a game effect. How you describe it a special effect.

 

The only time specific maneuvers are even explicitly identified are for Martial Arts, where you have stuff like "Flying Kick".

I am not a fan of those specific naming, personally. I think MA should just be generically named maneuvers; there is more then one way to "offensive strike" in any give martial arts that has an offensive strike.

 

This reminds me of a villain I had in Champions.  The villain had absorbtion into DCV.  Each time you hit him, he would learn your attacks and dodge better. The absorbtion had limitations that it was effective only versus the attacking person.  The next thing he had was Aid to OCV on a trigger.  Each time he hit, his OCV would go up against that character.

 

 The flaw in my design is that the combat went too quick for it to really get usable, that and my really poor to hit rolls.  After 3 hits, his DCV had gone up by 2 but he was KO'd.  After 6 attacks, only one hit and he never did get any OCV.

How about using CSL/CV's, only 5 AP per turn fighting agaisnt same foe? Would have done the same effect (the longer the fight, the better he knows you Kung Fu), without any need to hit or be hit.

Getting hit is never a good tactic to begin with.

[Altair]

We have tried a rule almost exactly like this. The players found it really, really frustrating. It took a lot of the fun out of the game for them. As the gm I wanted more descriptions and thought this would do it, but the players dealt like they were on the spot every time and it slowed combat to a crawl taking as much as 20+ minutes per turn.

 

I think for HERO, the Exalted Stunt model is really much more of the way to go. There's a lot of science on the relative merits of carrots v. sticks, and the short version is that rewards are fun and punishments suck. (See WoW changing its "you played too long" penalty into a "rest xp" bonus. Same mechanical effect, but one feels really negative, and the other is a nice little thing).

 

One of the problems you can have with a stunt system, is it changing the genre in ways you didn't intend. If you're trying to do fairly grounded superhero combat, and then you give somebody a 3-point stunt for running along a stream of bullets, bouncing off the raindrops, or other such improbable things, your game will head into Dragon Ball Z territory quickly. That's by design in the source material.

 

The idea here is to incentivize behaviors that you want to see more of, yes? Positive reinforcement has a lot to offer.

[mhd]

That's a good point, you can change a lot depending on whether a +3 stunt bonus is a quadruple backflip quintuple ninja slash, some weird German word from some medieval fencing manual or a Howardian description about the evisceration of your enemies.

[Hugh Neilson]

How about using CSL/CV's, only 5 AP per turn fighting agaisnt same foe? Would have done the same effect (the longer the fight, the better he knows you Kung Fu), without any need to hit or be hit.

Getting hit is never a good tactic to begin with.

I like that. I envision the "attack every phase" oriented players being very confuse by this fellow bobbing and weaving (Dodge and Block) for a turn or two as he takes the measure of his opponents.

[Hyper-Man]

That just seems like a custom application of the Analyze (Combat) Skill.  Possibly built with bonus CSL's with a Delayed Effect Limitation to achieve the slow improvement over time.

[Christougher]

Why not use the Exalted mechanic?  Because I've never seen Exalted.

 

Yes, bonuses would probably work better for encouragement than penalties, but I think it would be harder to adjudicate.

 

The amount of distinction was deliberately vague, something a GM could adjust to their campaign.

 

Thanks for the thoughts so far.

 

Chris.

[Greywind]

Have you tried simply talking to your players about your expectations when it comes to descriptive combat?

[Altair]

Why not use the Exalted mechanic?  Because I've never seen Exalted.

 

Yes, bonuses would probably work better for encouragement than penalties, but I think it would be harder to adjudicate.

 

Adjudicating such is another skill to learn, to be sure, and if you don't want to spend extra time on that, then something that doesn't require interacting with - like static modifiers - becomes much more appealing. I brought it up because hey, let's look at this from a couple angles. 

 

 

Have you tried simply talking to your players about your expectations when it comes to descriptive combat?

 

Metacommunication! It's good, if sometimes challenging.

[Steve]

If you are using Heroic Action Points to modify combat, cool actions can also be rewarded with letting a character recover them faster. This is another "off the character sheet" way to do it.

[NuSoardGraphite]

I use "surprise move" bonuses as a "stunt" bonus, meaning if the player describes an action in an interesting manner, I will give him/her between +1 and +3 to perform the action.

 

This incentive helps a lot to mitigate "I hit him" syndrome.

[NuSoardGraphite]

I also use a lot of dynamic movement in my combats. I also encourage the use of skills in combat.

 

In general, the rule for Skill use in battle is a successful skill roll adds +1 to OCV or DCV (whichever is appropriate) or a critical success (half roll) nets a +2. It can be done with any skill. Acrobatics. Contortionist. Slight of hand. Acting (faking an injury). Fast Draw (iaijutsu). Intimidation (causing your opponent to hesitate) Persuasion (eroding your opponents confidence in their skill or getting them upset, a favorite of Lord Vader)

 

It actually adds quite a lot to the combat.

 

Also positional bonuses help. High ground gives you +1 to your OCV and DCV. Flank or Rear attacks (unnoticed) attack 1/2 DCV. Weilding a weapon with reach imposes a -1 to your opponents OCV, but if they get inside your reach,, the penalty reverts to the opponent. This helpss initite a lot of dynamic movement in combat.

[Lucius]

I won't miss again: +4 OCV, Trigger (Activating the Trigger is an Action that takes no time, Trigger requires a Zero Phase Action to reset, Character does not control activation of personal Trigger, Trigger can expire (it has a time limit); +1/4) (25 Active Points); Limited Power Only lasts until target is struck once (-1), Conditional Power Only for that one target (-1/2)

After missing a target twice in a row, the character gains +4 to hit that specific target that lasts until actually hitting it

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary reminds me I'm supposed to play Monster Hunter today and should get my pants on.

[Spence]

I find this an issue solved by player/GM interaction instead of something that can be forced by rule tweaking. 

 

The long and short of it is, some people can play a certain genre and others struggle. 

 

It is just very hard to find players that can play a supers game with the same particular feel/flavor that you like.  Especially with the ever changing flavor/feel of the existing source material.

[Ninja-Bear]

 

For those who find their combats a little too vanilla, a little too repetitive, here's a rule idea that might help:

 

Three Strikes Rule: A character taking the same actions against the same opponent more than twice in succession receives a -1 OCV and -1 DCV penalty. (Still undecided if this penalty should be cumulative.)

 

 

It's to encourage more than 'I hit him again'. Take a half move, try another maneuver, another power, or another opponent. Make it dynamic!

 

The idea is partly emergent from LARP fighting, wherein the second or third time a particular swing was used, I could recognize it, and take advantage when they tried it again.

 

Opinions? Playtests?

I have thought of doing something simular but alas I haven't tried. One problem about giving bonuses is that everyone will hound you for a bonus all the time. I guess the best method I use, is to try to be descriptive myself and other longtime players do too then this encourages the other players who are used to "I strike" to expand their descriptions.

[NuSoardGraphite]

I find this an issue solved by player/GM interaction instead of something that can be forced by rule tweaking.

 

The long and short of it is, some people can play a certain genre and others struggle.

 

It is just very hard to find players that can play a supers game with the same particular feel/flavor that you like. Especially with the ever changing flavor/feel of the existing source material.

I use my stunt bonus rules for Heroic games. I like to throw a lot of swashbuckling in my games.

[Altair]

I know it's a bit off-center from what you were asking, but if the idea is to get dynamic combat, I cannot recommend terrain representation enough. With a group that's 100% new to Hero System, the thing that stood out the most, was just how dynamic, kinetic and full of movement and environmental interaction the combat is. 

 

You can get Fat Dragon Games' Capital City set for like, 9 bucks on DrivethruRPG. Scissors, cardstock, some glue. Brick goes from hitting dudes to throwing dumpsters at them, not because it's even more effective, but because HOLY CARP YOU GUYS I THREW A DUMPSTER AT THAT DUDE. It's wicked fun. 

 

And this is coming from someone with a giant pile of unpainted minis, because I gots the shakey hands, so when I say it's easier than you think, that's the context. 

 

Basically, if the problem you're trying to solve is static combat, then there are a couple different ways to address it. Hopefully one (or more) helps out!