The TEAMWORK skill -- more than just DEX-based?

[bigdamnhero]

"Allows a character to Coordinate (page 146) attacks with others, and generally work well as part of a team. Examples include superheroes who practice team tactics in “danger room” scenarios, soldiers trained to fight as a unit, and wolves employing pack attacks against their prey." -CC pg 35

So the Skill's scope has increased. Though it's primary function is still Coordination very dex based to me.

 

I would still recommend that a PC have  KS Team Tactics to keep it all straight.

I don't see what's new or different there? 6e1 p91 says Teamwork "reflects a character’s ability to fight well with others in combat." Seems like saying the same thing, just with different words.

 

As for requiring a separate KS? Depends on your game I guess. To me it's like requiring a character with Electronics to also buy SS: Electrical Engineering - I understand the concept of distinguishing between practical vs intellectual knowledge, but I don't get the point of doing so as a game element. I used to break things like that down a lot more, but nowadays I feel like all it does is add another die roll. YMMV of course.

[bigdamnhero]

CV is no longer DEX based (v6)

Ah, touche! Bad choice of example on my part. (My Old School "roots" are showing again...)

[Tasha]

CV is no longer DEX based (v6)

 

Though it IS useful to note that because it speaks to the game's design at it's earliest, which is when Coordination and Teamwork skills were created. 

[Tasha]

I don't see what's new or different there? 6e1 p91 says Teamwork "reflects a character’s ability to fight well with others in combat." Seems like saying the same thing, just with different words.

 

As for requiring a separate KS? Depends on your game I guess. To me it's like requiring a character with Electronics to also buy SS: Electrical Engineering - I understand the concept of distinguishing between practical vs intellectual knowledge, but I don't get the point of doing so as a game element. I used to break things like that down a lot more, but nowadays I feel like all it does is add another die roll. YMMV of course.

 

I do have some old rules memories that sometimes cloud what the current rules are. IIRC Teamwork was primarally concerned with Coordinating attacks. It seems like the other bits of knowing team tactics etc is somewhat of a new thing.

[JohnnyAppleseed098]

The other Dex based hand eye coordination skills and the original way that OCV was tied to Dex all point to the game being designed around Hand Eye Coordination being Dex based. Intelligence/Perception rolls are really more for discovery and Memory. It's all about keeping the system internally consistant with itself than "realistic"

I see your point, but I still believe that DEX is more of a Complementary Roll in Teamwork.

 

Another reason why I argue Teamwork is INT based is due to the training with your team that is required to use it. That does require memory (which you have conceded is INT based). Knowing when to move, when to strike, and possibly when not to strike is dependent upon the training you have received with your team. If one guy messes up the strategy (like the silent count in American Football, if one guy moves early), then the entire team is at a loss (5 yard penalty in the example). That seems more to me like the team member forgot what they were supposed to do (maybe the player thought of the wrong silent count or the wrong play). 

 

This is why I think Teamwork is INT based, and why I have already house-ruled it as such.

[zslane]

Okay, here is my obligatory This Is All Just My Opinion disclaimer.

 

So what does the Teamwork skill represent? This is essentially identical to the similar question of what the Tactics skill represents. I don't like either of them, personally.

 

Teamwork comes down to two basic components: decision making and (physical) execution. Decision making is what the player does, physical execution is what the character does. If you want a group of heroes who are good at fighting as a team, then the players need to learn to work well together as players. Then it is up to each character's DEX and CV to execute the intention behind each battlefield decision made by the players.

 

"But what about characters that are Super Tacticians?" I don't believe in such a thing, or rather, I don't believe they make any sense in the hands of players who aren't effective tacticians themselves. You can't just roll some dice and voila! have a good battlefield decision/plan pop out of thin air. And when you reduce "good combat decision making" to nothing more than a CV modifier or DRM, you are taking the micro-tactical nature of Champions combat and abstracting it too much.

 

So to my mind there should be no Teamwork skill, just like there should be no Tactics skill. They simply don't work for a game that is essentially a cooperative, multi-player, man-to-man tactical wargame once the battlemat is pulled out.

 

Decision making should never be abstracted away from being a player responsibility. RPGs just don't make any sense when you do that (and Champions especially so).

 

Again, In My Opinion.

[Greywind]

The tactician also needs good communication/persuasion skills to get his plan across and to get Mr. Lone Wolf to go along with it.

[whitekeys]

I see your point, but I still believe that DEX is more of a Complementary Roll in Teamwork.

 

Another reason why I argue Teamwork is INT based is due to the training with your team that is required to use it. That does require memory (which you have conceded is INT based). Knowing when to move, when to strike, and possibly when not to strike is dependent upon the training you have received with your team. If one guy messes up the strategy (like the silent count in American Football, if one guy moves early), then the entire team is at a loss (5 yard penalty in the example). That seems more to me like the team member forgot what they were supposed to do (maybe the player thought of the wrong silent count or the wrong play). 

 

This is why I think Teamwork is INT based, and why I have already house-ruled it as such.

 

This seems like the difference between learning the skill in the first place and executing the skill in a combat situation. Two different things.

[Hugh Neilson]

This suggests that there's no intelligence component, at all, to TEAMWORK, and that coordination/TEAMWORK is basically no different from rolling a coin across one's knuckles (which is pure DEX aside from the mind telling the body what to do). 

 

i.e. A DEX-only basis suggests that you don't need to see your target (since PER is INT-based), or need to use your brain (also INT-based, I'd hope!) to remember and process team commands/signals to focus on a single target.

How can we have Acrobatics without seeing the environment and thinking about how to coordinate your movement through it? Doesn't Breakfall rely on seeing the approaching ground, and Climbing on perceiving handholds? I think there is a difference between "it is DEX-based" and "INT/PER has no relevance whatsoever".

 

I personally have considered this for the entire time I have played HERO. I just think that teamwork is reasonably not DEX AT ALL. Hand-Eye coordination IMO has always been INT/PER based. Thus, I have never seen DEX as the appropriate skill for Teamwork. Think about it.

As noted above, that seems like it would make picking locks INT/PER based as well.

 

CV is no longer DEX based (v6)

Neither is it INT-based. Spotting the opportunity to attack before the other guy does is still DEX-based, though.

[Tasha]

Okay, here is my obligatory This Is All Just My Opinion disclaimer.

 

So what does the Teamwork skill represent? This is essentially identical to the similar question of what the Tactics skill represents. I don't like either of them, personally.

 

Teamwork comes down to two basic components: decision making and (physical) execution. Decision making is what the player does, physical execution is what the character does. If you want a group of heroes who are good at fighting as a team, then the players need to learn to work well together as players. Then it is up to each character's DEX and CV to execute the intention behind each battlefield decision made by the players.

 

"But what about characters that are Super Tacticians?" I don't believe in such a thing, or rather, I don't believe they make any sense in the hands of players who aren't effective tacticians themselves. You can't just roll some dice and voila! have a good battlefield decision/plan pop out of thin air. And when you reduce "good combat decision making" to nothing more than a CV modifier or DRM, you are taking the micro-tactical nature of Champions combat and abstracting it too much.

 

So to my mind there should be no Teamwork skill, just like there should be no Tactics skill. They simply don't work for a game that is essentially a cooperative, multi-player, man-to-man tactical wargame once the battlemat is pulled out.

 

Decision making should never be abstracted away from being a player responsibility. RPGs just don't make any sense when you do that (and Champions especially so).

 

Again, In My Opinion.

Again Teamwork is mostly there to allow for Coordination, which allows for Multiple attacker bonus and for all of the attacks to be added together after defenses have been applied. That sum is compared to the target's Con and if exceeded stuns the opponent. The other stuff was added for Players who don't have the kind of talent required to come up with team tactics etc.

 

Just like Tactics is a helper skill that allows people who don't have good tactical sense a chance to be a tactician. Also it's a great skill for GM's who wish their players were a bit more subtile. It gives the GM a way to give the PC's a bit of a nudge when it is needed. It also can give a fuller understanding of what a character is seeing tactically and what it potentially means. It's not a leash or a way to reduce player agency.

 

Deduction is a very similar skill that does the same thing for solving mysteries.

 

YMMV, but IMHO these skills are VERY valuable to the system and are great GM tools.

[Lucius]

I see your point, but I still believe that DEX is more of a Complementary Roll in Teamwork.

 

Another reason why I argue Teamwork is INT based is due to the training with your team that is required to use it. That does require memory (which you have conceded is INT based). Knowing when to move, when to strike, and possibly when not to strike is dependent upon the training you have received with your team. If one guy messes up the strategy (like the silent count in American Football, if one guy moves early), then the entire team is at a loss (5 yard penalty in the example). That seems more to me like the team member forgot what they were supposed to do (maybe the player thought of the wrong silent count or the wrong play). 

 

This is why I think Teamwork is INT based, and why I have already house-ruled it as such.

Training. Knowing. Remembering. Perceiving. All these are important to Teamwork.

 

They are also important to Acrobatics. And to Weaponsmith. And to every skill on the list in between them.

 

If you have made every single Skill in your game INT based, you are at least being logically consistent. If the above is your reasoning and you have not made every Skill in your game INT based, you are not logically consistent.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says Climbing should be STR based, and Riding should be PRE based just like Animal Handler is, and....

[Surrealone]

I don't mean any offense, but you could have doing it wrong this whole time  =P  

No offense taken, because I'm not the GM I'm just a player ... meaning if it's been done wrong all this time across years of gameplay, it's been done consistently wrong by many GM's across that span of time.  Occam's Razor would, however, suggest the simpler explanation of the way a number of people have tended to do it ... is probably a more accurate gauge of how the skill is actually used in the field.

 

1) Once your team has trained together and established what kind of signals you're going to use, then the ability to actually notice that your teammate is counting to three or giving a certain hand gesture is hardly a significant mental challenge. Yes obviously you have to be able to perceive it, but doing so is completely trivial under normal circumstances.

​...

 

2) Are you seriously arguing that dogfighting at Mach3 requires less perception that being aware of what the guy standing next to me is doing?

Red numbers added by me in your quote so I could reference them.

 

​WRT 1:  Ahh, but a failed teamwork roll by one member has been commonly explained in games I've played (under different GM's) as the result of things like: Bob didn't hear the signal/command; Bob lost count; Bob forgot what the command meant; etc.  Those things aren't even remotely related to DEX; rather, they play into the portion of the Teamwork skill that pertain to needing to perceive what other members of the team are doing .... and having trained together with the team to learn the team tactics.  If this is how GM's tend to use the skill ... and explain the failure of one member to coordinate while others succeeded, then there would seem to be a basis for INT factoring into the skill.  If, however, a GM explains a botched Teamwork skill roll solely by claiming Bob was off on his timing, then I can see a case for it being purely DEX-based.

 

I can't speak for others, here, but games in which I've played across the years have had plenty of dramatic license taken with botched teamwork rolls (i.e. explaining the botch as something other than a DEX-based issue) ... and I'm apparently not the only person who has experienced this -- as the current group of players with whom I game have noted the same from their past games ... as has the GM ... as has JohnnyAppleseed098.  That should be telling, I'd think.

 

WRT 2: No, I'm not arguing that, at all.  As I tried to illustrate previously, normal piloting/driving costs nothing ... other than the TF ... and that freebie capability to drive/pilot transports with which you're familiar is where I believe the INT/PER component is for driving/piloting.  Combat piloting/driving is a skill beyond normal piloting/driving that allows you to bring DEX to bear to represent your special combat skill which is above/beyond normal piloting/driving.  With that in mind, if you're blind in a car or a plane, you can't effectively drive/pilot it at all (using the non-combat, free variety of driving/piloting that only requires your TF) in most cases.  In such cases, you likely have no chance to bring your special DEX-based combat driving/piloting skill to bear ... or if you are given such a chance by the GM, it's probably an opportunity someone without the combat piloting/driving skill would not receive ... but one you receive because your special training entails specific muscle memory that goes beyond the 'mash gas to go; mash brake to stop; mash clutch for gear changes' that drivers with only TF: automobiles have at their disposal.  You don't think about the things you do when you drive, you just do them, right?  That's muscle memory ... i.e. motor learning ... i.e. things you do without conscious thought once you build the muscle memory -- like walking, riding a bicycle, etc.  Combat drivers/pilots have muscle memory for things like 'evasive maneuvers', 'bootlegger reverse' 'hover in place', 'autorotate due to power failure', etc..  Such things are practiced to the point that you don't need much input from the environment to do them -- if any -- in most cases ... and they're done without conscious effort because of the motor learning involved in practicing them ad nauseum.

 

It seems like the other bits of knowing team tactics etc is somewhat of a new thing.

New or not, it's RAW ... and there's more than just DEX involved in that component of the skill's description ... at least from where I'm sitting it seems like it.  I'm a bit baffled at how the powers that be felt DEX covered this aspect of the skill.

 

Another reason why I argue Teamwork is INT based is due to the training with your team that is required to use it. That does require memory (which you have conceded is INT based). Knowing when to move, when to strike, and possibly when not to strike is dependent upon the training you have received with your team. If one guy messes up the strategy (like the silent count in American Football, if one guy moves early), then the entire team is at a loss (5 yard penalty in the example). That seems more to me like the team member forgot what they were supposed to do (maybe the player thought of the wrong silent count or the wrong play). 

 

This is why I think Teamwork is INT based, and why I have already house-ruled it as such.

It's not just the training, but also the awareness/perception to be able to deploy it when the team is acting together.  So there's knowledge, perception (both of which are what I feel is the INT-based component) and the timing/coordination (which is what I think we all agree is the DEX-based component).

 

 

A) How can we have Acrobatics without seeing the environment and thinking about how to coordinate your movement through it? Doesn't Breakfall rely on seeing the approaching ground, and Climbing on perceiving handholds? I think there is a difference between "it is DEX-based" and "INT/PER has no relevance whatsoever".

 

 

C) As noted above, that seems like it would make picking locks INT/PER based as well.

Here we go again with the usual off-topic distractions into minutiae that will spin us off into the void if we let them.  To preclude that, I will respond to such distractions from you exactly once, Hugh.  I have added red references to your quote to respond to them.

 

WRT A): I already gave you an example -- flipping in place (i.e. within the space you already occupy) is Acrobatics ... and can be done while blind, deaf, mute, etc -- without any insight into the environment.

 

​WRT B ): Breakfall's skill description indicates (CC page 26) that it "allows a character to get to his feet as a Zero Phase Action, halve the damage taken from a fall, halve the damage taken from being Thrown, land on his feet (and suffer no damage) when taking Knockback, and keep his footing on treacherous ground."  Frankly, getting to your feet with a zero phase action only requires you to get the bottom of your feet to whatever surface the rest of your body is adhered to via gravity - meaning it's merely a shift in the position of your body that requires no targeting sense cues whatsoever.  Halving the damage from a fall could be explained as you did or it could merely be a character maneuvering during the fall in a way that slows the fall (example: shape shifter that uses a successful Breakfall roll to form a shape that slows descent by half -- something that requires no perception of the ground, handholds, or anything else).  Landing on your feet and taking no damage from KB is like getting to your feet from a zero phase action -- it's just bodily orientation -- without any requirement for visual cues from a targeting sense, etc.  Keeping your footing on treacherous ground is more of the same ... all positioning ... pure DEX ... you don't need to see squat to do it.

 

​WRT C): Feeling picks move tumblers is most likely DEX, not INT ... because to feel something that subtle you have to keep completely still (aside from working the picks) in order to avoid sensing a false positive.  Keeping still while working slowly and deliberately with only required/practiced movements and noises  ... something that's DEX-based and something most people can't do well ... is an inherent part of what a good lockpick can do ... and it falls right in with a purely DEX-based skill.

 

 

Again Teamwork is mostly there to allow for Coordination, which allows for Multiple attacker bonus and for all of the attacks to be added together after defenses have been applied. That sum is compared to the target's Con and if exceeded stuns the opponent. The other stuff was added for Players who don't have the kind of talent required to come up with team tactics etc.

I added red to your quote so that I could draw your eye to it.  As you said, 'mostly' ... but not 'completely'.  There's more to it than just coordination; that 'other stuff' ... doesn't seem to be DEX-based from where I'm sitting ... and apparently where others are sitting, too.  Please educate me as to why you feel that 'other stuff' falls under DEX.

 

[Tasha]

I think that Coordination is a HUGE Combat advantage. IMHO it overpowers the other functions that the Skill has. So it needs to stay a Dex roll. IMHO

[steriaca]

Hear is a solution. All skills start at 11- skills. No stat is important to the skill because ALL stats are important.

 

Or, 3 points buys a +1 to the roll, with the stat being by case by case bases.

[Lucius]

 

Better yet.

 

Eliminate INT, DEX is renamed to INItiative and doesn't modify Skills.

 

Skills start at 11.

 

Invent a new class of Skill Levels, very very slightly more expensive, that can modify more than one Skill in a given phase.

 

Give examples with names like "Perceptive: +1 with Tracking, Concealment, Perception" and "Agile: +1 with Acrobatics, Climbing, Breakfall, Riding, Contortionist" and "Studious: +1 with Knowledge Skills, Professional Skills requiring extensive schooling, Sciences, Mechancis, Electronics" -- in fact, present several of these as sample Talents, so someone wanting a Perceptive or Agile or Manually Dextrous character can find the emobidiment of their concept easily.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says once you've eliminated Figured Characteristics, decoupling Skills from Characteristics is the logical corollary.

[Hugh Neilson]

No offense taken, because I'm not the GM I'm just a player ... meaning if it's been done wrong all this time across years of gameplay, it's been done consistently wrong by many GM's across that span of time. Occam's Razor would, however, suggest the simpler explanation of the way a number of people have tended to do it ... is probably a more accurate gauge of how the skill is actually used in the field.

Only if we accept “gamers Surrealone has had direct contact with” is a statistically random sample. I submit that it is not. Occam’s Razor just as easily suggests that all of the gamers you have gamed with have a common source for their approach, such that a single error, well presented, has become an assumption shared by a variety of players and GM’s flowing out from “Interpretation Zero”.

 

 

Ahh, but a failed teamwork roll by one member has been commonly explained in games I've played (under different GM's) as the result of things like: Bob didn't hear the signal/command; Bob lost count; Bob forgot what the command meant; etc. Those things aren't even remotely related to DEX; rather, they play into the portion of the Teamwork skill that pertain to needing to perceive what other members of the team are doing

Occam’s Razor? The fact that these interpretations in play contradict the basis for the skill in the rules suggests that the interpretations are not correct.

 

By the way, missing one’s target in an attack can be interpreted as not perceiving the target was about to shift to his left. I don’t think that means we should eliminate OCV and use INT to determine likelihood of a successful attack instead.

 

Bob didn't hear the command? Does Ed get a bonus to Teamwork for his +5 Hearing PER Roll bat-ears? Bob lost count? Does Tina get a Teamwork bonus for her Absolute Time Sense? Bob forgot the command? I guess Lisa gets a Teamwork bonus too since she took Eidetic Memory. Wow - every ability provides a Teamwork benefit!

 

 

It's not just the training, but also the awareness/perception to be able to deploy it when the team is acting together. So there's knowledge, perception (both of which are what I feel is the INT-based component) and the timing/coordination (which is what I think we all agree is the DEX-based component).

It’s also not just the awareness/perception. Absent a rules shift to bring multiple characteristics to bear on a single skill, permit use of different characteristics for different users and/or uses of each skill, or de-linking characteristics from skills entirely, one characteristic has to be selected.

 

 

I already gave you an example -- flipping in place (i.e. within the space you already occupy) is Acrobatics ... and can be done while blind, deaf, mute, etc -- without any insight into the environment.

And describing how one undertakes a shoulder roll or backflip is something a skilled acrobat can reasonably do which requires no DEX whatsoever. One characteristic being selected is not perfect for every possible use of the skill, and that extends to pretty much every skill. Selecting one characteristic, like not having rolls in the millions so every possible factor can be used as a modifier, however minute, is a compromise we make for game play.

 

BTW, even your example requires an awareness of the ground beneath your feet.

 

 

Breakfall's skill description indicates (CC page 26) that it "allows a character to get to his feet as a Zero Phase Action, halve the damage taken from a fall, halve the damage taken from being Thrown, land on his feet (and suffer no damage) when taking Knockback, and keep his footing on treacherous ground." Frankly, getting to your feet with a zero phase action only requires you to get the bottom of your feet to whatever surface the rest of your body is adhered to via gravity - meaning it's merely a shift in the position of your body that requires no targeting sense cues whatsoever. Halving the damage from a fall could be explained as you did or it could merely be a character maneuvering during the fall in a way that slows the fall (example: shape shifter that uses a successful Breakfall roll to form a shape that slows descent by half -- something that requires no perception of the ground, handholds, or anything else). Landing on your feet and taking no damage from KB is like getting to your feet from a zero phase action -- it's just bodily orientation -- without any requirement for visual cues from a targeting sense, etc. Keeping your footing on treacherous ground is more of the same ... all positioning ... pure DEX ... you don't need to see squat to do it.

It is good to see you recognize that there could be multiple descriptions of the reasons a skill check succeeds or fails, some of which relate directly tio the characteristic on which it is based, others only partially, or tangentially, or even not at all.

 

 

Feeling picks move tumblers is most likely DEX, not INT ... because to feel something that subtle you have to keep completely still (aside from working the picks) in order to avoid sensing a false positive. Keeping still while working slowly and deliberately with only required/practiced movements and noises ... something that's DEX-based and something most people can't do well ... is an inherent part of what a good lockpick can do ... and it falls right in with a purely DEX-based skill.

“Feeling picks move tumblers” is touch-based perception, just as much as hearing and remembering teamwork maneuvers is. “Sensing a false positive” – perception guides the success or failure of a character’s senses, as I recall.

 

As you said, 'mostly' ... but not 'completely'. There's more to it than just coordination; that 'other stuff' ... doesn't seem to be DEX-based from where I'm sitting ... and apparently where others are sitting, too. Please educate me as to why you feel that 'other stuff' falls under DEX.

Please explain how shifting the roll to INT, which has nothing to do with what the skill “mostly” does, constitutes an improvement. Now we are focusing the rule on the outlier aspects of the skill rather than its core – its “mostly” to use the above terminology.

[Hugh Neilson]

I agree that decoupling skills from characteristics is a logical move. I suggest rather than complete decoupling, we might provide for the CHAR to vary based on the CHAR which would have the most impact on the skill's success, taking into account both the skill itself and the SFX of its use and user. Perhaps Captain America's Teamwork is PRE-based, as he motivates his team (I recall an old Marvel with the Thing thinking "just can't let Cap down" as he went beyond his own limits), while Spider-Man's might be DEX-based (aligning my shot with his) and Wolverine's might be INT-driven as a function of his enhanced senses telling him what his teammates and opponents will do even before they take that action).

 

An acrobat tumbling might be DEX based, but INT-based as he tumbles through hazardous terrain, knowing where to place his hands and feet, while explaining the technique becomes INT or PRE based.

 

Persuasion might be STR based when one is threatening physical violence!

[whitekeys]

​WRT 1:  Ahh, but a failed teamwork roll by one member has been commonly explained in games I've played (under different GM's) as the result of things like: Bob didn't hear the signal/command; Bob lost count; Bob forgot what the command meant; etc.  Those things aren't even remotely related to DEX; rather, they play into the portion of the Teamwork skill that pertain to needing to perceive what other members of the team are doing .... and having trained together with the team to learn the team tactics.  If this is how GM's tend to use the skill ... and explain the failure of one member to coordinate while others succeeded, then there would seem to be a basis for INT factoring into the skill.  If, however, a GM explains a botched Teamwork skill roll solely by claiming Bob was off on his timing, then I can see a case for it being purely DEX-based.

 

It's still just a special effect.

[doccowie]

When I first saw this thread I thought it was just going to be another of those "My group prefers doing things differently to RAW" threads, where someone tries to persuade everyone to change what they do.

Inherently this seems pretty pointless - RAW is imperfect but it's pretty darn good, if you and your group prefer something different then go for it, you don't need my permission! There's no such thing as having fun the wrong way*

(If it matters, I'm happy to use DEX, both from a simulation aspect, and because I just think DEX is a little expensive at 2 points** - Teamwork is a great skill and it throws DEX a bone)

 

Actually, though, it's been very interesting as an overview of how people see skills, so, thanks very much all for the insight.

 

*OK, obviously there is, but not in the context of house rules to HERO.

 

** I am super aware that it would be too cheap at one point.

    Ultimately, as always, is RAW perfect? No. Is it awesome? Yes. Do I care enough to argue? Not so much. Can I remember the name of that annoying politician who always asked himself questions and then answered them? No.

[ned-kogar]

Personally, I'd consider a non-skill solution, such as allowing the Co-ordinated 'combined damage for stunning' if two (or more) characters manage to hit the same target on the same Dex/Phase and make their individual To Hit rolls by X amount (eg. everyone rolls < half of what was required.. if you're not using Criticals).

 

Then allow a 2pt CSL in Co-ordinated attacks, that increase the chance of an individual's roll. It's cheap enough that members of a team might all buy into it, but also means a character can increase the overall chance even if she's co-ordinating with someone unfamiliar - a knack for team-ups, a perception of other's styles, perfect timing in matching someone else, etc.

 

Ned

[Tasha]

Personally, I'd consider a non-skill solution, such as allowing the Co-ordinated 'combined damage for stunning' if two (or more) characters manage to hit the same target on the same Dex/Phase and make their individual To Hit rolls by X amount (eg. everyone rolls < half of what was required.. if you're not using Criticals).

 

Then allow a 2pt CSL in Co-ordinated attacks, that increase the chance of an individual's roll. It's cheap enough that members of a team might all buy into it, but also means a character can increase the overall chance even if she's co-ordinating with someone unfamiliar - a knack for team-ups, a perception of other's styles, perfect timing in matching someone else, etc.

 

Ned

That's actually how you USED to Coordinate attacks.

[Sean Waters]

Coordinating an attack is all about hitting a target at the same time as another attacker so that you can add your stun totals to increase the likelihood of stunning the target by exceeding their CON.  In addition the DCV of the target is reduced against any coordinated attacks (although that is an optional rule, so may not apply in your game)

 

I think that coordinating is a bit too useful, personally, and I'd tone it down a lot if I were re-writing the system, given that Hero is more about thresholds than totals.  Having said that I really can not understand the injunction against coordinating physical and mental attacks.

 

On the one hand I would suggest that we should not be doing anything to make the Teamwork skill easier to use, and that it makes sense that agility is the skill category rather than intelligence because it really is all about the timing.  The rules even mention that if there is likely to be a difficulty in perceiving a signal or cue then a Perception roll would be appropriate.  Perception is INT based anyway, so INT is relevant in that way.  

 

On the other hand INT is often lower than DEX in superheroic games, so that would make coordination more difficult, which is good.

 

On the gripping hand, we do not have hybrid characteristic based skills in Hero and I would be loathe to introduce them as anything other than a house rule or a complete system overhaul.  As a house rule, I'd say 'go for it'.

 

IMO Coordination should work by reducing the effective CON of the target by 5 points for each coordinating character after the first, with the proviso that the effective CON can not be less than zero.  That feels useful but a lot less overpowered, especially as there is no downside to coordinating, and no way to resist it or avoid it, other than buying extra CON with limitations, which seems silly to me.  Alternatively you could introduce a downside to trying to coordinate and failing, perhaps giving all the participants an OCV penalty on their attack.

 

Part of the reason I do not like coordination is because it is powerful and, if you have the ability to use it, you might as well use it every time, and that just slows combat down if you are making extra rolls.

 

Arguably those extra rolls speed up combat too as you will take opponents down more quickly.  All well and good until it happens to you, eh?  It is like critical rolls: there are almost always going to be more opponents than PCs over the course of a campaign.  Moreover it makes building solo opponents difficult without making them look freakishly different from the rest of the campaign build guidelines.

[Mister E]

Occam's Razor

 

"Never multiply entities beyond necessity."

 

Lol

[Mister E]

I agree that decoupling skills from characteristics is a logical move. I suggest rather than complete decoupling, we might provide for the CHAR to vary based on the CHAR which would have the most impact on the skill's success, taking into account both the skill itself and the SFX of its use and user. Perhaps Captain America's Teamwork is PRE-based, as he motivates his team (I recall an old Marvel with the Thing thinking "just can't let Cap down" as he went beyond his own limits), while Spider-Man's might be DEX-based (aligning my shot with his) and Wolverine's might be INT-driven as a function of his enhanced senses telling him what his teammates and opponents will do even before they take that action).

 

An acrobat tumbling might be DEX based, but INT-based as he tumbles through hazardous terrain, knowing where to place his hands and feet, while explaining the technique becomes INT or PRE based.

 

Persuasion might be STR based when one is threatening physical violence!

Mental Combat Teamwork should be EGO based.

[Mister E]

... I really can not understand the injunction against coordinating physical and mental attacks.

 

 

& Social Attacks.