How to Model: Splash Damage

[Cantriped]

Same effect, but the second build succeeds over 90% of the time (unless the target actually has Smell Flash Defense - how common is that?), instead of succeeding somewhere between 37.5% and 16.2% of the time.

 

Which power will be more effective over time?

That depends upon the expectations of the campaign really. Well... and how the player chooses to use the power, or rather, what they combine it with.

 

In an average, simple Champions campaign, the latter is obviously more effective. However in such a campaign the GM probably shouldn't allow such an Attack Power if he isn't going to allow or encourage players to purchase appropriate amounts of its defenses.

 

In addition, if the character chose to combine the former attack with a Change Environment penalizing PER rolls, than its chances of success are much better... and an effective quantity of Change Environment is typically far cheaper than attempting to Drain/Suppress all of the Target's appropriate Defense.

 

I frequently design enemies with unusual attacks, such as Poison Gas (RKA, Area Of Effect (Radius), Damage Over Time, AVAD (Smell Flash Defense)), or Supersonic Croak ​(Blast, Area Of Effect (Cone), AVAD (Hearing Flash Defense)... As a result I make sure that I also design and make available "Reasonably Common" equipment which provides the appropriate defense (such as gas masks and ear-muffs). Likewise I encourage players to purchase the appropriate defenses when their concept warrants it.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Seems like this is a closer comparison, between NND and Saving Throw:

 

4D6 blast, AVAD Roll (+½): 30 active points

4d6 blast NND all-or-nothing vs flash defense vs smell (+1): 40 active points

 

All the rest of that stuff is extraneous to the bare comparison of advantages.  I'd say the 20 points of savings is a pretty nice compensation, particularly since you can make it a +¾ advantage and penalize their roll by active points/10 (so the 4d6 blast is now 35 points and the target has to make a roll at -3).

 

The attack works on everyone, even people with flash defense vs smell.  It also costs less, so you can buy more dice in the campaign's active point limits. Seems like a fair exchange to me.

[Cantriped]

There is also the fact that if your GM is reasonable enough to agree that since Everyone has a Characteristic Roll, a Characteristic Roll should therefore qualify as a "Very Common" Defense instead of a "Rare" Defense (which CC/FHC RAW classifies it as because it is a "specified defense or condition no listed [on the table]"), then a Blast, or Hand-To-Hand Attack can take it as a -1/2 Limitation (excluding Does BODY, which must still be taken separately as a +1 Advantage), and a Mental Blast or Drain could take it as -1 1/2 Limitation.

[Hugh Neilson]

In an average, simple Champions campaign, the latter is obviously more effective. However in such a campaign the GM probably shouldn't allow such an Attack Power if he isn't going to allow or encourage players to purchase appropriate amounts of its defenses.

If the defenses are purchased by most opponents, they are no longer rare defenses and the advantage cost should be reduced. The whole premise of AVAD is that a power which targets ae less likely to have defenses to offset is more expensive.

 

In addition, if the character chose to combine the former attack with a Change Environment penalizing PER rolls, than its chances of success are much better... and an effective quantity of Change Environment is typically far cheaper than attempting to Drain/Suppress all of the Target's appropriate Defense.

Now we're spending a bunch of extra points and actions to reduce the target's ability to defend against the attack. The AVAD advantage is supposed to reduce the target's ability to defend in and of itself.

 

I frequently design enemies with unusual attacks, such as Poison Gas (RKA, Area Of Effect (Radius), Damage Over Time, AVAD (Smell Flash Defense)), or Supersonic Croak ​(Blast, Area Of Effect (Cone), AVAD (Hearing Flash Defense)... As a result I make sure that I also design and make available "Reasonably Common" equipment which provides the appropriate defense (such as gas masks and ear-muffs). Likewise I encourage players to purchase the appropriate defenses when their concept warrants it.

If the equipment providing the defense is "reasonably common" so characters typically have the defense, then the defense is no longer "rare".

 

Seems like this is a closer comparison, between NND and Saving Throw:

 

4D6 blast, AVAD Roll (+½): 30 active points

4d6 blast NND all-or-nothing vs flash defense vs smell (+1): 40 active points

 

All the rest of that stuff is extraneous to the bare comparison of advantages.  I'd say the 20 points of savings is a pretty nice compensation, particularly since you can make it a +¾ advantage and penalize their roll by active points/10 (so the 4d6 blast is now 35 points and the target has to make a roll at -3).

Except that the first power (30 AP) fails somewhere between 62.5% and 83.8% of the time against the typical target. How many opponents have worse than an 11- PER roll? I think that failing 3/4 of the time is a pretty significant limitation.

 

Let's assume no one has a base roll better than 11-, so your -3 to the roll means they need an 8- to resist its effect. That's now the equivalent of a 12- activation roll (the power will fail 25.93% of the time). Applying a 12- activation roll, a -3/4 limitation, to the 40 AP power leaves a real cost of 12 points, a 12 point savings. I suggest opponents with a better than 11- base PER roll are a lot more common than opponents with smell flash defense. But if smell flash defense is more common in your games than, say, Life Support, or resistant mental defense (or is as common as sight flash defense, or power defense), then it is no longer a rare defense, and the advantage should be reduced.

 

Note that, when it succeeds, that AVAD (either version) will get 14 STUN and 4 BOD, on average, past defenses. The character could alternatively buy a straight 6d6 Blast, rolling an average of 21 STUN and 6 BOD. What are the average defenses in your game? In a Standard Heroic game, typical defenses are 6 - 10, half of which are resistant. Assuming 8 defenses, the Blast gets 13 STUN through on an average hit, and there is no chance the target succeeds in a roll to take no damage. A 100% chance of 13 STUN past defenses seems pretty superior to a 37.5% chance (or less) to inflict 14 STUN past defenses.

 

I think a +1/4 spread to impose a -1/10 AP penalty is quite discounted. But even then, we are now looking at 35 points for about a 75% (or lower) chance to get 14 STUN and 4 BOD past defenses. A standard 7d6 Blast will average 24.5 and 7, getting 16.5 STUN past those average 8 defenses, with no failure risk.

 

A Blast won't be inflicting any BOD damage, of course. If we went with a KA instead, a 2d6 KA will average 7 BOD and 14 STUN, passing 3 BOD past those average 4 rDEF, and 6 STUN past that average 8 DEF. 3 BOD every time versus 4 BOD 37.5% of the time is pretty clearly superior. 14 STUN x 37.5% = 5.25, so even the STUN is not really advantaged.

 

2d6+1 KA means 4 BOD on average, where your AVAD manages 4 BOD 62.5% (or less) of the time. It's passing through an average of 8 STUN, rather than 62.5% (or less) of 14 STUN = 8.75, so the AVAD has gained a tiny STUN advantage over the KA, whose purpose is not to inflict STUN anyway.

 

CONCLUSION: Under your pricing model, I would either use a standard AVAD with an Activation Roll, which will be effective far more often, or a normal, non-AVAD attack, which will average better damage anyway.

 

Math does not lie.

 

There is also the fact that if your GM is reasonable enough to agree that since Everyone has a Characteristic Roll, a Characteristic Roll should therefore qualify as a "Very Common" Defense instead of a "Rare" Defense (which CC/FHC RAW classifies it as because it is a "specified defense or condition no listed [on the table]"), then a Blast, or Hand-To-Hand Attack can take it as a -1/2 Limitation (excluding Does BODY, which must still be taken separately as a +1 Advantage), and a Mental Blast or Drain could take it as -1 1/2 Limitation.

Let's shop and compare:

 

5d6 AVAD (smell PER roll eliminates damage, -1/2) does BOD (+1) is a 50 AP, 33 Real Point power. If my target makes a smell PER roll, he takes no damage. Most targets will make that roll on an 11- to 13-, so each attack fails between 62.5% and 83.8% of the time. Average roll 17.5 and 5 x 16.2% to 37.5% success rate = 2.84 to 6.56 average STUN, .81 to 1.88 average BOD.

 

3d6 AVAD (Smell Flash Defense; all or nothing +1), does BOD (+1), Requires a roll 14- (-1/2; each phase -1/2, 14- +3/4 = -1/4) 45 AP, 30 RP costs a little bit less, and will only fail 9.26% if the time. So, 10.5 x 90.74% = 9.53 average STUN and 3 x 90.74% = 2.72 average BOD. And I suggest a PER roll better than 12- is a lot more common than a rare defense.

 

Getting closer, though. I am still leaning to pricing based on a "typical" success roll by the opponent matching the probabilities for an activation roll.

 

A 4d6 Drain drops in price to 16 real points under your model. So an average of, say, 14 STR Drained x 16.2% to 37.5% success rate = 2.3 STR to 5.25 STR.

 

That compares a lot better to the 5.5 I can average with a 1.5d6 Drain (15 AP and RP), but that small Drain with no activation roll is still superior. A 2d6 Drain with a 14- Activation Roll (20 AP, 16 RP) for an average of 7 x 90.74%, or 6.35 average STR drain, also seems superior.

 

To me, this type of "comparison pricing" is a first step, before playtesting, to assess the rough appropriateness of the pricing.

 

This is an attempt to model D&D saving throws. Prior to 3e, low level characters ha a tough time making saves, but high level characters became more and more resistant. RESULT: Abilities with saving throws were shunned in favour of those guaranteed to work, or at least to have some effect in the game.

 

3e+, saving throws became a lot less reliable, even at higher levels, making "save or suck" spells far more viable, and far more popular. However, I still see a lot of hate directed at spells that the caster must hit with, and the target must fail a save. Too many chances for failure. In the typical Fantasy Hero game, our Spellcaster likely needs to make a roll to successfully cast the spell, and make a roll to hit with the spell. Now we would add a third roll that permits the target to avoid the spell. Stick to swords!

[Christopher R Taylor]

CONCLUSION: Under your pricing model, I would either use a standard AVAD with an Activation Roll, which will be effective far more often, or a normal, non-AVAD attack, which will average better damage anyway.

 

Let's assume your analysis is correct; how would you handle the build?  Not "I'd throw it in the trash and laugh at you" but "how would you build what I've structured here in a way that you like the price better?"

[Hugh Neilson]

 

CONCLUSION: Under your pricing model, I would either use a standard AVAD with an Activation Roll, which will be effective far more often, or a normal, non-AVAD attack, which will average better damage anyway.

 

Let's assume your analysis is correct; how would you handle the build?  Not "I'd throw it in the trash and laugh at you" but "how would you build what I've structured here in a way that you like the price better?"

UMMMM..if you go back a page, I spelled out my model. Here, I'll reprint it:

 

Let's consider this from the vantage point of a limitation on the attack power. It doesn't have to be an "NND" type construct.

 

Analogizing the mechanic to one that already exists is my general preference - we have set values for those already. Here, I think the best basis is Requires a Roll.

 

Normally, a required roll is either a fixed roll (not the case here - it will vary with the target) or a skill roll modified by -1/X AP.

 

If all characters have the roll at a normal level, it seems resistance on 11- will be common, and a lot of targets will have a better roll. Let's call that a 12- on average. The odds of a 12- roll failing are the same as a 9- roll succeeding, so that implies a limitation of -1 1/2 (base roll of 11- is -1/2, a further -1/2 for rolling with every use and a further -1/2 for reducing the activation roll to 9-).

So that would make a 4d6 blast NND all-or-nothing vs flash defense vs smell (+1): 40 active points cost 16 points after the -1 1/2 limitation.

 

If the roll is an unusual one or one that characters normally only have as a familiarity, then the target will typically succeed on an 8-, but may have a better roll, so maybe we call that 9-. Odds of failure being 9- is equivalent to activating on a 12-, so that's -3/4 (base roll of 11- is -1/2, a further -1/2 for rolling with every use reduced by -1/4 for improving the activation roll to 12-)

So now it costs 40 AP, and the -3/4 limitation makes it 23 real points.

 

Now, a skill-based roll reduced by -1 per 10 AP is normally also a -1 limitation, but the character taking the limitation will normally have a pretty decent roll on that skill. Here, the targets likely won't. However, here we know the AP of the specific power, so we can just adjust the activation roll to compensate. If the power fails based on a normal skill/PER roll succeeding, and we set that at a 9- activation roll, then a -4 (1/10 of 40 AP) penalty to the target's roll is an activation roll 4 points higher - so base the limitation on a 13- activation roll instead of a 9- activation roll. That reduces it to a -3/4 limitation.

So now we are looking at a 40 AP power costing 23 RP.

 

If the roll only halves the effects, then only half of the power is limited. Only apply the limitation to half of the power.

We have the judgment call of what the average resistance roll will be, but we already have the AVAD judgement call of how rare the defenses are.

 

Now, I am using things like Smell Flash Defense, Resistant Power Defense or what have you as being close enough to "no one has it" that no one has it. Practically, though, I'd be OK with moving one step further down the AVAD line to say "now there is no defense". Now it's what, 3d6 with a +1 1/2 advantage = 37 AP, and apply the same limitations. A bit less damage (or a few more points - 3 1/2d6 will cost 45 AP), but no one gets any defense.

 

So I spend 45 AP/2.5 = 18 RP and it acts against the target's smell PER roll. It will fail 62.5% to 83.8% of the time, inflicting 12.5 STUN on every success, 2.03 to 4.69 average, so call that 3.5.

 

A straight 3 1/2d6 Blast will work every time, roll an average of 12.5 STUN and, against 8 defenses, get 4.5 STUN past defenses. Still a bit better, on average, but my spell now becomes worthwhile when dealing with a higher defense target, or one with lower PER rolls.

[Christopher R Taylor]

UMMMM..if you go back a page, I spelled out my model.

 

 

Yes, I read it before.  Apparently I wasn't being clear.  If you were to make the same sort of construct as I propose using AVAD as the basis how would you build it in a way that made you happy?

[Hugh Neilson]

Well, let me ask you how you would build it as a d20 game feat - seems just as reasonable.

 

To design this as an AVAD, I think you would best look to Cantriped's comments

 

There is also the fact that if your GM is reasonable enough to agree that since Everyone has a Characteristic Roll, a Characteristic Roll should therefore qualify as a "Very Common" Defense instead of a "Rare" Defense (which CC/FHC RAW classifies it as because it is a "specified defense or condition no listed [on the table]"), then a Blast, or Hand-To-Hand Attack can take it as a -1/2 Limitation (excluding Does BODY, which must still be taken separately as a +1 Advantage), and a Mental Blast or Drain could take it as -1 1/2 Limitation.

AVAD is priced based on how much more rare, or common, the defense s when compared to the default for the power. So simply being defended against by PD or ED (very common) means every character has the defense and will shave at least a few points off the STUN and BOD, and every character has (say) a Smell PER Roll, virtually always somewhere between 11- and 13- (some few may have a better roll, and the rare character might have worse).

 

So if we apply that logic, a 4d6 Blast, AVAD (Very Common defense of Smell PER roll, +0) that Does BOD (+1) would be a 40 AP attack (which, I note, is top of the range for Standard Heroic). It will roll 14 STUN and 4 BOD on average, and will fail somewhere between 62.5% and 83.8% of the time on average, so what's that? A 73.5% fail chance (rough average of 11-, 12- and 13- success chances) - say 75% as I expect there will be more 14+ PER rolls than 10- PER rolls. So an average per hit of 25% of 14 STUN and 4 BOD = 3.5 STUN and 1 BOD.

 

Meanwhile, that 8d6 Blast would have averaged 28 and 8, acting against normal defenses of 6 - 10, so it's going to pass about 20 STUN and no BOD past defenses on an average hit. Even at this level, I am not seeing any advantage to this alleged Advantage. Over extended time, I guess it will do a bit more BOD.

 

But the Blast will do little or no BOD, so what if we don't bother with BOD on our StenchCloud spell either, which makes it an 8d6 Blast, AVAD (Very Common defense of Smell PER roll, +0) which will roll an average of 28 STUN - success only about 25% of the time still means we only pass through an average of 7 STUN, but when it does work, that 1 chance in 4, the target is likely stunned, maybe even KOd, in one shot. That, at least, has some value.

 

So what if we apply this to a more esoteric attack, like a Ray of Enfeeblement? Let's drop the point cost down to 20 - the low end of the typical DC range for a Standard Heroic game - since that's a pretty low level spell, and in D&D it's a nuisance, but not crippling.

 

So that would be 2d6 STR Drain (maybe we toss on a reduced recovery rate, or make it 3d6, if we want it to mean more, but let's use this low level version for now), 20 AP and 20 RP, drains 7STR from the typical target, as very few will have power defense.

 

Moving from an uncommon defense to a Very Common defense of a roll virtually everyone has at between 11- and 13- is a -1 limitation, and All or Nothing makes it -1 1/2. So now I can buy a 46 STR Drain, half END (+1/4), 50 AP, AVAD (PER roll -1 1/2, all or nothing) for 20 real points. It costs the same 2 END per use, averages 14 STR instead of 7, but fails about 75% of the time. So it averages 3.5 STR, but when it gets through, a lot of targets drop to 0 STR (one good hit or two average hits that get through will cripple virtually any opponent), so we have a real "save or suck" spell.

 

I think I still like the 2d6 reliable STR drain better. But the more volatile "good chance it fails entirely, but when it works it is devastating" AVAD choice mirrors not only the D&D Save or Suck model, but is also reminiscent of the old STUN Lotto killing attack.

 

However, as the construct is still "you succeed or fail depending on a die roll", this still fits better under an RSR model, in my view. That makes it a lot easier to build, say, Volley of Arrows, which causes a volley of arrows to fly at the target:

 

8d6 Blast, Physical, (40 AP) reduced to 4d6 if the target succeeds in a DEX roll (RSR 8-, which is the same odds as failure on a 12- roll, must roll every time = -1 3/4, applied to half the power). So the volley of arrows will be a 4d6 Blast (a little damage to the typical character) if he makes his "reflex save" (DEX roll), but 8d6 if he fails it, which will pass a lot more damage through.

 

Change that to an Energy-based Blast, make it AoE, and we have a Fireball or Lightning Bolt.

 

But wait, you say, in D&D, the Fireball or Lightning Bolt does not have defenses. FALSE: many typical D&D spells do have defenses - in D&D, Fire Resistance or Electricity Resistance will reduce damage from a fire or electricity spell. In Hero, we have Energy Defense. Just like Damage Reduction in D&D is way less common than PD in Hero, Energy Resistance in D&D is way less common than ED in Hero, but the same analogy exists. D&D just puts a lot more "defensive powers" into bonus DCV than Hero would. If every energy-based attack (spell) is an AVAD, why should anyone buy ED?

 

That creates a new problem - ED is no longer a "very common" defense if no one buys it, so we need to re-jig the AVAD rules to compensate for the reality that, under this model, a plain vanilla attack that affects ED is much more potent - which now encourages more characters to purchase ED. Ripple effects can be a real pain!