Rethinking Haymaker

[Deadman]

I thought I would break this out into its own thread since it is getting buried under the discussion going on it the other thread.  I really want to see what everyone thinks.

 

I will preface this by stating that my first course of action is normally to tweak something that doesn't make sense to me.  In the case of Haymaker there are a few things that irk me since the change in 5E to allow all powers to use it.  I fully understand the thematic implications and do support them for the most part.  I offer the following as a way of tweaking Haymaker to make a little more sense (well at least to me).

 

First it must be agreed upon that Haymaker actually combines two elements to get the massive Damage Class bonus that it gives.  The first is reaching deep into one's self for more power.  The second is taking careful aim to maximize the damage.  If we use those two elements we can actually break them out and construct something that would be somewhat "realistic".

 

Power

When the character reaches deep within himself for more power he winds up and puts everything into his strike.  Since it is raw power the character isn't truly focused on where he is hitting and is able to adjust his aim unlike the accuracy portion below. It could be constructed as a Martial Arts Maneuver as below.  Since it is a standard maneuver I will ensure that it comes out as 0 overall points.

• The Power portion of Haymaker can do up to +2DC on ANY attack (4 pts. I averaged the points to increase DC on Normal and Killing Attacks)
• It is inherently inaccurate and receives a -1 OCV (-1 pt.)
• It unbalances the user and as a result gets -2 DCV (-2 pts.)
• It takes time to build up the power taking +1 Segment to land (-1 pt.)

Total Cost: 0 pts.

 

Accuracy

When the character aims his attack carefully he takes the time to make the shot count.  Doing so means that he will get a bonus to damage at the cost of being very focused on hitting a specific place. This would be constructed as a Martial Arts Maneuver like so.

• The Accuracy portion of Haymaker can do up to +2DC on ANY attack (4 pts. I again averaged the points to increase DC on Normal and Killing Attacks)
• It is inherently accurate and gets +1 OCV (1 pt.)
• It makes the user stand still to aim for -2 DCV (-2 pts.)
• It takes time to aim taking +1 Segment to hit (-1 pt.)
• If the target moves even 1m the attack misses (-2 pts.)

Total Cost: 0 pts.

 

Notice that the Power portion isn't restricted by target movement but if the target were to move out of LoS, behind cover or out of range the attack would miss as with any attack.  On the other hand the Accuracy portion is effected my ANY movement by the character as the attacker is concentrating on hitting one particular spot.

 

I would say that either option could be used by itself thus making a Power Haymaker or an Accuracy Haymaker would be possible.  But the real benefit is that the two can be combined for a True Haymaker which would look like this.

 

True Haymaker

• Combining the Accuracy and Power results in a whopping +4DC on ANY Attack (8 pts. Even though the cost for normal attacks is doubled Killing is not so I settled on 2 points per DC)
• It means that the character is both unbalanced AND stationary which results in an even worse penalty than the two combined -5 DCV (-5 pts. ya, ya, ya I know that per the Martial Arts rules you can subtract more than 2 DCV...deal with it)
• It requires time to aim and build power taking +1 segment to hit (-1 pt.)
• If the target moves even 1m the attack misses (-2 pts.)

Total Cost: 0 pts.

 

As a result we have what is exactly equal to the existing Haymaker maneuver.  So what does it really do for us?  Well I'm glad I asked.  It gives the GM some leeway as to what attacks can be used with each option.

 

For Example. . .

Mental Attacks can only use Power since they don't really benefit from Accuracy (Ultimate Mentalist Mind hit locations notwithstanding).  Of course the attacker could always push the attack for an additional 2DC.

Beam Attacks (Bullets, Arrows, etc.) may only use Accuracy since the Power is beyond the user's control.

Characters cannot use Accuracy vs. Barriers, Entangles, etc. (This addresses a particular pet peeve of mine).  Of course they could always push as well.

 

To Sum up we now have the following options for Haymaker.

 

Maneuver                              Phase          OCV        DCV        Effects                                                   

Power Haymaker                      1/2*             -1            -2          +2 Damage Classes to ANY Attack

Accuracy Haymaker                  1/2*            +1#          -2          +2 Damage Classes to ANY Attack

True Haymaker                         1/2*            +0#           -5         +4 Damage Classes to ANY Attack

 

* : This maneuver takes one extra Segment to perform and lands at end of Segment

#: If target moves even 1m in any direction the attack misses

 

 

 

So there is my idea for tweaking Haymaker to address some of the failings that I see but stay true to the rules as a whole.

 

What do you think?

[Surrealone]

I think the automatic miss portion needs to be done away with in any haymaker because it does not make sense for a number of powers that can be haymakered ... and it comes into conflict with automatic hit rules for some of those powers.

[Deadman]

I would tend to agree with the sentiment that the attack is considered very focused and movement even 1m away would throw off the attack (explained somewhat in the Accuracy Haymaker portion).  Of course in the options I am suggesting if you don't want that to be a possibility you could opt for a Power Haymaker and take the lowered DC bonus (and the -1 OCV). 

[Surrealone]

I would tend to agree with the sentiment that the attack is considered very focused and movement even 1m away would throw off the attack (explained somewhat in the Accuracy Haymaker portion).  Of course in the options I am suggesting if you don't want that to be a possibility you could opt for a Power Haymaker and take the lowered DC bonus (and the -1 OCV). 

 

Scenario:

True haymaker Mental Blast via a Mind Link -- which automatically hits (per RAW).  Target with whom you have the Mind Link moves 1m -- making the haymaker automatically miss (per RAW).

 

You can't auto-hit and auto-miss the same attack, sir.  But per RAW, that's exactly what happens ... and only GM fiat can resolve this systemic issue unless the rules are adjusted to fix the design defect in RAW. 

 

I personally prefer a designed fix to this sort of defect over GM fiat.  Since you're proposing a new design, it would make sense for your design to account for this scenario in a non-exceptional way, yes?

[Deadman]

Scenario:

True haymaker Mental Blast via a Mind Link -- which automatically hits (per RAW).  Target with whom you have the Mind Link moves 1m -- making the haymaker automatically miss (per RAW).

 

You can't auto-hit and auto-miss the same attack, sir.  But per RAW, that's exactly what happens ... and only GM fiat can resolve this systemic issue unless the rules are adjusted to fix the design defect in RAW. 

 

I personally prefer a designed fix to this sort of defect over GM fiat.  Since you're proposing a new design, it would make sense for your design to account for this scenario in a non-exceptional way, yes?

LOL...well anyone that was attacked with a Mind Link and actually let that attack hit is a fool.  It says in the RAW they can immediately disconnect the Mind Link if they are attacked.

 

6E1 pg. 258

Any character in a Mind Link who has a Mental Power can use it through the Link against any other character in the Link. Such attacks do not require an MCV Attack Roll (they automatically hit), but making one is an Attack Action. Of course, since a character must voluntarily accept a Mind Link, such “attacks” are rarely violent (unless the subject was tricked into accepting the Mind Link). If a character wants to turn off the Link to stop the attack, he can shut it off as a Zero Phase Action. In some situations this may count as a “defensive action” that the GM allows a character to Abort to.

 

Next, Per my Haymaker policy I wouldn't let Mental Attacks do a True Haymaker.  Mental Attacks would be limited to doing a "Power Haymaker" which would allow them +2DC at -1 OMCV and -2 DCV.  See the description above.

[Mister E]

& then there is Pushing.

[Hugh Neilson]

Scenario:

True haymaker Mental Blast via a Mind Link -- which automatically hits (per RAW).  Target with whom you have the Mind Link moves 1m -- making the haymaker automatically miss (per RAW).

 

You can't auto-hit and auto-miss the same attack, sir.  But per RAW, that's exactly what happens ... and only GM fiat can resolve this systemic issue unless the rules are adjusted to fix the design defect in RAW. 

 

I personally prefer a designed fix to this sort of defect over GM fiat.  Since you're proposing a new design, it would make sense for your design to account for this scenario in a non-exceptional way, yes?

As noted already, the attack can be automatically foiled already by disconnecting the Mind Link.

 

Second, the rules (6e v2 p 68) note that "For a Haymaker to be valid, performing it has to subject a character to the potential drawbacks of having a reduced OCV and taking extra time.". I assume OCV is a typo since Haymakers reduced DCV. Unless the Mind Linked attacker is also in physical combat, a reduced DCV makes no difference. As he can also be automatically hit through the Link by mental attacks (or break the link to avoid them), a reduced DMCV is also irrelevant. So, by RAW, it would be pretty unusual to be able to Haymaker through a Mind Link.

 

Finally, with two absolutes, one would have to adjudicate which one applies. I like Doc Democracy's belief from a related thread - you chose to perform a Haymaker and, in doing so, you accept the risk of failure that comes with a Haymaker. However, on a broader scale, the game tends to round in favour of the defender, so that would suggest "automatically misses" prevails over "automatically hits".

[Mister E]

Coup de grace.

[Surrealone]

As noted already, the attack can be automatically foiled already by disconnecting the Mind Link.

Assuming the target has a Phase ... and/or isn't surprised.  That's quite an assumption you and Deadman have made, one that's not always going to be true.

[Greywind]

Assuming the target has a Phase ... and/or isn't surprised.  That's quite an assumption you and Deadman have made, one that's not always going to be true.

 

Personally, unless RAW stipulates otherwise, I'd say that ending a Mink Link is a Zero Phase.

[Greywind]

Oh, wait... 6th ed, pg 258 bottom left.

 

uSING mIND lINK

To establish a Mind Link, a character must

have Line Of Sight to the target and must succeed

with an MCV Attack Roll to set up the Link (this

requires an Attack Action, so a character can only

Link with one person per Phase). The target must

be completely willing (MCV 0), otherwise the

Link fails outright. A character can voluntarily

leave a Mind Link as a Zero Phase Action (just like
deactivating any power).

[Lucius]

Assuming the target has a Phase ... and/or isn't surprised.  That's quite an assumption you and Deadman have made, one that's not always going to be true.

Have you forgotten we're talking about a Haymaker? You know, taking extra time so they can see it coming? And you're still going to claim it can come by surprise, and ignore the fact that the target has a segment to abort to "break contact?" No one is assuming it's not a surprise - it can't be a surprise. No one is assuming the target has a phase available, the target doesn't need it.

 

I find it hard to imagine that you have both read the rules for Mind Link and for Haymaker and still actually think a Haymaker via Mind Link will work. You started with a conception of how Mental Powers work that I acknowledge makes sense (something I don't want to lose sight of, it makes sense to me too) and an issue with the conception of how Mental Powers work that's enshrined in the rules NOT making sense to you as highlighted by the "Haymaker a Mental Power" situation, but I suspect you have passed beyond presenting that point of view and working on rules fixes that would work for you, to arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is pretty sure it's the latter and advises me not to rise to the bait again. But can't resist noting that our "assumptions" are "It's a Mind Link, as described in the rules, and a Haymaker, as described in the rules" and that an example of a truly big assumption is "Even though the rules repeatedly make it clear that a mind has an actual location in three dimensional space, I'm going to assume that the rules actually mean something completely contrary to that."

[Christopher R Taylor]

Again, I think the best thing is to just limit Haymaker as written to physical attacks depicting the "all out, no defense, super attack" shown so often in media, but never with a gun, for example.

[Surrealone]

Have you forgotten we're talking about a Haymaker? You know, taking extra time so they can see it coming? And you're still going to claim it can come by surprise, and ignore the fact that the target has a segment to abort to "break contact?" No one is assuming it's not a surprise - it can't be a surprise. No one is assuming the target has a phase available, the target doesn't need it.

Example:

You have a Mind Link with Bob because Bob the friendly mentalist established one with you.  You've had one with Bob for years because you are buds with Bob -- i.e. you trust Bob.  You're on one side of the planet, asleep, when Bob (on vacation on the other side of the planet) learns that you slept with his significant other prior to the time he established a Mind Link with you.  Bob is now very angry.  He is also a mentalist who, until now, respected your boundaries by never combing through your brain or mentally attacking you -- but no more.  Because you didn't respect Bob's boundaries, he no longer cares about yours -- so Bob decides he's going to turn your brain into mush.  He winds up a mental blast haymaker against you ... and will automatically hit you...

 

You clearly don't have a Phase.  Combat will begin on the Segment Bob commences the Haymaker ... and you will have no clue until it hits you (whether awake or asleep) ... unless you happen to have Mental Awareness (in which case you need to make some crazy PER roll because you're asleep).  But to be crystal clear, Bob is the mentalist, not you, so you lack Mental Awareness. With that in mind (see what I did, there? ), you clearly can't see the mental blast haymaker attack coming because you're halfway across the globe and it's an attack you can't perceive.  And if that wasn't good enough for the GM who insists on making ridiculous excuses to try to ignore the problem I've demonstrated exists within RAW (or find ways to try to deny it's possible for a mental haymaker to surprise someone) ... you're asleep ... when Bob can clearly haymaker you ... with surprise.

 

 

My point:

Haymakers can be surprises ... especially mental ones across a Mind Link from someone you trust.  I tossed in the slumber just to really underscore it for the naysayers... even though it shouldn't have been necessary to go to that extreme.

 

 

Let's take it farther:

Your slumber is taking place on the upper bunk of a bunk bed -- which places you 1.5m above the floor.  You have 1d6 of Unluck, which the GM rolls ... and determines that you fall out of bed.  It happens to be the exact segment the haymaker is supposed to land, so you move 1.5m, downward, land with a THUD, take a small amount of damage, and (obviously) awaken.  Per RAW, the mental blast haymaker misses ... because you moved at least 1m.

 

And we're now back to the automatic hit (via the Mind Link) ... automatically missing.  Our RAW conundrum is still alive and well ... with the only solutions presented so far being GM fiat ... mostly by individuals who would rather GM fiat their way around the flaw within RAW, than address/correct it.

 

 

 

The above is improbable, you say?  Umm, well, I painted a rosy picture gone bad.  Imagine, instead, that Bob didn't find something out and the he was, instead, Mind Controlled into attacking you ... by a hostile mentalist he was fighting.  Suddenly the attack on an unsuspecting friend ... across a Mind Link ... is highly probable.  But according to people, here, you can't surprise someone with a mental haymaker across a Mind Link.  RAW says nothing of the sort ... only GM fiat does ... and I'm looking for solutions other than GM fiat since we know we have a problem in RAW... in that RAW contradicts itself.

[Grailknight]

So what's your solution?

 

The current RAW, while not making realistic sense for one type of attackers(Mentalists), is fair in its results for all attackers. Any change to RAW, would have to remain equally fair to all attackers while removing your perceived RAW fallacy. Anything else just favors one type of character over another.

 

So I repeat, answer these scenarios for me:

 

Attacker A is about to Haymaker a punch when Target T moves and/or is moved back 9" down a well-lit  unobstructed tunnel. What happens?

 

Same scenario, but A is using Haymaker with a ranged attack?

 

And final scenario, has A using Haymaker with a mental power?

 

What are the modifiers that apply?

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Base assumptions from OP:

 

 

First it must be agreed upon that Haymaker actually combines two elements to get the massive Damage Class bonus that it gives.  The first is reaching deep into one's self for more power.  The second is taking careful aim to maximize the damage.  If we use those two elements we can actually break them out and construct something that would be somewhat "realistic".

 

The two bolded assumptions are counter to my understanding of the basic Hero principle of reasoning from effect, as they ask to have a rules mechanic flow from special effects assumptions. They strike me as putting the cart before the horse.

 

Re: GM fiat:

 

I don't see GM fiat as a bad thing. I see it as a necessity. No rules system can handle every edge case.

[Grailknight]

Though I favor the status quo, I'll  propose a change.

 

Haymaker : +1 OCV, 1/2 DCV, +4 DC; unable to abort until next phase.

[Mister E]

Example:

You have a Mind Link with Bob because Bob the friendly mentalist established one with you. You've had one with Bob for years because you are buds with Bob -- i.e. you trust Bob. You're on one side of the planet, asleep, when Bob (on vacation on the other side of the planet) learns that you slept with his significant other prior to the time he established a Mind Link with you. Bob is now very angry. He is also a mentalist who, until now, respected your boundaries by never combing through your brain or mentally attacking you -- but no more. Because you didn't respect Bob's boundaries, he no longer cares about yours -- so Bob decides he's going to turn your brain into mush. He winds up a mental blast haymaker against you ... and will automatically hit you...

 

You clearly don't have a Phase. Combat will begin on the Segment Bob commences the Haymaker ... and you will have no clue until it hits you (whether awake or asleep) ... unless you happen to have Mental Awareness (in which case you need to make some crazy PER roll because you're asleep). But to be crystal clear, Bob is the mentalist, not you, so you lack Mental Awareness. With that in mind (see what I did, there? ), you clearly can't see the mental blast haymaker attack coming because you're halfway across the globe and it's an attack you can't perceive. And if that wasn't good enough for the GM who insists on making ridiculous excuses to try to ignore the problem I've demonstrated exists within RAW (or find ways to try to deny it's possible for a mental haymaker to surprise someone) ... you're asleep ... when Bob can clearly haymaker you ... with surprise.

 

 

My point:

Haymakers can be surprises ... especially mental ones across a Mind Link from someone you trust. I tossed in the slumber just to really underscore it for the naysayers... even though it shouldn't have been necessary to go to that extreme.

 

 

Let's take it farther:

Your slumber is taking place on the upper bunk of a bunk bed -- which places you 1.5m above the floor. You have 1d6 of Unluck, which the GM rolls ... and determines that you fall out of bed. It happens to be the exact segment the haymaker is supposed to land, so you move 1.5m, downward, land with a THUD, take a small amount of damage, and (obviously) awaken. Per RAW, the mental blast haymaker misses ... because you moved at least 1m.

 

And we're now back to the automatic hit (via the Mind Link) ... automatically missing. Our RAW conundrum is still alive and well ... with the only solutions presented so far being GM fiat ... mostly by individuals who would rather GM fiat their way around the flaw within RAW, than address/correct it.

 

 

 

The above is improbable, you say? Umm, well, I painted a rosy picture gone bad. Imagine, instead, that Bob didn't find something out and the he was, instead, Mind Controlled into attacking you ... by a hostile mentalist he was fighting. Suddenly the attack on an unsuspecting friend ... across a Mind Link ... is highly probable. But according to people, here, you can't surprise someone with a mental haymaker across a Mind Link. RAW says nothing of the sort ... only GM fiat does ... and I'm looking for solutions other than GM fiat since we know we have a problem in RAW... in that RAW contradicts itself.

Is this still about Haymakers?

 

If the attacker is so favoribly positioned & the victom is so helpless, then I call it a coup de grace.

 

Adventurers might use it on monsters that were already beaten but not yet killed.

 

Not a noble act. Even vs evil monsters.

 

Walking around the aftermath of a battle delivering mercy-killings is a cold-blooded line that can not be uncrossed.

 

Demands strict lifelong atonement.

[Hugh Neilson]

Example:

 

You have a Mind Link with Bob because Bob the friendly mentalist established one with you.  You've had one with Bob for years because you are buds with Bob -- i.e. you trust Bob.  You're on one side of the planet, asleep, when Bob (on vacation on the other side of the planet) learns that you slept with his significant other prior to the time he established a Mind Link with you.  Bob is now very angry.  He is also a mentalist who, until now, respected your boundaries by never combing through your brain or mentally attacking you -- but no more.  Because you didn't respect Bob's boundaries, he no longer cares about yours -- so Bob decides he's going to turn your brain into mush.  He winds up a mental blast haymaker against you ... and will automatically hit you...

OK, ignoring the bizarre contrivance, and laying aside the ability of pretty much any Supers attack to take out a sleeping (surprised out of combat) target, let's look at the rules for Mind Link:

 

- "Since Mind Link is Persistent, if the character establishing the Link is Knocked Out, goes to sleep, or the like, the other characters in the Mind Link can maintain it. When the character who was Knocked Out wakes up, he can rejoin the Link by establishing LOS with anyone in the Link and making an MCV Attack Roll against MCV 0. If all the characters in a Link are Knocked Out or otherwise become unconscious, the Link vanishes and has to be established all over again by the character with the Power. Despite these rules, the GM generally should not let characters maintain the same Mind Link for very long periods (days, weeks, months, or more)."

 

Sounds like I broke the Mind Link when I went to sleep. If there were others in the Link, I can rejoin it only if I am within LoS of another participant in the link. So even your highly contrived situation does not actually arise. To your Mind Control example, it was instant, so Bob could not communicate the fact he was under attack?

 

Is Bob at risk due to the lower Haymaker DCV? If not, the rules say the Haymaker cannot be initiated.

 

You can also detect mental attacks directed against you, although I typically rule that happens after the attack is resolved, not before.

[Hugh Neilson]

A further thought: If I am already asleep, what difference does it make if I am easy to target? I'm already easy to target. As a GM, I'm quite all right ruling either that:

 

- you can't Haymaker through a Mind Link or a Mind Scan. The game balance rule of "reduced DCV is not a drawback" applies, and conceptually, I can see the extra buildup being too much to pass through the Link; or

 

- Mind Scan or Mind Link overcomes the "if the target moves, the Haymaker fails" restriction, but the Link makes it clear that the attacker is winding up for a Haymaker (so you can abort and break the link) and this allows a breakout roll at +4 before the Haymaker is launched.

 

- or perhaps "Mind Scan or Mind Link attack" is its own maneuver - no LoS required, and you can't combine it with other maneuvers. Why should I ever NOT Haymaker a Mind Scan? It's normally used out of combat, so the reduced DCV has no impact on me, and an extra segment is pretty meaningless too. That may be one reason for the "no Haymaker unless reduced DCV is relevant" rule, but I'd rather just have a rule that Haymakers don't work with MInd Scan, or even that no combat maneuvers work with Mind Scan. That could go right through to all mental attacks.

 

Conceptually, why does building up all my will reduce my DCV? It's not a lot tougher to justify movement frustrating the haymaker than to justify being able to haymaker the attack in the first place.