4, 5 or 6?

[Netzilla]

Fair. 

 

What exactly are you arguing with me about?  I'm telling you how I intend to run my games, and why.  I'm not telling you or anyone else how to run yours.  

 

What's your beef?

 

Can't really say I have a beef with you.  In post 140, I was responding to Christopher Taylor's post 138 (wherein he basically argued that normal people don't block ranged attacks with their bare hands).  I stated that the rules already allow unarmed people to block swords with their bare hands at no penalty by default and have done so since 1e even though that also requires considerable training and luck to succeed with.  In post 143, you responded by pointing out the CC optional rule for unarmed blocking.  I then gave the above response to clarify my point.  No beef involved whatsoever; simply a clarification of my position.

 

In any case, I don't believe I've ever told you that you're running your games wrong (heck, I barely know anything about how you run your games), but if I've given that impression, I apologize.

[Chris Goodwin]

Sure, your call as a GM would be to not allow an unarmed block vs most ranged attacks and I don't think I've ever contended that was outside of a any GM's purview.  My main point in the post you responded to was to explain how my POV isn't as inconsistent as Ninja-Bear seems to think it is. 

 

My main point in this thread is that the 6e rule on Blocking ranged attacks isn't some horrible aberration ripe for player abuse and worthy of a new Great Linked Debate (obviously, I'm failing on that 2nd part).  Yes, it requires GMs to make a ruling based on genre and SFX, but that's kind of the norm for the Hero System.  Hero's always been a game that requires a non-trivial amount of pre-campaign work on the part  of the GM, not just in the realm of mechanically building the game world but in deciding on which of the plethora of optional rules will be in play and clearing up any known rule vagaries.  Yeah, it would be nice if this rule were less vague but it's hardly the first or worst case of this happening in Hero's history.

 

Fine.  I was asserting that it might be abusive, but I'm dropping that.  I've had players who would stop the game to argue the point as extensively as this thread has gone on, and who are the ones who would be trying to abuse it.  I don't play with them anymore, but I suppose we're always fighting the last war...

 

Still, I disagree with the idea that just anyone can Block ranged attacks.  Wonder Woman's bracelets aren't the whole story.  Neither Captain America's shield, Luke Skywalker's lightsaber, Cyclops' eyebeams.  Regardless of how experienced the combatant, they couldn't just pick those things up and start blocking.  Wonder Woman is a demigod with ridiculous amounts of combat training and experience, and superhuman reflexes.  Cap is an enhanced human with ridiculous amounts of combat training and experience.  We are explicitly shown a scene where Luke Skywalker is being trained by Obi-Wan Kenobi in how to block blaster bolts with his lightsaber.  The X-Men have had a Danger Room since issue #1 in 1963, and are frequently shown training in it.  

 

All of that is reflected by the expenditure of points.  

[Christopher R Taylor]

 I was responding to Christopher Taylor's post 138 (wherein he basically argued that normal people don't block ranged attacks with their bare hands).  I stated that the rules already allow unarmed people to block swords with their bare hands at no penalty by default and have done so since 1e even though that also requires considerable training and luck to succeed with.  

 

 

Which isn't an argument for adding new nonsense, but an argument for an existing flaw in the game.  Its particularly not an argument to drop an existing power that gives people the ability to do something entirely for every genre in the base rules.

 

But I would note that every genre book other than Champions tends to tell the GM that you cannot do so with your bare hands in most cases. 

[Netzilla]

Fine.  I was asserting that it might be abusive, but I'm dropping that.  I've had players who would stop the game to argue the point as extensively as this thread has gone on, and who are the ones who would be trying to abuse it.  I don't play with them anymore, but I suppose we're always fighting the last war...

Sounds like you played with my old college group.

 

Still, I disagree with the idea that just anyone can Block ranged attacks.  Wonder Woman's bracelets aren't the whole story.  Neither Captain America's shield, Luke Skywalker's lightsaber, Cyclops' eyebeams.  Regardless of how experienced the combatant, they couldn't just pick those things up and start blocking.  Wonder Woman is a demigod with ridiculous amounts of combat training and experience, and superhuman reflexes.  Cap is an enhanced human with ridiculous amounts of combat training and experience.  We are explicitly shown a scene where Luke Skywalker is being trained by Obi-Wan Kenobi in how to block blaster bolts with his lightsaber.  The X-Men have had a Danger Room since issue #1 in 1963, and are frequently shown training in it.  

 

All of that is reflected by the expenditure of points.

Okay. I doubt our genre expectations are all that different. I suspect, that between you and me, the main difference is that I'd rather allow a chance for a player to get lucky than flat out deny the Block.  How much of a penalty I'd assess would be based on how well they sold me on the block action they took.  If The Thing wants to use a hunk of concrete or a mailbox to block Doctor Doom's blast then it'll be a small penalty.  If Tony Stark wants to catch an arrow in his bare hands when he's not wearing armor, it'll be a large penalty (enough so that it'll be a matter of luck to succeed). 

 

I suspect the other big difference is that I'd prefer more parity between Block and Dodge than you would.  In my experience, I've seen Dodge used far more often than Block because it's often the superior tactical choice based on the mechanics:

1) Dodge has always worked vs both HtH and Range and Block never used to work vs Ranged.

2) Dodge is equally effective no matter how many attacks you dodge whereas Block takes a penalty for each attack after the first.

3) Dodge DCVs were typically higher than Block OCVs unless a character had a lot of OCV-only CSLs.

 

Yeah, the initiative mod it gives can be nice but is very dependent on relative SPD and DEX scores.  If your DEX is already higher, the init mod doesn't help at all.  If your opponent's next Phase comes before yours, the init mod doesn't help at all.

 

So, overall, I'm happy Block has gotten a boost.

[Chris Goodwin]

Sounds like you played with my old college group.

:D :D

 

Okay. I doubt our genre expectations are all that different. I suspect, that between you and me, the main difference is that I'd rather allow a chance for a player to get lucky than flat out deny the Block.  How much of a penalty I'd assess would be based on how well they sold me on the block action they took.  If The Thing wants to use a hunk of concrete or a mailbox to block Doctor Doom's blast then it'll be a small penalty.  If Tony Stark wants to catch an arrow in his bare hands when he's not wearing armor, it'll be a large penalty (enough so that it'll be a matter of luck to succeed). 

 

I suspect the other big difference is that I'd prefer more parity between Block and Dodge than you would.  In my experience, I've seen Dodge used far more often than Block because it's often the superior tactical choice based on the mechanics:

1) Dodge has always worked vs both HtH and Range and Block never used to work vs Ranged.

2) Dodge is equally effective no matter how many attacks you dodge whereas Block takes a penalty for each attack after the first.

3) Dodge DCVs were typically higher than Block OCVs unless a character had a lot of OCV-only CSLs.

 

Yeah, the initiative mod it gives can be nice but is very dependent on relative SPD and DEX scores.  If your DEX is already higher, the init mod doesn't help at all.  If your opponent's next Phase comes before yours, the init mod doesn't help at all.

 

So, overall, I'm happy Block has gotten a boost.

 

I suppose if a character wants to get lucky, they can try. They'll likely get hit by the attack if they fail, though.  Even if they succeed, the blast is going to hit that chunk of concrete or whatever...

 

I've got it.  In my games, you can't Abort to Block a ranged attack unless you've bought Deflection (except for objects thrown by characters in the normal human Strength range).  You can use a Delay, but not Abort.  If you do, you use the rules otherwise as written.  I'll ask you how you're blocking, and who you're blocking for.  But you can still try the Block.  Everyone who has paid points for it has done so to get that extra edge, and has the mystical oomph or lightning fast reactions or whatever.  

[Ninja-Bear]

I think there's a disconnect here. I am contending that having the chance to Block a ranged attack is normal in the Heroic Action and Superheroic genre (and I suspect Hugh agrees). Having a chance, however, does not guarantee success. Heck, it doesn't even guarantee good odds (see post 162).

 

What you then pay points for is 1) to eliminate any 'object of opportunity' requirements set by the GM (technically requires the Deflect power) and 2) to increase the chance of succeeding with the Block. In other words, you're not paying points to do it; you're paying points to actually be good at doing it.

Btw I reread the rules and the modidiers have the little Hero guy beside them. That means that those are suggested for Heroic games. Just more confusion.

[Ninja-Bear]

Netzilla I honestly thought you were against buying deflection at all. If I understand you, you would not be against me buying it for your game if I wanted it to be relialbe. Else if I want to use block/range it will act more like oif oppurtunity with penalty for free. Example Shadow my ninja wants to knock down arrows, I pay for it ( and extra skill levels!). Shadow fights Lazer and i say can I use that mirror to deflect his shot? No points, you say yes. Shadow tries to deflect Boras wind blast with my nunchuks-for free. You say no dice.

 

Did I get it?

[Hugh Neilson]

Hugh except Netzilla kept harping back that block/ranged is free. I believe you and Netzilla are talking in circles. You agree that points are to paid to be better than normal yet you two keep saying block/range shouldn't cost points.

Being better than a normal at a Strike costs points. It does not require paying points to have the ability to Strike in the first place. Similarly, Being better than a normal at a Block or a Dodge costs points. It does not require paying points to have the ability to Block or Dodge in the first place.

 

Thus, following along, being better than a normal at Blocking a ranged attack can still cost points, even if there is no requirement to pay points to have the ability to Block a ranged attack in the first place.

 

Btw there is an optional rule I think in UMA to change block so If normal blocks Grond, it still hurts.

We can have a similar optional rule for ranged attacks still hurting in some cases.

[Hugh Neilson]

Apparently anyone can block any ranged attack? I'm suggesting Han can block a hand-to-hand attack. And... if we're in any edition prior to 6th? Two meters away is in the next hex, ergo Han could block Vader's blade.

Put two meters between them so they are not in HTH range.

 

Anyone can presently block any HTH attack. Why is it inconceivable that the rules allow the same for ranged attacks, but not imperative we change the rules for blocking HTH attacks? You did not have to wrack your brain for days to figure out how the SFX of Han blocking a Lightsaber strike could work, but if he’s out of arm’s reach, suddenly it is inconceivable?

 

Despite many, many opportunities to do so, we never see Han Solo or any non-Jedi block (or Block) ranged attacks (including things like thrown arrows and spears).

Don’t we? I have never seen the version of the movies with subtitles that translate the action into phase by phase Hero terminology. Maybe C-3P0 and R2-D2 are constantly using their “Lucky Me - They Missed” +30 OCV with Block power when the blasters keep missing. Was any non-Jedi main character less able to avoid being hit by attacks than a Jedi was?

 

Obi-Wan got carved in two. Dr. Evazan and Luke each lost a limb. Leia got shot once.

 

We don't see anyone except Force users doing it. (In fact, in episode IV we see Luke training to do just that.) We most often see them doing it against blaster bolts with lightsabers, but there is one notable instance where we see one particular badass blocking a blaster shot with his hand.

We don’t see non-Jedi use Jedi SFX to block, dodge, strike or make a PER roll. That’s all I can tell from the movies.

 

I infer that, in the Star Wars universe at least, blocking ranged attacks is a special ability of the Jedi. One that they have paid points for. And we've never, in primary sources at least, seen Han in combat with a lightsaber wielder. (If he has done so in pre- or post-Crisis Disney extended materials I have no idea. But Blocking a saber by shooting it with his blaster just seems to me like something Han would do.

I infer that Jedi are about as likely to be hit by an attack as non-Jedi, provided the latter are PC caliber, and not mooks. This does not imply the Jedi have spent points the non-Jedi have not, rather than having different SFX for achieving the same thing. Just like your “Han shoots the lightsaber” block achieves the same thing as a “Luke interposes his Lightsaber” block.

 

Interesting thought: Cap's (Missile) Deflection is most commonly bought through his shield as a Focus. Perhaps it ought not to be; if anyone can Block ranged attacks, certain Captain America could block them with something that is not his shield...

Or perhaps his shield should only give him bonuses to Block ranged attacks – paying points to be better at an ability anyone has, rather than paying points to gain an ability no one else has.

 

That's a perfectly valid use for Change Environment. I was pointing out that there's a bigger difference between a laser and a thrown spear than just scratching out the word "machine gun" and writing in "pizza oven"...

In Hero mechanics, what are these differences? A Spear and a Javelin are HTH weapons which can be thrown, a Laser is AP. What criteria are we using for deciding which is more easily Blocked when used at range? How do we extend that to Cap’s shield or Thor’s hammer?

 

If I'm the GM... I'm ruling that it's more like a bullet than a thrown object like a knife or a badger or shuriken or whatever.

What if Rogue, or another superstrong character, throws the knife or shuriken (or a giant hurls a rock).

 

Is that butter knife an attack? Did your kid take Familiarity with thrown knives, or buy some Attack Power through OIF: Focus Of Opportunity? Is he throwing it at you with intent to harm (making an Attack Roll)? Would you honestly have tried to Block it or Dodge it?

One need not have WF to throw an object at someone with intent to injure. I added the tantrum comment specifically to show the kid is trying to cause harm. Make it a rock instead of a butter knife, if you prefer. And I might well knock it out of the air or duck rather than get clocked with it, yes.

 

Because not everyone can Block ranged attacks. To me that's makes it a thing that you have to pay points for if you want to do.

But everyone can Block a lightsaber, Wolverine’s claws, Thor or Cap swinging (but not throwing, never if they throw) their hammer or shield and a punch by the Hulk. That seems like a double standard to me.

[Hugh Neilson]

Hugh except Netzilla kept harping back that block/ranged is free. I believe you and Netzilla are talking in circles. You agree that points are to paid to be better than normal yet you two keep saying block/range shouldn't cost points.

Being better than a normal at a Strike costs points. It does not require paying points to have the ability to Strike in the first place. Similarly, Being better than a normal at a Block or a Dodge costs points. It does not require paying points to have the ability to Block or Dodge in the first place.

 

Thus, following along, being better than a normal at Blocking a ranged attack can still cost points, even if there is no requirement to pay points to have the ability to Block a ranged attack in the first place.

 

Btw there is an optional rule I think in UMA to change block so If normal blocks Grond, it still hurts.

We can have a similar optional rule for ranged attacks still hurting in some cases.

 

 

I think there's a disconnect here. I am contending that having the chance to Block a ranged attack is normal in the Heroic Action and Superheroic genre (and I suspect Hugh agrees). Having a chance, however, does not guarantee success. Heck, it doesn't even guarantee good odds (see post 162).

 

What you then pay points for is 1) to eliminate any 'object of opportunity' requirements set by the GM (technically requires the Deflect power) and 2) to increase the chance of succeeding with the Block. In other words, you're not paying points to do it; you're paying points to actually be good at doing it.

Yup - we don't even need to keep the Object of Opportunity" - simple levels with Block improve the odds.

 

How is it we are so dead set against someone being able to Block a thrown rock, an arrow, a knife, a bullet, a blaster and a laser beam (as we move up the chain), but no one has any concern about the "realism" of being able to Abort to Dodge each and every one of these? Is that more realistic, or just backed by more history? I suggest the latter.

 

I'm contending that even in heroic fiction, those who Block ranged attacks have training, experience, often some kind of superhuman power which helps them do it (which may be a Focus, the favor of the gods, ridiculous luck, or plot armor). And characters who don't have those things, almost never attempt to Block ranged attacks, despite having opportunities to do so.

Or the SFX of their Block is not what you associate with the word. Putting a shield in the way can be a Block or added defenses, or, looking at standard Hero builds, a Dodge (since it adds DCV, and does not Block or add defenses).

 

If we consider Dodge “passive defense against all attacks” and Block “active defense against one attack at a time”, which is supported by Block becoming steadily more difficult when multiple attacks are made while Dodge does not, then the vision changes considerably.

 

Again, mechanics are not linked to SFX.

 

Still, I disagree with the idea that just anyone can Block ranged attacks. Wonder Woman's bracelets aren't the whole story. Neither Captain America's shield, Luke Skywalker's lightsaber, Cyclops' eyebeams. Regardless of how experienced the combatant, they couldn't just pick those things up and start blocking.

Other characters have used Cap’s shield over the years. That lady Captain Britain before she even got her powers, Wonder Man against Count Nefaria, Sub-Mariner in Olympus just off the top of my head. They had nowhere near his skill – they could never have Blocked at range, in particular (which DOES still cost points), but they could and did use the shield.

[Chris Goodwin]

Put two meters between them so they are not in HTH range.

 

Anyone can presently block any HTH attack. Why is it inconceivable that the rules allow the same for ranged attacks, but not imperative we change the rules for blocking HTH attacks? You did not have to wrack your brain for days to figure out how the SFX of Han blocking a Lightsaber strike could work, but if he’s out of arm’s reach, suddenly it is inconceivable?

He didn't buy the ability to Block attacks at range.

 

Don’t we? I have never seen the version of the movies with subtitles that translate the action into phase by phase Hero terminology. Maybe C-3P0 and R2-D2 are constantly using their “Lucky Me - They Missed” +30 OCV with Block power when the blasters keep missing. Was any non-Jedi main character less able to avoid being hit by attacks than a Jedi was?

 

Obi-Wan got carved in two. Dr. Evazan and Luke each lost a limb. Leia got shot once.

 

 

We don’t see non-Jedi use Jedi SFX to block, dodge, strike or make a PER roll. That’s all I can tell from the movies.

 

 

I infer that Jedi are about as likely to be hit by an attack as non-Jedi, provided the latter are PC caliber, and not mooks. This does not imply the Jedi have spent points the non-Jedi have not, rather than having different SFX for achieving the same thing. Just like your “Han shoots the lightsaber” block achieves the same thing as a “Luke interposes his Lightsaber” block.

 

 

Or perhaps his shield should only give him bonuses to Block ranged attacks – paying points to be better at an ability anyone has, rather than paying points to gain an ability no one else has.

 

 

In Hero mechanics, what are these differences? A Spear and a Javelin are HTH weapons which can be thrown, a Laser is AP. What criteria are we using for deciding which is more easily Blocked when used at range? How do we extend that to Cap’s shield or Thor’s hammer?

 

 

What if Rogue, or another superstrong character, throws the knife or shuriken (or a giant hurls a rock).

 

 

One need not have WF to throw an object at someone with intent to injure. I added the tantrum comment specifically to show the kid is trying to cause harm. Make it a rock instead of a butter knife, if you prefer. And I might well knock it out of the air or duck rather than get clocked with it, yes.

 

 

But everyone can Block a lightsaber, Wolverine’s claws, Thor or Cap swinging (but not throwing, never if they throw) their hammer or shield and a punch by the Hulk. That seems like a double standard to me.

 

I would here like to formally suggest that we rename the Block maneuver "Fleeblezorg" because the name seems to have no relevance to what the Maneuver actually does.  

 

Edited to add:  Quoting text from Champions Complete, with my suggested edit in place.  Does any of this sound anything like R2D2 and C3PO's walk through blaster fire?  

 

FLEEBLEZORG (1/2 Phase; +0 OCV; +0 DCV)

Allows a character to fleeblezorg an opponent’s attack and set himself up to deliver the next blow. The character must declare the Fleeblezorg before his attacker attempts an Attack Roll. A character can normally Fleeblezorg any non-Area attack that he can perceive, though the GM should consider common sense, dramatic sense, and game balance when determining what attacks a character can Fleeblezorg.

 

To attempt a Fleeblezorg, the Fleeblezorger attempts an Attack Roll against his opponent’s current OCV (instead of DCV). If successful, he Fleeblezorgs the attack and takes no damage or Knockback. If the Fleeblezorger and attacker both have their next Phases in the same Segment, the Fleeblezorger gets to act first (regardless of relative DEX). If the Fleeblezorg misses, the attacker still has to resolve his attack normally; he must still succeed with an Attack Roll against the Fleeblezorger’s DCV.

 

To Fleeblezorg a Ranged attack, the character must be the target of the attack, or must be adjacent to the target. The GM may also require that a character attempting such a Fleeblezorg have a shield or some other appropriate means of fleeblezorging, depending on the Special Effects involved. After a successful Fleeblezorg, the character can attempt to Fleeblezorg additional attacks in the same Phase, or in later Segments before his next Phase. Each such attempt takes a cumulative -2 penalty (-2 for the second attempt, -4 for the third, and so on), and once any attempt misses, the Fleeblezorger can make no further attempts.

 

A character can Fleeblezorg for someone else (at a -2 penalty), provided the Fleeblezorger is within Reach of either the attacker or the target. In this case, the “go before the attacker” benefit does not apply.

 

The “go before the attacker” benefit also doesn’t apply when Fleeblezorging Ranged attacks. Characters cannot Fleeblezorg both HTH and Ranged attacks in the same Segment. Combat Skill Levels with Fleeblezorg apply only to Fleeblezorging HTH attacks.

 

: An unarmed Fleeblezorger against an armed attacker takes a -1 to -3 penalty to Fleeblezorg HTH attacks (set by the GM). In Ranged combat, an unarmed Fleeblezorger is at -4 or more (if allowed to Fleeblezorg at all).

[Chris Goodwin]

Or the SFX of their Block is not what you associate with the word. Putting a shield in the way can be a Block or added defenses, or, looking at standard Hero builds, a Dodge (since it adds DCV, and does not Block or add defenses).

 

If we consider Dodge “passive defense against all attacks” and Block “active defense against one attack at a time”, which is supported by Block becoming steadily more difficult when multiple attacks are made while Dodge does not, then the vision changes considerably.

 

Again, mechanics are not linked to SFX.

Hugh, for over 30 years I've been pretty certain of the meaning of the short English word "block" as applied to HERO System combat.  Also, the text I quoted, barring my creative replacement, is both pretty close to my idea of the meaning, and hardly bears any resemblance at all to what R2D2 and C3PO did when they moved through that hail of blaster fire. 

 

I consider Block to be what it says in the text there.  Mechanics may not be linked to SFX, but I'm going to be pretty stubborn here about the meaning of the words used to describe them.  In general, a Block maneuver is one character using their offensive capability to "block" (small b, which word is used consistently among all of the editions I have) an attack.  4th edition even uses "block" in its description of Missile Deflection, and that Power specifies that it lets you use the Block maneuver against ranged attacks.  

 

Without stretching the meaning of the word "block" beyond any possible recognition, I refuse to accept that what R2D2 and C3PO did in that opening scene of Star Wars, Episode IV, can possibly be described by either the common English word "block" or its usage as a HERO System term of art as defined and described in the books.  I'm not even certain that the two droids even have an Offensive Combat Value, but the thing that those words refer to, to me?  Absolutely, positively, not what they used.  If a player told me that he wanted to Block a hail of ranged attacks, "you know, like R2D2 and C3PO did in that opening scene there," I'd say "Pull the other one, it's got bells on."  

 

If we're not going to agree on the meaning of the word "block", we may as well not even be having this conversation.  It may as well be a fleeblezorg, or a pumpkin, or a feather, as a block.  

[Ninja-Bear]

Fwiw Hugh, I reread block in CC and though you can still block any hth attack, they do suggest that depending on common sense, dramatic sense, etc that gm may rule otherwise.

[Netzilla]

Netzilla I honestly thought you were against buying deflection at all. If I understand you, you would not be against me buying it for your game if I wanted it to be relialbe. Else if I want to use block/range it will act more like oif oppurtunity with penalty for free. Example Shadow my ninja wants to knock down arrows, I pay for it ( and extra skill levels!). Shadow fights Lazer and i say can I use that mirror to deflect his shot? No points, you say yes. Shadow tries to deflect Boras wind blast with my nunchuks-for free. You say no dice.

 

Did I get it?

You've got it.

[Netzilla]

I would here like to formally suggest that we rename the Block maneuver "Fleeblezorg" because the name seems to have no relevance to what the Maneuver actually does.

 

You joke, but I recall suggestions to rename Block and Dodge because the names imply specific SFX. Heck Energy Blast, Force Wall, Armor and other Hero elements have been renamed to remove their SFX connotations so the idea isn't without precident.

 

Like you, I prefer Damage Resistance, PD and ED be reserved for 'hard' damage prevention rather than damage avoidance, so I'm not fond of the Combat Luck talent. I like the idea of a clear delineation of when an attack hits and misses and feel things like CL muddy those waters. Thus I fully understand your preference for Block only being used for attack interception/deflection defenses. Unfortunately, I feel that ship sailed without us many years ago.

[Ninja-Bear]

You've got it.

Thanks! I can agree wirh this!

[Hugh Neilson]

He didn't buy the ability to Block attacks at range.

How much did he pay for the ability to Block HTH? I find it more than a bit disingenuous to suggest the answer to "should a character have to invest points to be capable of Action X" is "well, he did not pay points for it".

 

 

I would here like to formally suggest that we rename the Block maneuver "Fleeblezorg" because the name seems to have no relevance to what the Maneuver actually does.

Netzilla nailed it.

 

Edited to add: Quoting text from Champions Complete, with my suggested edit in place. Does any of this sound anything like R2D2 and C3PO's walk through blaster fire?

Does it look more like a Dodge? How about a "Chin Block", which has definitely appeared in published characters as a Martial Block? Maybe they just activated their “You Missed Me! Damage Negation, IPE, can only scuttle along while using” power.

 

The reality is that it was artistic license that is not easy to express in game mechanics. They are not dodging. They are not blocking. They don’t have huge defenses. So why were they missed? Because the writer wanted it so.

 

But the writer got to make that decision unilaterally. Players and GMs do not.

 

To quote the rules (emphasis added):

 

Special Effects: The defining features of a power or maneuver, chosen by the player. Special effects determine an ability’s appearance and manifestation, how a power or maneuver is used, what Advantages and Limitations it has, and so forth.

Hugh, for over 30 years I've been pretty certain of the meaning of the short English word "block" as applied to HERO System combat. Also, the text I quoted, barring my creative replacement, is both pretty close to my idea of the meaning, and hardly bears any resemblance at all to what R2D2 and C3PO did when they moved through that hail of blaster fire.

So, does that ordinary English accord with your interpretation that Han can Block a lightsaber by firing a shot from his blaster? You seem willing to extend the mechanic to different SFX when it supports the rules you wish to retain, but not when it refutes the rules you wish to retain. BTW, if the Blaster has charges, does Han lose a charge for using maneuver anyone can use at no point cost? This is an advantage to Han, by the way - if he can Block with a blaster shot, the rule that a damage shield affects a character who Blocks in such a way that he comes in contact with the Damage Shield. This also implies it is possible to Block the Human Torch without taking damage from his flaming body.

 

Without stretching the meaning of the word "block" beyond any possible recognition, I refuse to accept that what R2D2 and C3PO did in that opening scene of Star Wars, Episode IV, can possibly be described by either the common English word "block" or its usage as a HERO System term of art as defined and described in the books.

Again, I contrast this with your own example of Han Solo using his Blaster to Block a lightsaber strike. Is that clearly far more consistent with the meaning of the word "block"? It IS very consistent with cinematic reality and dramatic sense. Which is more important to a good game?

 

Fwiw Hugh, I reread block in CC and though you can still block any hth attack, they do suggest that depending on common sense, dramatic sense, etc that gm may rule otherwise.

Funny…I thought CC put that right up front and stopped wasting verbiage repeating it in every third para. That one must have missed the edits.

 

So if you can Block any ranged attack, but depending on common sense, dramatic sense, etc that gm may rule otherwise, how different would that be?

 

You joke, but I recall suggestions to rename Block and Dodge because the names imply specific SFX. Heck Energy Blast, Force Wall, Armor and other Hero elements have been renamed to remove their SFX connotations so the idea isn't without precident.

Teleportation - must pass through intervening space.

 

We had to rename "Seduction" to "Charm". Running up a wall uses Flight rather than Running.

 

We use Block rather than fleeblezorg, pumpkin, feather for the same reason we apply a shorthand term in any other situation.

 

Like you, I prefer Damage Resistance, PD and ED be reserved for 'hard' damage prevention rather than damage avoidance, so I'm not fond of the Combat Luck talent.

It all started when we let Energy Blasts have physical effects…it’s gone downhill ever since!

[Ninja-Bear]

Funny…I thought CC put that right up front and stopped wasting verbiage repeating it in every third para. That one must have missed the edits.

 

So if you can Block any ranged attack, but depending on common sense, dramatic sense, etc that gm may rule otherwise, how different would that be

 

I wonder why they didn't make a rule simular to throwing characters

 

Well I will use that caveat to allow block either way depending on sfx.

[Netzilla]

It all started when we let Energy Blasts have physical effects…it’s gone downhill ever since!

 

And get off my lawn!

[Chris Goodwin]

How much did he pay for the ability to Block HTH? I find it more than a bit disingenuous to suggest the answer to "should a character have to invest points to be capable of Action X" is "well, he did not pay points for it".

In this case the rules are more specific. You can't Block attacks at range unless you buy Deflection.

 

Does it look more like a Dodge? How about a "Chin Block", which has definitely appeared in published characters as a Martial Block? Maybe they just activated their “You Missed Me! Damage Negation, IPE, can only scuttle along while using” power.

Maybe in your Star Wars Hero game, R2D3 and C3PO are 300 point martial artists with "Chin Block" and Martial Dodge and +30 OCV to Block. In my Star Wars Hero game, what they did more closely matches both the mechanical description of Dodge, and your restatement of Dodge above as "Passive Defense", than it does either the mechanical description of Block, or your restatement of it above as "Active Defense".

 

The reality is that it was artistic license that is not easy to express in game mechanics. They are not dodging. They are not blocking. They don’t have huge defenses. So why were they missed? Because the writer wanted it so.

Is watching movies and trying to figure out what they did in game terms no longer a thing?

 

But the writer got to make that decision unilaterally. Players and GMs do not.

 

To quote the rules (emphasis added):

BLOCK (1/2 Phase; +0 OCV; +0 DCV)

 

Allows a character to block an opponent’s attack and set himself up to deliver the next blow. The character must declare the Block before his attacker attempts an Attack Roll. A character can normally Block any non-Area attack that he can perceive, though the GM should consider common sense, dramatic sense, and game balance when determining what attacks a character can Block.

 

To attempt a Block, the Blocker attempts an Attack Roll against his opponent’s current OCV (instead of DCV). If successful, he Blocks the attack and takes no damage or Knockback. If the Blocker and attacker both have their next Phases in the same Segment, the Blocker gets to act first (regardless of relative DEX). If the Block misses, the attacker still has to resolve his attack normally; he must still succeed with an Attack Roll against the Blocker’s DCV.

 

To Block a Ranged attack, the character must be the target of the attack, or must be adjacent to the target. The GM may also require that a character attempting such a Block have a shield or some other appropriate means of blocking, depending on the Special Effects involved. After a successful Block, the character can attempt to Block additional attacks in the same Phase, or in later Segments before his next Phase. Each such attempt takes a cumulative -2 penalty (-2 for the second attempt, -4 for the third, and so on), and once any attempt misses, the Blocker can make no further attempts.

 

A character can Block for someone else (at a -2 penalty), provided the Blocker is within Reach of either the attacker or the target. In this case, the “go before the attacker” benefit does not apply.

 

The “go before the attacker” benefit also doesn’t apply when Blocking Ranged attacks. Characters cannot Block both HTH and Ranged attacks in the same Segment. Combat Skill Levels with Block apply only to Blocking HTH attacks.

 

H: An unarmed Blocker against an armed attacker takes a -1 to -3 penalty to Block HTH attacks (set by the GM). In Ranged combat, an unarmed Blocker is at -4 or more (if allowed to Block at all).

So, does that ordinary English accord with your interpretation that Han can Block a lightsaber by firing a shot from his blaster? You seem willing to extend the mechanic to different SFX when it supports the rules you wish to retain, but not when it refutes the rules you wish to retain.

In the situation I described: Luke is swinging his saber at Han. (HTH range.) Reasoning that a saber blade can block blaster bolts, so it should work the other way around, Han attempts to block by shooting Luke's saber blade out of the way

 

Han "...attempts an Attack Roll against his opponent’s current OCV (instead of DCV). If successful, he Blocks the attack and takes no damage or Knockback."

 

BTW, if the Blaster has charges, does Han lose a charge for using maneuver anyone can use at no point cost?

If it were a HTH weapon that used charges, I would rule that it uses a charge to block another attack. So, yes.

 

This is an advantage to Han, by the way - if he can Block with a blaster shot, the rule that a damage shield affects a character who Blocks in such a way that he comes in contact with the Damage Shield. This also implies it is possible to Block the Human Torch without taking damage from his flaming body.

"...though the GM should consider common sense, dramatic sense, and game balance when determining what attacks a character can Block."

 

Again, I contrast this with your own example of Han Solo using his Blaster to Block a lightsaber strike. Is that clearly far more consistent with the meaning of the word "block"? It IS very consistent with cinematic reality and dramatic sense. Which is more important to a good game?

Both, IMO.  IMO, and in my Star Wars Hero game, that fits both the mechanical description of Block and common and dramatic sense.

 

So if you can Block any ranged attack, but depending on common sense, dramatic sense, etc that gm may rule otherwise, how different would that be?

As the GM, in my games, I am ruling otherwise.

[Hugh Neilson]

BLOCK (1/2 Phase; +0 OCV; +0 DCV)

 

Allows a character to block an opponent’s attack and set himself up to deliver the next blow. The character must declare the Block before his attacker attempts an Attack Roll. A character can normally Block any non-Area attack that he can perceive, though the GM should consider common sense, dramatic sense, and game balance when determining what attacks a character can Block.

 

To attempt a Block, the Blocker attempts an Attack Roll against his opponent’s current OCV (instead of DCV). If successful, he Blocks the attack and takes no damage or Knockback. If the Blocker and attacker both have their next Phases in the same Segment, the Blocker gets to act first (regardless of relative DEX). If the Block misses, the attacker still has to resolve his attack normally; he must still succeed with an Attack Roll against the Blocker’s DCV.

Removing a lot of text, let's take another example:

 

Vader is about to swing at Luke, whose saber has fallen, with his hand, down to the bowels of Cloud City.

 

"I want to try to draw him in, then shift out of his swing and, while he is recovering from that, shove him over the edge"

 

That seems a perfectly reasonable maneuver to me. To work, however, it should be a Block. Why?

 

- It is not a Dodge - it is no harder for that Stormtrooper up on the catwalk to shoot Luke;

 

- a Dodge may cause Vader to miss Luke, but will not set Luke up to act before Vader next phase so he can shove Vader over the edge.

 

Luke's description of his action clearly describes the mechanic of Block with the SFX of evading, not obstructing, Vader's saber.

 

As I look at the Block description, I am reminded of a key reason I favoured Block working against ranged attacks in the SETAC discussions. Prior to 6e, Block and Missile Deflection were mutually exclusive. So if Cap Blocks one Hydra goon's blaster, a second Hydra goon can punch him in the face - he can't Block and Missile Deflect. That issue has been solved by the 6e rules, so if I Block Hulk's punch, Thor does not know he should throw the hammer rather than swing it at me, since I cannot missile deflect while blocking.

 

Would I let the Droids define their action as Dodging? Sure. That's equally valid. But I see nothing they have done "to avoid an attack", which is what Dodge does. They look like they are only running across the hall, neither dodging nor blocking. I'm not sure, then, why you consider one maneuver clearly appropriate and the other as obviously invalid. The SFX definition quoted above makes it clear any maneuver can have various special effects, and I don't see "scuttle across the corridor" being any more clearly a special effect of Dodge than Block, or vice versa, or enough Damage Negation to negate the blaster bolts with the SFX of being missed, or Combat Luck, or any mechanic that means they walked across the corridor through a hail of blaster fire unscathed.

 

Having accepted blasters, lightsabers, planet-scale starships and jedi powers, I don't think "block a ranged attack", even if done with the appearance of scuttling across a corridor, is that big of a stretch. Especially when I have accepted Han can Block a lightsaber swing - is that really so much more reasonable than using the same maneuver to avoid being hit by a blaster bolt, or even a rock thrown by an Ewok?

[Ninja-Bear]

I do know that in fifth, one difference between block and dodge was that block still set off damage shield even if it was described as a "dodge". Now in CC? No clue.

[Chris Goodwin]

Removing a lot of text, let's take another example:

 

Vader is about to swing at Luke, whose saber has fallen, with his hand, down to the bowels of Cloud City.

 

"I want to try to draw him in, then shift out of his swing and, while he is recovering from that, shove him over the edge"

 

That seems a perfectly reasonable maneuver to me. To work, however, it should be a Block. Why?

 

- It is not a Dodge - it is no harder for that Stormtrooper up on the catwalk to shoot Luke;

 

- a Dodge may cause Vader to miss Luke, but will not set Luke up to act before Vader next phase so he can shove Vader over the edge.

 

Luke's description of his action clearly describes the mechanic of Block with the SFX of evading, not obstructing, Vader's saber.

 

...Maybe.  He has no weapon, and Vader does; Luke is acting at at least a -2 here.  Luke has also just lost one hand; take another -2.  

 

And, just because I the GM am allowing this one -- Block still gives the GM some leeway even when Blocking HTH attacks -- doesn't mean I'm suddenly all okay with Blocking ranged attacks.  I still require either the Deflection Power or my 8-point house-ruled Deflect Skill to do that.

 

As I look at the Block description, I am reminded of a key reason I favoured Block working against ranged attacks in the SETAC discussions. Prior to 6e, Block and Missile Deflection were mutually exclusive. So if Cap Blocks one Hydra goon's blaster, a second Hydra goon can punch him in the face - he can't Block and Missile Deflect. That issue has been solved by the 6e rules, so if I Block Hulk's punch, Thor does not know he should throw the hammer rather than swing it at me, since I cannot missile deflect while blocking.

 

The following is in Steve's draft text. I'm pretty sure it's in 6E2 as well:

 

Third, characters cannot Block both HTH and Ranged attacks in the same Segment. Once a character Blocks one type of attack, he can’t Block the other type.

 

It's not in the text you quoted, though.  If you have it in front of you, could you check to see if it's in there?  If not, I'll check it when I get home.  (Edit:  6e2 p. 59)

 

Would I let the Droids define their action as Dodging? Sure. That's equally valid. But I see nothing they have done "to avoid an attack", which is what Dodge does. They look like they are only running across the hall, neither dodging nor blocking. I'm not sure, then, why you consider one maneuver clearly appropriate and the other as obviously invalid. The SFX definition quoted above makes it clear any maneuver can have various special effects, and I don't see "scuttle across the corridor" being any more clearly a special effect of Dodge than Block, or vice versa, or enough Damage Negation to negate the blaster bolts with the SFX of being missed, or Combat Luck, or any mechanic that means they walked across the corridor through a hail of blaster fire unscathed.

Maybe they didn't Dodge. Maybe they both had 6d6 of Luck. Maybe the GM gave them a break. Or maybe they both did a half-move and Dodge. They certainly didn't get hit.

 

Having accepted blasters, lightsabers, planet-scale starships and jedi powers, I don't think "block a ranged attack", even if done with the appearance of scuttling across a corridor, is that big of a stretch. Especially when I have accepted Han can Block a lightsaber swing - is that really so much more reasonable than using the same maneuver to avoid being hit by a blaster bolt, or even a rock thrown by an Ewok?

 

Tell me how they used their OCV. Tell me what weapon they used to Block those ranged attacks. I'm the GM here; I've got a lot of leeway. There were at least half a dozen blaster bolts there; did they make that many OCV vs. OCV rolls? And remember, in my games, if you want to Block ranged attacks, you still have to pay the points. Was either the Deflection Power or the 8-point Deflect Skill I house-ruled in on their character sheets when you submitted them to me?

 

(Edit to add:  I found 4th edition writeups for an R2 Astromech Droid and a Protocol Droid here.  4th edition was quite specific about requiring Missile Deflection in order to Block ranged attacks; neither of those writeups has it.)

 

(Second edit:  If you're buying the Deflection Power, part of what you're paying for is some leeway.  Yes, you could buy the Deflection Power and define it as "ridiculous luck and/or plot armor."  You couldn't in my games attempt to Block ranged attacks without it, using that as the SFX, because Block is at least 50% the GM's.)  

 

(Edit the third:  I would even let you buy Deflection with ACV to make it rolling your DCV vs. the attacker's OCV, to represent an "active dodge" or something.)

[Ninja-Bear]

Hugh what do you think about these options normals blocking Supers. Normals here defined as agents, NPCs, DNPCs, and such. Not PCs who are normal-i.e. Crusader.

 

With successful block, strike is still penetrating.

Another option would be strike is done at casual strength.

[Chris Goodwin]

Hugh what do you think about these options normals blocking Supers. Normals here defined as agents, NPCs, DNPCs, and such. Not PCs who are normal-i.e. Crusader.

 

With successful block, strike is still penetrating.

Another option would be strike is done at casual strength.

 

The full 6e2 writeup for Block discusses Strength differences a bit more, and talks about things like picking up a car and getting its DCVM as an OCV bonus to Block with.  It also gives the GM leeway to decide what happens in those situations.