Pseudo-magic Sword "Arts"

[Octotroph]

I've been knocking some ideas around for a new character that use techniques that begin or end with an attack. I've been using Divinity: Original Sin 2, Dark Souls, Sword Art Online, and some other things as inspiration, but I'm not experienced enough with the system to properly replicate my mental images. Here's what I'm thinking of:

D:OS2 Scoundrel Skill Backlash: teleport behind a target and execute an attack with your weapon.

"Vanishing Blade": after successfully executing an attack, turn invisible until you attack again.

"Exploding Edge": imbue your weapon with explosive power that releases upon impact.

"Lethal Dance": make an attack against each enemy adjacent to you.

 

Some of these could be pulled off with triggers, like Exploding Edge and Vanishing Blade, but Vanishing Blade has the "until you attack again" stipulation that I couldn't find. With Backlash, I want to prevent using the teleport freely. And with all of them, I don't want to use a generic HKA. This way if you get a better weapon your damage wouldn't be hurting as much. I expect a bit of a penalty would be added so regular attacks or martial arts would still be viable. I would love to hear your thoughts.

[Duke Bushido]

 

I think I can help you, in spite of having _no idea_ about any of your listed source material.  Thank you for spelling out precisely what it is you want to achieve: that makes doing this so much easier.

 

So let's being with my own suggestions, and I'm sure others will pop in as they have the time. These are great people.
 

 

19 hours ago, Octotroph said:

 

D:OS2 Scoundrel Skill Backlash: teleport behind a target and execute an attack with your weapon.

 

This isn't anything special.  This is literally a normal round of combat (if you can teleport).  This is a half-move (T-port) and attack (perhaps with a few +OCV to simulate being behind them, and thus making it a bit easier to attack.  As far as hoping for an opponent at 0 DCV, though, I'm afraid you won't be able to just build that into a move.  If you're opponent sees you before the T-port, he's well aware you're about, and T-porting, and he's being wary.

 

19 hours ago, Octotroph said:

"Vanishing Blade": after successfully executing an attack, turn invisible until you attack again.

 

Invisibility, flavored to taste with Advantages and Limitations, Triggered: successful strike.  Something I personally would need one heck of a good justification for.  Though remember that an opponent making a blind slash with his great sword has still got roughly the same chance of hitting you: I mean, you are standing _right there_, because the attack move ended your turn.  Anyone who wants to launch arrows at your opponent will turn this maneuver into a comedy in good shape.

 

 

19 hours ago, Octotroph said:

"Exploding Edge": imbue your weapon with explosive power that releases upon impact.

 

Add some damage to your normal sword attack: a few extra dice.  Add two dice of Killing Damage, say.  Or buy a Naked Advantage such as "Explosion" or "Armor piercing" or something like that.

 

Or

 

And for reasons I don't really understand- well, I sort of do: there are a few points to be saved with the over-all build.  I just don't particularly think the amount of work combined with the built-in limitations makes it a better alternative than either of the things I've suggested-- though I am completely certain that someone much more skilled with the framework can likely show you all the benefits (if you're luck, Hugh might come along: the man is staggeringly good at juggling numbers and has an astoundingly precise memory for the rules.  Plus, he's fun to converse with if you're not the prickly / sensitive to everything type ).

 

At any rate, figure out what sort of attacks and power combinations are sword-specific.  I don't mean combos and maneuvers and teleports and such; I mean which attack elements are specifically from the sword.  As an example:

 

1: Sword Bash: + 6D6 H-t-H damage, Stun only: I whack him with the flat of my sword

2: Mighty Cleave: + 4D6 HKA, only in conjunction with Haymakers

3: Gizzard Finder:  +1 D6 HKA: I thrust up through his abdomen in search of his throat (requires grab, STR Min, Armor Piercing)

4: Exploding Edge: +2D6 HKA, Explosion, Armor Piercing, Penetrating (is that still a thing in 6?)

 

Etc, Etc.

 

At any rate, those (or similar; this is just an example) can be worked into the Multipower Framework.  It takes a bit of math (my examples are pulled straight out of my ear, without regard to cost or balance-- I just needed a list of sword-related attacks) and some working and re-working until everything fits into your cost limits, and it may take a bit of tweaking to each example or concept to get it mathed out properly, but they tell me it's totally worth it.

 

Which brings us to the next item on your wish list:

 

19 hours ago, Octotroph said:

"Lethal Dance": make an attack against each enemy adjacent to you.

 

 

There are a _lot_ of ways to do this:

 

There is already a "Sweep" Maneuver as a combat maneuver.  You can put some skill levels on that to compensate for the cumulative penalties per opponent.  You can put "Area of Effect" on your STR / Multipower combo.  You can put how ever many bits of Autofire you need to feel comfortable that you can attack as many people as can stand adjacent to you (five?  Ten?  Ten: two purchases of Autofire).  If you want to be able to _not_ hit any good guys next to you, then I wouldn't recommend Area of Effect (unless you can add some sort of "selective" to that).  but I would definitely suggest Selective and whatever else looks good on Autofire.  It should only quadruple the cost, or something like that, but it will get you what you want.

 

Or--

 

and this is the way I would go, you buy a couple of skill levels with "Sweep" or "combat maneuvers" or what-have-you.  You add a slot slot to your multipower:

 

5: Fan Dance of Doom: +4D6 HtH damage, only with Sweep Maneuver.

 

 

 

If you don't think the Multipower is the way to go (and it really seems like it is: I mean, while I rarely use them (because we don't do a lot of "this weapon has so many options!" type builds (the maneuvers table handles that fine for us), that really is where the Multipower shines.  However, you might consider building a custom martial art, turning all these "attacks" into martial maneuvers that require the weapon element and maybe a STR min--

 

but honestly, if you think making a multipower is a nuisance, stay away from the fanny-flossing that building a custom martial art has become over the last couple of generations.  

 

 

[Christopher]

19 hours ago, Octotroph said:

D:OS2 Scoundrel Skill Backlash: teleport behind a target and execute an attack with your weapon.

Half-action Teleport with reorient. Half action attack. Baserules cover this.

 

19 hours ago, Octotroph said:

"Vanishing Blade": after successfully executing an attack, turn invisible until you attack again.

That is really tricky by the rules. After an attack Invisibility is usually disrupted until your next phase. That way the person attacked can counterstrike on their next phase.

And an attack that does not break Invisbiltiy is both expensive and weak, as it should be.

 

19 hours ago, Octotroph said:

"Exploding Edge": imbue your weapon with explosive power that releases upon impact.

Sounds like a Special Effect different from "Edged Weapon". Making that requires nothing. If you want to be able to choose between special effects, it becomes expensive.

Or does it have any effect other then single target damage, Explosion special effect?

 

19 hours ago, Octotroph said:

"Lethal Dance": make an attack against each enemy adjacent to you.

Area of Effect.

Alternatively combine Multiple Attack with "widen attack" (trade of DC for OCV to counter the Multiple Attack penalty).

[Christopher]

1 minute ago, Duke Bushido said:

 This is a half-move (T-port) and attack (perhaps with a few +OCV to simulate being behind them, and thus making it a bit easier to attack.

I can not find it right now, but I think there is a "unexpected move" modifier the GM can give out. Something like +1 to +3. Of course it will propably only work the first time/if the enemy has not studied that combatant.

 

7 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

Invisibility, flavored to taste with Advantages and Limitations, Triggered: successful strike.  Something I personally would need one heck of a good justification for.  Though remember that an opponent making a blind slash with his great sword has still got roughly the same chance of hitting you: I mean, you are standing _right there_, because the attack move ended your turn.  Anyone who wants to launch arrows at your opponent will turn this maneuver into a comedy in good shape. 

6E2 7 has this to say:
" However, characters can’t always perceive their
opponents with Targeting Senses. For example,
a character may have been blinded by a Flash, or
his opponent could be Invisible. When a character
cannot perceive his opponent with any Targeting
Sense, he suffers modifers to his OCV and DCV:
n In HTH Combat, the character is at ½ OCV
and ½ DCV. Tis applies both to when he
makes attacks in HTH Combat, and is attacked
in HTH Combat.
n In Ranged Combat, the character is at 0
OCV and ½ DCV. Tis applies both to when
he makes attacks in Ranged Combat, and is
attacked in Ranged Combat."

 

But among the base rules of Invisibility it is written:

" All Powers are to some degree perceivable.
Depending on their category and function,
they’re defned as Obvious, Inobvious, or Invisible
(imperceivable), as described below. (Perceivability does not depend on a Power’s duration,
whether it costs END, or other factors, unless
special rules apply.) Characters can alter the
perceivability of a Power with the Invisible Power
Effects Advantage or the Perceivable Limitation."

6E1 126 puts all attack powers into Obvious by default.

 

6E1 240 has some extra rules on Invisibiltiy and combat. And partially I as wrong:

Fringe would apply on Melee distance, but is easy enough to remove with a adder:
" An Invisible character has a “fringe” around
himself. Other characters may perceive the Fringe
with a normal PER Roll with the affected Sense
at a range of 2m or less. Invisibility can have No
Fringe for an Adder, or a Fringe that’s even easier
to perceive for a Limitation (see below)"

 

" Invisibility doesn’t automatically make a
character’s attacks or other powers Invisible as
well (that requires the Advantage Invisible Power
Effects; see 6E1 338). Using a perceivable power
can expose an Invisible character’s position.
Invisibility to Sight Group covers a character’s
fsts when he punches someone (or the like) using
just his STR (and related abilities, like Martial
Arts). But it doesn’t make his weapons-based
attacks Invisible — that requires the Invisible
Power Effects Advantage. As long as the character
just holds the weapon and doesn’t use it, his Invisibility covers it. As soon as he uses it, it and its
special effects become visible for the Segment in
which he uses it; thereafer his Invisibility covers it
again until the next Segment he uses it."

 

[Duke Bushido]

All that being said, in the instance of "I attack (ending my turn) and turn invisible, I am throwing away all that stuff in favor of common sense.  It's a book about how to play a game; it is not a religion I dare not violate.

 

You turn invisible in front in front of you opponent at the end of your turn, you get your normal DCV and of course you can still Abort to defensive maneuvers.  The guy you blinded wants to lose an arrow or pop off a cap or zap his eye beams?  Fine; he's at a serious disadvantage, as angle matters.

 

He wants to swing a meter-long sword through the one meter hex you're standing in?  I'm not giving him too much of a penalty for hitting you; it doesn't make sense.  Maybe a -3.  -4 if you really surprised him or came close to CON stunning him.

 

Sure:  "But I can drop or jump or twist or bark into a hat" and yes, you certainly can.  Not sure what good that last one would do, but even that is still covered by your native DCV.

 

Methinks the problem (for the particular character being discussed) is that Inviso does not in HERO work quite as it does in whatever his source material is.  As Doc Democracy is often the first to remind us, picking the power and shooting for an effect does not often do what we want it to.  Find the effect, and work backwards.

 

To that end, perhaps we should find a different build with the SFX of being-- or added on to actually being-- invisible.

 

 

[Christopher]

2 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

All that being said, in the instance of "I attack (ending my turn) and turn invisible, I am throwing away all that stuff in favor of common sense.  It's a book about how to play a game; it is not a religion I dare not violate. 

Why do people end up calling me a Religious Fanatic jsut because I disagree with them on a minor topic while doing soem quoting?

I just find that these rules are propably there for a reason. That there is wisdom in their existence. Wisdom gathered from people playing the previous 5 versions. Wisdom that will prevent you repeating a mistake.

 

As with Programming, I can only warn you that you are pointing a loaded gun at your foot. You are free to ignore me and hope the bullet never flies or misses your foot.

[Scott Ruggels]

Good lord! The specificities! I am guessing 6e changed a lot of the rules, and not just the stat calculations. Well, if I am to finish my book, I guess I need to read 6e

[Duke Bushido]

2 hours ago, Christopher said:

Why do people end up calling me a Religious Fanatic jsut because I disagree with them on a minor topic while doing soem quoting?

I just find that these rules are propably there for a reason. That there is wisdom in their existence. Wisdom gathered from people playing the previous 5 versions. Wisdom that will prevent you repeating a mistake.

 

As with Programming, I can only warn you that you are pointing a loaded gun at your foot. You are free to ignore me and hope the bullet never flies or misses your foot.

 

 

Forgive me, my friend!  I did not mean it as a slight to you personally any more than I meant it as a slight to _anyone_.  It was simply a convenient analogy, indicating that while there are things that are considered immutable in this life, but the game itself certainly isn't one of them, particularly in light of the number of times each iteration of the rules encourages you to change what doesn't work for a scenario or even doesn't work _ever_ for a particular group.

 

My deepest and sincerest apologies that it sounded offensive to you, or to anyone else.  I am truly sorry.

 

If it does not extend any offense I have already created, I would like to offer this:  If I have, or will have ever, said something that sounds offensive, I heartily encourage any reader to re-read it, changing inflection, or voice, or adding smarmy grins until it does not sound offensive, because I _promise_ you that was or will have been the intention behind it.  The largest problem with the written word-- and the single greatest (at the top of a list of many) reason that I do not text is the lack of communication.  What?  The lack of communication, you say?  Yes.  Keeping a purely formal tone helps, but since internet boards and text messages are really more of a social experience, it's difficult to _want_ to maintain formality when you're just "hangin' out witch yer Buds," ya know?  And the written word lacks inflection, facial expression, body language, laughter, handshakes, back claps, and all those things that set the mood of every comment.  If you've ever wondered why I use so many emoticons, well that's the reason.  It's not that I'm a twelve-year-old girl; it's an attempt to replace what I consider to be the most vital parts of any informal conversation.

 

As demonstrated elsewhere, I try to be aware of who I am, and what few triggers I have, and if something I see risks setting them off, it makes more sense to ignore it than it does to offend the good people who let me toss up my hare-brained ideas and provide community and camaraderie no matter how badly I need to hit the showers  (I may have said too much! )  

 

If I may continue the idea of changing versus a need:

 

I don't know when the "change orientation" thing came up for T-port, but I don't use it.  Or rather, I don't charge for it.  Let's face it: for thirty years, we all assumed it was there anywhere.  I have no reason to adopt a rule for which I have no need.  I might accept a -1/8 Limitation, in fact, for someone who decides he _can't_ change his orientation.  (Actually, I _know_ I will accept it, because I've used it to build "Jump Drive" type space ships ).   I wouldn't charge a character to turn to his side or even completely around to defend against an attack from the rear or to deliver an attack to the guy behind him: the first set of rules put anyone in an adjacent hex already within the range of melee and fisticuffs.  I am totally unwilling to re-write (and have to replay! ) the hundreds upon hundreds of T-port combats and change the history of my universe because a new set of rules says it now costs points to turn to my left.

 

Sure-- I can come up with all kinds of justifications for charging for it, or I can even decide it's just how the T-port Turn Mode works-- all at once--, or I can continue allowing you to attack someone who is in an adjacent hex.  For my own personal money, this was one of an uncounted number of changes that just weren't necessary. As always, your mileage may vary.

 

 

[Christopher]

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

I don't know when the "change orientation" thing came up for T-port, but I don't use it.  Or rather, I don't charge for it.  Let's face it: for thirty years, we all assumed it was there anywhere.  I have no reason to adopt a rule for which I have no need.  I might accept a -1/8 Limitation, in fact, for someone who decides he _can't_ change his orientation.  (Actually, I _know_ I will accept it, because I've used it to build "Jump Drive" type space ships ).   I wouldn't charge a character to turn to his side or even completely around to defend against an attack from the rear or to deliver an attack to the guy behind him: the first set of rules put anyone in an adjacent hex already within the range of melee and fisticuffs.  I am totally unwilling to re-write (and have to replay! ) the hundreds upon hundreds of T-port combats and change the history of my universe because a new set of rules says it now costs points to turn to my left.

It was not certain if that was actually a rule, but it turns out my memory was somewaht right:
"Position Shift: For this +5 Character Points
Adder, a character can use Teleportation to change
position/facing or go from prone to standing as a
Zero Phase Action. He can also change facing in
mid-Teleport when making a Half Move or Full
Move with Teleportation. Tis Adder has no effect
on Dive For Cover (for example, it doesn’t allow
a character to Dive For Cover without suffering
“prone”penalties)."

Position Shift is the king of thing you propably want just for the sake of standing up as a 0-phase action.

[Duke Bushido]

2 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Good lord! The specificities! I am guessing 6e changed a lot of the rules, and not just the stat calculations. Well, if I am to finish my book, I guess I need to read 6e

 

Yes indeedy.  I have been told, at length, that there were a lot of folks who really did need, or at least want, all the hair-splitting that 5 and re-5 introduced, but 6 is nothing short of the ultimate in micro-management.

 

 

[Christopher]

3 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

Good lord! The specificities! I am guessing 6e changed a lot of the rules, and not just the stat calculations. Well, if I am to finish my book, I guess I need to read 6e

 

1 hour ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

Yes indeedy.  I have been told, at length, that there were a lot of folks who really did need, or at least want, all the hair-splitting that 5 and re-5 introduced, but 6 is nothing short of the ultimate in micro-management.

 

 

I own the 5E Character Creation Handbook. And if anything I find 6E a lot more streamlined and generalized.

Now if only they could make Adjustment Powers not require 10 pages worth of Preliminary Information

[Duke Bushido]

2 minutes ago, Christopher said:

 

I own the 5E Character Creation Handbook. And if anything I find 6E a lot more streamlined and generalized.

Now if only they could make Adjustment Powers not require 10 pages worth of Preliminary Information

Oh they _could_.

 

As I recall, Bruce Harlick once _did_.

 

Oh and Scott:

 

In all fairness to 6e-- though I can only vouch this for as far as i made it in before realizing it just didn't feel like the same game anymore--  a _lot_ of the extra verbiage seems to be not just from nano-splitting hairs and entire decision trees of rules for every situation, but the fact that (again, at least as far as I made it, but as it was a good idea, I expect it continued on) there seems to be an example for _everything_.  While not always as helpful as you might hope, it is there, and even as a curmudgeon, I can't make a valid complaint about that.  At least, not a valid complaint beyond "can we get a thinner, more readable, more reference able, streamlined rules set that doesn't have all the fluff?  Something our players can scan through and pick up the rules?

 

 

[archer]

12 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

Methinks the problem (for the particular character being discussed) is that Inviso does not in HERO work quite as it does in whatever his source material is.  As Doc Democracy is often the first to remind us, picking the power and shooting for an effect does not often do what we want it to.  Find the effect, and work backwards.

 

To that end, perhaps we should find a different build with the SFX of being-- or added on to actually being-- invisible.

 

In a lot of fiction, being "invisible" grants what invisibility does in HERO plus a bunch of levels of DCV.

 

So I would suggest buying the triggered invisibility with linked or limited levels of DCV as being the most straightforward answer.

[Duke Bushido]

I agree.  He needs more than just "plain ol' fun of the mill" invisibility. I like the extra DCV better than where I ended up: inviso and desolid.  Just a bit too abusive there.

[Brian Stanfield]

22 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

In all fairness to 6e-- though I can only vouch this for as far as i made it in before realizing it just didn't feel like the same game anymore--  a _lot_ of the extra verbiage seems to be not just from nano-splitting hairs and entire decision trees of rules for every situation, but the fact that (again, at least as far as I made it, but as it was a good idea, I expect it continued on) there seems to be an example for _everything_.  While not always as helpful as you might hope, it is there, and even as a curmudgeon, I can't make a valid complaint about that.  At least, not a valid complaint beyond "can we get a thinner, more readable, more reference able, streamlined rules set that doesn't have all the fluff?  Something our players can scan through and pick up the rules?

 

 

HERO Basic is a concise version of the two volumes in 136 pages. I got it before I invested in the larger volumes, and it made the learning curve much easier. Now I keep several copies on hand for player reference. 

[Scott Ruggels]

On 10/21/2018 at 8:33 PM, Duke Bushido said:

Oh and Scott:

 

In all fairness to 6e-- though I can only vouch this for as far as i made it in before realizing it just didn't feel like the same game anymore--  a _lot_ of the extra verbiage seems to be not just from nano-splitting hairs and entire decision trees of rules for every situation, but the fact that (again, at least as far as I made it, but as it was a good idea, I expect it continued on) there seems to be an example for _everything_.  While not always as helpful as you might hope, it is there, and even as a curmudgeon, I can't make a valid complaint about that.  At least, not a valid complaint beyond "can we get a thinner, more readable, more reference able, streamlined rules set that doesn't have all the fluff?  Something our players can scan through and pick up the rules?

 

 

 

Thanks. But I may want to introduce players to fourth edition. It appears I have to learn 6th edition, though so as to get the book out. I did like the short PDF on how to play Fantasy Hero that was cooked up last summer. That was a good primer on Hero combat.

[Ninja-Bear]

For the Teleport attack, you could have a triggered AoE accurate! It’s only DCV 3 but that should work.

[Ninja-Bear]

On 10/21/2018 at 1:44 PM, Duke Bushido said:

All that being said, in the instance of "I attack (ending my turn) and turn invisible, I am throwing away all that stuff in favor of common sense.  It's a book about how to play a game; it is not a religion I dare not violate.

 

You turn invisible in front in front of you opponent at the end of your turn, you get your normal DCV and of course you can still Abort to defensive maneuvers.  The guy you blinded wants to lose an arrow or pop off a cap or zap his eye beams?  Fine; he's at a serious disadvantage, as angle matters.

 

He wants to swing a meter-long sword through the one meter hex you're standing in?  I'm not giving him too much of a penalty for hitting you; it doesn't make sense.  Maybe a -3.  -4 if you really surprised him or came close to CON stunning him.

 

Sure:  "But I can drop or jump or twist or bark into a hat" and yes, you certainly can.  Not sure what good that last one would do, but even that is still covered by your native DCV.

 

Methinks the problem (for the particular character being discussed) is that Inviso does not in HERO work quite as it does in whatever his source material is.  As Doc Democracy is often the first to remind us, picking the power and shooting for an effect does not often do what we want it to.  Find the effect, and work backwards.

 

To that end, perhaps we should find a different build with the SFX of being-- or added on to actually being-- invisible.

 

 

Me thinks this is a case of “I’m sitting at a table in a roleolaying game and what I know should happens should count as common sense”. For instance, your assuming that turning invisible is no big deal (which maybe not OP didn’t say) let’s say that it is. You really think you’re going to swing at the air when in most likely case your mind is going to wonder what just happened? I see your answer as more of a player at the table response than a character’s response.

[Ninja-Bear]

The bigger issue I have with your response Duke is that you want minimalize the effect of the invisible strike whereas to pay the points to get the affect by RAW is a hefty investment. And a guideline has always been get what you pay for.

[shuddemell]

I might suggest linking a PRE attack to the teleport and invisibility, that way you can get the extra hesitation that you need to avoid the wild swipe. Just a thought, but it would cover the WTF? moment that the character would likely have.

[Duke Bushido]

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

The bigger issue I have with your response Duke is that you want minimalize the effect of the invisible strike whereas to pay the points to get the affect by RAW is a hefty investment. And a guideline has always been get what you pay for.

 

No; I agree that you get what you pay for. 

 

This is why I suggested finding a way to model.this without depending heavily on the power of invisibility.   Christopher's recent post put Flash into my mind.  Unless it's wildly different in 6, it would disorient the victim. A blinded character, to my way of thinking, can't be sure of the direction in which he's swinging, or even facing.  I have no issues with him suffering sever OCV penalties, even against a character who hasn't moved since striking him. 

 

It doesn't completely resolve the "invisible until the next strike"  part, though.  Or being invisible to anyone who happened to not get flashed. 

 

Hmmmm. 

 

 

[Duke Bushido]

56 minutes ago, shuddemell said:

I might suggest linking a PRE attack to the teleport and invisibility, that way you can get the extra hesitation that you need to avoid the wild swipe. Just a thought, but it would cover the WTF? moment that the character would likely have.

That is an extremely elegant solution. 

 

Well done. 

[shuddemell]

14 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

That is an extremely elegant solution. 

 

Well done. 

Thanks, I did something similar when I was trying to model a ninja teleport and it seemed to work pretty well. (I was modelling Hattori Hanzo from Samurai Showdown, to be specific.)

[Christopher]

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

This is why I suggested finding a way to model.this without depending heavily on the power of invisibility.   Christopher's recent post put Flash into my mind.  Unless it's wildly different in 6, it would disorient the victim. A blinded character, to my way of thinking, can't be sure of the direction in which he's swinging, or even facing.  I have no issues with him suffering sever OCV penalties, even against a character who hasn't moved since striking him. 

Flash (Sight) on you has the exact same combat effect as Invisible (Sight) on the target or Fighting in Darkness (Sight).

In all 3 cases you can not use your primary targetting sense (sight) and thus are usually left with 0 targetting senses and the penalties.

 

4 hours ago, shuddemell said:

I might suggest linking a PRE attack to the teleport and invisibility, that way you can get the extra hesitation that you need to avoid the wild swipe. Just a thought, but it would cover the WTF? moment that the character would likely have. 

But it is not surprising all the time. After it is used once, you know what to expect. Even after having been told about it, it would no longer work.

 

And there is still a positive effect, like the enemy expecting you can not reach him and taking some action that prevents reaction:

Maybe they are ranged combatatns and braced their shoot (1/2 DCV).

If they know you can teleport, the only options are:

• keep melee fighters back there to guard the ranged combatants (held action for when you appear)
• do not let the ranged combatants use any dangerous maneuvers (like brace)
• do not bring ranged combatants to begin with/get even the ranged combatants to attack in melee

[Scott Ruggels]

14 hours ago, Brian Stanfield said:

 

HERO Basic is a concise version of the two volumes in 136 pages. I got it before I invested in the larger volumes, and it made the learning curve much easier. Now I keep several copies on hand for player reference. 

Have a source or a link, please?