Flying Dodge to enter Combat

[Brian Stanfield]

6 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Though honestly, you could make a thousand-fold improvement in 6e just by bringing back COM.

 

Well, I have to nit-pick here. I hate that stat. It seems like something left over from the old D&D days, and has virtually no game effect (the rules even explicitly state as much in 3e) other than how people react to you. This is easily covered with PRE or even EGO, and skills such as Conversation, Seduction, and the like. It seems a bit weird to make how someone looks become a rule mechanic above and beyond the special effect of one's character conception and costume, etc. Of course, once COM was dropped, the talent "Striking Appearance" was added to simulate especially stunning good looks having an effect on some Skill rolls and PRE attacks. 

 

But maybe that's just my nit to pick . . . . Now back to your normally scheduled topic.

[Lucius]

 

Historically, the arguments over COM were long and bitter.

 

I hope we are not about to reprise that.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary threatens to make like Appearance and go on Strike.

[Hugh Neilson]

12 hours ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

I'm a 5E player and so leaving this thread since it's blindingly obvious that not having memorized the edition I don't play is leading to me being edition-differenced to death. 

What rules have been cited that were not in 5e?  Martial Arts has not changed much since (IIRC) 3e, when we moved to "Pay your STR and get all 5 martial maneuvers; pay a further half your STR to add half your STR to their damage/effects:" to purchasing specific maneuvers. 

 

In particular, I believe the minimum 10 point investment in maneuvers has always been there.

[Surrealone]

19 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

Do you mean the bare minimum financially or rules-wise? (serious question).

 

Because I neither have nor want that damned thing and I have more trouble finding new players than I do actually playing.

I meant that in terms of both financial cost AND character creation rules/CP costs for character creation.  Key to this is that if you turn on certain Hero Designer options, you basically have martial maneuvers, advantages, and limitations from most of the 6e material (including CC, FHC, etc. with the APG's obviously excepted) … and you can also kick it into 5e mode and set options within it that have the vast bulk of the 5e character creation rules/CP costs (including things from Star Hero, Fantasy Hero, The Ultimate Speedster/Brick/Martial Artist, etc.)

 

15 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Though honestly, you could make a thousand-fold improvement in 6e just by bringing back COM.

I vehemently disagree with this.  The reason I disagree is that the Striking Appearance talent as implemented in 5e and later (as a replacement for COM) results in an infinitely more appropriate and useful ability on the character sheet when it comes to appearance-based playability.  It is built as: +5 PRE (5 Active Points), Only For Interaction Skill Roll And Presence Attack Bonuses Where Appearance Might Be A Factor (-1) (total cost: 3 (rounded up to allow for difference between “all characters” and “limited group of characters”).

This means that in 5e and later you can still effectively do the equivalent of Drain to COM … despite COM having been replaced by Striking Appearance … by simply performing a Drain to PRE with the SFX of making the target uglier to onlookers. I see no downside to the Striking Appearance, at all, especially since Striking Appearance tends to see much more acknowledgement/use from most GMs than COM ever did, gameplay-wise.

 

7 hours ago, Lucius said:

Historically, the arguments over COM were long and bitter.

Probably not; Duke Bushido is pretty reasonable … unlike some of the people I believer were engaged in said long and bitter arguments!


 

[dsatow]

Just tossing in my $0.02

 

I have no problem with Flying Dodge as a concept nor the full move with the dodge itself.  I have seen many action movies where someone rushes forward while being shot at.  My problem is that when aborted to, the user of flying dodge gets to abort for free (no dex roll), move up to their full movement, and remain standing up.  Its the ultimate defensive fall back.  If you get shot at, you get DCV.  If its an area of effect, you get your full movement to move out of the area and you get to be full DCV after doing it.

[Duke Bushido]

3 hours ago, Surrealone said:

Key to this is that if you turn on certain Hero Designer options, you basically have martial maneuvers, advantages, and limitations from most of the 6e material (including CC, FHC, etc. with the APG's obviously excepted) … and you can also kick it into 5e mode and set options within it that have the vast bulk of the 5e character creation rules/CP costs (including things from Star Hero, Fantasy Hero, The Ultimate Speedster/Brick/Martial Artist, etc.)

 

Now that's kind of interesting.  I didn't know about it fitting anything other than some generic Champions template.   It doesn't help me much simply because it didn't exist until two versions after my favorite edition, but it's still neat to know. 

 

Though let me ask you this much:

 

Assuming that someone had _only_ what you suggest as the bare minimum to play, would they have what they need to understand what these thing are, what they do, and what they mean in game terms? 

 

I completely understand it is difficult to answer a question based on feigning ignorance on something in which you are well-versed, but in your honest opinion, would a person, using only the materials you suggest and no other exposure, be able to gain all the information he needed to run a game smoothly, and with a solid understanding of mechanics and how to use them? 

 

3 hours ago, Surrealone said:

 

Probably not; Duke Bushido is pretty reasonable …


 

 

 

Thank you, Sir.  I very much appreciate your vote of confidence and hope to not disappoint you or anyone else taking it as a given. 

 

I will admit that I _did_ lose my cool in a post a while back (which I try very hard not to do; it was just bad timing and bad phrasing all around).  I regretted it immediately and edited out things that were frankly a bit nutty, but at that point, I had inadvertently offended someone who was completely outside the whole exchange.

 

I offer that only as a lesson to all of us to act civil with one another: I'd hate for anyone else to be reminded about "stray bullets" and "innocent bystanders" the way I was. (That reminds me; I failed to appologize to him.  I need to do that when I get home tonight.) 

 

 

All that being said, and with no wish to open a long-rotten can of worms (as proof, I am dropping the subject entirely after this personal anecdote), I would like to mention, without excessive detail, that COM is important to me, particularly in PC /NPC interactions.  It is important enough that in one of my game groups back during the SETAC Era, when my players got wind of the rumor of COM being dropped and began arguing about its validity (for and against), I stopped charging for it. 

 

Amusingly enough, that prompted several waves of characters with a wide range of COM, rather than what were becoming standard increments of 6.

 

 

Duke

[Surrealone]

35 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

Assuming that someone had _only_ what you suggest as the bare minimum to play, would they have what they need to understand what these thing are, what they do, and what they mean in game terms? 

 

I completely understand it is difficult to answer a question based on feigning ignorance on something in which you are well-versed, but in your honest opinion, would a person, using only the materials you suggest and no other exposure, be able to gain all the information he needed to run a game smoothly, and with a solid understanding of mechanics and how to use them? 

Given that what I suggested as the bare minimum was "Hero Designer plus the HERO System 6th Edition Bundle: Character Creation/Combat and Adventuring PDF", my instinctive response to your query is: I believe so.  Of course, I can't be certain...

[Duke Bushido]

It's all good.  I have no idea, as I own neither of those products.  As long as it is, in your best opinion, truly viable, I can comfortably recommend it to others looking for an inexpensive way to test the waters. 

 

You know:

 

Since the thing everyone is asking for a "GURPS Lite" style set of rules, and the thing on the schedule is yet another volume of additional rules via an APG3....

 

 

[Hugh Neilson]

6 hours ago, dsatow said:

I have no problem with Flying Dodge as a concept nor the full move with the dodge itself.  I have seen many action movies where someone rushes forward while being shot at.  My problem is that when aborted to, the user of flying dodge gets to abort for free (no dex roll), move up to their full movement, and remain standing up.  Its the ultimate defensive fall back.  If you get shot at, you get DCV.  If its an area of effect, you get your full movement to move out of the area and you get to be full DCV after doing it.

 

It was pointed out above that Flying Dodge can accompany a full move but does not, of itself, grant a full move, so Aborting gets +4 DCV, but no extra movement.  I have not read the maneuver in some time, so I don't know whether that was correct, but if it is, that would seem to eliminate a lot of the objections.

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

5 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

It was pointed out above that Flying Dodge can accompany a full move but does not, of itself, grant a full move, so Aborting gets +4 DCV, but no extra movement.  I have not read the maneuver in some time, so I don't know whether that was correct, but if it is, that would seem to eliminate a lot of the objections.

I edited that post shortly after making it.  The components of Flying Dodge when put together should not grant movement when you abort to it.  But the long-form description given in 5E's Ultimate Martial Artist contradicts this by explicitly stating that someone who aborts to a Flying Dodge can make a full move. 

[Boll Weevil]

Forgive me if this is a distraction from the thread but could someone please explain what exactly a Flying Dodge is? In real world terms, what is it a character is trying to do? I have seen Flying Dodge talked about but never knew what it was. Thanks!

[Lucius]

2 hours ago, Boll Weevil said:

Forgive me if this is a distraction from the thread but could someone please explain what exactly a Flying Dodge is? In real world terms, what is it a character is trying to do? I have seen Flying Dodge talked about but never knew what it was. Thanks!

 

The character is trying to do two things:

1. not get hit

2. move

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says actually going airborne is optional

 

 

 

[mallet]

2 hours ago, Boll Weevil said:

Forgive me if this is a distraction from the thread but could someone please explain what exactly a Flying Dodge is? In real world terms, what is it a character is trying to do? I have seen Flying Dodge talked about but never knew what it was. Thanks!

 

It is supposed to simulate those times in moves (or comics) where a character is being attacked and they jump up into the rafters of the building, or leap far away from where they were standing. 

I always think of it from a comic point of view where Spiderman is standing in the city street and Green Goblin throws a grenade at him and Spidy leaps up on to a fire escape to avoid the blast. 

 

The is where the "Flying" in Flying Dodge comes from, but as this is martial art move it is supposed to cover lots of possible variation, so it also works with any form of movement, from Running to Teleportation to Flight.

[Duke Bushido]

2 hours ago, Boll Weevil said:

Forgive me if this is a distraction from the thread but could someone please explain what exactly a Flying Dodge is? In real world terms, what is it a character is trying to do? I have seen Flying Dodge talked about but never knew what it was. Thanks!

 

 

Think about it as being similar to diving for cover, except the cover is very far away and when you get there, the cover isn't actually there at all. 

 

Seriously though:

 

As a mechanic, it is a way to dodge AOE attacks.  They couldn't call it dive for cover, as that name was taken.  Personally, I would have preferred modifying Dive for Cover, but I didn't write the book. 

 

Thus, we have Flying Dodge.  As Dodge still leaves you in the same hex, of perhaps an adjacent one, depending on the narrative elements, it stinks against AOE powers.   At its core, it is little more than "aborting to full move.". I've always allowed that, anyway, for myself-sacrificial heroic actions and to balance against AOE attacks, so I don't have a problem with that aspect of it.  And frankly, I don't think many people really do. 

 

However, because it is a Dodge (or maybe because it's "martial" and people just demand that "martial" means "give some bonuses;" I neither know nor concern myself much with the martial arts mechanics as-written), it has typical Dodge bonuses.  And again, I'm not really bothered by that, considering the reasons for which I traditionally allow "abort to full move.". 

 

But there don't seem to be any enforced CV penalties for the Full Move element, either, meaning it allows you to both abort to a full move without suffering CV penalties _and_ get some CV bonuese, too.  This bugs some people. Oh, and unlike dive for cover, you retain your balance and footing. 

 

As far as real world effects:

 

You hear something fall. Crap!  It's a grenade! Quick!  Turn around run behind that concrete wall! 

 

Does any of that help? 

[dsatow]

16 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

It was pointed out above that Flying Dodge can accompany a full move but does not, of itself, grant a full move, so Aborting gets +4 DCV, but no extra movement.  I have not read the maneuver in some time, so I don't know whether that was correct, but if it is, that would seem to eliminate a lot of the objections.

 

I've asked Steve Long about it, since I thought for 5 points, the maneuver was just too good.  So, as long as your total movement hasn't been used for that phase (aborted or delayed, as in a half move and delay), you get to move up to your full movement allowance.

[Surrealone]

On ‎1‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 6:47 PM, Duke Bushido said:

Since the thing everyone is asking for a "GURPS Lite" style set of rules, and the thing on the schedule is yet another volume of additional rules via an APG3....

I'm personally looking forward to APG3 coming out.

[Hugh Neilson]

20 hours ago, dsatow said:

 

I've asked Steve Long about it, since I thought for 5 points, the maneuver was just too good.  So, as long as your total movement hasn't been used for that phase (aborted or delayed, as in a half move and delay), you get to move up to your full movement allowance.

 

For 5 points, you get the ability to use a Dive for Cover without falling prone, and with a +4 DCV.  I agree that's a pretty good benefit for 5 points.  I suspect there was not a lot of thought put into the DCV bonus, which is right between Dodge and Martial Dodge.

 

I suspect it was written up with the other "full move element" martial maneuvers, from which perspective this is a Martial Dodge with a lower DCV bonus which permits a full move.  Basing it on Dive for Cover might have been more appropriate. 

 

As for SFX, like most maneuvers it can simulate a variety of actions, but I'd call it "evasive maneuvers".  A character lacking Martial Arts could make a half move and Dodge.  This maneuver improves on that non-martial basic ability by +1 DCV and allowing a full move.

 

[Boll Weevil]

Thanks for the explanations. I guess my confusion was that it was always mentioned as a martial maneuver and not listed in core rules. I like the idea and it does simulate something I see in comics often. Like many of the "brick tricks", I plan to allow it in my games as a thing anyone with the right set of powers/skills/situation can do. 

[Surrealone]

24 minutes ago, Boll Weevil said:

I guess my confusion was that it was always mentioned as a martial maneuver and not listed in core rules. 

Probably because it is a martial maneuver … one that originated in The Ultimate Martial Artist, IIRC.

[Brian Stanfield]

On 1/4/2019 at 5:47 PM, Duke Bushido said:

It's all good.  I have no idea, as I own neither of those products.  As long as it is, in your best opinion, truly viable, I can comfortably recommend it to others looking for an inexpensive way to test the waters. 

 

You know:

 

Since the thing everyone is asking for a "GURPS Lite" style set of rules, and the thing on the schedule is yet another volume of additional rules via an APG3....

 

 

 

At minimum, HERO Designer allows new players to fiddle with character design without getting lost in the rules. The program only allows legal builds, so it minimizes the risk of improper applications or calculations. The new Character Creation Cards that came out for Champions Complete are a great resource for using the book, HD, and the cards in a quick and easy character building exercise. 

 

Now, if someone would only clearly explain how to use the cards for people unfamiliar with HD. . . .

[Beast]

12 hours ago, Brian Stanfield said:

  Now, if someone would only clearly explain how to use the cards for people unfamiliar with HD. . . .

Ok here you go

 

1 either choose or randomly select an arch type
2 determine how you want to split up your 250 pts(2x100 and 2x25 pt or any combo you desire use the icons to match up powers & skills,etc)
 3 pick 75 pts in complications
4 be sure to have the HD files for it in a place you can find and load them as prefabs for HD(I did a folder just for CCCC in the prefab folder in where HD lives in my computer
5 each card has a tiny number in the bottom left(this number needs to be larger is my only real complaint)
6 start HD
7 use open character and goto where you placed the CCCC files and find the file CCCC HD Files and open it
8 click on Cards 03-08 Chatacter Templates(these are actually HDC files so save as (new character name here))
9 all the cards are numbered and seperated by point cost or are complications
10 if you cannot find a number go back and check the "CCCC HD Files ll", folder it has the expansion files

have fun

[dsatow]

On 1/6/2019 at 7:16 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

 

For 5 points, you get the ability to use a Dive for Cover without falling prone, and with a +4 DCV.  I agree that's a pretty good benefit for 5 points.  I suspect there was not a lot of thought put into the DCV bonus, which is right between Dodge and Martial Dodge.

 

I suspect it was written up with the other "full move element" martial maneuvers, from which perspective this is a Martial Dodge with a lower DCV bonus which permits a full move.  Basing it on Dive for Cover might have been more appropriate. 

 

As for SFX, like most maneuvers it can simulate a variety of actions, but I'd call it "evasive maneuvers".  A character lacking Martial Arts could make a half move and Dodge.  This maneuver improves on that non-martial basic ability by +1 DCV and allowing a full move.

 

 

I find it generally less annoying and requiring less problems when I tell players that "any abort to movement requires a successful dex roll a la dive for cover" as a house rule.

[Surrealone]

15 hours ago, dsatow said:

 

I find it generally less annoying and requiring less problems when I tell players that "any abort to movement requires a successful dex roll a la dive for cover" as a house rule.

I would personally find additional dice rolling for maneuvers that do not normally require it to be more time consuming, more of a hassle, and, thus more annoying.  

Unicuique suum, I suppose.

[Deadman]

18 hours ago, dsatow said:

 

I find it generally less annoying and requiring less problems when I tell players that "any abort to movement requires a successful dex roll a la dive for cover" as a house rule.

After doing some digging into the books, Flying Dodge goes against the rules for Aborting an Action.  In 6eV2, 21 it says...

 

"A character cannot normally Abort to a movement Action, such as to run, fly, or Teleport out of danger’s way. Dive For Cover and decelerating or turning are exceptions to this — although they do involve some movement, characters can Abort to them. At the GM’s option, characters may be allowed to Abort to other forms of movement in appropriate circumstances."

 

With that said, I feel that allowing the maneuver itself would require the GM to allow others to Abort to movement as well.  They wouldn't get the DCV bonus that Flying Dodge confers but would be able to move as a defensive abort action.  Of course if the GM allows this then it renders the Dive For Cover maneuver obsolete since no one would want to end up prone if they don't have to.  Right?  Therefore if you require a DEX roll for someone to Abort to movement I feel it is justified to require it for those trying a Flying Dodge.  If they miss the roll they still have the +4 DCV but they are in the Hex when the AoE goes off.

 

Just my $.02,

 

T

[Duke Bushido]

For what it's worth, I allow abort to movement as a defensive option for the character himself (I gotta git outta the way of that!) or another character (good lord!  That blast will kill her!) 

 

It incurs all penalties related to the movement, but you _do_ have the option.  If you need to get out of the way, you can choose between taking a movement penalty and keeping your feet or getting a DCV bonus and laying on the ground. 

 

Honestly, "flying dodge" doesn't bother me as a construct, since it's a martial arts thing, and being better with the technical skills of combat and pre ision movement is part of their schtick. 

 

It's just not something my groups have ever really had a need to invent before 6, so we don't really use it.