Guidelines Block Range Attack

[Ninja-Bear]

17 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

 

1.   The GM can decide that haymakers don't exist too.  Changing the rules to fit the game is part of customizing the Hero system to create a game.  If RAW says Block is Everyman, so anyone can attempt to Block any HTH attack, we accept that (the GM would have to say no, not so).  Now, the RAW says blocking ranged attacks is also generally allowed.

 

2.   This argues that Block should not be an Everyman maneuver, doesn't it?  Instead, since 1e, it has been permitted, but the GM can apply penalties.  Not everyone can block a punch, but cinematic action heros can, so it's a basic maneuver.  It's pretty cinematic to Block at least some ranged attacks as well, isn't it?

 

3.   But at present, Block is not something special by default.  Why is is so much worse for Blocking ranged attacks to not be something special by default?

 

4.   The RAW sets Block as a standard maneuver, and that maneuver allows Blocking a punch and a tiger claw.  Blocking a laser requires a roll at OCV zero since, realistically, lasers are invisible.  But a "movie laser"?  I've seen action heroes block those with reflective surfaces.

 

5.   At this point, we do assume that  Deflection is the "block attacks at range" power in 6e. 

 

Would I let a cinematic character try to prevent Grond punching some poor defenseless civilian by throwing a heavy object to divert his punch?  Yeah, probably - it's heroic, cinematic and fun, so why not?   Would I let Stalwart Sam try to prevent Dastardly Dick from shooting Incessantly Imperiled Iris by throwing a bible to jar his gun hand?  Yeah, probably - it's heroic, cinematic and fun, so why not? 

 

But it won't be as easy for someone without Deflection.

 

 

Now we are back to MicroMan and his amazing flying move through.  How easy is it to Dodge a bullet?  Everyone can get +3 DCV, in most situations when the gun is fired (Abort).  Or they can Dive for Cover.  How realistic is that?  I can leap 4 meters less time than it takes the bullet (or laser beam) to cross the room?

 

"gritty realism"  and "cinematic" have historically been opposite ends of the scale in Hero parlance.  In a very gritty game, ranged blocks might not be allowed by default.  But would I tell a PC he can't try to throw off a rifleman's aim by throwing his helmet, or a fair-sized rock, at the rifle from a few meters away?  Seems like that kind of thing happens in even "realistic" cinema.

You make good points. However Hugh as a man on these boards will compare cost effectiveness with builds, your answer doesn’t touch upon the new reality of Block-Ranged which I started this thread. Namely, what is the appropriate penalties and thus the proper build for abilities for things that were once covered by Missile Deflection? You can confidently know how much Dex to offset Dex penalties for Supreme Balance. Right now as RAW to confidently be able to Block Arrows as Green Dragon, (confidently I’ll define as having Basic OCV vs OCV) is +4 good enough?  Did I pay off the penalty? Do I have actually more and gained a bonus? (Perhaps the GM only is assessing a -2). And I started this thread because I’m trying to get a feel for what is appropriate Penalty to asses in a game to tell the players. And also what if I want to introduce a Macguffin which “breaks” the guideline. How is it best accomplished? For example in a Superheroic game Lasers can’t be blocked by normal means (unless perhaps a Heroic Point was spent). However a Questionite Shiled can Block anything.  Do you still assign a higher penalty to he bought off or something else? I just find your answer of “well really the GM could always define what was in his game” to be well, pardon the pun, Deflecting the question. 

[Hugh Neilson]

1 hour ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Another question I have is can you multiple Deflect as you can Block (with of course appropriate penalties)? If you can’t, then buying levels in Block might be the more attractive option.

 

6e V2 p 59 discusses ranged Block.  The rules are generally the same as Block, other than the suggested penalties ("-4 or worse"), lack of the "act first" result, can't Block HTH and Ranged attacks in  the same segment (interestingly,  not the same Phase, so apparently Luke CAN block Vader's Saber in Segment 6, then Block a Stormtrooper's Blaster in Segment 8), and CSL's have to be with Ranged attacks to Block ranged attacks.   Deflection makes a character more proficient at Blocking ranged attacks, so the same rules apply.

 

27 minutes ago, Ninja-Bear said:

You make good points. However Hugh as a man on these boards will compare cost effectiveness with builds, your answer doesn’t touch upon the new reality of Block-Ranged which I started this thread. Namely, what is the appropriate penalties and thus the proper build for abilities for things that were once covered by Missile Deflection? You can confidently know how much Dex to offset Dex penalties for Supreme Balance. Right now as RAW to confidently be able to Block Arrows as Green Dragon, (confidently I’ll define as having Basic OCV vs OCV) is +4 good enough?  Did I pay off the penalty? Do I have actually more and gained a bonus? (Perhaps the GM only is assessing a -2). And I started this thread because I’m trying to get a feel for what is appropriate Penalty to asses in a game to tell the players. And also what if I want to introduce a Macguffin which “breaks” the guideline. How is it best accomplished? For example in a Superheroic game Lasers can’t be blocked by normal means (unless perhaps a Heroic Point was spent). However a Questionite Shiled can Block anything.  Do you still assign a higher penalty to he bought off or something else? I just find your answer of “well really the GM could always define what was in his game” to be well, pardon the pun, Deflecting the question. 

 

While the penalties are undefined, RAW, other than that "-4 or worse and some things may be impossible", both penalties for Blocking a weapon attack bare-handed (GM can assign a penalty of -1 to -3), and the GM may establish a rule for using a weapon held in the off hand as a shield to get a bonus to Block attempts.  "If the GM wants to", he can also modify Block to substantial STR differences.  So I will suggest that the rules for blocking HTH weapons also leave a lot of uncertainties for the player who want to be confident that, say, his unarmed Pixie can easily block a Giant's war-club.  And I see NO rule to override these penalties - PSLs are the only available option.  Although it seems like it would be reasonable to fold this into Deflection - Wonder Woman's bracelets and Cap's shield can deflect knives and swords.  Someone who can brush aside bullets with ease should be able to block a hand-held weapon as well.

 

To "I want to confidently Block ranged attacks with no penalty", again, DEFLECTION.  20 CP, costs END, no penalties to Block ranged attacks.  Season to taste.  Green Dragon can buy Deflection, 0 END (30 AP), No Range (-1/2), Only Works against arrows and similar projectiles (in a Supers game, probably -1 at least).  So don't bother with PSLs - you improve Block against Ranged attacks with Deflection.

 

Your Questonite Shield grants Deflection.  Heroic games already add the Shield DCV bonus to Blocks, so a special material might grant that property, to a limited extend (e.g. only magic, or only fire, or what have you) and be purchased with money and/or acquired through questing.

 

The more we discuss this, the more convinced I am becoming that the 6e model offers more options, better options and a more cinematic feel (if desired) than any prior edition in this area.

 

BTW, when I comment on this issue, I look at the Deflection power (6e v1 p 187) and the Block rules (6e v2 p 57) because I do not see Block (ranged or otherwise) used very often.  Adding some versatility to something not used all that often seems like a good idea to me - maybe it will see more play.

[Tech]

This thread is an example of why I'm backing away from these forums for now. We have angry responses, accusations and so on.

[Ninja-Bear]

I think I’ve been overly concerned about allowing Blocks with a large penalty (-5). Really what’s the odds of it succeeding? 1 in 216? And even if it does, since Block can be described as “Dodging” and Green Dragon is specifically described as Blocking and Dodging Missiles, I don’t think it would be bad to say that if a Normal rolled 3 ones, the sfx of the Block was some sort of luck involved which caused the attack to be missed.

[Scott Ruggels]

Humorous RL Example:

 

 

[Greywind]

His arm position makes the whole thing look awkward.

[Toxxus]

The gaps between the blades also make it likely that the fire would wash through the shield and scorch him.

[Scott Ruggels]

1 hour ago, Toxxus said:

The gaps between the blades also make it likely that the fire would wash through the shield and scorch him.

 Actually it doesn't happen in the video, but  with higher pressure flames it  might.  However the  airflow has the most influence on the flame path.

[Christopher]

15 hours ago, Toxxus said:

The gaps between the blades also make it likely that the fire would wash through the shield and scorch him. 

 

13 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 Actually it doesn't happen in the video, but  with higher pressure flames it  might.  However the  airflow has the most influence on the flame path.

It does happen. Look at the slowmo in 3:45:
https://youtu.be/AdibV3MQ2Sg?t=225

 

And game mechanics wise that mechanic could be any of these:
- shield is used as armor but a high DC attack still does stun past defenses

- a high DC attack is harder to block

- the high DC attack is being spread to increase the OCV, making it harder to block*

 

*There is technically not a rule for this. But that is mostly because the Attack and Defense sucesses are absolutes. In a game that uses Attack vs Dodge Sucess to define part of the damage (Shadowrun, Storyteller), it would mater. And maybe HERO should have an option to drop DC to make it harder to block as well?

[Vanguard]

On 3/22/2019 at 7:36 AM, Toxxus said:

 

Also, it's quite historically accurate to be able to block arrows with shields.  It is the historical go-to tool for dealing with ranged attacks.

 

I'm not a history buff but were they really blocking the arrows or more just hiding behind their shields as the sky rained arrows?

 

[Ninja-Bear]

3 hours ago, Vanguard said:

 

I'm not a history buff but were they really blocking the arrows or more just hiding behind their shields as the sky rained arrows?

 

In Hero terms, does it matter? (Not being snarky here)

[Toxxus]

On 3/31/2019 at 3:22 AM, Vanguard said:

 

I'm not a history buff but were they really blocking the arrows or more just hiding behind their shields as the sky rained arrows?

 

 

Depending on the range and volume of arrows it was probably some of both.

[RDU Neil]

On 3/30/2019 at 1:22 AM, Christopher said:

And maybe HERO should have an option to drop DC to make it harder to block as well?

 

I like this idea... doing something the opposite of using CSLs to increase damage... you can drop a DC to give you CSLs... on vs. block, or just pure OCV bonus?

 

Is there something broken here? To say, "You can sacrifice a DC for +1 OCV?  Getting +2 to hit for a single does seem broken... where as sacrificing +2 OCV for 1 DC has been fine in play for years. I think whatever you are sacrificing should be higher value than what you get, because it is the flexibility in the moment you are paying for.

 

Does anyone here see a huge, potentially exploitable, broh-ken aspect to allowing this? I don't, but the math guys might see something.

[Hugh Neilson]

8 hours ago, RDU Neil said:

Is there something broken here? To say, "You can sacrifice a DC for +1 OCV?

 

That's part of ranged attacks now - Spreading to enhance OCV. 

[Greywind]

"Now"? Has been for a while.

[RDU Neil]

16 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

That's part of ranged attacks now - Spreading to enhance OCV. 

 

Oh yeah, good point. Wasn't thinking of that, more in the mindset of hth, but of course. So making it a more general rule would be taking something away from EBs (which I'm loathe to do, as they are the most inefficient form of attack in the game), but in general is not a broken concept.

[archer]

13 hours ago, RDU Neil said:

 

I like this idea... doing something the opposite of using CSLs to increase damage... you can drop a DC to give you CSLs... on vs. block, or just pure OCV bonus?

 

Is there something broken here? To say, "You can sacrifice a DC for +1 OCV?  Getting +2 to hit for a single does seem broken... where as sacrificing +2 OCV for 1 DC has been fine in play for years. I think whatever you are sacrificing should be higher value than what you get, because it is the flexibility in the moment you are paying for.

 

Does anyone here see a huge, potentially exploitable, broh-ken aspect to allowing this? I don't, but the math guys might see something.

 

 

If you know you can one-shot someone if you ever hit him, that perhaps could be a problem.

 

There's a lot of mentalists, gadgeteers, martial artists, and energy projectors who can't take a solid hit from Grond, the Hulk, or Solomon Grundy. If the h-t-h attack starts out high enough, dropping a dice or two doesn't make all that much difference.

[Hugh Neilson]

13 hours ago, Greywind said:

"Now"? Has been for a while.

Yup - since 2e, it has been part of (Energy) Blast and according to an article way back, it was intended for 1e.  Can't recall whether 4e or 5e expanded it to all ranged attacks.

[Vanguard]

On 3/31/2019 at 4:41 AM, Ninja-Bear said:

In Hero terms, does it matter? (Not being snarky here)

 

That's okay. No snark detected.

 

And I suppose not.  Whether you're hunkering down behind your faithful shield or slapping arrows aside while charging . . . it all boils down to "I don't get an owie".

 

On 4/1/2019 at 6:09 AM, Toxxus said:

 

Depending on the range and volume of arrows it was probably some of both.

 

/salute

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

I may be a bit late here, but shouldn't the real question be which attacks are built with additional OCV Only to Hinder Blocking?  The distinction is irrelevant in a Heroic game, but a lot of Superheroic examples are coming up and that's where you have to put a point cost on "bullets are harder to block than arrows". 

[Toxxus]

1 hour ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

I may be a bit late here, but shouldn't the real question be which attacks are built with additional OCV Only to Hinder Blocking?  The distinction is irrelevant in a Heroic game, but a lot of Superheroic examples are coming up and that's where you have to put a point cost on "bullets are harder to block than arrows". 

 

You might also just chalk that up to special effects.

 

Bullets and lasers are harder to block, but arrows can pin the target to a wall and boomerangs can easily be bounced into secondary targets.

[Ninja-Bear]

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

I may be a bit late here, but shouldn't the real question be which attacks are built with additional OCV Only to Hinder Blocking?  The distinction is irrelevant in a Heroic game, but a lot of Superheroic examples are coming up and that's where you have to put a point cost on "bullets are harder to block than arrows". 

Yup that’s part of what I’m looking at. Btw To Catch Bullets in HSMA is built as +6 OCV, now considering -5 OCV is considered silly to attempt, that should be enough.

[Hugh Neilson]

13 hours ago, Ninja-Bear said:

Yup that’s part of what I’m looking at. Btw To Catch Bullets in HSMA is built as +6 OCV, now considering -5 OCV is considered silly to attempt, that should be enough.

 

Seems reasonable to me.  I expect you will see two schools of thought, though:

 

(a)  That is a reasonable cost, compared to what else could have been done with the points, and it more than offsets the penalty for am action which would otherwise be "sheer folly". 

 

(b)  That's not realistic.  People can't deflect or catch bullets.  Impose a penalty of -40 so it's still impossible.

 

The former, to me, is playing the game.  That's a reasonable value for the ability and fits within the mechanics.

 

The latter is a passive-aggressive approach to campaign parameters.  If the game in question is so grim, gritty and "faux-realistic*" that catching bullets just can't be accepted, say so.  It's not a question of "how many points" it's a question of "not an ability anyone in this game would ever possess".  Say so - that concept is not a fit with this game - and move on.

 

* No RPG is ever truly realistic.  How many times can someone be knocked out without suffering long-term detrimental effects?  How many gunshot wounds can one fully recover from?  Broken bones?  People survive a fall from incredible heights, and they die slipping and falling in their homes - what game simulates that?  We compromise reality all the time, in every game, in the interests of playability.