Cover (maneuver): How to Use

[Duke Bushido]

38 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

  I mean, no matter how well you have someone covered, if they just disappear... they're gone.

 

 

And the more the rules and even the fans try to beat everything into the exact same shape as everything else in the category, I find stuff like this to be _critical_ to the game: this is one of those things that makes T-port _different_ from Running: it's not just a way to get from point A to point B.  (for the same reason, I rule that, barring an SFX that says otherwise, T-port movement is resolved before all other movement)  It just helps it to _feel_ different.

 

Really gotta run!
 

 

[Duke Bushido]

(yo, MT:

 

i've managed to split the page break.  If you didn't see the example I promised, it's on the bottom of the previous page)

 

[Duke Bushido]

Oh:  one last thing:

 

Those of you who's arguments against breaking out of cover are along the lines of "but the attack has already hit" now completely understand my outrage at "Combat Luck means it missed me!"

 

[edited]

 

 

Edited September 5, 2019 by Duke Bushido
On re-read, it sounded far more aggressive than I meant it to be

[Scott Ruggels]

I just use Cover as straight, as written. No wiggle room at all.  This is why team work is important. 

[Greywind]

3 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Oh:  one last thing:

 

Those of you who's arguments against breaking out of cover are along the lines of "but the attack has already hit" now completely understand my outrage at "Combat Luck means it missed me!"

 

 

Rolling damage for an already successful attack is the fastest thing that happens on the list 😛

[Hugh Neilson]

11 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

Why would someone "use cover if it's such a waste?!"  [paraphrasing my own]

 

I don't know.  Morality, perhaps?  A desire to _not_ have to shoot someone?

 

Lack of choice?  "I'm supposed to bring in Bad Granny for questioning, but all I've got is my 4d6 RKA blast pistol...."

 

And of course, the fact that it works on mooks without having to _actually_ splatter them.

 

How often do we have discussions about players refusing to follow genre tropes?  How often does it work out that their refusal to follow genre tropes leads directly back to being "punished", in-game, for following genre tropes?  If we want these to be used, they need to be neutral at worst, and ideally rewarded.

 

When we want everyone to display higher moral ground and not kill opponents, or show restraint and not fire off full-power blasts at every unknown target, or actually role play rather than looking for the absolute best tactical choice in every situation, and forget the reality that people are seldom guided by a detailed analysis of every possible alternative, selecting the best one with logic and efficiency their sole guide, what do we get?  "Well, my character is a tactical genius who hates to lose and is utterly remorseless in his fight against evildoers, so it's IN CHARACTER for him to only make the best tactical decisions, to hit the bad guy with everything he's got and to kill him off if he thinks the justice system, or poor prison security, will just put him back on the streets."

 

Why?

 

Because the GM rubs the players' faces in the return of defeated foes because a tricky lawyer got a "not guilty" or Stronghold was nowhere near strong enough to hold them.  Because the Hero fires off a low-power Blast that plinks off the unknown villain's defenses, and that villain then fires a massive counterattack that Stuns the Super.  "HA HA - the press runs humiliating stories of your crushing defeat.  All your PRE attacks are -3d6 for the next month due to this negative press."  Because EVERY KO'd villain gets a recovery, gets back up and blasts the heroes in the back, so "screw honour and hit him one more time when he's down, just to be sure".

 

If Cover means that the opponent probably just break cover anyway, why would the player be motivated to take a penalty to OCV and a delay to damage?  ANSWER:  They would not.  They would be motivated, instead, to rationalize why they strike first, and hard, so that they defeat that opponent,  not have him break cover, so they just wasted their action anyway.

 

A desire not to shoot them?  Sure.  But all Covered means is, if they don't cooperate, I either shoot them anyway or I back off.  Maybe I should have Grabbed "Bad Grandma" and restrained her instead of pulling my UberGun, or engaged the mooks using my attacks at less than full DC, or taken that OCV penalty to Pull my Punch instead of Cover.

 

11 hours ago, Duke Bushido said:

First off: this works best for a super escaping a normal. And let's be honest, it makes sense that a super _should_ have a chance to escape a normal. 

 

If the goal is to show how Super the Super is, yes.  If the goal is to have that Normal still capable of a dramatic threat, no.

 

Looking at the source material, how often has MightyMan heard "Back off, buddy, or I'll shoot Nellie, here, in the head" [Nellie is Covered by Gunman] and thought "Hey, I'm virtually certain to win the DEX roll-off anyway, and even if I don't, a handgun can't do enough BOD to kill Nellie in one shot anyway, so my teammate with Healing powers can save her."?

 

I see a lot more thought bubbles like "For all my power, he's rendered me helpless - I cannot allow harm to come to an innocent girl like Nellie!"

 

We accept that, in the time it takes MightyMan to ignite his heat vision, his opponent can activate his force field, go Desolid and Dodge, Dive for Cover or Missile Deflect (all by Aborting - ha ha, that always goes first).  But we can't accept that Cover means the attacker has a "priority abort" to roll his damage?

 

Now, I would classify the hero doing something with no visible cues, that the attacker could in no way expect, as being a potential "distraction" that provides the potential for breaking cover.  Maybe that should require a Stealth roll, or an Acting roll, against the attacker's PER roll (with bonuses if the power he wants to use has Invisible Power Effects).  The attacker already took a penalty to OCV, hit anyway and delayed his damage.  It seems reasonable that this should not mean "no problem - the target can easily avoid the attack".

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Looking at the source material, how often has MightyMan heard "Back off, buddy, or I'll shoot Nellie, here, in the head" [Nellie is Covered by Gunman] and thought "Hey, I'm virtually certain to win the DEX roll-off anyway, and even if I don't, a handgun can't do enough BOD to kill Nellie in one shot anyway, so my teammate with Healing powers can save her."?

 

Yeah that would be bad.  Has anyone suggested such a thing in this thread?

[Duke Bushido]

More to the point:

 

You do you.  As I said above: if you and yours are happy with the way covered currently works, go for it. 

 

I'm happy with the way this system works; I've been going for it for almost thirty years (so it's got a good bit of play testing behind it) , and have zero in changing. 

[Scott Ruggels]

3 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

How often do we have discussions about players refusing to follow genre tropes?  How often does it work out that their refusal to follow genre tropes leads directly back to being "punished", in-game, for following genre tropes?  If we want these to be used, they need to be neutral at worst, and ideally rewarded.

 

When we want everyone to display higher moral ground and not kill opponents, or show restraint and not fire off full-power blasts at every unknown target, or actually role play rather than looking for the absolute best tactical choice in every situation, and forget the reality that people are seldom guided by a detailed analysis of every possible alternative, selecting the best one with logic and efficiency their sole guide, what do we get?  "Well, my character is a tactical genius who hates to lose and is utterly remorseless in his fight against evildoers, so it's IN CHARACTER for him to only make the best tactical decisions, to hit the bad guy with everything he's got and to kill him off if he thinks the justice system, or poor prison security, will just put him back on the streets."

 

Why?

 

Because the GM rubs the players' faces in the return of defeated foes because a tricky lawyer got a "not guilty" or Stronghold was nowhere near strong enough to hold them.  Because the Hero fires off a low-power Blast that plinks off the unknown villain's defenses, and that villain then fires a massive counterattack that Stuns the Super.  "HA HA - the press runs humiliating stories of your crushing defeat.  All your PRE attacks are -3d6 for the next month due to this negative press."  Because EVERY KO'd villain gets a recovery, gets back up and blasts the heroes in the back, so "screw honour and hit him one more time when he's down, just to be sure".

 

If Cover means that the opponent probably just break cover anyway, why would the player be motivated to take a penalty to OCV and a delay to damage?  ANSWER:  They would not.  They would be motivated, instead, to rationalize why they strike first, and hard, so that they defeat that opponent,  not have him break cover, so they just wasted their action anyway.

 

 

Bad GMing, or Genre Tropes, it's hard to tell, but I got so sick of this, especially the revolving door, that I just walked away from "Four Color Adventures" eventually, sticking with Spies and Mercenaries, and sliding comfortably into gritty, low magic, high politics, fantasy. Hero is just that flexible.  Most of those Genre tropes were artifacts of the Comics Code enforcing a moral certitude upon the publishers, before the government did. I had a philosophical opposition to the existence of the comics code, but it was there before I was born, and I only got interested in comics again after it was gone.

[Chris Goodwin]

We do see it all the time in source material where someone has the hard-boiled hero Covered.  But because they're the protagonist, the other guy never just pulls the trigger on them.  There's pretty much always a distraction, allowing the protagonist the opportunity to wrestle the gun away from the attacker.  

 

If you haven't noticed by now, I like to look back at the origins of a mechanic, trying to gauge the intent behind it.    Looking back, Covered as a maneuver didn't exist in first-gen Champions, but it did exist in the first-gen standalone games.  To me, that implies that it, here and now, it's not a generally superheroic mechanic, but ought to be considered a toggle-able option along the lines of Knockdown vs. Knockback, Impairing/Disabling Wounds, Bleeding, and so on.  I would probably not use it in anything but what I consider "low heroic" games; thus making moot most of the questions along the lines of, what if the target activates a power?  

 

The first-gen standalone games' version is similar enough to the modern version, with the exception of the version in Danger International.  (Trivia: the Covered maneuver doesn't appear at all in Justice Inc. or Espionage!)  The Danger International version states that you don't pre-roll the attack; it instead states that if you surprise the target by shouting "Freeze!" and they're in combat, they're at half DCV for one action; if they're out of combat already you have them at DCV 0.  This is odd and different enough that I probably would have used the other games' versions of it in DI, but see below...  

 

The current version works well enough that you could probably use it just fine against NPCs, especially mook level ones.  Against PCs or PC-level, named villains, I find the idea of pre-rolling the attack to be somewhat odd.  Does the attacker get to know the results of the pre-rolled attack?  If that roll comes up a 17 or 18, do they know that their firearm will jam or otherwise fail?  Does a miss on the pre-roll mean the target is not covered, or does it mean that the target is covered but their attack roll will miss?  

 

I would say that to successfully Cover someone, you have to get them to half or 0 DCV in some way, or otherwise gain an advantage over them: a Presence Attack at a minimum of PRE+10 (shout "Freeze!" at them, roll high enough on your PRE Attack and they will), have them Grabbed, knock them Prone, Stun them, catch them Surprised and out of combat.   I'd probably rule that if combat is still going on, they're at half DCV, and you have a high potential for distraction.  Note:  you don't pre-roll the attack roll!  

 

If it all goes the way you expect, and you have your target at 0 DCV, then all of their Hit Location penalties are halved.  Pointing your gun at their head or knife at their throat (Head, normally -8 to hit), you have them at a total DCV of 4, and a delayed Phase.  Still not quite a pre-rolled hit, but should it be?  (This ends up being pretty similar to the version that appeared in Danger International, with the exception that in mine here you have to actually get them to half or 0 DCV rather than having the maneuver do it for you.)  

 

Trying to get out of being Covered then comes down to simply using the rest of the HERO System combat mechanics.  The Covered character can be considered to have a delayed Phase, as would the character holding them.  At that point you're checking DEX vs. DEX, with whatever other situational modifiers might apply.  

[Christopher R Taylor]

I think the "it always hits" thing is an attempt to enforce genre, because almost never in a movie does anyone do anything once covered.  They may try to talk their way out of it or get a distraction but once you cover someone, they give up.  Players aren't fond of that, and will usually try to find a way out of it so the rules try to force them to behave like the source material by telling them they're gonna get hit and there is nothing they can do about it except hope for a distraction.

 

Of course, there's exceptions, in the source material.  In several movies, Jackie Chan literally takes the gun out of the hand of someone that has him covered (Jet Li pulled a pistol to pieces in Lethal Weapon).  It is known that in real life, some guys like Hardin were so fast that even while covered, they could draw and fire before the other person could shoot.  To imagine someone could trigger a defensive power without being first shot is not so incredible or unreasonable.

 

Its just a question of what you're trying to accomplish, and I like to give players the benefit of the doubt like Hugh Nielson was talking about.

[Chris Goodwin]

2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I think the "it always hits" thing is an attempt to enforce genre, because almost never in a movie does anyone do anything once covered.  They may try to talk their way out of it or get a distraction but once you cover someone, they give up.  Players aren't fond of that, and will usually try to find a way out of it so the rules try to force them to behave like the source material by telling them they're gonna get hit and there is nothing they can do about it except hope for a distraction.

 

It's not "it always hits" though.  You roll to hit when you first point the attack at them, and then if it hits you get to "save" the damage until such time as you decide to inflict it.  The current verbiage doesn't say anything about whether the target is resisting, and in fact in the example in 6e2 the target is at full DCV.  Which to me doesn't make sense; to have someone Covered, they need to not be moving, resisting, or otherwise at full DCV.  Or at least willing to freeze, which is where the PRE+10 Presence Attack comes in.

 

If someone is at full DCV, and they're ignoring your order to "Freeze!", and you're trying an attack roll against them, you're not properly attempting the Cover maneuver against them.  You're attempting an ordinary attack against them.  

[Hugh Neilson]

6 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

 

Bad GMing, or Genre Tropes, it's hard to tell, but I got so sick of this, especially the revolving door, that I just walked away from "Four Color Adventures" eventually, sticking with Spies and Mercenaries, and sliding comfortably into gritty, low magic, high politics, fantasy. Hero is just that flexible.  Most of those Genre tropes were artifacts of the Comics Code enforcing a moral certitude upon the publishers, before the government did. I had a philosophical opposition to the existence of the comics code, but it was there before I was born, and I only got interested in comics again after it was gone.

 

I would say that this predates the Comics Code, and dates back to (at the latest) Batman #1.  That was the first appearance of the Joker.  As written, the Joker did not survive the story.  However, the Editor realized, if we are publishing a story every month in Detective, 6 or 8 a quarter in Batman, plus all the other Batman appearances, we are going to need antagonists, and this one is just too good to kill off after a single appearance.

 

I agree with, and respect, "I don't like the tropes, so I don't like the genre, so I will play something else".  I don't agree with, and cannot respect, "I don't like the tropes, so I will pay the genre but subvert it at the expense of the game everyone else wants to play".

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

It's not "it always hits" though.  You roll to hit when you first point the attack at them, and then if it hits you get to "save" the damage until such time as you decide to inflict it. 

 

I apologize for not stating it in the most lengthy and detailed manner possible.

[Chris Goodwin]

Just to complicate the discussion further, how many GMs allow the "throat slitting" rule?  Meaning, if you have someone completely helpless, you do get to automatically inflict your damage.  I'd guess that most do.  

 

Which is really what we're talking about, isn't it?  

 

(remembering "Aw, man.  I shot Marvin in the face."  In the same tone as if it were "Aw, man.  I dropped my ice cream cone.")

[Scott Ruggels]

I do to a point. Yes inFantasy Hero. 

 

Somewhat related though is “The Sniper”.  I allow PC snipers to take the shot against unaware NPCs. But in the interests of fairness, lethal shots at PCs, always miss the first time, or shoot the NPC the Hero was talking to, because players need to feel they have a chance. 

[Manic Typist]

On 9/4/2019 at 2:35 PM, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

 Do they somehow lose the ability to Abort because a Cover was declared? 

 

 

...actually, they kind of do. The player was told that their opponent was making an attack against them. If they don't declare Abort before the attack, then they don't get to do it afterward. You can't abort to a Dodge after you know the opponent hit you in the hopes that your DCV will make the difference.

 

Remember, with Cover, the PC has already been hit. It's just damage hasn't been rolled yet.

 

Also, as a general aside... I've only ever played Champions once. I was introduced, have GMed, and with one session exception only ever played NON-supers games. I view equating HERO with supers as erroneous - it's a legacy that's there, but Champions =/= HERO.

 

Though I still do want to build a PC who can survive a fall at terminal velocity and then use it in a game...

[Gnome BODY (important!)]

30 minutes ago, Manic Typist said:

...actually, they kind of do. The player was told that their opponent was making an attack against them. If they don't declare Abort before the attack, then they don't get to do it afterward. You can't abort to a Dodge after you know the opponent hit you in the hopes that your DCV will make the difference.

No, in response to the Cover being declared. 

 

Especially since a Block or Missile Deflection makes zero sense at that time. 

[Vanguard]

On 9/4/2019 at 6:34 PM, Duke Bushido said:

"Combat Luck means it missed me!"

 

Combat luck doesn't mean that.

 

Combat luck is just that, Luck.  It *could* mean the attack missed, it could mean the attack bounced off your armor, it could also mean a myriad of other things, at least that's the way we've always played it.

 

Also, part of the text quoted from 6th Ed (I know you don't play that edition but I honestly think it's just a cut and paste from Dark Champions) "Because Combat Luck depends on a character’s
ability to dodge, block, or otherwise avoid damage, it doesn’t work if the character is asleep, unconscious, or deliberately throws himself in the way of an attack (for example, to save a comrade
from injury). Nor does it protect him from damage in most situations where he deliberately does something he knows will hurt him (such as performing a Move By/Through, both of which
cause him to take some of the damage he does to the target). In some cases Combat Luck won’t apply if the character is Surprised (see 6E1 50); the GM may require a PER Roll or other roll to
determine if the character perceived the attack in time to use his Combat Luck."

 

So Combat Luck isn't some kind of super "i can't be hurt power". It's a power that was mainly designed to give Heroic characters some kind of resistant defense when/if they were ever caught without their body armor.  But it also states that there are circumstances where it won't apply.

 

On 9/5/2019 at 6:35 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

ecause the GM rubs the players' faces in the return of defeated foes because a tricky lawyer got a "not guilty" or Stronghold was nowhere near strong enough to hold them.  Because the Hero fires off a low-power Blast that plinks off the unknown villain's defenses, and that villain then fires a massive counterattack that Stuns the Super.  "HA HA - the press runs humiliating stories of your crushing defeat.  All your PRE attacks are -3d6 for the next month due to this negative press."  Because EVERY KO'd villain gets a recovery, gets back up and blasts the heroes in the back, so "screw honour and hit him one more time when he's down, just to be sure".

 

If that's how a GM deals with things like that then it's time to find a new GM.

 

On 9/5/2019 at 6:35 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Looking at the source material, how often has MightyMan heard "Back off, buddy, or I'll shoot Nellie, here, in the head" [Nellie is Covered by Gunman] and thought "Hey, I'm virtually certain to win the DEX roll-off anyway, and even if I don't, a handgun can't do enough BOD to kill Nellie in one shot anyway, so my teammate with Healing powers can save her."?

 

And if you have a player that things and/or does this, then that's metagaming and the player needs a talking to.  We've had a few players like this and yes, we've talked to them about it.  However, it's been a long time since we've player a Super Heroic campaign so it's become less of an issue due to the the limited powers/abilities of the players.

 

On 9/5/2019 at 6:35 AM, Hugh Neilson said:

Now, I would classify the hero doing something with no visible cues, that the attacker could in no way expect, as being a potential "distraction" that provides the potential for breaking cover.  Maybe that should require a Stealth roll, or an Acting roll, against the attacker's PER roll (with bonuses if the power he wants to use has Invisible Power Effects).  The attacker already took a penalty to OCV, hit anyway and delayed his damage.  It seems reasonable that this should not mean "no problem - the target can easily avoid the attack".

 

Which leads me to this.  Since we've mainly played Heroic games for the last little while, Covered comes up a bit in them.  Whether it's us Covering the bad guy or the Bad Guy covering one of us or a hostage.  We've always played that there must be some kind of distraction to break the cover.  If no one can think of anything, then the Coverer has us dead to rights and pretty much gets their way.  

 

But we get them back on the rematch.

 

On 9/5/2019 at 10:35 AM, Scott Ruggels said:

 

Bad GMing, or Genre Tropes, it's hard to tell, but I got so sick of this, especially the revolving door, that I just walked away from "Four Color Adventures" eventually, sticking with Spies and Mercenaries, and sliding comfortably into gritty, low magic, high politics, fantasy. Hero is just that flexible.  Most of those Genre tropes were artifacts of the Comics Code enforcing a moral certitude upon the publishers, before the government did. I had a philosophical opposition to the existence of the comics code, but it was there before I was born, and I only got interested in comics again after it was gone.

 

Wait . . . the comics code is gone? Or did it get replaced by the Governments Code? 

 

[Duke Bushido]

6 hours ago, Vanguard said:

 

Combat luck doesn't mean that.

 

 

 

Bull snuckles.

 

I'm not going to have yet another conversation about this, so here's my once and done:

 

The write up specifically says its a build to represent being missed using a mechanic (armor ) that does nothing until after you've been hit _and_ the damage has been rolled.

 

 

If that's not enough, look at the usage:

 

I've got no flack jacket; I've got no hard plates-- Hell, I've got nothing but well-tanned pecs while my nips remain embarrassingly pink....   Imma jump me inna some combats!

 

Here I go, nothing but but a set of cotton boxers and my reliable ol' revolver.

 

 

Oh noes!  Gitted shot!  Point blank!  Inna nekkid chest!     Woo-hoo!  thanks to my "Combat Luck" (and his crap roll) I am unhurt!

 

 

So which is that?  Did it miss?  Or are there painless holes in his torso and lungs filling with damage proof blood?  Maybe his skin got really thick and impenetrable for the briefest of moments, or perhaps pink nipples on tan pecs are one of the secret signs of telekinetic missile deflect---

 

no....  No; it can't be Missile D, because if it was Missile D, he wouldn't have had to both hit _and_ roll damage first......

 

 

Combat luck means it missed.  Rules say so.  Write up says so.  Usage says so.     Take away any form of protection _except_ Combat Bull Snuckles then explain why the attack that clearly should have left him serious impaired did _not_ leave him seriously impaired   (Amazing!  The used the Kennedy Bullet, only it's been re-trained to circle you, looking for an existing opening, make all the twists and turns necessary to pop harmless out of which ever was the other end of your digestive tract, then fall to the ground!) or even touched, given the right values for damage rolls and Combat Bull Snuckles, 

 

or accept that you have to tell they guy who just finished rolling his damage:  "you missed, Tony.  Oh, and the rules say I should bitch slap you with Volume 2 when you aren't looking."

 

 

[Duke Bushido]

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

No, in response to the Cover being declared. 

 

Especially since a Block or Missile Deflection makes zero sense at that time. 

 

 

Pre-roll them, too.  Then when the covering guy decides it's time to assign his pre-hit damage, you can assign your pre-dodged miss or your pre-approved deflect.

[Hugh Neilson]

10 hours ago, Manic Typist said:

 

 

...actually, they kind of do. The player was told that their opponent was making an attack against them. If they don't declare Abort before the attack, then they don't get to do it afterward. You can't abort to a Dodge after you know the opponent hit you in the hopes that your DCV will make the difference.

 

Remember, with Cover, the PC has already been hit. It's just damage hasn't been rolled yet.

 

One possible way of viewing Cover is that the attacker's use of Cover turns his attack into a "super-abort" - he can make the attack (roll the damage) at any time, in priority to any other Abort by the target, unless he is distracted/surprised.  The question then becomes what kind of actions can surprise the attacker, breaking the cover.

[Scott Ruggels]

8 hours ago, Vanguard said:

 

Wait . . . the comics code is gone? Or did it get replaced by the Governments Code? 

 

 

There was an issue of Spider-Man, dealing with a character's drug abuse. The comics code prohibited the depiction of the use of drugs. Stan Lee thought the story was important so he appealed. The appeal was denied, so he took the seal off the cover, and printed it anyway. The public didnt notice. The seal stayed up for a time but concurrently other publishers arose, like Pacific Comics (With titles like Groo The Wanderer, and John Sable Freelance), Eclipse Comics, and others that never bothered with the comics code. The code was an artifact of Newsstand distribution. With the shift of comics to comic shops, there was no longer a need for the code. 

 

[Manic Typist]

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

No, in response to the Cover being declared. 

 

Especially since a Block or Missile Deflection makes zero sense at that time. 

It sounds like you're in violent agreement with me, since that is an alternative way of stating what I said.

 

You asked, after no one suggested this was the case, if PCs can't Abort when Cover is in play. I noted that, once a Cover is successful, that is the case... because that means the attack has happened, and the standard rules for Aborting apply (as always).

 

That is all.

[Hugh Neilson]

If we accept that a Cover is a "super-Abort", perhaps the Cover simply becomes "I Cover" - my attack action is used up, but I can take my attack, with the -2 OCV, penalty and only on that target, at any future point, with no other actions available to the target before my attack rolls to hit.