Ninja-Bear

Years ago I saw something like this question and really, unless your hidebound about the rules (which I can be to my own annoyance) the VPP for skills is really the easiest way to go.

Well this past weekend I got to run the Battle in Christopher Park. My brother used a heroic version of Powerhouse straight out of the book and I used an updated (to 4th) version of Brick from the Viper Nest booklet. And it was a tough battle! I still can’t get my brother to understand that he almost stunned Brick. The version I used has a whopping 38 CON!

That’s neat but I’d be glad just to have the tile pieces!

I’ve just caught Powers themselves have changed too. I just updated Brick from (I think 1st because he’s on the pamphlet of Viper’s Nest) to 4th and things like DI and Growth have extra benefits that 4th doesn’t provide. Growth adds to running for free. Also DI adds to Con although the extra STR from DI doesn’t add to leap.

When I get the chance I’mll look at Combined Attack but my gut says that Hugh is wrong. Combined was designed to allow two different attacks to he fired off at the same time else why is there also Multi-attack which does allow you to fire off the same attack more than once? Also Combined Attack is an optional maneuver right? So the GM just says no? -Right? And I noticed that we as a group hafe seem to have gotten away from the rule about Sfx. That in defining a sfx you may get minor benefits and drawbacks. As Lonewolf pointed out, having 32 pistols should allow a typical human to fire all 32 at once. In fact when I have allowed Two weapon attacks, I limited them to two attacks only. It limits rolls and the drag on the game extra rolls can cause.

I got two points for you Hugh and honestly and either one really are unsatisfactory. 1) Even though they are distinct I feel they still fall under Multi-attack. Multi-attack uses the same mechanical attack in each strike. I guess Steve considered HKA and RKA as being different enough. 2)Well by default a Viper agent who successfully blocks Ogre takes no damage nor knockback. (I had to explain this to a friend). Does it make sense? Depending how “realistic” you see your game, no. (I told him that there are ways to deal with that.) IOW, I really don’t know. Its a wrinkle in the rules. I also allow you to grab an agent and throw him into another agent in the same phase which seems to become outlawed in 5th ed. I can’t find that being a no-no in previous editions and I still House Rule that you can anyways.

Check out pg S25 of the BBB. It has some guidelines filled out for sample games. One is for Standard Supers.

Ah, ok. Yeah, typically they do.

Yeah, I am missing because I thought the argument was because of buying the second sai you could then use the multi-attack. Btw, two weapon fighting is neat but it has it problems of reduced DCV. Good question because well I’m not sure either.

So if and that’s a big if, I understand Muti-attack, I can hit the same opponent more in the same phase? If that’s true, I did some very rough math. So say I put on AF x2 (+1/4) on the sai-represent hitting twice with two sais. At 15 ACT pt and with the advantage you’ll be paying 19 ACT so it actually cheaper than the 5pt rule. At 20 act pt then it works out to to an even 5 pt. 30 pts you do get it cheaper as then it goes to 7 pts. Plus Multi-attacks incur a cumulative penalty. So no, the rule itself isn’t abusive

And that’s fine. And what I defined Seeker’s second sai was to have two and if one got disarmed then he has a second one. Now sfx wise, that second one probably be in use as a descriptor but no extra mechanical bonus. For example, I might described them as being crossed when Blocking but no additional DCV unless paid for. Or one sai is in guard postion while the other one strikes. No adding damage, no multi-attack. (Mainly cause I could never figure out the thing and multi-attack always seemed over powered.) As to lending it to Obsidian, why not, in the short term anyways though personally if I bought it as defined in one if the martial supplement, I would only allow the HA to be used unless Obsidian somehow knew how to use a sai or similar weapon. Using those tines to aid in Disarming takes some skill. But lets not forget that that having the second sai being OAF can be used against Seeker also.

I found it. Pg S22 “Playing the Numbers”

Its also reprinted in the BBB.

I was thinking Suppress REC only vs Natural Healing: Body.

@Hugh Neilson, since you don’t like the 5pt doubling rule (which is fair) how then would Seeker’s character buy the second Sai? Would you charge the player full points for a second weapon? Or custom limitation like OAF (-3/4)? Or something else?

If memory serves me correct, in the beginning of Classic Enemies, Scott Benny does list a rough guideline of how the villains are built. Since most were 4th ed updates, they held fairly close to the reasonable character suggestions listed in 3rd ed. Whereas in CKC, Steve Long modified characters up (and down I think) in power levels and also origins, for example Vibron is now an alien.

As soon as I posted, I thought of your point of clarity of the rule. Yes what is implied I believe but should’ve made clear that the doubling doesn’t add to the doubled power. I.e. Seeker having two Sais doesn’t give him a +6D6 HA he still does +3D6 HA but could lose one. So the same way that the armor example. You shouldn’t be able to add two pieced of armor together to get tougher armor. You lose one ring and you still have the same amount of armor Def. That should be explained a little better.

I really don’t think that its explained poorly. I was a way for weapon users (I think primarily) to cheaply pay for an addition weapon. It does follow the logic of buying vehicles and Bases. I mean we can go back to having a weird OAF (-3/4) I believe this was suggested Dark Champions 4th ed. The OAF is reduced because with Seeker if someone Disarms his Sai, he has another one or someone would have to do a Sweep Disarm to remove both in a single phase. I see this doubling as allowing a player to buy a redundant power to “make sense”. That is the spirit of the rule. And anything that goes against the spirit of the rule shouldn’t be allowed. Isn’t that Hero 101?

I like the doubling rules When used in reason. Seeker should have have 2 sais not one. However Hugh all you showed that a rule can be abused past its intended use. So how is that really different than than any power in Hero System?

Would not the Hero rule of Round in character’s favor apply? I would think so.

That’s an interesting idea. I like it.

So you are thinking Speedsters are overpowered?

The 3rd ed Champions has a section labeled Reasonable Characters. I’m glad that @assault got to post this.

@Word Sensei 515, who should have a 12D6 Kick? I’m not sure who you are referring too.

Well I had player in Star Wars D6 who burnt character rolls like candy and still couldn’t make his target number and its still just memorable. I’ve also made bad rolls where a HAP really would’ve helped. Jumping over a person and landing on a small child really ruined that game. GM later admitted that that was something he shouldn’t allow to happen. Still memorable but for the wrong reasons. The point of the game is to have fun and a little bit of fantasy fulfillment correct? Correct use of HAPs doesn’t take away from it.