FreeDice

Re: Eberron Hero

If she doesn't' date=' she damn well should.[/quote']

 

Avast, ye necromancer!

Re: New STUNx Column for Hit Location Table (Help w/ Math)

I think the problem is that the issue was presented in the form of "I want to make the hit location table have the same' date=' or similar, average to the 1d3 roll" rather than "I want the hit location table to result in combat working more like X". What is the desired result in game, rather than the desired math?[/quote']

 

This is the desired result. I'm worried that implementing an optional rule (Hit Locations) into a campaign that has yet to use them will alter the amount of damage characters are doing and is done to them. By bringing hit location more in line with 1d3, it will make the characters equally viable as they were before the implementation.

Re: New STUNx Column for Hit Location Table (Help w/ Math)

Basically that chart is fine and dandy for a Champions campaign where people throw tons of Normal attacks, and having a 16% chance of getting a x5 multiplier was quite unbalanced for some campaigns.

 

In a normals game where you are throwing avg dc 4-7 killing attacks, if you make the average Stun mult x2 it makes the combats longer and MUCH bloodier. I really don't want to go into it again. Just Assume DC3 throws 3.5 body on average and then multiply your stun mults out with rDef values of 3, then again with rDef values of 8.

 

So if the above chart is for Champions, then good for you and have fun with it. If you are going to inflict it on a normals campaign you will find that it is quite broken.

 

Tasha

 

PS This is discussed in old threads talking about what we want to see in 6e powers, and again in one of the many 6e threads that came after 6e shipped. I (and others) explained it in nauseating detail there.

I'd like to see this - I've done searches. Any chance you have a link?

Re: New STUNx Column for Hit Location Table (Help w/ Math)

Actually, multiplying the multiple of each roll (on 3d6) by the related Stun Multiple, I get an average of 1.7083.

 

If I drop Head to x3, bump Arms to x2, Shoulders to x2, Chest to x2, Stomach to x2 and I get an average of 2.0787. That also brings the range to the same 1 - 3, and seems to space out the 2's and 1's better. 3's are great hits (head or stomach) and 1's are bad (hands and feet) with almost all hits getting a x2 multiple. Of course, only Head and Vitals beat 3 in the old chart, and most hits were 2x or 3x. There's only so much you can do if you only have three choices. I suppose we could use halves, but that makes the math more of a nuisance.

Wonder how I screwed that math up. Thanks!

Re: New STUNx Column for Hit Location Table (Help w/ Math)

For those who want to use the Hit Location table for random hits (as opposed to those who want to use it for called shots, although I guess it could be used for that), I've created a new STUNx Column for the Hit Location table, to be used so that characters created for games without Hit Location rules are balanced against characters created for campaign with them.

Head (3-5): x3 STUN

Hands (6): x1 STUN

Arms (7-8): x2 STUN

Shoulders (9): x2 STUN

Chest (10-11): x2 STUN

Stomach (13): x2 STUN

Vitals (13): x3 STUN

Thighs (14): x2 STUN

Legs (15-16): x2 STUN

Feet (17-18): x1 STUN

If I did my math correctly, this adds up to an average STUN multiplier of 2.07 for a Killing Attack in campaigns using random Hit Locations, which is comparable for the average STUN multiplier for campaigns that are not using them. Suggestions welcome.

Re: New STUNx Column for Hit Location Table (Help w/ Math)

The stun multiplier on the hit location chart and the killing attack stun multiplier have NOTHING to do with each other. Never have. This has been covered several times on these boards.

My bad. I tried taking a peak for an answer through some old posts and through Google, but didn't find anything. Would you happen to have a link to something? I'm considering using Hit Location rules for regular combat (instead of called shots) in my next campaign (never have before), and I'm just curious what if any rebalancing I'll need to do from the basic rules (which assume an average of 2x STUN to Killing Attacks) to that optional rule (~3x STUN to Killing Attacks). Thank you!

Re: Critical and Altered Maths

I've been thinking about this aspect of RPGs lately. I'm thinking of making critical success capability an add on to powers and skills using the rules of power creation. Does anyone have a model of creating a "critical" success capability as a power?

I'd be interested to see what you come up with, because I've been toying with the idea of making an "Improved Critical" adder, so that some spells and weapons are more likely to be "critical" than others.

Alrightay...

I noticed that the Hit Location STUNx Column (and possibly the whole table) hadn't been updated from 5th to 6th. But the amount of STUN by a Killing Attack had changed a bit.

The average KA in 5th did 2.66 STUN per BODY. (16/6, or 1d6-1, minimum 1)

The average KA in 6th does 2 STUN per BODY. (1/2d6)

The average attack using a random roll on the STUNx Column on the Hit Location table does 2.86 STUN per BODY.

Math=

 

(.0046 x 5) + (.014 x 5) + (.028 x 5) + (.046 x 1) + (.069 x 2) + (.097 x 2) + (.116 x 3) + (.125 x 3) + (.125 x 3) + (.116 x 4) + (.097 x 4) + (.069 x 2) + (.046 x 2) + (.028 x 2) + (.014 x 1) + (.0046 x 1) = 2.8656

That's only a slight increase in 5th (+0.2 STUN per BODY), but almost an extra STUN per BODY in 6th.

I was wondering if someone with a better head for probabilities might be able to craft a STUNx Column for the Hit Location table that averaged the STUN a little closer to the non-Hit Location average of 2 STUN per BODY.

1) I like critical hits.

2) I'm planning on running my next session with variant die rolls for the HERO System. I'm playing with some people with d20 exclusive experience, and I want to make things easy for them. One of the things I'm doing is "higher is better," to keep it in familiar territory.

So, for example, a skill is 10+ instead of 11-. Et cetera.

The math has been coming along nicely, except, in critical hits.

Critical hits require "making a roll by more than 1/2." This doesn't work when small numbers are bad and big numbers are good, and the math doesn't work when the roll is more than double.

3) Any thoughts on how to make critical hits work when the math is "more is better"?

4) For reference, 6E2 118.

Re: power usable once per hour

Here's how it could be done with Charges.

 

47 Multiform (350 Character Points in the most expensive form) (70 Active Points); 32 clips of 1 Continuing Charge lasting 1 Hour (Increased Reloading Time: 1 Hour; -1/2) - END=[1 cc]

Isn't reloading an "active" action - if it takes an hour to reload, doesn't the character have to sit there for an hour and reload? Or am I misinformed?

Re: FANTASY HERO Sneak Peek #1: The Cover!

This kind of stewardship causes my love for DOJ to swell. Thank you! Looks incredible.

Let's say I wanted to be able to knock people down in a Heroic game (down, not back), but without the need to do lots of damage. A "Presence Attack" trick or a some form of Air Magic.

I'm assuming I'd build it with Telekinesis, but I don't have HSMA yet, so I don't know if there are any throw at a distance rules I'm not thinking of.

The following is an example from page 29 of the APG:

Example: Brainstorm wants to use his Persuasion to convince a guard to let him go. He decides to mentally enhance his Persuasion with 40 points worth of his Mind Control, giving him +4 to his Persuasion 12- (total 16-). ... The GM rules that the guard will try to resist the attempted persuasion with an EGO Roll. His base roll is 11- and he has 5 points of Mental Defense. This adds to his EGO Roll, giving him a 16- roll to resist Brainstorm’s Persuasion roll.

Is this correct? Without using his Mind Control, Brainstorm has a 12- Persuasion against the Guard 11- EGO, effectively giving him +1 in the Skill versus Skill Contest. When he uses the Mind Control, his 16- Persuasion goes up against a 16- EGO + Mental Defense, netting him +0 in the Skill vs. Skill Contest.

Brainstorm does worse when he uses his Mind Control? Is that a typo or is there rationale I'm missing?

Thank you so much!

Re: Cover Fire ability. Comments?

Why not just use the rules for Suppression fire?

Re: 6th Edition Mega-Scale and Movement

There isn't one. However' date=' this is what Minimum Purchase rules are for. See 6e1 pg. 119. AFAIK there is no reason not to buy the minimum purchase amount of base movement if you want to put Megascaled on it.[/quote']

 

Missed that rule. Even uses Teleportation as an example. Thank you!

Re: 6th Edition Mega-Scale and Movement

So, if you're building a combat power, there's value in movement greater than 1m, but so far, there's no reason for non-combat movement.

Is there a reason to by a movement power at a value greater than 1m if it has MegaScale?

1m Teleportation, 1m=10,000km MegaScale (+2) = 3 Active Points.

10m Teleportation, 1m=1,000km MegaScale (+1 3/4) = 27 Active Points

Since Teleportation allows you to go anywhere in between the minimum and maximum, is there a reason to buy it at a greater value than 1m?

Did 5th limit the incremental increase? I can't remember and don't have FREd handy.

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

Woot! Car analogy, I'm NOT the only one that uses it.

 

~Rex

Oh, sorry. Did I miss a post where you say the same thing? My bad.

Re: Who is sticking to 4th or 5th Ed HERO

I think both sides have valid arguments, especially when looked at from an economics perspective. Rather than food, look at it from a car perspective:

Some people go out and buy a car, mostly through a loan. They make their payments every month, and when they pay off their car, they go get another one. It's not really something they own, but a "driving utility" (utility as in electric, gas, water, trash) that they pay for.

Other people go out and buy a car. They own it. When it breaks, they fix it. When it dies, they fix it for a lot of money. It's their car, it's an object that they own. They don't want to spend money every month.

RPGs are the same way. Some people see the value (especially HEROphiles) in buying one book, and owning all the rules they'll ever need. A new edition, no matter how useful, thwarts that value. Others see RPGing as a hobby, wherein you buy a new book every other month to keep up.

The former is a valid methodology, and I respect and support it. The latter (how I operate) is the foundation of a successful role-playing company. I guarantee that we'll see HERO 7th in ~10 years, assuming we're fortunate enough to still have DOJ. That's how these companies work - they have to keep selling products. And new genre books don't help as much as new editions - no Cyber HERO or Galaxy of Intrigue or book about Faerun is going to be anywhere near as successful as a new edition.

4th Edition, 5th Edition and FrankenHERO Players - I salute you. Your custom tailoring and house-ruling and rules-waving represents the pinnacle of what the HERO System represents - a toolkit, not just a system. I support your decision, and wish you and your campaigns the best of luck. But the HERO System marches on, as it inexorably must, and those of us who can afford to do so will update with the times.

So, the rules state that characters normally shouldn't buy Ranged STR, they should buy Telekinesis.

However, Telekinesis is costed out as as STR with a +1/2 Advantage, and with the separation of primary and figured characteristics, Ranged STR isn't necessarily broken.

While I would have a character who wants his/her STR Ranged all the time buy Telekinesis, I'm wondering if, a character with a Variable Advantage STR (special effect defined as magically infused fists) should be allowed to put Ranged on his/her STR.

Thoughts? Experiences?

Re: Killing Damage in 6e

of course a 1 pip pen knife in the hands of a 60 str brick now does 4d6+1 killing

Well, only if the GM is a fool. Because if the GM is no fool, then they might limit the damage of a weapon to twice the weapon's damage. ;-)

6E2, page 99.

Re: DC Guidelines versus DEF Guidelines

I loves me some game balance, so I tend to take a little more complicated route. First I look at the likelihood of hitting a given DCV (say, 8). Then I look at average STUN against a standardized DEF (say, 20). Multiply the probability of hitting by average damage to get a probable damage/attack figure. Multiply that by SPD and you get my preferred balaccing calculation/"Rule of X".

 

So an OCV 8 (62.5% chance to hit), DC 10 (15 avg STUN), SPD 5 character would have a "Rule of X" figure of 46.875. I tend to look for something around 50 in a game like that, so this would be fine.

Followed the math. But. How do you figure when the DCV/DEF changes? How did you come up with an 8 OCV/DC 10? Why not an 11 OCV, DC 12, SPD 5? (90.74% x 22 = 99)?

I'm just curious - do you define the average DCV/DEF and make the Rule of X fit that?

Thanks.

Re: Question about keeping equipment balanced in heroic campaigns?

Well, I think it depends on the nature of your campaign. A low-magic fantasy campaign will likely be limited by Encumbrance - let characters have almost all they can afford, and they likely can't hurt game balance, because weapons and armor are heavy.

Whereas in a scifi campaign, it'll be a bit harder - stuff is light, and technology can do a lot more.

And then you add in magic, and it all gets knocked out of whack.

What kinda campaign are you running?

Re: DC Guidelines versus DEF Guidelines

In Heroic campaigns you'd usually get equipment for free though' date=' which in fantasy campaigns would amount to 1-8 additional rDEF while it is worn, making those balances more reasonable.[/quote']

 

Wait, am I supposed to be adding the DEF and the rDEF together? (Adding them in the Guidelines. I know how to add them in combat.)

Re: DC Guidelines versus DEF Guidelines

A character with 10 DEF and 18+ CON seems to me to be not too far out of line for a Very Powerful Heroic game.

I agree - I'm not saying it's out of line. In a Very Powerful Heroic game, I would certainly expect to see some 10 DEF, 18+ CON characters. In a Very Powerful Heroic Fantasy HERO Game, I'd expect fighters and paladins and clerics, even rogues and rangers, to be in that range.

But a Rogue might have a 10 DEF and a 17 CON. Respectable numbers, overall. And yet, the average attack rolling an average number of STUN, would Stun the character. To me, playing a character like that, means that half the time I get hit I get stunned. That seems... odd.

I can do it with the other tiers, as well. A Standard Heroic character, with an average total PD of 8, gets hit with an average attack doing 5.5 DC (I know DCs can't be halved, but I'm trying to do some long term averages). 5.5 DCs x 3.5 average STUN = 19 STUN and change. That means that any character with a CON of 10 or less will be Stunned more often than not. I recognize that plenty of characters will have higher CON values, but many won't. If you're not planning on being in the forefront of combat, you may want to save those points for magic or for sniper skills or whatever. And then, when you do get hit, half the time or more you have to spend an action to Recover from being Stunned.

I realize that there are optional rules in the 6E2, but I'm just surprised the values in the toolkit "as is" come out to characters being Stunned half the time.