Sean Waters

This is long. Sorry. It’s written from the perspective of a Champions type game, but I think the issues have broad applicability, whatever the genre. I think it would be useful to have more discussion of the thinking behind game mechanics so we’re aware of the issues they can present and how we can use them to heighten playability. I’ve never really been a fan of the Killing Attack mechanic in Hero, even after the 6e changes, but maybe I need to re-evaluate my position. I decided to run identical characters against each other, but one using a normal attack and one using an equivalent DC KA. The results were interesting. I’ll get to them later. I used Hardpoint (high Resistant Defence) and Maelstrom (High Normal Defence) from 6E2 (and 5E) who had three battles each against themselves and I used a generic character with 12/24 Defences and 12/40 Body/Stun who had four battles. In total that was 25 rounds of combat ranging from a 4 phase battles to a 1 phase KO. I ignored rolling to hit as the characters were identical and I ignored Stunning (although, as it happened, that would not have affected any of the results) and Knockback. I assumed combat started on segment 1 so no one got a PS12 recovery, and both participants just used the one attack. The problem, in theory, with KAs mechanically is that they use far fewer dice than Normal Attacks which means much greater variability, in theory. I say ‘in theory’ because I was overly concerned that you’d get some really big Stun results for KAs, but over 25 phases of combat I got one each of 51, 48, 45 and 42 and the rest of the results were under 30 which does not seem unreasonable. By comparison the highest 12d6 normal Stun result was 56. The problem, in theory, with the ‘realism’ of KAs is that I’d imagine that having a life-threatening injury would hurt more, but then I suppose it is Heroic to ignore such injuries and soldier on. The problem with KAs in the game is that Body damage takes a long time to recover from and you don’t want characters sitting round in a hospital for most of the game session. You can give characters higher Resistant Defence (although that is a direct nerf to KAs and makes them pointless – so to speak) or, probably far better, access to Regeneration or Healing. Anyway, those results. 10 battles is not an enormous sample and different builds could have yielded very different results, but I think it is enough to draw some conclusions from. Of the 10 battles, there was one draw (where they knocked each other out simultaneously) and the rest were all wins for the Normal Attack. In one instance the Normal Attack Character was reduced to negative Body on the last attack and in another the Normal Attack Character was in negative Body on the penultimate attack, but negative Body doesn’t prevent you acting (you just bleed). That was not the combat with the draw. In every combat the Normal Attack Character lost Body (final totals were 10, 9, 7, 6, 6, 5, 3, 1, -6, -7) which meant between 2 and 21 Body were lost and in only 3 of the battles the Stun of the Normal Attack character was less than double figures. That means about 9 Body lost on average (8.8 actually) which would take most characters between 2 and 4 weeks to heal (assuming a REC in the 10-20 range) or 1-2 weeks of hospital care. That’s a long time, and that’s just a one-on-one fight. Very few of the characters would have survived a second fight without healing first. So, in summary, the biggest problem with Killing Attacks seems to be managing the consequences, which seems like an issue of scenario and character design: the team could have a character with high resistant Defences and/or Regeneration to tackle incoming KAs or access to Healing either through a team member or some other method. There are some rule tweaks you could make to change things though. 1. Track wounds individually. When you take Body damage, keep a note of how much each lot of Body damage was as well as reducing current Body. When you heal, each wound heals simultaneously which will (usually) substantially reduce overall healing time. 2. Body as a buffer. Body damage is considered to be scrapes and bruises – painful and doesn’t recover as quickly as Stun but not incredibly long lasting. When you finish a combat and are able to rest for a couple of hours (or whatever period is appropriate in your game) you immediately recover all your Body except any negative Body, which you keep a track of separately. This negative Body has to heal at the normal rate. For example, in a combat a 12 Body character is reduced to -3 Body. After a rest they are back to 9 Body (12-3) and they have to heal that at REC/month. If they are in another combat and are reduced to -5 body they can recover back to 4 Body (12-3-5) and have to recover 8 Body (or 3 Body and 5 Body if you also use individual wounds) at the normal rate. Once you get to -Body, you die. 3. Body as Bruising. As well as or instead of the above, you can consider each point of Body taken as Bruising. Until you recover you start every combat with your current Stun reduced by an amount equal to the 2x Body damage you have taken. You can recover from this Bruising at REC/day (even if you have not fully healed the Body damage, but additional Body damage does add to the Bruising total). There’s obviously lots of ways you can deal with these issues if, indeed, you consider them issues. What do you do?

I don't see the problem. If there's two house bricks on a table, can you pick them both up as a single telekinetic grab? You could as a non telekinetic grab. You could grab two opponents with a normal grab, so why not with a TK grab? There's penalties. If probably require them to be adjacent to each other, or say least close. Then there's the two opponents, one grab. Say both opponents are 30 STR and you've got a 40 STR TK, if they're both in a single grab, why not allow them to combine STR and effectively be STR 35? I mean, you can do what you want, but I don't see how these suggestions are game breaking and they allow for more flexibility in gameplay which has to be a good thing.

Flight does not allow you to stop instantly. There's the acceleration (5m/m) thing. Which is really unhelpful. It isn't as simple as that though? Most 'brick' characters don't have gravity control. Damage avoidance shouldn't be metagamed, should it?

Page 295, Book 1 A character with Telekinesis can use it to Grab multiple people in successive Phases — one person in his first Phase, a second in his next Phase, a third in his next Phase, and so on. He’s not restricted to only using the Telekinesis on one person at a time, or to the number of persons he could Grab using his own limbs. Of course, he has to pay END for each separate use of Telekinesis. That answers that one then. Given that you can definitely grab multiple opponents I'd probably allow a multi-attack. Given that is one use of TK I would only charge you END for one use but I would allow the grabbed targets to combine STR to break free. Seems balanced. Like one big hand rather than lots of little ones. You may decide not though. Matter for you.

I would not build an invisible attack with an obvious focus as that would be foolish but if someone else did I'd just treat it as any other invisible attack with the advantages that implies and, more to the point, they have paid points for.

You can't be too carful. CAreful. Careful. Hello Doc

Well, no, the way the OP defines it either immunity will stop it. It is OR, as stated by the OP. It couldn't really be AND: I certainly wouldn't say that 'many, characters have both and I would say there's not enough characters that are likely to have immunity to both heat and cold to make it a valid NND condition. If the damage is caused by the shock of the rapid transition and you are ignoring one half of the transition there's going to be no shock, so the whole attack fails.

As you've defined it, if she had LS: Cold, she takes no damage, despite the vulnerability to heat. Maybe the lack of hot/cold contrast negates much of the attack and the cold part nullifies the heat, at least in her case.

The problem here is that falling damage is silly. 30d6? Falling off a tall building is really going to do more damage than Grond pushing his strength with a haymaker? I think not. Hero lacks a consistent approach to damage, meaning that we have to come up with either cheap but tricksy solutions or really expensive ones to what is (or generally should be) a niche problem. Superheroes (and non-superheroes, for that matter) often survive long falls in the subject matter, even if real people don't - but then a normal taking 15d6 damage or 30d6 damage is going to be just as dead. The reason falling is very dangerous is not because of the impact of you on the ground but because of the impact of your internal organs on the inside of you when you hit the ground. A light creature should take far less damage. so a character with shrinking should be able to reduce their effective falling velocity for damage purposes by the amount their KB is increased by (also the increased KB thing is silly because that isn't how momentum works, at least in atmosphere. If you hit a fly it doesn't shoot 20m across the room. Another time. Creatures with no hit locations (i.e. no differentiated internal organs) should probably take less damage from falling. There's an argument that Stretching should also protect you. Then there's the question of HOW you are surviving a long fall. If it is because you are really tough, then you shouldn't be taking a 'falling damage only' limitation: if someone throws a building at you you're going to be just as resistant. Trouble is that if you can survive even one 30d6 punch we have a terrible case of power inflation. If you are a teleporter, the 'no relative velocity' trick works well. I'm not sure about using flight because it is not instantaneous: turning flight on or off does not instantaneously stop your current movement and buying enough increased acceleration/deceleration to get you to instantly stop is going to get expensive and silly. Technically 'no turn mode' will allow you to change vertical movement to horizontal movement instantly, thus preventing contact with the ground, but it is not going to stop you moving. Anyway, if you can fly, why fall at all? Probably the most appropriate superpower is Leaping, but again the rules are silly. You wouldn't actually accelerate after you have left the ground, but you would decelerate to your apex point and why do you need DOUBLE the vertical leaping to arrest your fall (you're already halving your Leap for going up): being able to leap 60m straight up should arrest a terminal velocity fall. If you have 'no gravity effects', does that mean you only (only ! ha!) need 60m of leaping? You don't need to be completely immune to falling damage to look good (it's unlikely you'll be taking falling damage every phase), you just need enough protection that you aren't going to pass out or be stunned or at least not go SPLAT! So, let's not worry about total immunity, let's look at what we already have in the toolkit. 75% damage reduction changes 105 Stun and 30 Body into 26 Stun and 7 Body. Probably a bit less as you will have other defences, presumably, so, for a superhero, maybe 20 Stun and 2 Body after all defences. I'm not a fan of Damage Reduction though. I don't think it is a power we would have in Hero as it is not really a defence but rather a situational stat multiplier. We can talk about that elsewhere. Personally I think falling damage should be more like velocity/3 DCs, possibly Armour Piercing (which would mean that hardened defences are particularly effective against falling damage - something a super is more likely to have). A terminal velocity fall would be velocity fall will do 20DCs damage: more than enough to kill all but the most outrageously lucky normal instantly, and enough to seriously shake most supers but not put them out of the fight. Using Breakfall, the roll shouldn't be distance dependent but should be (something like) reduce the damage by 1d6 if you make the roll and another 1d6 for each point you make it by.

There is no right answer, it depends on your game and your group. You can play Steampunk as 'slightly above average normals' with special equipment or as fully fledged superheroes, depending on what you want. What I'd do is reverse engineer it. Think up a character concept, build the character work out how much it costs, round to the nearest 50 or 25 and give everyone the same points. It also depends on what threats you want them to face. If they are going to be facing a cunning criminal gang robbing a bank using a clockwork mole, I'd probably go for 50 or 100 points plus free equipment, whereas if I wanted them to face the menace of the city-smashing Steam Titan I'd probably make them steampunk themed superheroes and give them 400 points.

I'm not sure it does. 6E1 358 USABLE AS ATTACK modifiers:can grant power to one recipient, recipient need not be willing, grantor controls power, grantor pays END for power, recipient must be within reach to receive power, recipient must remain within LOS of grantor Value: +1¼ If you also needed to also buy some UOO it would be at least +1 1/2. I appreciate that the cost is the same as base UOO plus 1, but then the cost of AoE (Radius) is the same as cumulative plus armour piercing and autofire. I'm not sure that establishes a principle. Also, see below, but if UAA was a part of UOO then you definitely could grant the power to yourself as a +0 because that is one of the modifiers you can 'buy' for UOO. You are right, but, like much in the overlong and rambling 6th edition that makes no sense. If I have a Blast power, can I not use it on myself? I might not want to, but it is an attack and it would work just fine. Not being able to use the 'base power' is an unnecessary and inconsistent injunction doubtless inserted to counter some perceived but unlikely abuse. Sure you'd need to use the advantages and such and pay full END for the real cost, but where its the possible harm in being able to use a UAA power on yourself? It just means you have to stick it in a MP with a power without the advantage which is a completely unnecessary build complication.. I'm pretty sure this sort of thing is why I don't play Hero much any more. Fine if you are standing on the edge of the hole but the example power is ranged, so as soon as the target is 2m deep you lose LOS and the power stops, shallower if they are crouching. Again, what is the point of this? I'm sure I could think of some convoluted situation where it would be a problem, but that is what GMs are for. Anyway it stops, or at least confuses, some perfectly legitimate builds. What if I wanted to UAA flight someone and include Uncontrolled so I can just switch off their gravity and they float away? Does Uncontrolled (does not need LOS) trump UAA (does need LOS)? They are both specific rules. It is just that one of them is completely unnecessary because Constant powers (Flight, for example) DO need LOS to keep working anyway. I appreciate you could make a ruling on that, and I can guess what it would be, but you shouldn't have to, and wouldn't have to if the LOS thing was not there in UAA. The point is that Hero is increasingly impenetrable and that makes it less fun. I could almost put up with that if all these arbitrary rules and comments made the game clearer and quicker to play, but that is not what is happening.

OK. It lets you decide who goes first. Whoop-de-do. You don't get more goes, not anymore. I'm not saying that's not useful, I am saying it's not that useful, plus you are ignoring my bit about economies of scale, which was a good bit. If you but 30 DEX and I don't buy any extra, that's 40 point's I've got to whup your ass and if you buy 30 points and I buy 29, that's only 2 point's I've got on you. High DEX is only really useful if it's highest DEX. Sure everyone gets to whale on the slow brick, but that extra 20Pd/20ED is going to help, right? Then Brick takes out one of the opponents because they don't have an extra 20PD and we rinse and repeat. Maybe he takes out the fastest opponent out of spite. Or, right, and this would be a real laugh: you have 30 DEX and 4 SPD and I have 10 DEX and 6 SPD. How we doing now? You hit first, I hit 50% more. Or +2OCV and +2DCV. You get the picture. I accept that Combat Driving and Breakfall are useful, to an extent, in combat, but they are really not so useful out of combat, pretty much by definition. Analyze, Concealment, Deduction, Disguise, Lipreading, Mimicry, Paramedics, Security Systems and Tactics, Acting, Bribery, Charm, Oratory and Persuasion all have serious combat applications (as do Perception and PRE attacks) AND they (and all the other skills derived from INT and PRE) have serious non-combat skills related to Role Playing. Great, you picked the lock but set the alarm off. Now they know we're here. As for taking down a suicide bomber in a shopping mall, the reason snipers go first isn't because they are are so quick and champing at the bit, it is because someone else is keeping the suicide bomber talking while they line up the shot. 'Decoding a computer countdown' would almost certainly be an INT based task. There's no prizes for doing it quickly, if you don't do it right. As my wife keeps telling me. Sure you can build a way to do the Quicksilver thing, but you'd probably also need indirect and some sort of improved perception. AoE's Running won't get people out of closed rooms unless you want to get mush back and AoE Teleport requires you to be able to shift enough mass. Oh and you'd have to snag everyone because selective, and there's always going to be some bad rolls. Build it and see what it costs: unless it's a slot in a multipower the raw cost will be prohibitive and, even if it is, good luck scraping it in under the real point cap. Anyway, the point about Quicksilver wasn't that fast is not good but that strong can also be just as good: it is situational. Fast is not always better, strong is not always better. More to the point fast is not better twice as much as strong. Also, I suppose, DEX wouldn't really help: the GM is unlikely to say the house blows up on DEX 29 and you are DEX 30 unless they are going it for dramatic effect and to make you feel that ridiculous point investment was worth it. Throwing does not require skill levels. If I can hit you with a punch I can hit you with a rock for probably only -1 or -2. Of it there is a handy telegraph pole (which there often is) at no penalty at all. Or, like I say, a bus. Big penalty, aiming for DCV 3, and it probably does not matter if I miss by a little. Or I don't throw it and just flip it on you. I mean you CAN dive for cover, but that's your next go gone, right, so your fancy DEX isn't going to help with your next attack and anyone can abort to a defensive action whatever their DEX (so DEX is irrelevant to timing) and sure it allows you to dive further, but sometimes you are going to roll a 16 and then you are under a bus, literally. I appreciate that is only 5% of the time, but the dice can be vindictive. Even if you make it, you are prone, and at half DCV and can't use Acrobatics or Breakfall to avoid the half DCV or get up until your next go, so let's hope I'm alone. Maybe I was using Acting to make you think I was going to splat you with a bus but I was just trying to get you to Dive For Cover so you'd be easier to hit. I can throw a bus that far, and the points I put in PRE come in real handy. In combat. If StrongCharacter is under a bus, just shrug it off and carry on. Not that you could lift a bus. To be absolutely clear, I am not saying that a point of DEX is not useful, but I am saying there is absolutely no way it is twice as useful as a point of STR, if anything the opposite, and almost certainly no more useful than a point of INT or PRE. Certainly not in the context of the wider game and not really even in 'just' combat.

Is. No, Krondite is the typical brick. The strength can be used for all the stuff that strength can currently be used for. Lifting, throwing, punching. Breaking stuff right away. You see what happened there? Indescructecon and Shalamar are a strong slow character who can lift stuff and do a lot of damage but only when they can apply leverage and a weak character with lots of MA or HtH Attack. We have a way to do Shalamar, that's easy: low STR, plus extra damage from various sources. We don't really have a way to do Indestructecon other than a custom limitation, which no one is ever going to bother with because Strength is so cheap and because the game does not encourage you to think that way. Admittedly that is because most big muscly characters in comics and movies can hit hard. Still, take a look at a small skilled boxer and a big, strong unskilled thug seeing who is going to win at the fairground punch ball machine (it's the little guy). The point is that, and this tessellates nicely with the bit about DEX being comparatively too expensive, Strength in Hero (and to be fair, most games) is not actually a good representation of what strength is, it is a good representation of our channelled expectations. Plus it is too cheap, which is the real problem here.