MikeyMitchell

Re: TK + a brick = deadly weapon?

If he dosent travel as far that is slowing down' date=' im pretty sure of it.Throwing a Density Increase type and then having hin turn it on mid flight seem like a perfectly valid tactic. Im sure this has happened with collosus on numerous occasions.I dont own or ever intend to own 5th ed, mainly from bad press on these boards regarding several rules and character inflation.[/quote']Such is your choice. I can only tell you that the rules for throwing objects are dependent on mass, and this carries over to the fastball special tactic. You are free to ignore that rule or any other that doesn't fit your concept, as long as you and your players are in agreement.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

They do!?!?!?! Okay' date=' now I see what people are up in arms about. That's absurd. I don't use the CU anyway, just bought the character pack for the purposes of board discussions plus possible "quickie" usage.[/quote']Oops! My bad. It's not Destroyer, it's the Crowns of Krim. Dark Seraph counts them as "As Powerful", and the other Crowns count them as "More Powerful". No less absurd, really, but I wanted to be factually accurate.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

I was going to run a Defender vs Defender probability analysis comparing Standard Effect Normal 12d6 damage to Killing Attack 4d6 with full "lottery"in effect' date=' and just assume (for simplicity) they hit each round. But here's a funny little fact - the way Defender is constructed, he is stunned immediately if hit with a Standard Effect 12d6 blast! So if Normal Defender goes first against KA Defender, he just wins, period, since KA Defender is stunned and never has a chance to recover, and if KA Defender goes first against Normal Defender he has a 45% chance of not stunning Normal Defender. Of course then factoring in the probability of hitting it shifts a bit. But I just thought this was interesting anyway. I was going to take this further but I need to go back to bed.[/quote']And the Champions count as "more powerful" for Dr. Destroyer's Hunted? Does anyone see a problem here?!?

Re: TK + a brick = deadly weapon?

I dont see it printed anywhere that a flying bick with density increase has to slow down.

Re: FYI: why more people aren't playing HERO (rpg.net)

Regarding the ease of use of Hero' date=' you may want to consider pre-packaged settings+rules books, like the "powered by GURPS" line by SJG. You could customize the rules to the setting and provide it in a single book. You could write expansion books to these "powered by Hero" lines, or just let the one book stand on its own.[/quote']This is mildly amusing, considering that, before the 4th Edition, that's exactly what HERO products were. Each genre had its own customized rules specific to the setting.The problem with that setup was that the rules weren't easily transferred between genres. Hence the consolidated rules. I doubt Steve wants to go the reverse direction.

Re: The Truly Evil GM

But the miniatures were GREAT!

Re: Character Sheets

Just wondering what people usually do for character sheets.You've got the sheets exported from HD' date=' but those are unalterable without printing off a new copy every time someone spends experience points. You've also got a traditional sheet, filled out by hand, but with all the advantages and limitations of powers that can get real ugly real quick.How do YOU handle character sheets in your game?[/quote']I have a database I built in FileMaker Pro for doing character sheets. I also use Hero Designer, but mostly just for building powers. I keep the characters in the database because I have other utilities built into it - like combat record sheets, little counters for representing the characters in combat, and so forth. Of course, you do have to print the character sheets out after each alteration, but I don't think you can do anything on the computer that wouldn't require that unless you did away with paper completely.And that's probably not helpful to you, but you did ask.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

Gameplay results are purely anecdotal evidence. The properties of one random number multiplied by another random number is not.But if you are committed to anchoring your arguments in actual game play experience' date=' my contribution is this: Most of the GMs I have played with use villains with considerably more defenses than the published materials would suggest is average. They are dissatisfied with villains that fold like a cheap suit after one solid hit, be it EB or KA. This makes using EBs in play less attractive than KAs.[/quote']And, IMHO, therein lies the problem. I don't care how many 350-pt heroes with 12DC attacks you throw at Dr. Destroyer, more than likely he's going to laugh off any normal attack they can throw at him. That's why the players start resorting to KAs - just to have SOME chance of doing SOMETHING to stop him.That's why I tend to be fond of Damage Reduction for master villain types rather than extraordinarily high defenses. It means they don't fold like a house of cards from a lucky hit, but it also means the average hero has a reasonable chance of contributing something towards bringing them down. I also try to encourage the players to take exotic attacks (like Drains, et al) for those cases where the villain is too heavily defended for normal attacks to be effective.And, yes, I'm aware this is drifting off topic...but it seemed a logical tangent. Is that an oxymoron?

Re: HELP from Italy!

Hello' date='i'm an italian player, 31 years old. I speak a simple english but i'll try to talk with you, guys:i'd like to buy "Champions" caus i like superheroes. I don't know nothing about Hero Games but i've heard a lot of happy impressions from others players years i play.Now i'm going to buy (in Italy) Champions but i don't know what i need to start to play superheroes.Can i play Champions just buying "Champions" the core book or i must buy the HERO SYSTEM core book before?Aren't there the play rules in "Champions" or i find them only in the base HERO SYSTEM core book?Finally, what i need (at minimum) to play Champions?I'm sorry for the poor english. I hope you'll understand me.BYE![/quote']The minimum to play the Champions genre is Fifth Edition Revised. It contains all the rules for the HERO system, and it would be pretty tough to play without it. The Champions genre book is useful; it contains information on how to use the core rules to create a superhero campaign, but it's not strictly required.And don't worry about your English. It's much better than my Italian.

Re: TK + a brick = deadly weapon?

There probably is no real advantage to increasing your mass after being thrown' date=' unless you have been thrown pretty much straight up. The reason for this is that once you change mass it changes your velocity as momentum has to be conserved so you just need to re-calculate the total distance and velocity of the brick once his mass changes.Of course of you've been thrown straight up (or nearly) then you do get to add extra plummetting damage for being heavier, and it will be an advantage assuming that you change mass at or after the apex.[center']NB As far as I am aware this is not an official rule, so if you want to allow the fastball special to get full velocity unaffected by hte mass change, that is fine, it is just not physics, and may well be unbalancing, depending on the total damage you can generate that way.[/center]

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

I don't need Nebula to have a campaign. I do need megavillains (not necessarily Dr. D' date=' but characters to fill that role). Such megavillains can readily be constructed without a power contruct a PC would be denied, albeit at point levels not available to starting (or possibly any) PC's.After 40 years of weekly gaming, a PC could be comparable to Dr. Destroyer. He will never be comparable to Nebula, because of the EDM UAA. As I would deny such a construct to a PC, I don't feel it appropriate to allow it to an NPC. As such, so long Nebula![/quote']You know, this is getting scary. We're in agreement again. ;)Yeah, I first saw Nebula and said, "When Hell freezes over and pigs grow wings and fly through it wearing ice skates." :)I always try to look at things from the perspective of the players, as if I were playing the character and ask, "Would I be genuinely upset if someone did that to my character?" If the answer is "yes", then I don't do it someone else.Before everyone climbs on - that doesn't mean I'm not going to slap the hero with a 20D6 EB once in a while. That's the hazard of combat - but the heroes have defenses against that sort of thing, and the effect is temporary. Being confined in another dimension and subject to torture for all eternity, with no way to get back - that's WAY over the top.

Re: TK + a brick = deadly weapon?

How would I model a power in which one player using TK to throw a brick type character(who increases his density in transit) at an enemy as an attack?What skills/powers would need to be involved?

Re: FYI: why more people aren't playing HERO (rpg.net)

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=169824Before I launched into my first HERO campaign' date=' and it's still a few months off, I thought I'd find out what some of the common objections/pitfalls/turn-offs were regarding HERO, from the people who don't play it. (This is mainly so that I can pre-empt any bogons which I think might befall my group. I know, I'm a "caring" GM, but don't worry, I'm planning to get treatment )Anyway, don't know whether you folks have seen (or care about) the responses from rpg.net, so I thought I'd cross-post, just FYI.The thread does not seem to contatin any ranting or flaming. How nuts is that!Thanks to all for making me feel welcome on these boards,(_8(0)[/quote']Common complaints I've heard are generally in two categories: Complexity and the amount of dice rolling required. New players sometimes are overwhelmed by the large number of options, ways of building Powers, Advantages, Limitations, and so forth. The number of options available in combat sometimes gets them too - all those maneuvers and modifiers. And I've heard groans about, "Geez, I have to roll to hit (after performing a complicated calculation to determine what I need), then I have to roll damage (plus maybe a hit location), then I have to roll Knockback, then I have to roll Knockback damage? Do these people have stock in dice companies or something?" :)Players who are used to an initiative-based combat system, where each character gets an action every "turn", sometimes balk at the SPD chart. That's about it. I'm sure others on the list can contribute.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

{snip}That doesn't mean the KA rules need to change. In many genres' date=' and many Supers games, it's not causing a problem. In games where it is, there are solutions - fixed stun multiple or requring the "reduced stun multiple limitation" seem adequate to me. But saying "The villains can use these more efficient attacks, but you can't" is bound to face some resistance, at least from some players in some games. Just like banning, say, EDM Usable as an Attack, but then letting the villains commonly have and use the construct.[/quote']Hearty agreement. Letting the villains have something the players can't is a REALLY bad idea; it can actually drive players away from the game. And that helps nobody.If a rules change is made, or restrictions are placed on which powers people can have, they have to apply across the board, in the simple interest of fairness if for no other reason.

Re: I love a parade!

And I'm thinking about having Black Harlequin have an Escapade involving one. One of the things it'll involve is driving the horses and a pair of elephants crazy so they stampede' date=' but I don't have stats for either animal.Help?[/quote']Bestiary?

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?Everyone is focusing on whether the STUN damage from a KA is comparable to the equivalent normal attack. The spread on the STUN is greater, the possibility of getting a STUN result is higher, and so forth. Unfortunately, there's still more to the story than that.A Killing Attack's BODY damage bypasses nonresistant defenses. I flipped through a couple of the books today, and I noted several characters who have resistant DEF too low to reasonably prevent their being wounded by a 4D6 KA (the 60-point level being discussed). So, I'm going to disagree slightly with one of Hugh's earlier statements that the BODY damage done by a normal attack vs. a KA is a wash against supers.Before I write up the list, though, this is only a sample, and these types of characters are in the minority. Most of the villains in CKC have resistant DEF high enough to reasonably expect to bounce the BODY damage from a 4D6 KA (especially the master villains). However, there are enough of the other type to take notice.I omitted characters such as Cheshire Cat and Shrinker, whose primary defense is an unusually high DCV. I also omitted characters, such as Masquerade and Mirage, who don't get involved in direct combat if they can avoid it. Still, I came up with several villains who could expect to take BODY damage from a 4D6 KA, but not from a 12D6 normal attack:Character...................................DEF/rDEFScorpia........................................14/8Ultrasonique.................................18/10Binder..........................................17/9Radium........................................18/12Blowtorch.....................................18/12Fenris..........................................21/11Herculan......................................21/6Hornet.........................................12/5Riptide.........................................16/6Thorn...........................................16/6What's my point? That you can't just look at the STUN damage. In each of these cases, the villain would expect, on average, to take 0 BODY from a normal attack when the equivalent KA would inflict (sometimes significant) BODY. In fact, except for Scorpia and Hornet, most of these folks would likely never take BODY damage from a 12D6 normal attack. But they could all expect to take BODY from a 4D6 KA, just about every time.It gets worse when you consider that a 4D6 roll has a shallower bell curve than the 12D6 roll. In other words, the 12D6 roll will tend towards the center more than the 4D6 roll - meaning it's less likely to vary a whole lot from its average value of 12 BODY.Okay, so what? Well, "so what" is the difference between a villain with a few bruises and a hospitalized one. Bad PR for the hero, to say the least.I'm not trying to start another argument. The majority of the villains in CKC, and in the other supers books, can reasonably ignore BODY damage from either KAs or normal attacks. So Hugh was right - especially if we're talking about the likes of Grond, Firewing, or Dr. Destroyer - that the difference in BODY is negligible (if even noticed) most of the time. I just don't want all the folks reading this thread (especially the newbies) to think they can safely buy a KA and unleash it on any super-powered target they want.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

{snip}Can I suggest telling the players ahead of time that if they want to use killing attacks you will be using opponent's with similar attacks. They'll laugh at the x1 stun multipliers then' date=' when they get that x5 at an inconvenient time they are not so cocky. Make players who insist on having any using killing attacks take negative reputations or appropriate hunteds. If you don't like Killing Attacks, there are good ways to discourage their use. If you do like them, don't complain when that 4d6 killing attack hits you in the head.[/quote']Hear, hear! :)Although players may balk that I'm stunting their KAs effectiveness at delivering STUN damage, they have to remember that the door swings both ways. I've had combats where some street punk with a shotgun got a lucky STUN multiplier and put a brick down. To my mind, well out of genre. I wrote it off as a fluke at the time (before I ran the numbers), but now I'm convinced it's a glitch in the mechanics. Capping the top end at a maximum of 4x means that 2D6 KA tops out at 48 STUN instead of 60 - and that, I believe, will make a big difference in minimizing the luck factor.For the other folks who mentioned that randomness is a part of the game and shouldn't be allowed to ruin the story - you're basically right. As GM, you can always ignore or re-roll results that bust your story. However, the randomness associated with attack rolls and normal damage falls within a normal (i.e. bell curve) distribution, meaning that the results tend to cluster in the center. Plus, the more dice you roll, the steeper the curve gets - meaning the results cluster even more to the center. So, you can predict with reasonable sureness that the results won't be too far removed from the average the vast majority of the time.The KA doesn't work that way, because the STUN multiplier is, first, linear (sort of) - meaning all results (except 1) have an equal probability of occurring. Second, it's a multiple - which really screws with the distribution. (See the PDF attached to my previous post for the distribution of a 4D6 KA.) It looks nothing like a bell curve, which means the predictability is much less.What I'm basically saying is that the randomness associated with virtually every other part of the system is far more predictable, and thus controllable, than the KA. I've never been fond of them for that reason, but before, it was an intuitive dislike. Now I have the data to back it up! :)This has been a good discussion. My thanks to all the participants. I like learning new stuff - even about a game system I've been playing for over 20 years.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

It might have been said and I've forgotten' date=' but in any case the stun lottery works both ways. There's little more annoying if you have a KA than rolling a 1 or 2. And the deviation mentioned above with larger KAs becomes more of a crapsoot, both for worse and better.I don't tend to think of KAs as undercosted just because average actual damage inflicted is more with higher target DEFs. There is a higher likelihood of less damage as well as a higher likelihood of more damage. And with all due respect d6-2 as a stun multiple does make for a 50% chance of doing relatively trivial stun damage, to the point I think it's far too blunted. One thing to consider isn't merely the SDev but the spread. However, if it works for you that's great and to be fair it wouldn't matter as far as playing in your games to me (though I'd be far less likely to take a KA even for "color", such as one of my PC's lower-KA knife - it's already far too ineffecive, at d6-2 it'd be of marginal value).[/quote']Yes, the STUN lottery works both ways. But we're trying to tell a story here, and the wild randomness it introduces is, in my experience, harmful to the story aspects of the game.The point was to discourage people from taking KAs as a means of doing STUN damage. Killing Attacks are there for the purpose of inflicting BODY damage, whether used against living or unliving targets. (Hence the comment Steve L. made in the Power description about not taking KAs just hoping for a lucky STUN multiple.) At this, they are very effective - they do more damage than the comparable normal attack, and they bypass normal defenses. Blunting their STUN damage simply prevents the lucky "look Ma, 90 STUN" effect.It's an attempt to restrict the influence of luck on combat. It's no fun to be humming along, using great tactics, giving and taking, only to have the character go down for the count because of a single lucky die roll. (After all, do you really want Dr. Destroyer to go down because a character got a lucky 6 at the wrong time?) :)Plus, I never said that players would only have the 1D6-2 multiplier available. If you really want that extra STUN multiple, you can still take the +1/4 Advantage.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?Based on Hugh's suggestion, I ran the average data again, but this time using a 1D6 - 2 STUN multiplier (as if you had taken the -1/4 Limitation). Here are the results:3D6 normal:............................Average.............SDevDEF 0:......................11....................3DEF 10:......................1....................2DEF 20:......................0....................0DEF 30:......................0....................01D6 killing:............................Average.............SDevDEF 0:........................7....................6DEF 10:......................1....................3DEF 20:......................0....................1DEF 30:......................0....................06D6 normal:............................Average.............SDevDEF 0:......................21......................4DEF 10:....................11......................4DEF 20:......................2......................3DEF 30:......................0......................02D6 killing:............................Average.............SDevDEF 0:......................14..................10DEF 10:......................6....................9DEF 20:......................2....................5DEF 30:......................1....................23D6 killing:............................Average.............SDevDEF 0:......................21..................14DEF 10:....................11..................13DEF 20:......................6..................10DEF 30:......................3....................7The KA is still slightly more effective at the upper end, but not significantly so. The top end is reduced by a multiple of (6 * # of dice) in each case. 1D6 maxes out at 24 vs. 30; 2D6 at 48 vs. 60, 3D6 at 72 vs. 90, and so forth. This is still higher than the maximum of the corresponding normal attacks, but it's more manageable.I think this just became the default house rule for my campaign. The standard STUN multiplier for KAs is 1D6-2. Limitations and Advantages start from there. This should help the players out when some enterprising thug with a gun shows up and rolls that lucky 6 on the STUN multiple, too.Minimal adjustment, no significant change in mechanics, blunts the STUN lottery. I like it.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?Hey, can somebody pass me that plate of crow over there? Yeah, that's right, the big helping. And a fork, too, while you're at it... I just couldn't get this out of my head, so I built a quick little utility today to run the numbers. And, what I got confirms virtually everything Hugh has been saying.I ran all the actual possible results for 1D6, 2D6 and 3D6 KAs, along with all the results for 3D6 and 6D6 normal attacks. (I was going to do 9D6 as well, but when I calculated the algorithm would take about 150 hours to run the 10 million possible combinations, I decided against it.) :)Okay, the results are as follows:3D6 normal (216 possible results, maximum possible damage 18).......................Avg Dam.......SDev of DamageDEF 0:..................11.....................3DEF 10:..................1.....................2DEF 20:..................0.....................0DEF 30:..................0.....................0For the 1D6 KA (36 possible results, maximum possible damage 30).......................Avg Dam.......SDev of DamageDEF 0:....................9.....................7DEF 10:..................3.....................5DEF 20:..................1.....................2DEF 30:..................0.....................0Okay, now we can look at the 6D6 normal attack (46,656 possible results, max damage of 36):.......................Avg Dam........SDev of DamageDEF 0:..................21.....................4DEF 10:.................11.....................4DEF 20:...................2.....................3DEF 30:...................0.....................0And, finally, the 2D6 KA (216 possible results, max damage 60):.......................Avg Dam........SDev of DamageDEF 0:...................19....................13DEF 10:..................10....................12DEF 20:....................5.....................8DEF 30:....................2.....................5So, we can see that, as the DEF value goes up, the damage that is actually inflicted on the character is higher, on average, for the KA than for the corresponding normal attack. Which, to reiterate, confirms what Hugh's been saying. It also confirms my opinion that KAs are undercosted. They bypass normal defenses AND do more damage than the corresponding normal attack (and we won't even talk about increased STUN multiples).The SDev is included to demonstrate that the KA has that much higher degree of variability than the normal attack. Of course, SDev is not entirely a good measure in the case of the KA, because the KA doesn't fall along a nice bell curve (see attached PDF if you're curious). But still, the degree of variability is much higher on the KA. (Much more so than the difference between Standard Effect and rolling normal dice.)However, that variability isn't the reason for the higher average STUN (after defenses) delivered by the KA. That comes from its high end being so much higher than the normal attack, and the fact that it's a flatter curve (i.e. you have a higher chance of hitting the high end with the KA than with the normal attack). For example, you have 1 chance in 216 of getting maximum damage (60 STUN) with the 2D6 KA. However, you only have 1 chance in 46,656 of getting the maximum of 36 STUN with the 6D6 normal attack.Now, to some of Hugh's specific comments:

This is the dichotomy of Killing Attacks in a Supers campaign - an attack intended to be lethal is' date=' in fact, more effective at knocking out the typical Super opponent than an equivalent Normal attack.There is an easy fix, if you don't mind a house rule. "Killing attacks are intended to kill, not wound. Therefore, in this Supers campaign, all Killing Attacks, as a default, must take the -1/2 limitation "-2 Stun Multiple". This will ensure killing attacks are effective at inflicting BOD, and not at inflicting STUN."[/quote']I like this solution. I'll consider it. Maybe even with only a -1/4 Limitation to discourage munchkinism (although so far my players haven't gravitated to KAs very much).

Put a Hologram of a raving Grond over a captive normal human' date=' then let your players sneak in "unnoticed" by the Big G. Do you think that poor slob under the hologram is going to survive, regardless of whether any of your players have a killing attack? In virtually all games, they'll hit Grond with everything they've got - call that 4 12d6 normal attacks. Will a normal survive that better than 4 4d6 KA's? Will the press or the police somehow "know" those weren't killing attacks? How does a 4d6 Flame RKA look different from a 12d6 Flame EB? [i keep asking that question and you keep ignoring it, BTW']

You can't. Happy?But you can tell the difference between a fist and a gun.And the "fragile normal hidden by an illusion" is a good ploy to use against players who are too bloody-minded. With normal or KAs. Although, normally most of my players tend to hit with less-than-maximum attacks the first time out (but they may not do so if they're convinced it's really Grond, and they actually know who that is).As an aside, the police would probably not get too grumpy in that situation, if the characters were able to prove that the illusion tricked them into thinking it was Grond. It's kind of like a cop shooting a kid with a toy gun in a dark alley. Based on how things looked to the cop, he was justified in doing what he did. Where it's fun is in discouraging the players from opening up with both barrels right off the bat.

I don't like seeing killing attacks used for the purpose of KOing the villains. Neither do you' date=' as I see it. Where we seem to differ is that I understand the mechanics enough to see what drives the "powergamer's" (for lack of a better word) selection of a KA. Against a typical Super opponent, it is no more lethal than a normal attack, and more effective at inflicting STUN.[/quote']Now that I've run the complete statistical picture, I agree. Sorry for any hurt feelings or offense taken; I tend to be long on mouth sometimes - you know, type first and ask questions later.

Assuming the role playing in genre solution doesn't work' date=' there are two ways to address this mechanically. First, make it more lethal. Reducing or eliminating resistant defenses for most characters, and commensurately reducing the power and frequency of KA's is one approach. Second, reduce its potential to inflict massive STUN damage. Approaches include requiring the "Reduced Stun Multiple" limitation or using a standard STUN multiple. The latter must be less than three, however, or the KA now gets the same average STUN as an EB, and still has greater variability. 2.67 or 2.5 wuld work.[/quote']All good ideas. I appreciate the discussion (even if I lost).

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

It's because there is more variance. 4 to 120 is more variable than 12 - 72. 5 dice (4d6 and the Stun Multiple) have wider statistical swings than 12 dice.

I'm not arguing anything is' date=' or is not, OK. I am pointing out that KA's, on the whole, are capable of delivering greater STUN after significant defenses than normal attacks. [As early as 2e, there was a module suggesting the villains won't use KA's unless it's the only way to get some STUN damage in on tne heroes. This should not be news.']

They're both bell curves' date=' the killing attack is just a narrower bell curve. The Stun multiple roll itself is linear, but 4 BOD and 20 STUN doesn't impress any more than 24 BOD and 24 STUN.[/quote']I was referring to the STUN multiplier.

I agree - players don't opt for standard effect' date=' preferring a higher average with greater volatility. Why then would you expect them to shy away from an attack with an even greater voariability, and greater average STUN getting through. [Yet mine do, and I do as well. This comes back to play style.']

Play style is one thing, but deliberately using a deadlier attack because you want to hit it lucky is something else.

2d6 can inflict 2 BOD on a normal' date=' as can a 4d6 pulled punch. {snip}[/quote']But, since normals usually have a normal DEF of 2, they don't take any actual BODY damage.

How does John Q Public know whether FlameMaster is using a killing attack (BAD Flamemaster!) or an Energy Blast (Oh' date=' that's all right then!). Is it really less acceptable to use a knife in a bar fight (call it 1/2d6 KA, 1d1+1 w/ STR) than level someone with a crowbar (call that +4d6 normal, so 6d6)? Both are fully capable of inflicting serious injury (killing IRL).I just find it odd your concern is only players who are too fond of KA's. I'm just as concerned by Super characters who throw around 12d6 EB's as those who have a 4d6 KA. Either is, in my opinion, "Lethal Force".[/quote']You're right, they are, against normals. What I'm saying, though, is that some supers can tolerate a normal attack without taking any BODY, even a big one. But, unless they have some resistant DEF, the KA will go right through them.I've always felt that KAs were undercosted, based on that fact alone. Something that bypasses defenses so easily AND causes primarily killing damage shouldn't be as cheap as it is, IMO.

This has been the "Wolverine attitude" for a long time. "A man comes at me with his fists' date=' I meet him with my fists." Further, virtually all Supers are using attack powers which are at least as lethal as a Hero system handgun. Is it "wrong" for Batman/Robin/Nightwing to throw Batarangs? Look at the effects - these are reguualrly shown 1/3 to 1/2 embedded in their target - or going right through a hand. That's a KA to me.[/quote']Well, I haven't read any comics in about 15 years, and I never read Batman, so I can't comment. However, Batman is the "avenging dark knight" type, so in that sort of setting, more deadly actions are normally within genre. They aren't in more four-color settings.

There's a big stretch between "KA" and "icing opponents". Most Supers have adequate resistant defenses that a KA is not really a threat to life and limb. You want to scare a Super' date=' you need a Penetrating KA. The fact is that, as it stands, KA's are only marginally more effective at doing BOD than normal attacks, but they are more effective at Stunning opponents and average greater STUN.[/quote']They're only marginally more effective IF the target has, as you say, significant resistent DEF. How does the PC know? What if he unleashes that KA against someone who doesn't? Normal attacks are generally safe against any super. KAs aren't always that way.I guess I'm just objecting to the plethora of deadly attacks we're seeing, especially in supposed "heroes". It's out of genre, it's undercosted, and it's munchkinizing things. The objective should be to win the fight, not kill the opponent.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

ASIDE: Am I the only one who is somehwat surprised to see Wolverine used to support the assertion that killing attacks don't fit the Supers genre?

Re: Superhero ImagesA lot of these images are GREAT! Where can an individual, such as myself, who has all the artistic talent of your average rock, get a utility that might allow me to do something useful?I looked at HeroMachine, and it's okay, but I have a shapeshifting character, a brick who can also manifest tentacles / pseudopods as Extra Limbs. I'd like to incorporate a couple of these into an image and not have it look like my daughter drew it. HeroMachine doesn't appear to allow that. Any suggestions?

Re: Entangle, Desolidification, and the Quest for Truth

And wastes two phases when he could have casual strength punched through the wall and done it all in one. Paying points for a power should actually grant some benefit' date=' IMO. Desolidification is a stop sign power and so each instance needs to be weighed by the GM. I would not have any problem if a player used the sited example or the JJ example in my game. I don't consider it to be too unbalancing.[/quote']Unless, of course the Desolidifying character doesn't have the STR to punch through the wall. Or doesn't want to damage it, for reasons previously noted.

Re: Limits on Killing attacks?

The variance on the KA is considerably greater' date=' with the result being average STUN that gets through is considerably higher.[/quote']Oh, just for everyone's information - I just ran a calculation. This statement isn't true for our example of the 4D6 attack vs. a DEF of 25. It does:0 + 0 + 3 + 17 + 31 + 45 / 6 = 16 STUN on average.The normal attack does 17 STUN on average. Since 25 is a reasonably common DEF in a Standard campaign, I'd say your average STUN value is about the same. Assuming, of course, the target has some resistant DEF. If not, the KA is always going to do more damage.