secretID

The guy with whom I'm discussing it put it pretty much perfectly in the question to Steve: "If a character has ranged martial arts maneuvers like Offensive Shot (+4 DC) or +4 damage classes with ranged attacks, are they entitled to add: 1) +4D6 to each of three normal-damage autofire attacks? 2) +4D6 to an NND EB shot? (I say +2D6). 3) +4D6 to a sight and hearing group Flash shot? 4) +2D6 BODY and 2 DEF to an Entangle shot (with the +1/4 advantage that the entangle and target both take damage)? (These are all slots in a multipower from a single multi-ammo weapon, if that matters)." After much struggling in the past with the question as applied to advantaged HA, I finally found this: http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62215&highlight=arts That confirmed for me that you get die-for-die DC pluses from MAs adding to advantaged HAs, as abusable as that may be. So, the questions that we have now are: - Is that particular to HAs? - Is there an exception for NNDs? - Can you add ranged MA DCs to flashes, entangles, etc.? From a prior thread on that, it looks like it's an open question in the rules. Bonus question: Why the heck does it work that way with adding MA DCs to advantaged HAs (and possibly other advantaged attacks)? Is this something that makes a lot more sense in some genres than in others? Thanks for any answers.

Re: I know what you are getting for Christmas (I've felt your presence) Christopher's idea is interesting. What about: - PRE (or whatever it gets called) is only for offense, and only for intimidation/inspiration - base defense against PRE comes from total character points, or something like that (characteristics + powers?), and EGO adds more - seduction-type PRE is completely independent, and uses COM/charisma/whatever Meh - I get the impression others have spent a lot more time thinking about this than I'm willing to, so I should shut up. I missed the boat on 6E discussions, and that's probably a good thing.

Re: I know what you are getting for Christmas (I've felt your presence) My first comment wasn't very productive. I think PRE should be capped (as a crude fix) and I think it should only be offensive, but those are outside of Sean's points, which, as usual, are great.

Re: I know what you are getting for Christmas (I've felt your presence) I think PRE attacks are a mess. At high levels, PRE is the most effective characteristic. And it's never made sense to me that PRE defends against PRE.

Re: Home on the Range In support of a move in Sean's direction: Even if you don't apply AP limits, the effect of a damage power having ranged, etc. by default can be significant. There's a big difference between a lim and the absence of an advantage - and between an advantage and the absence of a lim - in MPs and VPPs. E.g., there's almost no point benefit to taking a lim on one MP slot. If everything, e.g., defaulted to no range, I for one would just feel better putting that no-range EB in a MP slot.

Re: A DC Animated-style HeroMachine How are you still using the 3/4 pose? I preferred it, and I thought it was gone in the new version. Thanks.

Re: Mass musings This reminds me of the V&V system - lots of things were based on mass. It was kind of cool in that it naturally tied some things together.

Re: Campaign limits (for a PbP game I'm about to run) I think the question is how long you want combats to last and how many hits you want characters to be able to take. I would assume that most players will max or almost max DCs, so everyone will have at least 10 dice, and many will have 12 or more. That's 35 or 42 average damage per hit. If average STUN is 35-40 (and I would recommend capping STUN), you can calculate DEF from there based on how many hits you want on average. If you want characters to go down after about 3 hits, then you would want DEFs around 25. (42-25 = 17; 17x3 = 51; that's higher than expected average STUN, but that allows for recoveries during combat.) The custom advantage for MP powers is pretty cheap. If a player puts it on every MP slot, that will at most double the AP cost of the MP reserve, while giving something that's probably worth a lot more than that. E.g., in a 4-slot MP, in which each power has +1/2 in other advantages: 45 reserve 4 slot 4 slot 4 slot 4 slot Under the standard rules, to make them all usable at once, you'd have to pay 135 more points, to increase the reserve to 180. With your house rule, it looks like: 75 reserve 7 slot 7 slot 7 slot 7 slot That's only 42 more points. You can watch that of course, but it caught my eye.

Re: Campaign Limits It's easy to forget STUN as something to be limited. If I were starting one today, I'd go with: 10 OCV/OECV 12 DC 5 SPD 10 DCV/DECV 30 DEF/30 rDEF 40 STUN I think this makes for pretty long combats. I'd allow up to +20-25% for any one offensive category, with the same % deducted from another offensive category, and the same for defensive categories. I don't see much value in limiting APs. I also don't see much reason to limit rDEF lower then DEF, since I don't really want PCs who are much easier to kill than knock out. One big thing that's worked well for me: minimum expenditures on non-combat stuff and "flavor" stuff. I'd go with 40 non-com and 10 flavor. Non-com is defined pretty narrowly, and flavor has to be pretty much totally useless. When giving out XP, I let players buy non-com and flavor stuff more cheaply than combat stuff - 1:1.5 for non-com, and 1:3 for flavor.

Re: when "automatic" perception gets limited Thanks for the responses. Great answer/comments, Shrike. I'm still a bit dissatisfied, though. The way the rules are written, it's not automatic to see someone standing right in front of you in broad daylight, since that's a total of 0 in modifiers. I've thought before that the range table was too harsh for sight. Maybe I'll adjust it down, including a bonus at close range - e.g., start with +2, get to 0 at about 6-8", etc. That's not something I would put in a house rule or anything - just something to keep in my head.

Two characters are only a few (scale) inches apart, with perfect visibility, therefore no PER roll needed. Then someone does a Change Environment, -7 sight. What now? A PER roll should be required, but it doesn't seem to me that it should be at -7, since the starting point wasn't a flat PER roll, but automatic perception. My thinking so far: Automatic perception is like a +6 or more PER roll, since an average person (PER roll of 11-) will almost always perceive. That would mean the PER roll in the example is somewhere around even. I'm really hoping that there's a simpler way to look at this. Thanks for any insight.

Re: mental awareness on "invisible" mentalist Funny - suddenly so simple reading it as Crosshair Collie put it. I guess it's still something of a matter of chance/PER to pinpoint the exact hex. Thanks!

I'm very surprised I can't find an answer to this anywhere: Mental awareness allows one to identify the user of the mental power, but what if the user is otherwise invisible to the mentally aware character? Mental awareness isn't a targeting sense, so I don't think it should allow an exact pinpointing, but should it give any information regarding location? Thanks.

Re: Focus on focus I like Sean's system. I've recently been having discussions on just these issues, and this system would resolve them more neatly than I did.

A Grab is performed at range with Stretching, Does Not Cross Intervening Space. On a later segment, while still grabbed, the grabee wants to HTH strike the grabber (with an appropriate free limb). 1) The FAQ strongly suggests that this is possible, but I'd like a confirmation. 2) If it's possible, do Hit Location modifiers apply (e.g., for only an arm), or just the Grab OCV modifiers? In addition to the FAQ on reversal, I found these passages from the rules relevant: "The Grabbing character and Grabbed character both occupy the same hex." "The Grabber must use both hands/arms to gain full effect of a Grab." "The Grabbed character may be able to attack the Grabbing character..." - not "his hands," etc. On the other hand, there is a rules reference and a FAQ reference to Hit Locations, though they aren't specific to grab.

Re: same old Q: MAs stacking on advantaged HAs

I KNOW this has been addressed before. I swear that I’ve read the rules, the FAQs, and all relevant threads I could find. (I don’t have the revised 5th or UMA, though.) I still don’t understand the stacking of advantaged HAs with unadvantaged MAs in superheroic games. I also know that it’s my choice as GM, etc., but right now I’m just trying to get the standard answer by the rules. I’m not looking to argue whether it makes sense. Here’s the example: - superheroic game - 10 STR - HA of 4d6, explosion, armor piercing (in a MP, if that matters) - martial strike, +0 OCV, +2 DCV, +2d6 - no MA extra DCs 1) On p.272 of 5E, it addresses this, but it’s a bit cryptic to me: “Damage bonuses from…Martial Maneuvers…are not affected by advantages. They add to an attack which has Advantages at the same rate, and by the same rules, as an attack which has no Advantages. For example, if a character is using a Martial Strike (+2 DCs) to increase the damage done by his knife (HKA 1/2d6), the knife does 1d6 Killing Damage regardless of whether the knife is an ordinary HKA, an Armor Piercing HKA, an HKA with +1 Increased STUN Multiplier, or what have you.” That seems to suggest that MAs add to advantaged attacks just like STR does – the dice get added regardless of the advantages. So, in my example, it would result in an 8d6 attack with explosion and armor piercing. However, that section is separate from the section addressing the effect of STR on an advantaged HA, so maybe it means what I have in #2 below, that this just becomes a 8d6 attack with no advantages. 2) In the FAQs, it says this: "If a character has bought an Advantage for his STR (say, Armor Piercing), and he then uses a Martial Maneuver or Haymaker, how does the Advantage apply — to all the dice, to just the STR dice, to none of the dice? It applies to none of the dice (see 5E 272, second paragraph in the right-hand column). For example, a character with 20 STR, Armor Piercing, who uses an Offensive Strike (+4d6) does 8d6 Normal Damage, with no AP effect. If a character wants to make an Advantages Martial Arts attack, he should buy Advantages for specific Martial Maneuvers, as described in the optional rules on page 104 of The Ultimate Martial Artist." Would the same apply to advantaged HAs? If so, that would mean that this results in a 8d6 attack with no advantages, if the character wanted to use the MA. 3) In an old thread on this, someone seemed to be saying that the way to look at it is that the HA stacks onto the MA, not the other way around, and the HA advantages are just part of the DC calculation. That means, I think, that this would be a 12d6 attack with no advantages (2 dice from STR, 2 dice from MA, and 8 dice from the HA, because the HA is 4 dice with +1 total advantages). Help? Help!

Mind Control, cumulative, and an attempt to get an effect with the +20 "target doesn't realize/remember." The power isn't Continuous, and we can assume that the first few hits will not be enough to reach the +20 level. The questions are: 1) Is the target aware of the hits? 2) Is the target aware of the misses? 3) If either is a "yes," how can the power be built without those issues? There are a few things in the rules and FAQs that MAY be in conflict. 5ER on mental powers: "...the target of a mental attack can sense the source of the attack and knows what Power he's been attacked with. This identification occurs immediately for Ego Attack, Mind Scan, and Telepathy; for Mind Control or Mental Illusions it usually occurs after the Power no longer affects the character." 5ER on Cumulative and mental powers: "...Until [the total equals or exceeds the required amount] the Power has no effect (though the target realizes he's being attacked with that Mental Power)." FAQ on whether "Invisible power effects" at the "hides the power effects" level on a mental power negates the need to reach the +20 level: "No. The Advantage makes the effects of the power completely undetectable by other characters (and, in the case of Cumulative, prevents the victim from feeling the “building” power). The +20 effect hides the effect (the “damage,” if you will) from the victim himself, which IPE can’t do." FAQ very close to this exact question (so why am I asking? - see below): "In a Cumulative situation, it doesn’t make any sense for the target to have awareness of the attack right away but forget it later. In this situation, the best approach would be to have the mentalist declare a specific total he wants to achieve (such as “I’ll keep attacking until I get a total Effect Roll of 70,” or what have you). If that suffices to achieve the desired command and the +20, the target’s never aware of the attack. If it fails to achieve that total, the target becomes aware at that point that he was being attacked by a Mental Power that failed. If the attacker stops (or is stopped) before achieving his declared total), the target becomes aware at that point that he was being attacked by a Mental Power that failed." So...is there a conflict here. I can reconcile the two FAQs by saying, "Full IPE makes the 'building power' undectable to the target even if the attacker doesn't go for the +20 effect, but if the attacker does go for the +20, the 'building power' is automatically undected." That does still leave an apparent conflict between the second FAQ and the 5ER section re cumulative mental powers. I'll add that personally, I don't see it as nonsensical that the target of a Cumulative mental attack would be aware of it and then forget - certainly not in the case of MC or MI. Either way, I still have my question #2: What happens with a miss in the series of Cumulative mental attacks, when the attacker is building to the +20 effect level? Is the target aware? Thanks.

Re: Teleporter - Only Here's "Rift," an all-teleportation PC: http://www.herocentral.net/characters.htm?campaignId=808015

Re: teleporter attacking fliers Aha! Vindication! Sort of! Thanks for checking, H-M. It does seem to contradict what jwpacker quoted earlier - maybe that was just re: applying levels. I think I'll only apply the penalties on the phase after the attack - I like the idea that it's controlled movement on the attack phase. I'll drop the KB penalty, too. As often noted, there's myriad problems with KB overall. Thanks for all the input.

Re: teleporter attacking fliers I appreciate those builds, but: 1) Is the idea that I would insist that the character pay the points for the extra power, and force him to accept an attack of lower DC? 2) The character is already built and in use - is the idea that I insist that he rewrite him or wait for XP? I think the limitations I talked about are far less burdensome than that, at least for this particular character. I also think a DCV penalty is exactly the kind of thing the rules have all over the place, so I don't find it strange or burdensome. As it turns out, as someone found, the rules explicitly give no DCV penalty while falling, so this would be a house rule. That makes me a bit less likely to do it, but I don't think that the rules have EXACTLY the right level of complexity, so that any tinkering is too much. I just wish I had some good ways to tinker to eliminate some existing complications.

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced?

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced? Sure, but I think the advantage is underpriced across the board. For a low price - 45 AP - you can get an attack that can take the majority of normal superheroic characters out of the fight: a 2d6/4 DEF entangle with takes no damage.. I.e., it will more or less permanently entangle those under 25 or so STR, barring desol and similar. Absolutely no defense applies. The effect is permanent, with no time, LOS, or END limitation. Friends can't help the target. I'm sure there are complicated, possibly abusive builds that are similarly overpowered, but this isn't some manipulation of the rules - it's a simple use of one advantage.

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced? Cool - that sounds perfect. Thanks for the help.

Re: "takes no damage" entangle - underpriced? That's REALLY interesting. It's not really clicking for me, though. Could you walk me through it, from the start of the attack? Is it as follows: - MC attack, OECV vs. DECV - effect equal to 8d6 - ED - if that's sufficient for "stand still," then breakout roll vs. CON - repeat If that's right, a few questions: 1) Could he count PD instead of ED, which makes more sense to me? 2) When determining whether the attack was strong enough to cause the effect, would we compare it to the target's EGO or to his CON? Thanks for any help. I can look this up when I get home, but you've got me really curious.