Grailknight

Those are just cases of defining your SFX to a concept where those powers are applications of your STR. I can just as easily make a character who bases their Flash on DEX/SPD that hits so often you're disoriented or INT that uses their knowledge of anatomy to hit nerve clusters similar to acupuncture. Can those characters improve those other abilities without improving their STR (or DEX or INT ...) or will you require both to be raised proportionally? I agree that it's that way for the reasons you mention. And yes, STR adds to HA and HKA and no other powers in HERO have a characteristic add. But please stop with this idea that they are the only orphan mechanics in HERO. Every power in HERO is an orphan mechanic. Blast works differently from Flash which works differently from Entangle and so on and so on. We don't notice because we've played for so long that these things are second nature to us. It took a new player who was a GM of some other games to make this connection for me. We don't do it anywhere else because there are no written examples anywhere in the game. I'd have no objections to adding those options in an APG type book. Adding those make more sense that trying to disconnect STR. Of course, you'd need to add a method to stop the more abusive edge builds like say Doubling.

I'd modify this slightly. Base move would be 1/2 their average move because a faster runner can drag a slower one along while supporting them. If the characters have Teamwork, use that. If not use DEX rolls. Take the average of what they make (or fail) their rolls by and add/subtract that to the base move that phase. If both fail on the same phase, both need to succeed at a DEX roll or they fall.

A lot of words that don't address the main problem of why your solution is incomplete. You do an excellent job of finding balance in the rules, but you cannot express it in a manner that makes me accept that STR does not add to HTH Combat. I told you that if you could, I'd switch my position and you didn't even try. . That's a glass is half empty way of looking at a functioning compromise. It's also incorrect. Doubling is a limit to the extreme abuse that can occur without it but not a perfect solution. Not buying matching STR is a choice that can be made because the concept doesn't call for it, not an unholy heresy against the gaming gods. Not nearly as big a disconnect as STR not affecting HTH combat. The fact that the limitation is in the rules but is not the default should be an indicator of something. As long as the choices have the same cost, what's the problem? Why do you insist that any nonoptimized build is badwrongfun even if it's what the player wants? What about a player who wants to start with a smaller HKA and wants to buy it up with XP? Or one that starts with an HKA as a slot in Multipower and only needs 1 or 2 XP to bring it up the campaign standard without increasing STR? Again, you use your definition to debate my point. In my version of HA it still adds STR just as an HKA does. It's just normal damage instead of killing. It's a needed power for defining Normal damage weapons but it's application outside of Heroic games is limited. So, no apology and a sarcastic use of the word you found offensive in another backhanded insult. No problem. I'll still stay civil even if you felt the need to get one last dig in. So certain concepts should get things for free then? Maybe you should just tell that player that that star surfing character doesn't fit within the constraints of the campaign because it would be too expensive to buy. Except that metarule of the system clearly states that only the more expensive options are valid for use.

Yes, in a choice between game balance and game utility, game balance should always be given higher priority. And you're ignoring the fact that the example characters you're using that fly through stars and across space all would laugh at that 9d6 Blast anyway. And if you can address that dissonance, your stance would have much greater support, including mine. I would guess that they wanted it to not initially be another form of STR. They wanted something to simulate Normal damage weapons but couldn't decide how to make the new power. At 5 points per DC, it's a niche power for Supers as buying more STR is just better. But it filled a large hole in the powerset for Heroic level campaigns. Here you are prioritizing cost over balance. Doubling is a compromise awaiting a better solution. The Limited Range example at least does have some tiny loss of utility, the 1/2 STR added and 1/2 no STR does not. Both of these should be struck down by the GM. People tend to ignore the " If there are two valid options to achieve the exact same result then the more expensive option is the valid one" metarule all the time. Under doubling, all the combinations are equal in cost, so equally valid. The proposed versions with No Range violate the metarule when compared with them.

I understand actually mostly agree with your stance in principle. But you need to come up with a complete fix before you impose your change. Doubling is a provably workable compromise for STR adds issue not because it is perfectly balanced but because it incorporates the very real fact that STR does enhance HTH weapons and combat while reducing the worst abuses of not having it. Totally with you on all of these. I ultimately came around to removing Figured Characteristics and COM. It took a few weeks of remaking NPC's to show me the benefits in character creation an to accept the reduced costs. I would have reduced the 5x and 4x STUN modifiers on the Hit Location chart by 1 but I agree with the change for Supers. I would not have removed Negative Characteristics. The current penalty for going from 1 to 0 is too harsh and makes Adjustment Powers too effective vs PRE and INT. Most pertinent to this and some of our past discussions is that I would have made HA into the HTH counterpart to Blast and completely separate from the idea that it should be limited STR. I'm fully invested in keeping the cost of a DC at 5 points across the entire game and would raise the cost of Density Increase and Martial Arts DC to keep them consistent. But I need it to work better for everyone but especially new GM's and players. Without doubling or a completed version of your substitution, tiny HKA and massive STR is not only RAW but the best build by far. The only argument otherwise for high HKA and low STR or even balanced HKA and STR is concept. Doubling keeps those builds in shouting distance on both the points and the concept fronts so i can accept the imperfect balance. Because it's unnecessary to a build. If your character concept is an HKA that cannot be boosted with STR. buy an RKA with No Range. I realize that this doesn't fix your issue with the rules, but you've got to find a way to bridge that disconnect before the change is better. So why would I ever buy 6th edition Growth or Shrinking then? I can get the same results for less points by buying the Characteristics as Powers with Non-Persistent or Costs End Only to Activate. Or keep doubling and the 50 STR, 1 pip HKA option is now not possible. Balance of outcomes if not perfect balance of points is maintained. I debate you accepting your rules changes, you debate me without accepting mine. To me, HA is a unique power that is not associated with STR in any way. The disconnect is the main issue. If you can't justify it in an appealing way, how will you get acceptance from your current audience or appeal to new GM's and players? Leave your option to an Advanced Player or GM guide until then. The part I saw as a near personal attack was " Find a semi-literate GM". There are better ways to make your point than an implied insult. Like bolding. If you see my use of "disingenuous" as an attack on you personally then I hereby apologize. It was not intentional, and I will refrain from further use of the word.

You can do the amorphous body with Shape Shift as long as you don't want to go through a solid object. It even has an example of going flat to go under a door.

it's called doubling because it limits the addable DC's to the amount already purchased. You quoted Steve Long's example on why more is abusive but don't seem to want to accept that it agrees with my argument. I can understand not accepting it from me but why would you question his opinion? And you presented that character to me in a 12 DC campaign, I'd hand it back with the limitation valued as -0 and tell you rebalance your point totals. If it was a 15 DC campaign, I'd let you play it after explaining how ineffective and unenjoyable I believe it would be. I'd even urge you to raise your STR to 15 and remove the limitation so you'd have a competitive build. Yes, it's more balanced. It's an alternate method of getting nearly the same performance for slightly greater points that's not as useful because a rare situation could arise that requires the maximum amount of STR and the HKA. And your 5-point cost difference is disingenuous. In a game with doubling, the AP HKA would cost 31 points. No doubling saves 26 points in a true apple to apple comparison though you would get a slightly higher 3d6+1 ap HKA out of it. That's where the abuse lies. Doubling mitigates it to a level that's been mostly balanced for decades. It's not perfect but keep it until you have a fully fleshed out better option. HKA's are just the most prominent trouble spot but HA's are just as bad. Until you rewrite the entire system to say that HTH combat damage is not augmented by STR and find a way to present it that somehow convinces players that that disconnect makes sense, I can't accept your version. Give me the text of your change with all of its ramifications and I'll consider it and adopt it if it's an improvement. That's dangerously close to a personal attack. Let's stay civil. And you're being disingenuous again. That character sheet has 15 STR + 1d6 HKA for the first part of the attack, not 2d6 HKA. Trying to cheese that past me would make me skip the red and yellow caution highlighters and go directly to the black marker of doom. It does not create free STR. You have to choose to buy it up to double. You asked me for an example that buys STR lower than that optimal point, so I present to you, your cheesy example with 15 STR that is attempting to achieve 4d6 HKA in total. Apparently such a concept is not totally foreign to you.

It's the difference between having STR and an HKA compared to having STR or the HKA. One has both at all times, the other has to make a choice. It may only rarely be an inconvenience, but it can happen. Ok, if the mechanical effect is that STR fails when used this way, do all aspects of his STR fail? Can someone with a held action Entangle or Grab him while he has his side weapons out and only have to deal with his low STR? Can he not hold a heavy object in one hand while cutting a rope in the other? Is he like Wonder Woman, so that if I tie him up with a switchblade in his hand, he becomes powerless? If the answer to these is yes, then he gets a Limitation on his STR. But one special snowflake doesn't invalidate doubling. It was put in to stop the abusive builds that were present in 1st and which are making a comeback in 6th. You shouldn't design a ruleset around edge cases. 2d6 HKA+ 30 STR is generally better than 3d6 HKA + 15 STR but neither is as good as 55 STR + 1 pip HKA. The balanced purchase is the most common and effective build with doubling for a character that doesn't have STR but HKA as their main attack. Not having the STR to double the HKA is a less common build, but you're totally ignoring concepts built around movement or skills where it's better when doubling is in effect. The huge STR, tiny HKA build is just an abuse to get the option of a campaign level HKA for low points. If I was going to do your multipower version, I'd go with 55 STR, a 5 point control pool and 2 slots, 1 of +5 STR and 1 of 1 pip HKA. That costs 2 extra points. By the way, any GM I've encountered would tell you that your last build example for 40 points is only going to yield a 3d6 HKA. Combining a limited power with a normal one doesn't work that way.

That is an entirely different matter from the doubling rule we were debating. I've never had such a character suggested or even theorized before. Working on the assumption that 50 STR is an adequate attack in the campaign, I wouldn't give it any Limitation. I would however give one to all of his purchased HKA's and HA's and I'd give him a Physical Complication to reflect his inability to use them or weapons of opportunity properly. Used alone his STR works properly, he can even carry heavy weights in one hand while using the extra attacks in the other. The HKA's and HA's are unable to meld with his STR for some reason though, so they get the Limitation.

Yet you just said that you'd make weapons that got boosted by DEX or INT for Fantasy. I have no objection to those at all in principle. Which is it? That's an entirely different issue from balance. Show me a character that uses Variable Slots in a Multipower. Doubling does stifle those builds that used high STR/ low HKA but again, Steve long's examples gives the reason why this is this way. Characters with an HKA that they don't have the STR to double are pretty common in Fantasy and a concept matter for campaigns. I see them on occasion, but if you don't that's just all your players being efficient. If you don't think it was an essential change, why did you drag it out as an example? Your build will always have at least one more Limitation for No Range and will have to add Linked if you want a version that adds a Characteristic to the damage. Added complexity is added. Refer back to Steve Long's example which you quoted. You won't accept it coming from me. ???? What makes it work differently for that one example character than for any other character. Again, doubling limits HKA by requiring that added damage from any source cannot exceed the DC of HKA purchased. Everyone else's STR works the same way. The speedster wouldn't get Limitation on his excess movement and the Skill monkey wouldn't get one on his excess levels. Would you give a retroactive Limitation to a character that bought an HKA with XP? That's not an abuse, it's a rare situation that might arise in an unscripted and therefore unpredictable scenario. Why do you imply that I would single out my player to take advantage of part of their build that's not a Limitation?

I have absolutely no objection to such powers being added but I see that you do not absolutely object to a limit on how much damage can be added. Sounds like a good rules project. What do Combined Attacks have to do with doubling? I have no issues with this but it distracts from the conversation. Is it perfectly balanced? No. Did doubling fix the problem from 2nd through 5th edition? Yes. A compromise solution was arrived at where you had to buy at least 1/2 your HKA as HKA directly and it worked for decades. No, we didn't all cruise along ignoring the STUN Lotto. Some of us cut our GM teeth teaching engineers and programmers not to power game a ruleset that is a power gamers dream. It was kept under control by GM supervision in various campaigns I've been involved in. Obviously, your experience was different, but you found yourself taking advantage of it. I had no problem with this change to the ruleset. But STR adding to HKA wasn't game breaking with doubling, so no change was necessary. Here we disagree. Why remove a rule(doubling) to make an extremely common power into a more complicated build that does the same thing? What will your write-up for a HKA that is not purchased with money but with points look like for a mage who summons swords look like? I'll bet it'll be longer than HKA-x DC's. As you yourself quoted, Martial Arts and Move-by/through have to be exempted by the GM. That's because of the language of the optional rule for 6th is all inclusive. That wasn't necessary in 2nd through 5th because doubling only applied to HKA. How is his STR limited? He can still use it fully for all other purposes. Doubling is not a rule to limit STR, it limits HKA's. It's a combined attack and each has defenses applied separately. The multipower build introduces scenarios where he will not have his full STR. It'll rarely come up, but it can happen. I don't have to. Steve Long's example said it all. But I'll summarize, it stops abusive builds.

Thet do have a case as I doubt that fair use applies here. They were not compensated or even consulted about the use of their works, it's being used for commercial purposes and they may lose money from competition.

In simple terms, because while RAW allows STR to add to HKA, it does not allow HKA to add to STR. In genre, stronger things hit harder and do more damage with weapons including what HERO classifies as Killing Damage weapons. Doubling hits a sweet spot between play balance and realism where you can only add so much to a weapon and beyond that point it becomes ineffective. Without doubling we get those "thumbtack vs battleship arguments" that we've had before and don't need to repeat. Now in simple terms, tell me why the reverse is not also viable? Why can't my 15 STR plus 3d6 HKA hit for 60 STR instead of 4d6 Killing? As you say, the points are the same. If this were possible by RAW, I'd agree that doubling is unnecessary, but I've never seen anyone beside myself make this argument. As for what worked well about HKA, doubling was added in 2e and was RAW for decades until 6e where it was changed. It says something about doubling that in the very next paragraph it was mentioned as an optional rule for consideration. I don't recall any other instances where Steve Long wavered like that and this is the man who removed Figured Characteristics and eliminated COM.

I understand it also. I'd prefer to just change HA to 5 points and have it act like HKA. Or did you forget that HA also benefits from that same free STR?

Hugh's objection to HKA is based completely around the idea that STR adds to it. His version of KA is full priced for Ranged and gets the Limitation for No Range but STR doesn't add. He says in his previous post that the method of getting more KA is to buy more and if you want it to be dependent on STR, you will, with another Limitation, link it to STR. Does that seem simpler to you?

Which is more complicated than Killing Attack, HTH. One is a Power, the other is a Power with a Limitation. And it doesn't even accomplish his main goal of eliminating the free points of STR. Anything of 6 DC or more saves 10 or more points because of the Limitation. Oh! Let's fix that by making No Range only worth -1/4. But then do we leave Range at +1/2 or is it only worth +1/4? And how do we then price Telekinesis? Perfect points balance is a desirable goal but let's keep the very good until we answer all the questions. And I can give you a perfect fix for that free STR issue. Make any HKA require a 10 STR Minimum.

Yet that same sword build in Supers is incredibly simple. Plus, why would we want to ditch HKA? The problems caused by adding STR are caused by removing the doubling rule. With doubling rules, it's balanced with RKA on an DC per Active Points basis. Using your change will give every HKA the same discount/reduced pricing that's so troubling with HA. Yes, there's that free 10 points of STR, but that's available to everyone. I can't see your pursuit of perfect as worth it against my very good status quo. Give me something better and just as simple and I'll be open to it.

It wasn't qualifying that did them in, it was the interaction between car and tire on that particular track. For some reason, Red Bull was degrading their tires faster than the podium teams so they couldn't push as hard as they could. Red Bull's cars just weren't better than everyone else at this track like they have been everywhere else the last 2 seasons. They had trouble at Singapore last year also. This race convinced me that Verstappen is a product of superior technology. He's an excellent driver but he's dominating more because of his car than his skill this year.

It's off topic, but you wouldn't use Penetrating or Armor Piercing for this type of effect. You'd use Damage Over Time with the target only gets Defense once bump. It's off topic, but you wouldn't use Penetrating or Armor Piercing for this type of effect. You'd use Damage Over Time with the target only gets Defense once bump.

An agent attacking a normal? I expect 2 hits. I'm not sending out Imperial Storm troopers. My villainous agencies follow the Evil Overlord list here. Any combat agent that can't consistently hit a man-sized target at 30 feet shall be used for target practice. And I only need Penetration to be effective at low end of the powers scale. The mission statement for the blaster design team was for a low cost(thus the lower point total) weapon that could be used to capture hostages and still be effective against super opposition with a large numerical advantage. My agents also carry some 3d6 NND gas grenades, 3d6 Flashbangs and some 1 hex area Entangles but nonstandard attacks are more expensive in universe. They can be very effective if they have a large numerical advantage, but their 3 SPD lets the generally 5-6 SPD supers prevail.

HA at 5 points is only an issue if you are seeking perfect points balance. The difference between Density Increase and Martial Arts DC's versus HA and STR is 1 point per DC. We whine about it at times, but we've always accepted that some concepts are slightly more expensive than others. KA is not the only power that comes bundled with STR. HA does also. Doubling and proration solve all the problems except the free 10 STR.

If an agent hits an unarmored normal 3 times, then they'll do 14 STUN vs their defenses x3. Any value of PD or ED less than 7 or 8 will take more than that 8d6 Blast on average. I use these in 12 DC campaigns though. They can still affect heroes built for that level and I don't have to have agents running around shooting attacks equivalent to the heroes.

Penetrating costs more because it is more effective at causing BODY damage. It also is a better option for the weapons of agents. Consider this: Blast 4d6, Auto fire (3 shots; +1/4), Penetrating (+1/2) (40 Active Points); 4 clips of 16 Charges (+1/4) That's the standard blaster I use for most agents. They'll take out an unarmored normal with the Auto fire and will do some damage to all but the toughest supers. Getting swarmed by them is a problem but not an insurmountable one.

Another reason that we hated CLOWN: They're cowards. They play their tricks on heroes not villains or even corrupt politicians. Why? Because if they antagonized those people, they'd have to face some brutal and possibly lethal retribution. Most heroes will probably go easy on them, they only pick on those who won't fight back seriously.

Don't worry about points worry about capabilities and campaign feel. How many agents does it take to challenge an average hero? If it's 1 or 2 then they are too good, if it's more than 6 or 7 then they may be too weak. This should vary some by organization.