Fox1

Re: Why exponential progression doesn't work for damage

I hope that's said in jest.

Of course it was.

These boards with but rare exception are one of the better examples on the Internet.

Is that damning with faint praise?

Re: Why exponential progression doesn't work for damage

Hoy! I resemble that remark

 

Do feel free to drag more in like this one though. Stunning work on JAGS.

Marco is one of the best.

An excellent designer, and a good solid person.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

I see the point of the differences you're pointing out as of now. I'm still trying to decide if I think that fits with posts you've made on these kinds of subjects before or not.

Even those who generally can't stand me have admitted I'm consistent if nothing else. I don't believe you'll find a single post by me ever supporting a change in costing for any of the powers, skills, or characteristics in HERO.

You will find disagreement with certain changes in 5th edition, disagreements of style, or statements about rule sections I wouldn't use or would replace. But point costing and balance? Very rare if ever.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

Can we all come and play in your game? It sounds absolutely perfect.

Luke: "I don't believe it"

Yoda: "That is the reason you fail"

Re: Why exponential progression doesn't work for damage

Finally: Hi Brian

 

-Marco

Hi Marco!

Long time no see. Sorry I dragged you into the den of scum and villainy known as the HERO boards. I hope everything is going well for you.

Btw, was it just my browser or are some of the links on your webpage not showing stuff? The FAQ for example.

Re: Why exponential progression doesn't work for damage

Given this difficulty' date=' I don't think we can model damage/defence/BODY exponetially - mixing linear and exponential is just plain confusing - and if we don't do it in one part of the system, we shouldn't do it elsewhere.[/quote']

 

You worry too much, or rather are applying a correct worry to the wrong game.

 

HERO isn't designed to represent reality, it was originally designed to represent comic books using a fun and crunchy game system that is still rather easy to play. That's why it mixes linear and exp systems the way it does, it matches comic books.

 

You can reduce the problems by controlling your range of character/object construction, but the underlying concept will always be there. It's up to you if it bothers you or not.

 

If you can't put it out of mind, I'd suggest taking a look at JAGS (http://www.jagsrpg.org/), its a HERO like free product that attempted to correct some of the more glaring issues.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

Which' date=' given the amount of slamming you've done of the system with all the various things it "does wrong", is a [i']very[/i] elightening comment.

I freely admit that the changes I've done in order to match HERO to my own style of play and requirements are of my own creation and represent no true balance issues (with the exception off hand of 'Dive for Cover' vs. melee).

Thus I don't claim HERO's firearms are 'unbalanced' and thus seek to recost them.

No, I claim they aren't as realistic as I need and thus alter how I construct them- without changing base costs.

See the difference?

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

As a reasonably standard 350 point character facing a dozen agents' date=' would you rather they had 6d6 EB autofire blasters or 2d6 RKA autofire blasters?[/i']

In my campaign, neither weapon would give a 350 point character much cause for concern.

It seems we run very different campaigns.

Which once agains points out a truism with HERO, if it's a problem- it's highly likely to be one of your own creation.

Re: Book recommendation for guns?

Dark Champions indeed has everything you would want to know about modern guns in the Hero System' date=' but you might want to check out the HERO System Equipment Guide.

It will work if you want the offical, but really really crappy stats.

Re: A reason to play a 'straight' MA

Perhaps we are in a Star Wars analogy: Steve Long is The Chosen One who will bring balance to The Hero' date=' but first he'll take it to a very dark place indeed (check out 5ERs cover: we are not on a journey to the light side!).[/quote']

 

I find great amusement in this comparison. But it's likely due to my low opinion of the newer Star Wars movies.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

Whilst I agree with Fox1 as to the 'natural disincentive' to killing attacks: they kill people - it doesn't work in practice.

Again, I think you are considering your construction methods as the only solution to an issue at hand.

As characters, weapons and objects are constructed in my own campaign, the disincentive is very clear and solid in its impact.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

If we instead just use a Normal Attack with modifiers, we can streamline the system more by reducing the number of rules required. Killing Attacks, like EGO Attack, is an anomaly in the system. They are not power elements like other effects, but packaged powers.

If you wish to go down the path towards re-writing HERO system, you are certainly free to do so.

I however see no advantage to myself of any kind however. If this was ever done for a upcoming edition, I would not measure such a effort in what was gained- for it would gain nothing, but rather in what was lost. I imagine the result would be as lacking as FUZION was and for much the same reasons.

But we'll see if it every actually happens.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

I just don't like a flat x3 multiplier

If you don't like, you don't like. Nothing to be said about that. I find your reasoning however for doing so completely personal and campaign specific.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

Hit locations to determine Stun are fine for the hack & slash crowd' date=' but what about area effect KA's? Fireball, grenades, gas attacks, etc.[/quote']

 

I don't use Hit Locations for area effect/ex attacks, I just use a flat 3x stun multiple seeing no reason for more randomization than that which exists in the low number of dice used for KA resolution.

 

Something of an small edge to the KA over EB there, but again NOT killing people is considered an advantage in HERO.

Re: A reason to play a 'straight' MA

There you go' date=' the ayes have it. The full maneuver damage is added to the HA, including both extra DCs and the maneuver component itself.[/quote']

 

Just because it's official doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

Logically it SHOULD be an advantage but to make it one changes the balance (if such it is) that we have now

Besides, not killing people is considered an advantage in and of itself. That's why "Does Stun Only" is a -0 limit in HERO.

Re: Clubs, Lethal Weapons? (Killing Damage Not Normal)

So' date=' I just ran the detailed numbers on it for BODY and STUN vs. a range of armor types and the [b']Killing Damage Clubs are actually less Lethal than the Normal Damage Clubs because of the crippling Reduced Penetration Limitation![/b]

Are you restricting yourself to only book limitations?

If not, you can try something like one of my House Rules. It doesn't split the damage roll like Reduced Penetration, but instead just multiples any encountered resistant defenses by a set value.

For example, a -1/2 limit results in the resistant defense being increase by 1.5 times. So a 2d6 attack hitting a 2 rPD and 10 PD attack would be resolved as if the target had a 3rPD and 10 PD attack.

The full details are on my website under Limits- New\Armor Effect. Depending upon how big a deal it is in your compaign, you may want to change the limit value up or down a bit.

Re: A reason to play a 'straight' MA

OK.

 

The rules for adding damage to advantaged HAs are poorly organised and explained. I assume you can not more than double the advantaged damage of the HA no matter the source of the added damage, but that really is not clear.

 

I will post a question for Mr Long.

I was thinking the same, however there isn't anything that says the limit applies to Martial Arts and the example given did limit STR bonus to 2x.

I think it's a rather important flaw in the rules. They really over complicated that section in order to make some things as easy as they should be (like adding to weapons with a stun bonus).

Re: A reason to play a 'straight' MA

I didn't think so either' date=' originally. I was quoted the following earlier:[/quote']

 

So it seems.

 

I would still disallow it.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

I would be interested to see the builds in supers campaign that didn't have quite a substantial CV difference though. Of course it can be done: you just say everyone has to have a CV of 5 to 8 (or whatever) and that may be fine for that camapign' date=' but it doesn't reflect the apparent variations in the coic books. That may be of no concern in your game.[/quote']

 

There are other ways of dealing with the problem besides reducing the base CV spread.

 

However I strongly disagree that a lower spread doesn't reflect the comics. I've ran with a lower spread for years even before the hit location rules because I feel that it DOES reflect comics.

 

HERO uses a rather Bell for its hit resolution system, small modifiers go a long way.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

Now your games may be different' date=' and if so then you'll have less problem with hit locations, which is fine: as I said it is less of a problem in heroic games, maybe even a feature.[/quote']

 

Looking over your numbers I see one simple fact, that you've created your own problem in the design of characters allowed in your game (or perhaps your GM did).

 

There are other issues with high CV advantage that need to be dealt with in order to balance the game. As you have such values, I must assume you've dealt with them by altering character design or other methods. Yet here you use the words "That seems wrong to me." as if there is no way of dealing with the problem in a Superheroic game.

 

There a huge number of ways of dealing with it.

 

First up is to realize that hit location is a optional rule- not just in its entirely, but in its parts. So, 1. Don't use hit location for normal attacks, only kill attacks and 2. Don't allow called shots.

 

Problem solved.

 

The other solution is to build your characters such that they exist in a world with the full hit location rules. Not very hard at all actually.

 

Also problem solved.

 

 

Most problems in HERO can be resolved not by rule change or cost adjustments, but by careful character design and proper use of the rules as written.

Re: A reason to play a 'straight' MA

Second I don't think that the martial manouvres/DCs are going to add to a constructed power like that. If not the basis of the thesis is flawed.

From my memory without my books near me, it doesn't work like that.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

What Hugh said.

I don't read what Hugh says, he's on my ignore list. Making the assumption it had something to do with my last reply to you, I took a peek.

Wasn't worth the effort as usual.

Do you have your response? If not, I'll consider the subject closed.

Re: Has the game made anyone like comics even more?

I'll have to say that playing a superhero game made me dislike comics more. Before that I would just pick up a issue, read it and that was that.

After picking up gaming, I started to see all the disconnects that are the unavoidable result of never-ending stories and changing authors. I gave up on them completely shortly after the first edition of champions came out.

Now they do help me like the current movies and animated shows better.

Re: If you hate Killing Attacks, how would you replace them?

Those of you with high CV characters (and you know who you are' date=' Treb) probably have little problem in getting +6 to +8 OCV, which makes your attack's twice as powerful in damage terms. [/quote']

 

A campaign that allows an on the top CV advantage of +6 to +8 OCV over typical foes has more balance issues than just the balance between normal and killing attacks...

 

If you break the system, expect it to break.