Ki-rin

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

Plastic Man fits the definition of several archtypes including Brick. (He's so friggin' hard to kill that being ripped into shreds and being scattered throughout the ocean didn't kill him.)

Yes, Plastic Man or Elastic Man or Reed Richards are very interesting characters to try and categorize their combat roles using the HERO stereotypes with.

Tough? Absolutely. Bricks? I'm not sure because their combat role doesn't tend to fit the Brick stereotype except possibly in the "damage sponge" role.

Iron Man (who Defender from the Champions source book is a decent version of) has a 55-60 STR (according to the old Marvel Universe Handbooks at least). He's more known for blasting his opponents with his suits 'Blasters' than he is for punching them with his suit-enhanced STR.)

Iron Man is definitely a Brick/EP hybrid. Most PA supers are. That's kind of why "PA" is an archetype itself, yes?

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

Perhaps you need to define "play balanced" for us. Are you requiring bricks do identical damage to other archetypes?

Hugh has correctly noted that "play balanced" can be a complex calculation.

The bottom line is that everyone playing should be able to enjoy themselves without damaging anyone else's right to do the same.

"Interesting" and "Fair" are the key values.

Since we are talking about combat centric efficiency, let's simplify the problem to "combat balanced".

If multiple characters spend equal points on being good in combat, they should be equally good in combat overall.

Clearly, they can have very different things they are good at. One might be faster. One might be tougher. One might be very accurate. One might dish out enormous amounts of damage. etc.

But each of them should be ~ equivalent to their peers in "combat CP spent" in how long they can survive and how effective they can be while fighting.

The first pass metric I use for offensive combat effectiveness is

(chances to attack)*(chance to hit)*(damage dished out)

All characters that have spent the same amount of CP on offensive combat effectiveness should be ~ equal by that equation.

Bricks tend to maximize the last term of that equation. Which means that they need to have lower values in the other two catagories to be combat balanced compared to their peers.

Me, I can't see any reason not to run a STR 60 brick with several martial maneuvers.

I have already repeatedly said I agree. But if the team's best brick is also the team's best MA, that kind of leaves the team's MA "out in the cold".

There are even ones that don't add to damage, such as Defensive Strike or Nerve Strike or, for that matter, using ones that do add damage. Bricks hitting as hard or harder than most MAs or EBs seems quite consistent with the source material.

Again, I have repeatedly said I agree with this.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

Um.... I build a character with STR 60 whose primary form of offense is a Ranged Multi Power?

 

really.... you can't be serious.

 

No you are. I should have kept ignoring you.

You know I was not being that shallow. Your claim was

Originally Posted by ghost-angel

(High STR is) A defining characteristic (of a Brick). Not THE defining characteristic.

 

You can build low STR brick and high STR bricks.

 

You can build an Energy Projector with high STR. . . even in 5E with Figureds.

As they say in court, "Objection: assumes facts not in evidence"

To provide evidence for your PoV, you have to provide

1= a character concept that everyone will agree has low STR yet is a Brick.

2= evidence how you will play balance a 60 STR EP in campaigns set at various CP levels. This may be ridiculously easy in a 1000 CP game, but can it be done for the default CP level HERO assumes? How small a CP budget can you still prove the concept is validly play balanced? Etc.

EDIT: corrected typo below

In most games with a 12 DC cap, an EP with 60 STR would at first blush appear to be a real threat to other characters roles and schticks.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

A defining characteristics. Not THE defining characteristic.

 

You can build low STR brick and high STR bricks.

 

You can build an Energy Projector with high STR. . . even in 5E with Figureds.

There's no fair way to evaluate the validity of claims like these without examples to back them up.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

I'll do one better.

 

Here is a 65 STR MA that is balanced with the rest of the members of their team (link to team is at the bottom of my sig).

 

Edit: Here is a 60 STR one as well.

If one follows canon as closely as possible...

Wonder Woman is a demi-god 2nd in power only to Superman...

Aquaman is more a Mentalist than a Brick...

(60 STR ! When has Aquaman acted like he had a 60 STR?)

(Of more concern is that you are giving Arthur/Orin a 60 STR in a campaign where Diana is only 65 STR ? and SUPERMAN has a 60 STR ?!?)

Your JLA are clever builds. If they are intended to be homage builds, you and your GM need to have a talk to make sure character concept is staying true to the source material.

You've got some interesting ways of min-maxing that probably need discussing as well.

...and the JLA are =not= play balanced with regards to each other.

Case in point from your own set of examples. Folks like

http://killershrike.com/MiscCharacters/Contributions/Hyper-Man/Supers/JLA/The%20Archer.HTML

are on the same team as the above and

http://killershrike.com/MiscCharacters/Contributions/Hyper-Man/Supers/JLA/The%20Dark%20Knight.HTML

not to mention

http://killershrike.com/MiscCharacters/Contributions/Hyper-Man/Supers/JLA/The%20Green%20Alien.HTML

and (of course)

http://killershrike.com/MiscCharacters/Contributions/Hyper-Man/Supers/JLA/The%20Man%20of%20Steel.HTML

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

So... what I'm wondering is... if a brick is born with high STR, say 60, and learned from childhood to control and interact with "normal" reality... what's the mechanism stopping them from becoming a Martial Artist?

 

Oh.. right... nothing.

100% agree.

And if you can come up with a 60 STR MA that is play balanced compared to the other PCs, you are welcome to play such in any supers campaign I ever run.

High STR doesn't preclude mixing in any other Archetype, nor does High STR actually make on a Brick Archetype even if that is a defining trademark.

The first statement is obvious. There are no DnD like character classes in HERO.

The second is a bit tricky. After all, as you yourself say, high STR is the defining stat of a HERO system Brick.

Prior to 6E, high STR and high CON were all but requirements for a Brick because of the Figureds involved.

Even if we ignore that, the reality is that the tricks Bricks are known for are essentially feats of great STR.

I'm not sure most would call a character a Brick if it conformed in every way to the Brick stereotype with the sole exception of much lower than Brick standard STR.

I suspect that most would classify a character according to what it can =do=.

"No Brick Tricks because the STR is not there" would imply "not a Brick" to those.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

In my games' date=' Bricks are not born with 50 STR (OK, not all of them are). They have lives prior to obtaining super powers. There is nothing to prevent a character in an accident which grants him super-strength having been a martial arts student before the accident. Such a character would have a high Strength and Martial Arts.[/quote']

MAYBE.

 

Axiomatic to MA study is that a major part of it is learning to know yourself very well and then using that knowledge to control yourself to a high degree. (A "true" MA will apply this principle to both physical and non physical traits. Not all MA do.)

 

If STR 10 Charles Fort origins into the STR 50 Brick Fortress, he's just become 256x stronger. Usually in less time than it ordinarily takes for him to drink a cup of coffee (heck, maybe drinking the coffee =was= the origin!).

 

Realistically, there is NO WAY Fortress going to be able to use the MA he used to know in a controllable or predictable manner without extrensive retraining.

Heck, he's going to have trouble doing ordinary life tasks w/o disasters taking place until he's gotten used to his new found STR.

 

A Brick could certainly be trained after gaining his powers. Nightcxrawler trained Colossus in acrobatics. Cap trained Tony Stark in martial arts. If adding a bit of MA training creates a huge advantage for the Brick, why would he not learn it? Sure, some Bricks would be too impatient, overconfident, etc., but Bricks don't come with a one size fits all personality. Or at least they shouldn't!

Colossus did not become a circus capable acrobat. He learned some =basic= falling and tumbling techniques.

Tony Stark learned =basic MA= from Cap =specifically= for when he was =not= Iron Man.

(see below for some of the problem of a super strong brick doing MA precisely and controllably)

 

In game terms, neither Colossus nor Tony spent nearly enough time at anywhere near the level of commitment needed to give them serious abilities in these areas. Such stuff takes intense, regular training over a period of months and years. And even after you get it, you have to maintain it or you will lose it.

 

Picking up a few techniques to round yourself out is =not= the same as becoming an acrobat or a MA.

 

How many real world 50+ STR Martial Artists have worked with these techniques to allow you to reach this conclusion in an objective manner?

Physics doesn't change just because one has not witnessed a specific example of a physical effect. A tree =does= make a sound if it falls in the forest regardless of whether anyone is there to hear it.

 

If it takes 1% of your maximum STR to do something, it'll be easy to learn to do it precisely and correctly. If it takes 1/25600 or even less of your maxmium STR, your margin of error is very, very small. Doing something in a controlled and precise manner will be correspondingly more difficult.

 

"Realistically", a punch from someone with enough strength to heft a battleship should go straight through a human being. It doesn't. Nor does the battleship just snap in half, or get a hole punched in its hull, when supported by that tiny set of hands. We accept compromises to reality to make the game playable, and achieve the effects we see in genre.

Some compromises are forced upon us by issues of playability or game balance. That does not mean we should just ignore opportunities to improve the system so we can reduce the need for those compromises .

 

The in-game balance on this is that obviously punching holes through people puts you in a whole different catagory of "Bad" than just mixing it up every now and then. Even causing $millions in property damage is not going to p*ss people off as much as having a Rep for being a Casual Killer.

 

Supers who act like villains or commit illegal acts get stopped. Supers who are Casual Killers make many more, much more ardent, enemies. Casual Killers are themselves =killed= ASAP. Using any means necessary.

 

Why does a villain find inflicting NND STUN and BOD damage something he wishes to avoid, again? That just makes him even more dangerous, doesn't it?

I never said anything to suggest that a villain would want to avoid inflicting non-ND. But see above and below for some serious provisos.

 

If you don't allow STR to augment all martial maneuvers by default, the balance issue is largely resolved. Hay - maybe that's why, in Hero, STR doesn't automatically add to all martial maneuvers!

...and create other problems that my play group, which includes real MA, occasionally find too inconsistent or too illogical to ignore.

 

Such over-simplification or inconsistent game mechanics to protect game balance because the underlying mechanics are broken is one reason why many of us who used to play games like DnD stopped and went looking for a better RPG system.

 

You add power to STR in the name of realism, but the realistic result should be that high STR characters would then tend to learn these new ways to augment their effectivness

Yep. And they will have the opportunity. Some will even take advantage of it to some extent.

 

But character concept and game balance are going to trump everything else.

 

Any real MA will tell you that studying a MA to the degree needed to get the benefits we model in HERO as MA skills, MA maneuvers, let alone MA +DC classes, requires regular, ongoing, and nontrivial commitment.

 

Commitment that most can not keep up. Commitment that especially most Bricks are not going to see a need for or feel the desire to keep up.

("What do you mean, I have to learn to punch? *puts hole through steel plate with one swing* Looks like it works well enough to me. Can =you= do that, Mr 'sensei'?")

Re: "revised" hit location chart?

Here's an idea that I think might add reasonable realisim while not slowing play much or be too hard to explain/understand.

Unless you are using a Called Shot, you aim Low, Medium, or High intending to hit whatever opportunity presents in those areas.

Hitting Low is a bell curve centered on the lower 1/3 of the body.

Hitting Medium (the default if no intent is stated) is a bell curve centered on the center 1/3 of the body.

Hitting High is a bell curve centered on the upper 1/3 of the body.

For each +1 that you make your To Hit roll by you can adjust the randomly generated location of the hit by + or - 1.

For further realism, one can take facing, height difference, etc into account when deciding which hit locations are in the Low, Medium, or High zones.

I ?think? this will result in greater realism while being much faster than using a full blown set of custom Hit Location tables.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

That's not so. Damage bonuses added by a Maneuver' date=' and Extra DCs purchased for Martial Arts, only add at half the rate to Killing Attacks. [b']Strength[/b] adds normally (+1 DC per 5 Str) unless there are damage-affecting Advantages on the KA (which generally there aren't on a Killing Strike Martial Maneuver).

I never said otherwise. But KD is more expensive than ND so

+5 STR => +1d6 ND. +15 STR => +1d6 KD.

The MA gets a bonus here since +1 MA DC => +5 STR or +1d6 ND but +2 MA DC => +1d6 KD.

By the way, the halving for Maneuver bonuses and Extra Martial Arts DCs seems to be gone in 6E. It appears a DC is a DC for Maneuvers and Extra DCs now too.

??? MA DC add the same amount of damage dice to an attack regardless of damage type in 6ED!?

I =can't= have read that correctly.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

Incorrect. His post was referring to Martial Maneuvers that do NND' date=' Killing or Flash Damage. STR does not add to those by RAW.[/quote']

Agreed for NND and FD.

 

Not true for KD =if you are using a STR powered weapon=

 

MA or not, if you are using a weapon powered by your STR, STR does add to damage done by these in RAW.

 

p403 5ER "STR may add to the damage done with melee weapons."

No qualifier about ND or KD.

IMHO, this makes sense with STR powered thrown weapons like spears as well.

(But not missile weapons where the energy is previously stored like Bows or guns.)

 

In campaigns where STR minimums for STR powered weapons are enforced, when and how much STR you can add to the weapons base damage is modified by the rules on p478 5ER "STR Minimums".

 

Adding damage to a KA is 2x the cost of doing so for a NA, so +2d6 ND from STR is only +1d6 KD if added to the weapon of the appropriate type.

 

Also, you can't mix damage types via the STR bonus. You can't add +2d6 ND from STR to a weapon that does KD. Nor can you add KD from STR to a weapon that does ND. And of course NNDs are in a category by themselves.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

STR isn't going to boost the effect of NND's' date=' KA or Martial Flashes but DC's/levels will. Which is why I mentioned it. I believe (and I could be wrong) STR does add to your KA just that it takes 2 normal DC to equal 1 killing DC.[/quote']

Mild correction.

 

RAW, STR will boost the damage of a KA using a STR powered =weapon= (sword, staff, spear; but not Bow, M-16, etc) as well as NA.

 

Otherwise the above is correct RAW.

...and it makes no physical sense.

 

BTW, I thought that it never made sense that you couldn't add STR to your NND martial manuever. But if you bought an NND on a HA then you could add so many points of STR for free. (I think it was upto the unmod ? Gotta look at the book.) I know that this created a lot strife with the people I was gaming with at the time.

 

Don't get me wrong the Martial Arts is great in Hero, I just think that it has alot of inconsistances.

Yep. Those inconsistencies bothered both myself and my gaming group enough that we started to look for ways to resolve them while still keeping HERO system balanced.

 

Ki-Rin as a side note, I agree with the -1/4 lim for str and I too have had trouble with it.

I'm just doing the best I can to make HERO as good as it possibly can be.

Re: "revised" hit location chart?

2d6x3 gives 1331 possible results.

Ummm, No.

2d6 gives 6^2= 36 possible locations.

Multiplying by a constant doesn't change the number of possible locations.

Just changes their numbering from 3-18 to 3*(3,4,5,...,18)= 9-54.

3d6 gives 6^3= 216 possible locations.

4d6 gives 6^4= 1296 possible locations.

5d6 gives 6^5= 7776 possible locations.

(Note also that the bell curve becomes more "spike like" as the number of dice increases.)

If you want 1331 possible locations, then you need 3d11= 11^3= 1331.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

I thought higher STR meant lower SPD and DEX' date=' and lower chances to hit. And more STR means further reductions. Are you now going back on that claim?[/quote']

Nope. I meant what I said.

 

But as Trebuchet correctly noted, high amounts of STR give a character a multi-purpose tool all by itself to compensate, both in and out of combat, for having less stats or abilities in other ways.

 

In effect, Brick class STR is the original EC, MPP, or VPP of HERO.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

When I review characters' date=' I look at play balance from all angles. Superior offense could be offset by reduced versatility, reduced defenses, reduced mobility, etc.[/quote']

We 100% agree.

 

What prevents the 50+ STR Brick learning a bit of MA? Why not get a CHoke Hold, Nerve Strile and HKA when your STR immediately bumps them to competetive level attacks? Normally, the MA DC's to raise them are too expensive, but when STR boosts everything, this seems like a reasonable build. Why can't a Karate student become a Brick instead of a much more skilled Karate master? It's hardly an unreasonable concept!

Every character concept has to be both interesting/fun to run while at the same time not ruining anyone else's interest/fun.

 

That's ultimately what I mean by "play balance".

 

As for pure Bricks learning MA, there's at least two in game controls on this:

1= Bricks and MA approach life and combat differently.

Bricks who can do things like lift planes, throw tanks, and rip bank safe doors off their hinges are not usually of the mind set to be MA.

 

2= As someone else noted earlier, TOO MUCH STR GETS IN THE WAY OF DOING MA. Choke holds pop heads off. Grips Crush bones or destroy other structural components. Nerve strikes shatter things instead of numbing them.

Precision of effect necessarily becomes more difficult as your margins of error shrink due to the amount of power you are used to using by default.

(not to mention the problems of being precise when your attacks cover larger amounts of target area.)

 

Meta-game, there are issues of play balance that must be enforced to avoid destroying the game for other players by stepping too much on their roles or schticks. Or by having a super munchkin so outclass others that the others cease to enjoy themselves.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

Why? We've already agreed Thor and Captain America work fine on the same team. I'm pretty sure we'd agree that Thor's defenses and attacks are significantly higher than Cap's. I haven't noticed that Thor misses very much; in point of fact he's an extremely skilled warrior even by Cap's standards.

...and in the Avenger's Cap's role is more as Team Leader and overall strategist and tactician for exactly the reason that Cap is not as useful in situations where the raw power of Iron Man, Thor, Vision, or Wonder Man is.

OTOH, if you want something done =quietly= and as surgically as possible, you send Cap and the other non bricks instead.

That's the way it should be. Each kind of character concept has a different role in which it shines; and having access to a wide variety of them is synergistically better than the sum of their individual roles as long as they work as a team.

My thought is that this player brought you a well-thought-out character concept and asked you to build it. He wanted a character that had to think and use skill rather than raw power to accomplish his goals; which I think is entirely admirable. It seems to me it's unlikely he didn't realize he might be lower in several categories but still wanted to play that character as conceived. Maybe you ought to stop trying to shoehorn him into your view of what is balanced when it's not even clear "balanced" is what the player wants.

100% agree.

I spoke quite extensively with the player to make sure we both had the same understanding of the character concept before I started doing anything to model them using HERO game mechanics.

I'm doing the exact opposite of trying to "shoehorn him into my views".

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

Scanned back through and saw that - wow - that does make the faux strong Martial Artist officially a crazy efficient build. Ultimately that would seem to, if you were to allow it to affect figured characteristics, reduce the value of Not for Lifting as Strength now has expanded utility. Taking away lifting reduces it less that it would normally.

 

I think I might well be done with this one, I do pity the players that go with Mentalists and Energy Projectors or even just built using the rules; they're going to be left a bit in the dust point-wise.

Actually, Mentalists and EPs tend to be even more dangerous than Bricks or MA.

Particularly if they do not have to be physically within arms reach or have LOS to use their powers.

...and if they do not need to be =either= physically within arms reach or to have LOS, they can be downright ludicrously powerful.

Mentalists and EP properly played tend to run all over Bricks and MA of the same CP build cost.

Unless or until the Bircks or MA can successfully attack them. Then they tend to be toast.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

surprised that Find Weakness has not come up yet...

Find Weakness, like Missile Deflection/Reflection and any other (!) or (Stop!) Power, has always been something that a GM has to pay close attention to in order avoid damaging the play experience.

Moderate amounts, IF IT IS IN LINE WITH THE CHARACTER CONCEPT, can enhance play by increasing the variety of things that can happen during play.

Go overboard and you destroy the game balance and the play experience for at least someone in the room (including possibly the GM!).

Bottom line: characters should be fun to play; and if conceived to be effective in combat they must be play balanced against their peers who have spent equal CP on being good in combat.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

Err...what? Extra DCs for Martial Arts do not add to CV' date=' ever. They add to damage, or to the bonus Strength of certain maneuvers (e.g. Martial Disarm, Martial Escape, Martial Grab). Never ever to OCV or DCV. Maybe you're confusing them with CSLs?[/quote']

D'Oh! I have to stop posting when I'm too tired...

 

=OF COURSE= MA DC's can't be used for purely defensive maneuvers like Dodge or Dive For Cover. That's been true since at least 3ED.

 

The =actual= problem I was alluding to is what happens if a MA can take lot's of MA DCs +and+ CSLs.

Then their sheer flexibility can make them outrageously munchkin like in play.

 

IME letting MAs buy more than 2x their base DC in MA DCs or letting them get more than ~2-4 CSLs (and 4 is =BIG=) starts being imbalancing in play.

Especially so if said MA is already high on the DEX and SPD scale relative to other characters.

 

Again, sorry for the stupid mistake in the previous post.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

What I don't understand is why Ki-Rin implied this concept cost 40% more using RAW than it did with his rather minor Limitation on STR. Yes' date=' the build seems to be a bit overdone, but it still doesn't seem like it should be so expensive unless there's a lot more to it than we've seen. A 40% overage on a 350 point Champions character comes out around 490 CP. Nothing in his posts suggested a 500 point-level MA. Quite the contrary; it sounded like the character was perhaps dangerously underpowered.[/quote']

Offensively, (chances to attack)*(chance to hit)*(damage done when hitting) has to ~ be a constant between characters who have spent equivalent CP in the same areas.

Defensively, there's an equivalent equation.

 

This particular character's DEX and SPD are slightly better than middle of the road while their damage is on the low side. That means defences have to be higher to play balance the character.

 

Having a 10 STR and buying everyhing to the needed values separately is 1.4x the CP of buying the character's STR up to the DC point of the character concept.

 

That smacks of screwing the player in my book. So I went looking for ways to fix it.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

If you don't think 10 Str + 2 MA DCs is enough' date=' go with +6 MA DCs instead. **shrug** There's no limit there. Martial Arts DCs add to base damage (in 5E).[/quote']

+6 MA DCs is abusive. At the =very= least, I'm going to FORBID +11 DCV Martial Dodges! *shudder*

 

I think people pay too much attention to the stereotypical character concepts in any case. Build your character to do what you want him/her to be able to do. That's what the Hero System is about. We don't have character classes. The archetypes are just there as a descriptive way to get across to other people roughly the way your character is built, not as a way to restrict or railroad your abilities.

Agreed.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

I think you misunderstood me (and if you didn't them I apologize ): It's not that a brick has a multi-tool - which sounds like I meant a Brick Tricks Multipower or Power Tricks (STR) Skill; it's the STR itself that is the multi-tool. You can bend things with it, you can break things with it, you can lift things with it, you can hold things with it, you can catch things with it. It does pretty much anything we use cranes, bulldozers, beams and braces, fireman's nets, wrecking balls, battering rams, and other heavy equipment to accomplish IRL. A brick is a one-man rescue (or wrecking) crew.

 

The old axiom in our campaign is "There is no substitute for Strength."

Yes, we agree that STR itself is a multi-tool.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

You think Bricks and MA should both have high STR (albeit one limited to not lift things)' date='[/quote']

No I do not. The ~18-25 STR I expect in a MA is =very= different from the ~50+ I expect in a Brick.

 

Due to play balance issues, no higher SPD, higher DEX, more skilled character like a MA is =ever= going to be allowed to have the sheer brute power of a Brick.

If you want the STR of a Brick, you have to be an appropriate combination of slower, less dexterous, and less skillful in HTH combat than a "pure" MA.

 

...and by extension high REC and STUN (the PD isn't as much an issue as the MA would typically buy PD up to the 8 - 12 area anyway).

And again No.

 

The issue is play balance. =Some= MA concepts do not need particularly high PD, REC, or STUN.

The extreme is the "lightning fast egg shell". Good luck hitting him, but if you do even once, they are scrambled eggs.

 

In my games, martial artists generaly have sufficient STUN and REC for their niche with 20 - 23 STR and CON (8 - 10 REC, 30 - 35 STUN). They don't suffer from not having the much higher STUN and REC of the typical Brick because they don't have to soak up as many hits. They'd rather spend points on martial DC's (which, by RAW, do some things STR does not - you have removed that benefit) and cool martial arts tricks (you mention Brick Tricks a lot, but seem to ignore the fact MA's can also buy cool abilities as SX of martial arts).

The above are representative of =some= MA concepts.

Nice thing about HERO is that we've got the flexibility to explore others as well.

 

No character with NCM? A Martial Artist with 10 STR can buy damage classes to push himself up into Brick territory. Energy Projectors can buy any number of dice of EB or other attack powers without breaking NCM. DEX, SPD and CON are typically the stats EP's take above the NCM breakpoint. That scrappy guy with claws may only have a 15 or 20 STR, but can easily have damage classes on par with the Brick. Mentalists seldom hit the NCM for STR, but often have DC's similar to the Brick.

At some point that smacks of too much min-maxing or of character concept abuse.

 

10 STR MA taking 6+ MA DCs so they can dish out Brick sized Strikes is abusive for more than one reason. Especially if they expect to also have the DEX, SPD, etc usually associated with a MA.

 

Play balance requires that

(chances to attack)*(chance to hit)*(damage done when you hit)

is approximately constant for characters that have spent equal CP on the same category of attack.

 

In some games, DC's vary. In other games, everyone has 12 DC, but they get there in different ways.

I gave the criterion for play balance in combat above.

 

Brick with 60 STR gets 12 DC's. Martial Artist with NCM will have 20 STR, various strikes including Offensive Strike at +4 DC's. Add in 4 Martial Arts DC's and he can do the same 12 dice. Or, if he reduces his damage, he can enhance his OCV and DCV. Or he can use his Martial Arts levels to enhance his damage.

Giving a more dexterous, higher SPD, more skilled character the ability to do the same damage as one lesser in those categories is not fair.

 

You want the MA, typically harder to hit and faster moving, to have the same STUN and REC advantages the Brick's high strength provides.

Nope. Not even close.

 

 

The MA doesn't typically absorb damage - he avoids it. This is definitely true of Batman.

We agree.

 

Cap has high defenses through his shield, but at "peak human ability" of 30 STR and 30 CON, and let's say 20 rather than 30 BOD, he has 50 STUN and 12 REC. That's pretty high for a martial artist - especially with his 30 DEX and combat levels making him much harder to hit than those Bricks with maybe 20 more STUN and 6 more REC. And he can always use his Shield to absorb a big hit. Cap's more a Brick/MA hybrid than a true MA.

Cap's physical stats are not as high as you are making them unless in your world stat inflation has resulted in "normal" Olympic athletes with stats of 30 if you are staying true to canon source material.

 

If you are pushing Cap into physical stats +5 above what your game world's "normal" Olympic athletes have, you are indeed pushing him into being a Brick/MA. ...and making him nonhuman enough that his appeal to the Man On The Street will be significantly less.

 

In most games, the reward of MA is versatility. Faced with a high defense opponent, the Brick pummels ineffectually. The MA switches to a Nerve Strike or Choke Hold and does NND damage (which, again, under RAW would not be augmented by STR, only by MA DC's). Against an agile opponent, the Brick flails about ineffectually, while the MA switches to his high OCV attacks - if he's a team player, he Legsweeps or Sacrifice Throws the target allowing the rest of the team to successully connect. The MA has versatility. The typical Brick, even with Brick Tricks, is more focused and has less choices in combat.

...Then you haven't got Bricks that are being played well enough!

 

Well played, Bricks are =very= versatile; and the higher their STR, the more versatile they become.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

Alright' date=' I can see that. What I don't understand is why you think martial arts Damage Classes won't do what you need? After all, if you're harder to hit you're almost by default going to hit more often as well, so I don't see why an MA should be expected to hit as hard as a brick.[/quote']

MA DC won't do what I need because the character concept does not go far enough into "hard to hit" for it to be fair to be "an egg shell when hit".

 

In addition, while very skillful, the character's SPD*(Chance to hit)*(Damage when does hit) is not high enough with 2d6 STR + 2d6 MA DC. Yet the character is explicitly designed to be of average STR.

 

The character does not have Batman's infrastructure or toys/gadgets. Nor does he have semi-mystical armor and shield like Cap. He's a much more realistic hero than even most NCM heros in a supers campaign. Let alone the comparison between him and the real supers.

 

So for fairness, I need to give this character reasonably high defences and a bigger attack w/o violating the character concept or breaking game balance.

And when I did it using RAW, I ended up paying ~1.4x more CP for the concept than is fair IMHO. Thus my search for something more fair began.

 

Captain America (one of my absolute favorite heroes, BTW) fights on the same team as Thor, but nobody expects Cap to hit with the same power as the Thunder God. That sure as Hell doesn't mean he's some kind of wimp.

I 100% agree.

 

If a brick in the campaign is doing 10d6+ damage with his 50+ STR, why in the world would an MA with 20-25 STR, Offensive Strike (+4d6) and perhaps a couple of levels of Damage Class be considered inadequate?

Of course he wouldn't be! But that is not this character. This is a MA with 10 STR.

He gets things done MA wise using skill, not power.

 

What about horse archers?

Brick/EP hybrids.

 

I agree it is legit if it works in the context of your campaign, although I could point out that IRL martial artists are often known for performing feats that would often be attributed to strength but more often actually involve leverage and/or technique. Does the player of this MA you're working on feel his character needs to have a high STR (with Limitations, of course) in order to be competitive or to be fun to play? What kind of STR are we talking about here? 25? 40? 55? Surely the "little old man" master typical of martial arts films isn't using pure (if Limited) strength to perform his feats and bump up his defenses? I'm not certain you wouldn't be better off concept-wise buying some extra DC's, Leaping, and a bit of Damage Reduction or Combat Luck, but you know your own campaign best. Buying limited STR solely for the extra PD, REC, and STUN it provides rather than the "muscle" just smacks of metagaming to me (specifically, metarule #6). Even if it's technically legal it still feels to me like an attempt to end run the RAW; and I'm pretty sure I'd disallow it in my campaign if a player came forward with such a build.

The player came to me with a concept and asked me to build as best as I can for him.

That's about as far from trying to meta-game or min-max as it gets.

IMNSHO, it's in everyone's best interest to give that sort of player the best fair shake I can.

 

The player never asked for STR with a Limitation on it. Or any other way of building this character for that matter. He left how to build this character completely up to me. I the GM decided that the most fair way to build this character concept was with that game mechanic.

 

I'm allowing this character no more than 25 STR of this type in a campaign where the Bricks are often in the 50 STR range.

The Limited STR and the Figureds from it represent a lifetime of developing those stats for specifically those purposes.

 

He's a very narrow specialist while the average Brick has that STR multi-tool you spoke of earlier.

 

Do post the character when he's completed. It sounds like a cool concept even if I might not agree completely with your build. That's OK; you probably wouldn't agree with all of mine.

I'll try to.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

You seem to see the difference' date=' so why do you seem to think they need to be built in similar ways? One doesn't build a scalpel the same way one does a hammer. Both are excellent tools, but that's pretty much where the similarities end. MAs don't need the kind of CON, REC, or STUN Bricks do because they're supposed to avoid getting hit in the first place - that's why they tend to have higher SPD and mobility: to evade getting hit. Higher SPD for MA's isn't to allow them to hit their opponent more often; it's to give them enough Phases to Dodge or DfC to keep from being hit and still get in some counterattacks. I've never seen a Hero MA that didn't spend a good third of his or her Phases Dodging, Blocking, or otherwise evading attacks or recovering from them; attacks that many bricks can simply shrug off.[/quote']

First off, I believe it was you who said that the line between Brick and MA is a Blurry one? In fact, "increasingly more blurry" was closer?

 

I don't think Bricks and MA should be bought the same way. =BUT= I do believe that character concepts should be honored as long as it can be done in a way that's fair and fun for everyone in the group.

 

In the typical supers campaign, no character with NCM or whose concept is based on them being a superbly disciplined and trained yet otherwise normal member of the base population of the campaign is going to have the ability to dish out or take the kind of damage the typical superheroic Brick can.

Nor are they going to be able to do any of the rather large set of "Brick Tricks" a Brick's inhuman stats allow them to.

 

If STR for the MA is in the 18-25 range, STR for the Bricks is going to often be 50+, with "semi-Bricks" usually in the STR 35-40 range.

 

If SPD for the Bricks is going to be in the 2-4 range, SPD for the MA is going to be in the 4-6 range.

etc.

 

And then we come to Play Balance.

Defensively, the more hits you can take, the slower and easier to hit you should be. The less hits you can take, the faster and harder to hit you should be.

 

Offensively, the more damage you do when you hit, the less likely you should hit. The reverse is also true.

 

...and along comes a perfectly reasonable and well thought out character concept that has MA and combat survivability in the Batman or Captain America range but does not have the STR or other advantages of those characters.

I'm going to find a way to reward the player for doing the innovative and right thing regarding character design. I'M GOING TO MAKE IT WORK. That's my responsibility as GM.

(and my privilege. It rates to be a cool character. Especially given the player's IRL expertise in the subject matter the character is based on.)

 

(As an aside, I personally disagree that bricks are HtH specialists. As you note, they are blunt instruments, who IMO tend to use HtH because that's where their high STR and defenses are most useful. The HtH aspect is incidental; a serendipitous benefit to being strong, tough, and getting your hands on the enemy.)

=You= were the one who introduced the concept that Bricks and MA are both HTH specialists. I agree with your original statement.

 

Bricks and MA approach HTH differently just as heavy cavalry and light cavalry approach that differently. But neither Bricks nor MA is going to be as useful in a ranged EP role as that character concept will. Just as cavalry can not do the job of polearms or archers.

 

Strength has plenty of other uses than just delivering damage; it's the super equivalent of a multitool. There are plenty of major bricks out there in the source material with serious ranged attacks.)

BINGO! Dead in the black.

 

That's why "STR only for the purposes of figured characteristics and combat maneuvers but not for lifting or other feats of STR" is a legitimate (-1/4) Limitation to me as long as the math works.

 

As for a Brick's "serious ranged attacks", for pure Bricks they are usually "Brick Tricks" based on opportunity. They don't come close to being able to keep up with ranged EBs (Nor should they.).

 

Of course, just as there are Brick/MA hybrids, there are Brick/EB hybrids.

 

Let's not forget overall power levels either.

An accurate homage build of Thor involves building a =god=. 1000 CP is not unreasonable for such a character concept.

Re: fair cost for strength that isn't strong

And how exactly are you interpreting that as support of your viewpoint?!

 

If anything, it supports Trebuchet's argument since there is no mention of Bricks being "HTH specialists".

=Trebuchet= is the one who first called both Bricks and MA "HTH specialists".

Trebuchet in post #32 of this thread said...

There is no clear cut line between bricks and martial artists. Both are HtH specialists; and I've seen any number of "martial bricks" over the years who split the difference by leaning to one side or the other of the exceedingly blurry "dividing line."

I simply agreed with him on that point.

I also agree with everything you and he have said since about the roles and schticks of Bricks and MAs.

(there's nice literary consonance in the phrase "the roles and schticks of Bricks..." BTW)