Utech

Re: Help how do I balance PCs against NPCs

I second (or third or fourth...) the notion that running a few example combats is a good idea. It will help you and your players learn the ins and outs of the system and give you an idea of what to expect from different numbers.

A lot will depend on the kind of game you want to run. With just a little tweaking of a few characteristics, defenses, and damage, you can make your game:

- big suits of armor bouncing blows off of each other until they can get lucky, get help from a friend, or something similar

- an extremely deadly affair where a drawn weapon pretty much means somebody's going to die

- swift, lightly armored folks twisting out of the way of blades and then darting in to land the perfect shot

- a G-rated world in which hardly anybody important gets hit, nobody dies, and the teapots sing

- or a hundred other things.

Have fun!

Re: When sfx lie

Leaving the thread bewildered and saddened.

Re: When sfx lie

I'm with Markdoc here. You seem to be having a completely different conversation with different points to be made than everyone else. The question was if certain mechanics map poorly too certain sfx. DCV maps poorly to invulnerability. If you do something else to bandage the situation is really not the question. if you think others are missing the point such as Markdoc' date=' I ( never humbly) disagree.[/quote']

I'm not sure why you can't follow. I'll give it one last college try and then give up.

 

Does DCV provide you with perfect invulnerability? No. But no one has ever argued that on this thread. Let's drop that, shall we?

 

Is it OK to describe increased DCV with the sfx "invulnerability"? Of course. DCV maps very well to invulnerability. A failed "to hit" roll means that no damage dice are rolled. You are "invulnerable" to that attack. It doesn't matter how many (or few) dice are in that attack, you simply ignore it. That's invulnerability.

 

Can other things take the sfx "invulnerability"? Of course! High PD and ED, for example. Desolidification. Missile Deflection. All sorts of things map just as well as increased DCV.

 

Do you need to have increased DCV to describe any failed "to hit" roll with the sfx "invulnerability"? No. This is particularly appropriate for Brick characters. Players playing Bricks may be thrilled to have failed "to hit" rolls described as hits that bounce right off.

 

Is the sfx "invulnerability" a lie? No. It's not the whole truth, of course. There is no provision for true invulnerability in the HERO system by default. A poor GM could accidentally mislead his players to take unproductive actions by describing the sfx poorly, but a good GM would never run into that problem.

Re: When sfx lie

If Shale (High DCV' date=' sfx 'I tense up at the last minute in anticipation of the blow') throws himself in front of Penelope Pitstop so that the machine guns of the Ant Hill Mob can not perforate her pink perfection, is she actually protected?[/quote']

In this case, damage dice are rolled against Shale.

 

he effectively reduced his DCV to the point where he WAS hit so he does take the damage - which is 'mechanically' right - you might suggest that as he is interposing this somehow prevents him from tensing up properly.

Just so.

 

tell Shale's player that the build does not reflect the construct and he'd better think about doing it some other way.

Say who? The build perfectly reflects the construct. You just explained how. He didn't tense up properly and so takes some damage. No conflict.

Re: When sfx lie

Shrug. In that case' date=' you're having a discussion with yourself and nobody else on this thread.[/quote']

Maybe you should re-read the thread. Neither I nor anyone else suggested that increased DCV was all you'd need to be invulnerable.

 

The thread is about whether or not sfx lie. That's what I've been talking about the whole time. Honestly, I've no idea what you're talking about.

 

It's already been mentioned at least twice that damage negation can cause a similar effect.

Yes, it has. What's your point? As you're certainly aware, there's more than one way to skin a cat in HERO. High DCV is one way to model some aspects of invulnerability -- namely that people never get to roll to damage your character if they don't "hit".

 

This sentence makes no sense at all.

You don't agree that "you don't get to roll damage dice" can be represented by the sfx "I'm invulnerable to that attack". That's too bad. It's simply putting sfx on game mechanics. That's HERO.

Re: When sfx lie

Congrats you're handing free extra advantages to abilities. There's no straw man here or even a credible attempt by you to create one. Your answer seems to be"just change the power to MAKE it fit." It is a poor fit because the mechanic is designed to do something else which has everything with being nimble/

Explain please? I've said from the beginning that invulnerability would have to include a variety of defenses.

Re: When sfx lie

Right. That's one approach - but now you are saying that by defining his levels in DCV with a certain special effect ' date=' he ALSO gets free levels in ECV or extra free PD.[/quote']

When did I say that? It's obvious that anyone building a character meant to be "invulnerable" would buy more than DCV. Please, do not put words in my mouth.

 

Agreed. This argument is not about "invulnerability" per se' date=' but about poor matches between SFX and power set.[/quote']

No. This is an argument about between those who see "you don't get to roll damage dice" as equivalent to "invulnerable" and those who insist that "you don't get to roll damage dice" must equal "you missed".

 

You could for example' date=' take a player with super-running and define it as "flight". Would you then allow the payer to take off from the ground? It's within the scope of his SFX, after all, and he's no more paid for it than Invulnerable man paid for extra ECV.[/quote']

I wouldn't. Haven't suggested anything of the sort, either.

 

I like Hero system' date=' precisely because a little thought at character creation means that as GM I [b']know[/b] how the character works, which means actually running the game is a snap.

Excellent. Then you'll agree that thinking "if they can't roll any damage dice against my character, I'm invulnerable" is perfectly logical. You'll know how both how the character works and how the game mechanics function. You'll have expanded your horizons and opened up to another way to play. Snap on!

Re: When sfx lie

GM: "OK, actually Corporal Punishment misses, but he sees his attack bounce off - he's apparently invulnerable to bullets!"

Mind Lass. "OK, my TK is BOECV. I hit him with a thrown rock."

GM: "Ummmm, well, he's invulnerable to bullets, and Mighty Man's steel crushing blows ... but not to thrown rocks."

Congratulations, Markdoc, you've knocked the stuffing out of that straw man! I doubt he'll come up again. (I hope not. I'm tired of seeing him.)

Let's start again:

GM: "Invulnerable Man smiles a wicked smile as Corporal Punishment's bullets bounce off his chest. Clearly he was ready for the attack. You'll have to catch him unawares or aim better if you want to do any damage."

Mind Lass: "OK, my TK is BOECV. I hit him with a thrown rock."

GM: "He wouldn't very well be called Invulnerable Man if he weren't a tough nut to crack! He's a nut all right. And plenty tough. Roll to hit."

Mind Lass: "How's that?"

GM: "Not good enough. The rock bounces off his chin. At best, you helped remove a bit of scruff he missed with the morning shave."

As far as I can see' date=' DCV really doesn't map will to invulnerability - as your example shows: there's a ton of ways to get around it - many of which don't correspond to doing more damage or even hitting more accurately.[/quote']

There's nothing in HERO that maps perfectly to invulnerability. High ED, PD, Mental Defenses, Flash Defenses, Power Defenses, Desolidification . . . you name it, there's bound to be a way around it. Which means if your schtick is invulnerability, you'll need to cover more than one base. No one has argued that.

 

Whether you buy increased DCV or not, however, it's perfectly within the rules to describe any "miss" result as a "hit" that does no damage and call that "invulnerability" or "chin block" or "damn I'm good" or "the Force" or "cheese factor X" or "Larry". That's particularly appropriate for Bricks and similar characters whose schtick is all about being tough enough to bounce bullets and has nothing to do with being nimble. It's nothing but sfx and if it makes the game more fun for you to play, good on you! If you're not able to suspend your disbelief enough, then don't allow that particular sfx in your game.

Re: HERO SYSTEM MARTIAL ARTS -- What Do *You* Want To See?

Ninja-Bear, thank you. You certainly took my point as it was intended. For those who missed it, I am in no way shape or form suggesting that parkour is a martial art in the real world. What I'm suggesting is it makes a good common reference point in popular culture for how someone might be inspired to create a new martial art.

Re: When sfx lie

Obviously we've got strong disagreement here. I think it's fair to say that while some people can't abide the particular sfx-DCV combo described in the OP, others have no trouble with it at all. Neither camp is likely to persuade the other. Best advice: make sure your group agrees on what is and what is not acceptable. That's all that really matters.

Game on.

Re: HERO SYSTEM MARTIAL ARTS -- What Do *You* Want To See?

I noticed a few people asking about parkour and Steve's note that he would not include it as a martial art. I think that's fine, but I also think it might make a good example for writing up a martial art not included in the book.

Something along the lines of:

David Belle has seen a lot of parkour videos on YouTube and loves parkour sequences in movies. He asks his GM if he can take parkour as a martial art. David's GM says that it seems to him that parkour can be modeled with extra Running and Acrobatics. David whips out his notebook PC and plays the trailer for District 13: Ultimatum - a movie in which the traceurs engage in plenty of martial arts. David's GM says he's willing to create a new parkour martial art with David so the two put their heads together and come up with a list of moves. Kicking and punching seem really important. Fighting groups of people is also key -- as is the use of things in the environment to strike and/or disrupt opponents...

Re: When sfx lie

It's been mentioned but this is essentially reconstructing D&D's Armor Class' date=' where an attack that would successfully hit AC 10 modified by DEX would actually "hit" but if it didn't overcome the additional AC provided by your armor the attack was considered to have been blunted.[/quote']

What are you talking about? There are plenty of examples of just this among the thousands of published HERO characters. Characters are built with increased DCV (often through increased DEX) provided by power armor or a magical necklace or focused qi or what-have-you. An attack that would successfully hit the character without the power armor (or whatever) fails to hit because of the additional DCV provided by the armor. There is no difference.

 

The problem is that the HERO lexicon has "hit" established as successfully targeting' date=' start warming up the damage dice.[/quote']

 

That's a very narrow reading of the HERO lexicon! It makes as much sense as insisting that every Strike be a punch, every Block be interposing a limb, and every Dodge be something you can do only against dodge balls. The rulebook is full of counter-examples. If the Attack Roll fails, the attack doesn't harm the target and the character's Phase ends. If the Attack Roll succeeds, the character must determine how much damage the attack does and/or what other effect it has. Insisting that failed Attack Rolls mean that the target was in no way touched is limiting and often silly -- as when a Brick winds up on Godzilla and rolls an 18 and you insist that means he slipped on a banana peel or some other nonsense.

 

If you start eliminating perfectly valid sfx, you end up telling perfectly good players that their ideas can't be incorporated into HERO, which leads to the door, which leads me to think that it is a bad idea.

Re: When sfx lie

So what would counter this construct?

A better roll to hit.

The GM very clearly indicates (examples earlier in the thread) that you failed to be accurate enough to damage the target. You are in no way duped -- you understand that a better to hit roll would have succeeded in doing damage. Honestly, what's difficult about this?

Re: When sfx lie

sometimes the only way to do that is to reveal the mechanic at work and not only does that make suspension of disbelief harder' date=' it reveals the mechanics that sfxc are there to hide i.e. it makes the sfx pointless.[/quote']

Sorry, but that's bunk. We all know about the mechanics in the game. We're constantly reminded. Every time we pick up the dice or cite their results, we're reminded. Every time we mark off some STUN damage or check to see if our total will be enough to Mind Control the mook into shooting his boss, we're reminded.

 

I'm certainly not so tender that it would eliminate my suspension of disbelief or ruin a game to have a GM tell me "You were right on target. He took that shot right in the chest -- seemed to invite it! -- and he took no damage at all. You're convinced, however, that if you could aim just a bit better, you might be able to wipe that smile off his face. His face. Yeah, that's the ticket. By-the-way, your roll was a miss."

 

The other way - and most important way - that sfx lie doesn't involve mechanics at all. If Slippery Jane' date=' a martial artist with no resistant defence, decides to 'chin block' a 90mm DU tank shell, that is a lie, a lie that is harmful to the integrity of the game.[/quote']

We call that bad role playing. It's mentioned often in the rules.

Re: When sfx lie

But DCV simply doesn't map well to the SFX described' date=' in this case[/b'].

 

cheers, Mark

Sure it does. Someone attacks, they "miss", it is described as a "hit" -- the GM makes it clear that mechanically it was a "miss" -- and the character seems to be practically invulnerable. You'll have to roll much better to find the chink in that armor.

Naturally, you'll also need more defenses to cover certain situations, but since when is that new? If you go with lots and lots of PD/ED, you'll still need to pick up tons of Power Defense and Mental Defense and Flash Defense (to counter those nasty AVLD attacks), etc.

DCV maps extremely well to the sfx.

Just an idea I thought I'd pass on. Do with it as you will. This is meant as a B plot for an existing campaign -- not the main arc of a campaign -- but it could certainly shake things up in your campaign world.

Our heroes are first alerted that something bad is afoot when all the lights go out in Campaign City. A powerful paranormal attacked and severely damaged the coal-fired power plant that supplies the power. Machinery is in ruins, the train tracks that lead to the plant have been slagged, and a coal-carrying train is afire. Plenty of normals are in danger and need assistance, but no one was injured in the attack.

Later it becomes clear that coal plants and coal mines around the globe are being targeted and attacked. All by the same paranormal. Clearly, somebody has a thing against coal.

The closing of so many coal plants and suppliers is causing terrible disruption in power supplies around the world. Known villains are taking advantage of this to

• commit crimes
  
• manipulate the commodities market
  
• spring their friends from prisons
  

and so on -- as is their wont. Our heroes have their hands full dealing with all the disruptions and it's hard to find any time to track down the paranormal responsible for all this.

The paranormal goes on a real spree. He hits a couple of large automobile factories and disables a couple of oil supertankers. He simply must be stopped.

While other heroes around the world work to contain the chaos, our heroes are tasked with tracking down the paranormal and stopping him.

Tracking him down is a problem since nobody seems to know anything about him. He's not known on any continent. At last (of course) our heroes do manage to track him down. He's a citizen of the Maldives, a superpatriot who cannot stand the thought of his entire nation going under water. That's exactly what will happen if global warming causes sea levels to rise. The Maldives cannot wait around while other nations dither and pass half-measures that won't change the looming doom of the Maldives one whit. He demands to know of our heroes, "Would you do anything different if you were in my position? I am a hero! I am saving my country. I am saving a people with 5,000 years of history. And here you are. What will we do now? Do we fight? I don't want to fight you. You should join me."

And, of course, I leave that ending up to you and your players. Put the hurt on him, help him find a better way, join him... Whatever floats your campaign's boat.

Re: Talk to me about: Haymaker

Grab bad guy (your choice: Brick character, Martial Artist, TK, etc.) and everyone gathers 'round for a Haymaker fest.

Entangle bad guy (your choice: Takes No Damage From Attacks or simply a low level Entangle only meant to immobilize someone for a second -- 1d6 AOE can be nasty) and everyone gathers 'round for a Haymaker fest.

Invisibility and/or great Stealth roll = Haymaker time!

Blinded bad guy (your choice: Flash, Darkness that your heroes can see through, etc.) and everyone gathers 'round for a Haymaker fest.

Re: A way to fend off attackers

Change Environment is clearly meant for just this sort of thing. Anyone entering the area will have to make a roll (your choice, but EGO, DEX, or PRE make sense) or be forced to back off. They take no damage from the attack and could certainly improve their roll by taking a little time and preparing. Likewise, with the proper preparation, they could easily counter the Change Environment -- a shield, long weapon, or cloak, for example, could easily be used to disrupt and/or foul the spear flourish.

Re: When sfx lie

Sean, I really don't understand your basic premise. How could the sfx possibly lie? Your GM could lie to (or mislead) you, but the sfx can't.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with building a character normally and saying that any missed attack roll is actually a hit that does no damage. You don't have to buy more DCV with this sfx, it's just the way you conceive of your character. As long as your GM agrees, you're good to go.

You certainly want to be transparent about the mechanics of this with your players. Let people know that mechanically they missed on their attack even though sfx-wise, they hit.

This is really no different from the way Powers work in the game. You can let people know that mechanically they've been struck by a Killing Attack even though sfx-wise, the fire blast didn't look any different from a normal attack.

Re: Invisible Armor

Something like Combat Luck is sort of a necessity for game balance... no-armor wearing guys who rely on agility to survive in combat need *some* mechanism to survive the AoEs' date=' Dive for Cover doesn't always cut it. I agree that it does cause some irregularities in SFX though[/quote']

Another option is to have a GM that understands that each character deserves to be challenged in their own way. No-armor wearing guys don't need Combat Luck if the GM and players are all agreed that the no-armor guy won't be dealing with the same attacks that near-indestructible guys will.

 

If you prefer more of an egalitarian game where the same sorts of attacks are thrown at all PCs, Combat Luck is a lot more necessary.

Re: When sfx lie

I would be extremely wary of any construct that would logically lead a character to haymaker when they should be spreading or vice versa.

No build can do that. Only a GM who isn't doing the job properly.

Re: When sfx lie

It depends on what "hit" means in your games. It can mean at least two things:

1) Contact is made.

2) Effective contact is made.

These lead to very different descriptions.

If your game prefers 1, you might say things like, "Your blast passes within an inch of her face, but she must have anticipated the attack -- you fail to strike her and she emerges unscathed."

If your game prefers 2, you might say things like, "She tilts her head in your direction, holds up a hand, and catches your blast. Though disappointed, you're certain that with better aim, you'd catch her unawares and wipe that smile off her face."

Re: Invisible Armor

If the power provides clues to the observer to make tactical decisions then it is Visible. No one smart wastes bullets on Colossus because he has Visible Resistant Protection; they shoot at a different one of his teammates or opt for something that might scuff his armor. People still seem to want to take a shot at Superman' date=' even with his reputation, because he looks like he has bullet-vulnerable flesh.[/quote']

That's one way to look at it. Colossus and Superman, however, are in comics where supposedly smart opponents shoot at them with very strong attacks rather than using those strong attacks against fellow heroes with little or no armor. In games based on that sort of source material I'd absolutely expect both smart and stupid opponents to shoot at Colossus and Superman while ignoring (or using lesser attacks) against Cyclops and Robin.

 

If you are in a more realistic game, however, your GM may well want you to spend some points on something that causes your well-armored character to draw fire. Reputation might be enough.

Re: Apology

I don't personally have any problem with archers unloading on hand-to-hand combatants standing right next to them. Sure, you need space to properly prepare and aim, but you also need space to attack with a two-handed sword. It strikes me as cinematic and exciting to allow an archer to duck, dodge, weave, and fire arrows at opponents whether those opponents are down the block or within spittin' distance.

Re: Beginner suggestion for a free download

I think you'd want not just one quicky downloadable adventure, but several. One for each of the major HERO genres. I'm afraid I don't have time to work on all that right now, but it's something for the "someday" list.