Deadman

Heroic Action Points (HAP)

Okay I give.  Both Neil and Surrealone mentioned using Heroic Action Points and I have to say that I can't think of anything much more cinematic than that.  It will allow for major characters to somewhat change an otherwise catastrophic event and survive it.  On the other hand I do like a somewhat gritty feel to an adventure and allowing too many modifications could remove that. 

For that reason I would do several things: 

1. I would lower the roll from the 2d6 suggested in 6Ev2 pg. 287 to only 1d6.  
2. I would say that the GM may add HAP during the course of the game for Heroic, Creative, and/or Dramatic acts on the part of the player. 
3. I would say that the HAPs a character has are unknown to the Player.  They are rolled once per adventure by the GM.  
4. I would say that HAPs can affect almost ANY dice roll even those performed by others but this does depend on what die roll is being altered.
   1. Skill, Characteristic, Perception, To-Hit and Hit Location rolls are 1 for 1.
   2. Normal Damage attacks are 1 HAP per STUN (adding 3 STUN will automatically add 1 BODY) or 2 HAP per BODY (no STUN adjustment).
   3. Killing Attacks are 3 HAP per BODY or 3 HAP to raise the Stun Multiplier by +1.
   4. Other Attack modifications will based on a 1 HAP per 5 AP of the attack.
5. If a character spends HAP on something but doesn't have enough for the desired effect the points are still used.  They just don't adjust the roll enough to have the effect the Player wished.
6. Players may spend HAP to achieve Lucky Breaks (described in Luck below).  The cost is left for the GM to decide.
7. In an attack situation the defender gets the last say on HAP expenditures.  Just in case a bidding war starts.

HAP Example:  Hair Trigger is facing off against El Azteca's Lieutenant, El Escorpion and a couple of his cartel soldiers.  She is pinned down behind a short wall taking automatic fire.  Suddenly the shots stop and El Escorpion leaps the wall looking to surprise our Heroine.  The GM gives her a perception roll to hear him coming (he misses his Stealth roll of 12- by 1 but uses a HAP point to make it).  Her hearing Perception roll is 12- and she rolls a 13 (1 short of hearing the stealthy El Escorpion).  Her Player decides to use a HAP point to improve her Perception roll by one to make the roll.  She is not surprised when El Escorpion leaps over and they have to roll to see who can get the first shot off.  They each make a DEX roll which El Escorpion wins (neither spends any HAP points to increase it).  El Escorpion fires two shots at Hair Trigger using Multiple Attack (he has Rapid Attack) and is aiming for a Head Shot (this is a -4 OCV but nullified by his PSLs).  His total OCV for the attack is 8 (10-2 for Multiple Attack) and he rolls to hit.  He gets an 11 on the first attack and a 14 on the second.  Hair Trigger (DCV 6) is hit by the first (by 2) and is just missed by the second.  El Escorpion decides to use a HAP to lower his second roll to 13 to hit Hair Trigger (the nerve!!!).  Hair Trigger's player says that he will also spend a HAP to keep it a miss (El Escorpion can't spend more to raise it again as Hair Trigger is the defender).  The Hit location roll for a Head Shot is 1d6+2 and El Escorpion rolls a 5...(uh oh...our Heroine just got hit in the Head!).  Hair Trigger's player figures that she might be running out but tries to spend a HAP point to change the Hit Location roll to a 6 hitting her in the hand instead.  She has enough and El Escorpion rolls damage getting 4 BODY and 8 STUN in the Left Hand (hitting the hand is 1/2 BODY and the -x1 STUN Multiplier is offset by the Hollow Point bullet's +x1).  After her Combat Luck she takes 1 BODY, 0 STUN unfortunately she misses her DEX roll and drops the pistol that was in that hand.

Hair Trigger returns fire with the pistol in her right hand, shooting El Escorpion twice with her Quick Fire (Autofire 2 shots for pistols).  Her OCV is 10 and she cannot use targeting.  She rolls a 9 and hits El Escorpion (DCV 4 since he use Multiple Attack) both times.  She rolls a 9 and a 13 for Hit Location hitting him in the Shoulder and the Groin.  The Raw Damage is 5 BODY, 15 STUN from the first hit and 6 BODY 24 STUN from the second (Hollow Point bullets +x1 Stun Multiplier).  El Escorpion takes the first shot but worrying about the second elects to use 2 HAP points to change the location to 11 in the Chest where he is protected by his Jacket.  Unfortunately El Escorpion is out of HAPs and takes the shot to the Groin.  This means that the Stun Multiplier is +x1 and he takes 6 BODY, 30 STUN from the attack.  He ends up taking no damage from the first attack (Combat Luck and Armored Jacket) but takes 3 BODY, 19 STUN from the second Stunning him.  Hmmm...what is a good Vigilante to do?

Thoughts, Comments?

T

Here are a few more that have been brought down to 225 Points.  Many of these don't have Backgrounds and such.

Barracuda

Edge

Orion

Purgatory

Slash

Talion

The Shield

Commando

Here are some of the characters that could be used as starting PCs in my campaign.

Originals

Hair Trigger (with background, etc.)

Stone

Ace

Tracer

Hero System 6eV2

The Verdict

Alena Drake

Libra

Sarge

Blade

Hammer

Knockout

Shadow

15 hours ago, RDU Neil said:

I realize I mistyped... my range mods were off... I use the old DI range mods... so 3 game inches... six meters... that is where the first -1 kicks in.

 

You actually have AF hitting for every -1? wow... that seems really, really good. 

 

I know if you are playing much more realistic scales... where a five OCV is crazy good... that might make sense. But at cinematic levels, where PCs start at 6 OCV (comparable to 18 DEX or so) and have levels, that would get nuts good. Trained agents have a five or six total... standard cops and crimals, 4-5 OCVs... but only the non-combatants are at 2s and 3s. I think scale of the game really matters.

 

I can't remember if I posted this... but here are guidelines for "character levels" in game terms and game world terms.

 

Character Combat Skill Classes

 

“Be not afraid of greatness. Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and others have greatness thrust upon them.”

 

 -- Twelfth Night, Act 2, Scene 5

 

 

 

Secret Worlds characters, particularly Specials, are most often both superior in natural ability and highly trained. This combination makes them very dangerous combatants. Below are lists of mechanics along with a "descriptor" that gives a sense of how the character would be perceived by others.

 

 

 

Stat Level: OCV and DCV (Reflecting natural ability and combat experience)

 

·       Normal = 3

 

·       Athletic = 4

 

·       Talented = 5

 

·       Natural = 6 (A person twice as good as normal without any particular training)

 

·       Prodigy = 7

 

·       Phenom = 8

 

·       Peerless = 9 (A person three times better than normal without any particular training) 

 

OCV and DCV should be considered separately. A character could be a Prodigy in avoiding attacks (7 DCV) but only slightly better than normal in attacking (Athletic 4 OCV), if that matches the character concept. PCs are limited to Prodigy levels or below w/o GM permission.

 

 

 

Skill Levels: (Reflecting Training with a weapon/attack maneuver/group of maneuvers.)

 

·       Untrained: No Weapon Fam, -3 OCV w/weapon, base OCV for basic HtH maneuvers

 

·       Trained: Weapon Fam, minimum martial maneuvers, but no levels.

 

·       Skilled: Trained, +1-2 with a single maneuver

 

·       Advanced: Trained, +1-2 CSLs with a small group of attacks

 

·       Expert: Trained, +1-2 with a small group of attacks AND +1-2 PSLs with a group of attacks or other combination

 

·       Veteran: Trained, +3 levels with a group of attacks AND +2-3 PSLs, or other combination

 

·       Master: Trained, +4 CSL with group of attacks AND +3-4 PSLs, or other combination (but no more than 5 CSL with any one attack)

 

·       Legendary: Trained, 5 or more CSLs AND 5 or more PSLs with a group of attacks, and no limits to how they are combined on any one attack

 

Skill Levels and Stat Levels should be thought of combined to establish the character concept. e.g. A Skilled Normal, or a Trained Prodigy, etc.

 

--

 

We had one character at Prodigy, with Master skill levels, and he was hell-on-wheels master sword fighter, and just gross compared to nearly everyone else. He retired and the other two top notch gusy are more the Veteran Natural levels, and still really good, but not quite as over-powering. 

 

When you get characters like this, they are so much better than most Trained Normals or even Advanced Atheletes, that Auto-fire at -1 only would be so, SO good for them.

 

This is an absolutely awesome breakdown.  I may stea...er...borrow this for my games.  Just to clarify I don't do an extremely low powered game.  If and when I start my DC game back up it will be at the Powerful Heroic level (225 starting points).  I consider it a very "cinematic" game.  What this means is that the PCs should have little problem dispatching little gangsters or cannon fodder types.  Though they still need to be wary of guns in general and understand that one lucky shot from one of those mooks could end it all.  This generally means that they have to be smart about it.  Now when they are going up against a higher powered villain, like Lieutenant level they really need to watch it because they will have the same capabilities that the PCs possess.  Here is a typical character from my game.  Her name is Hair Trigger and she is at starting level.  By your breakdown she would be a Natural/Veteran.

Hair Trigger

5 hours ago, RDU Neil said:

Autofire attack...

• for all shots, range penalties are doubled (so you have to be 3 meters or less away to have -0 for just the first shot... practically point blank).
• Braced/set... using bipod/tripod, removes doubling of range penalties.
• further shots hit based on single attack roll for every 2 less than the minimum required (stand AF rules)
• AF may be used to increase the chance to hit by +1 for every 3 rounds fired, but with a max of only one shot hitting. (Perhaps this is allowed only for those who have appropriate WF?)
• Any positive OCV modifier to the weapon only applies if brace/set

Multiple Attack...

• range penalties are doubled (so you have to be 3 meters or less away to have -0 for just the first shot... practically point blank).
• each shot suffers a -1 OCV for each extra attack (instead of RAW -2)
• but number of shots allowed is dependent upon the weapon (semi-automatic handgun (5) vs. revolver (3) vs. flintlock (0), or size of round/kick recoil, etc.)
• braced/set removes MA penalties from the first shot
• Any positive OCV modifier to the weapon only applies if brace/set, or if not braced, will apply against MA penalties

With range penalties getting very high, very quickly, do we really need to add further penalties?

Here is what I am suggesting...but, as always, do what fits your game.

Autofire Attack

• Range Penalties are Doubled unless the weapon is mounted or Braced.  In my game I use the Optional Range Modifiers so the doubling doesn't begin until 9m.  Normal penalties are (0-8m:0, 9-12m: -1, 13-16m: -2, 17-24m:-3, 25-32m:-4, 33-48m:-5, 49-64m:-6, etc.).  This is what is doubled.
• Further shots hit based on single attack roll for every 1 less than required (adjusted from the +1 hit/2 in the RAW).
• If shooter is untrained (no Weapon Familiarity) the first shot takes no penalty (other than the untrained modifier of -2 OCV) but the further shots only hit at a rate of 1 per (# of Total shots fired).

Multiple Attack

• Range Penalties are Doubled as autofire above.
• All shots suffer a -1 OCV for each extra shot fired (adjusted from the -2/additional shot in the RAW).
• Number of Multiple attacks is limited by Weapon Type (Semi-Auto: 4, Double Action Revolver: 2, Knife or Barehanded: 4, Shortsword: 3, Longsword: 2 ).  This may be further adjusted if character is close to STR Minimum of the gun/weapon.

Additionally most scopes and such are created with the Limitation (Must Set or Brace to use: -1/2) or (Must Set and Brace to use: -1). 

I do not apply any other modifiers but may add some maneuvers like the Quick Fire maneuver I previously posted.

T

Here is what the 6e Martial Arts book has to say on the subject...

“Mixed Martial Arts,” or MMA, is a term used in the Martial World for a type of full-contact fighting, and the training associated with it. This form of martial arts contest became particularly popular thanks to the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) competition, which begun in 1993.

MMA training emphasizes three areas. The first is groundwork — fighting on the ground. Royce Gracia’s victories in the first, second, and fourth UFCs (which were single-elimination tournaments) showed how important this aspect of combat is. The second is clinchwork — throws, takedowns, and striking an opponent while grabbing him. Last is stand-up work — punching, kicking, and other strikes and maneuvers performed while standing up.

MMA isn’t alone in the world of full-contact fighting. For example, Vale Tudo (“anything goes”) is a similar form of fighting competition in Brazil. It began as “taking on all challengers” fights in Brazilian circuses in the 1920s and remains a popular sport today.

In HERO System terms, if you want to build an MMA-style fighter, you should buy a variety of Martial Maneuvers and Skills from the following styles: Boxing; Jujutsu (especially the Brazilian Jujutsu substyle); Karate; Muay Thai; and Wrestling.

1 hour ago, Surrealone said:

Realistically, I feel; an appropriate Autofire skill should be in place for Autofiring … and without it, ugly OCV penalties should be suffered in progressive fashion for every shot after the first.  This, of course, assumes you want realism.  If the goal (per Neil's goals) is more Hollywoodisms in the form of lots of lead in the air due to increased Autofire use, then even the skill/technique aspect I feel should be in place … should be ignored.

Oooo...I like that.  Perhaps implementing the -1 OCV per shot after the first might not be a bad idea.  Though I would adjudicate that it only impacts how many times they can hit the target.  This means that if an untrained person were to fire a three round burst the first round isn't impacted but they only hit once additional for every three points they hit by.  That is unless the character has the proper Weapon Familiarity (this also works for things like Thrown Blades, etc.).  I think that a WF: Assault Rifles, Submachine Guns or the like would work to negate the penalty (as would WF: Small Arms since it includes the former).  This means that no characters would really be impacted and it could be thrown in immediately.

This really does give more of a Hollywood feel.  Think about a person unfamiliar with a submachine gun picking it up for the first time.  I can just see the shots going everywhere.

Nice suggestion Surrealone.

Alright on to the next topic Recoil...

This should be relatively short since I think that the STR Minimum combined with the modifiers for certain maneuvers accounts for recoil enough to be at least passably realistic.

Recoil

 Recoil represents the tendency for a weapon's muzzle to rise when shot.  Here is the description directly from 5e Dark Champions...

"Thanks to the physical law of action and reaction, guns, particularly ones fired on full automatic, have a tendency to recoil violently and to “ride up” — i.e., jerk upward when fired, thus throwing off the shooter’s aim for shots aft er the first. The HERO System rules don’t specifically account for recoil when guns are fired. In “realistic” Dark Champions games, the GM may want to do so by adopting the following rules:"

One of the rules given attaches a pretty severe OCV penalty when Autofiring, something that I don't think is really necessary.  In fact we have made it easier to hit with Autofire in previous posts.  My personal take is that the STR Minimum is what primarily defines the recoil.  If a character doesn't meet the STR Minimum for the weapon he begins to accrue OCV penalties (per the RAW).  This, in my estimation, along with the penalties for Multi-Attacking serve to represent recoil well enough.

Recoil compensators would actually be a function of bringing down the STR Minimum.  They would be bought as STR with Focus, Only To Meet STR Minimum (-1 at least) and other limitations.

Just to refresh everyone the RAW say that for each 5 points (or fraction thereof) a person is short of the STR Minimum he suffers -1 OCV and -1 Damage Class on the attack.  One caveat that I think I would impose with Firearms is to remove the Damage Class penalty and make the OCV penalty -1 OCV per 3 points the Character's STR is short of the STR Minimum.  This means if Helen (STR: 5) picks up a .44 Magnum Colt Anaconda she would be 6 points under the STR Minimum of 11 and be at -2 OCV to use it.  Of course she can use two hands and lower the STR Minimum of the Weapon by 3 and Brace to lower it by another 5 then she would be able to fire it without penalty.

Thoughts?  Input?

2 hours ago, Surrealone said:

 

Learning to shoot through obstacles is as much an art as a skill.  For instance, shooting through a car windshield DOES actually offer the occupant some protection UNLESS the shooter is skilled at doing so.  Why?  Because a car windshield is angled and, as a result, the bullet is deflected downward through the windshield if fired at the car from a head-on location.  Likewise, firing from WITHIN the car through its windshield will deflect the bullet upward as it penetrates the glass.  How much deflection will depend on the angle of the windshield, of course … but a skilled shooter who has practiced this kind of shooting stands a higher probability of hitting his/her target through a windshield than the average gangster unloading his/her Glock sideways at the occupant of a car (or at someone from within the car and behind the windshield).

 

In a similar situation, most bullets begin to tumble as they deform due to impact with drywall, glass, a car door, you name it.

 

I mention these things because, while glass provides no Resistant Defense, it and other substances that are readily penetrated (by a bullet that deforms) absolutely increase the probability of a miss (when the fired round might otherwise be a hit) … and I believe this dose of reality should probably be accounted for when shooting through things.  Appropriate skill in shooting through misc materials things might make sense to offset any applied negatives to hit something beyond an obstacle.

What you say is very accurate and I would agree that some penalty would definitely be in order.  In my estimation it would be related to how obtuse the angle.  For example a squared shot (straight 90 degree angle) would receive fewer penalties than say a shot from 150 degrees.  Perhaps a somewhat subjective -1 to -3 penalty.  It may be better stated to say that a -1 per 45 degree differential.  This means that our shooter in my example who may have been shooting from a 15 degree horizontal differential and an 18 degree vertical differential would add to 33 degrees and therefore correspond to a -1 OCV penalty.  Again, this is somewhat arbitrary and up to the GM.  That said, I find it very realistic and it would gladly implement it.

1 hour ago, RDU Neil said:

A ranged attack penetrating a barrier and carrying on to hit something on the other side, ok... that makes sense... but a hand attack? I try to swing a baseball bat through a door to hit you on the other side? Really? I mean, if you are leaning right up against the wall, sure, but if you are even a couple inches away, the door will stop the bat from going through it. Maybe a penetrating  attack, sticking a spear or sword through it... with length maybe... but I just don't see how even an axe is going to get through a barrier and then, somehow, while still in your hand, continue on through and hit someone in the room on the other side? 
 

Is this really the rules?  Weird. I don't think we've ever played it this way. Like, even taking a sledgehammer to drywall, it will put a hole right through it, but the sledgehammer stops "in" the wall.  Right?

 

Anyway... I like the table of PD and Body... very helpful. I also agree that any kind of barrier gives minuses to hitting something on the other side... at least double range penalties sees correct for the "tumbling" factor. 

 

Also... is the idea that putting the gun "up against" the window or door so the substance deflects the trajectory less... is that really a thing? Seems to logically make sense, but I wonder.

Well Neil, I don't know you personally but I would speculate that you wouldn't have a 20 STR   Having done demolition on homes and such I can tell you that if I am using a 16 pound sledge on drywall, you do not want to be on the other side of it.  Keep in mind that the range of a HTH attack is limited anyway so the target would have to be in close proximity to the barrier.

I am not suggesting that Lt. Burroughs would have traveled very far beyond the door, even a meter would probably be out of range.  This was meant more for someone right on the other side of the barrier...at least for HTH weapons.

As with all of my posts, they are just suggestions.  They are oddball ideas that I come up with that I do want to socialize to see how others feel.  If I ever have the chance I will incorporate some or all of them in a game to see how they work.  If I do I will share the outcome.

Blowthrough and "Barrier" Defense

The 5e Dark Champions Book defines Blowthrough as follows: “Blowthrough” is a gun user’s term for the ability of a bullet to penetrate some barriers or targets and keep traveling with relatively little loss of energy.

While I do think this is a good rule in general since there are some "Barriers" which do not provide much defense versus bullets (or other Killing Attacks).  The 6e rules, as far as I can tell, do not address this.  Instead they introduce the idea of some items not having Resistant Defenses.  Substances like Glass provide no Resistant Defense and are therefore very easy for Killing Attacks to penetrate.  Some semblance of reality is buried in between the two somewhere.  Without completely overhauling the "Breaking Things" system in the game it would be somewhat difficult to replicate.  So while I don't want to overhaul it, the "Breaking Things" table could do with some additions.  In my opinion this would do away with the need for the Blowthrough ruling and allow us to use traditional rules...Well sort of.

I think we need to look at how the protection is calculated with a Barrier .  Way back in 3rd Edition if you were hitting someone on the other side of a "Force Wall" you had to take down the barrier first.  This involved subtracting the dice by the highest rolls first.  In my opinion this unfairly gives the character more defense than he should get since you subtract out all of the sixes rolled, then all the fives and so on (when using a regular attack).  Instead I would suggest using Standard Effect for what is removed.  See my examples below on how this would all play out.

This table more throroughly breaks down many modern building materials.

Example 1: Bash is chasing Lt. Burroughs through a house with a baseball bat.  Lt. Burroughs runs through a bedroom door and slams it shut.  Bash decides to smash through the door attacking Lt. Burroughs on the other side.  The GM decides that because he can't see him Bash attacks at 1/2 OCV.  Lt. Burroughs has a 5 DCV and Bash has a (4+2)/2=3 OCV.  Bash rolls a 7 on 3d6 and has successfully hits Lt. Burroughs in the left shoulder.  Bash rolls his damage of 7d6 (20 STR + 3d6) and gets (6,6,5,3,3,2,1)  26 STUN and 8 BODY.  The door takes a total of 5 BODY to smash through and with Standard Effect removes 15 STUN from the Normal Damage attack.  Lt. Burroughs applies 3 BODY and 11 STUN to his personal defense (4 PD) resulting in 0 BODY and 7 STUN, a glancing blow...whew!  That could have been much worse...

Example 2: Barracuda is armed with a .45 Mac10  with ball ammunition (remember +1 STUN Multiple) and is carefully proceeding through a house that he saw two of Buckshot's men run into.  As he makes his way through he hears the slide rack on a pistol on the other side of the wall.  He opens up on the sound with a 5 round burst.  He gets 1/2 his OCV (6+2)/2=4 vs. the thug on the other side of the wall who is DCV 3.  Barracuda's player rolls a 10 and hits the thug three times (we are using the optional Autofire rule which dictates that for every 1 point an Autofire attack hits by another round finds its mark).  Barracuda's player rolls three 1d6+1 rolls against the standard hit location resulting in hits in the Right Shoulder 6 BODY x3 Multiple, Chest 3 BODY x2 Multiple, and Groin 4 BODY x3 Multiple.  The wall is standard Drywall and has 1 resistant PD and 2 BODY.  The thug has no resistant defense and ends up taking 3 BODY 9 STUN from the first bullet, nothing from the second and 1 BODY 3 STUN from the third resulting in 4 BODY and 12 STUN.  He's hurt but not out of it and returns fire through the wall with his Glock 17...

Example 3: Crosshair has been given an assassination mission and has taken up a position across from an abandoned house where Freddy Howarth, his target, is hiding out.  He is using a .30-06 rifle with Ball Ammunition (2d6+d2) a long arm laser sight and a x9 Scope affording him +2 OCV and +14 Range Mod.  When his target comes into view through the window he Braces (+2 RMod) and Sets (+1 OCV) and squeezes off a shot at Freddy's head.  Freddy is unaware of the attack and is 1/2 DCV 4/2=2 and Hit Location modifiers are halved (Head=-8/2=-4).  Crosshair is 6 OCV + 2 CSLs + 1 (Set Maneuver)=9 OCV.  He needs a 14- to hit his target (the Range levels more than offset the Range Modifier) and rolls an 11.  Freddy is on the other side of a double paned window.  Crosshair rolls 9 BODY on the attack and x5 STUN Multiplier 2(roll)+2(head)+1(caliber).  The window has no resistant defense and 1 BODY resulting in 9-1(Glass BODY)x2(head shot)=16 BODY and 16x5=80 STUN).  Poor Freddy...

Thoughts?  Input?

13 minutes ago, RDU Neil said:

So... you roll a PRE roll for courage under fire?

I always ruled that it was EGO that your rolled to have the "steely will" to act in the face of danger, or vs. pain/injury, exception hardship, etc.

 

I only use that for the most "realistic" of games, where it is as close to a real world, action drama, rather than fully cinematic action movie... let alone supers.

Now... using PRE actively in a game to cause others to hesitate, stay under cover, etc., absolutely. I would have no problem with PCs or badguys spending an action doing a PRE attack while spraying gunfire, etc. Intent is always important... so the player is saying, "I want these people to keep their heads down and give us a chance to escape" or whatever... then you have them roll the PRE attack with whatever modifiers seem appropriate.

 

For someone to ignore the effects, they roll Ego roll, - x by how much the PRE attack rolled.

 

Been doing that basically since original Danger International came out, when we played "real world" PIs and terrorists, etc.

The write-up does say that you can use EGO as a complimentary roll.  However there is a difference between Willpower and Courage.  If you were hurt and needed to overcome that to act I would say that is Willpower.  Courage, on the other hand, is a function of Presence so that is why the roll is based on it.

From Hero System 6Ev1 pg. 45

Presence represents the character’s
forcefulness, charisma, bravery,
confidence, bearing, and leadership
qualities — in short, his impressiveness.

Grace Under Fire

This represents a Character's ability to go through with actions which place his life in danger.  The full write-up is in Dark Champions pg. 193.  One of the abilities encompassed by Presence is courage and that is what this Optional Rule represents.  I would suggest that it be optional for PCs but villains should use it when appropriate.  Here is the table as amended by me.

Thoughts?

T

Here is what I came up with.  I also decided to base the STUN Multiplier strictly on the 1d3 per the RAW.  This gives a shot that hits the head a range of x3-x5 which seems pretty correct to me  I don't think that this will really mess up things and since I use MapTool to run my Online Games it is pretty easy to put in a Macro.  If you are running Face to Face it may be a bit more difficult but the "realism" may be worth it.  I have also decided that if a character takes all of his BODY in a single attack in the Head or Chest he is Dead.  The GM could wave this for PCs and principal villains but for others it should stick (though many GMs just say that if Mooks take all of their BODY they are dead).

Let me know what you think.

T

1 hour ago, RDU Neil said:

Just my thoughts on hit location...

1. I feel it works 95% of the time as is, so I am loathe to tamper with it too much. That is my starting place.
2. x5 Stun for KA to head tends to feel "right" when the body rolled is low.  The painful creasing shot across the skull, etc. High body rolls, it doesn't really matter most of the time, or feels right as a direct shot into a helmet that may not kill, but totally rings your bell. Where it feels to high, IMO, is the mid-range body rolled vs. a helmet, where I think too much Stun is generated. In this case, though, using the "hard armor is like a barrier" rule... this would likely mean "no body, no stun", meaning the helmet worked like it should. With that "barrier" rule in effect, I'm less inclined to need to change the x5.
3. I often find the x4 to stomach and vitals to be way more of a game changer to combat. These locations get hit a lot more (the PC that died had the nickname "Ballbuster" because the player rolled 13 at least 9 shootouts in a row), and result in more damage, but typical body armor is less protective than of the chest. Fits reality (hard to plate the groin area) but seems to drop characters, even armored there, more than feels right.
4. The x1 Stun multiple for Hands and Feet is just too low. The body is already halved, which seems appropriate in terms of "how much closer to death does this shot bring you" but Stun = Pain, as you indicated and I agree, and there is nothing "less painful" about getting shot in the hand or foot. (Heck... in movies, stabbing or shooting someone in the foot seems to be completely incapacitating in many classic scenes... I'm looking at you, Point Break and True Romance) I think they should both be x2 at least, but leads to my next point.
5. Stun damage to a limb is very different, in a "realistic" aspect, than stun damage to the head or torso. The latter can lead to unconsciousness, "wind knocked out of you" etc., that really does put you down, if just for a little while. Shots to limbs is more about shock and pain than "knocking the person out" and thus, I kind of feel the stun damage of those shots should only be counted toward "Con stunning" (usually reflected as cry of pain, grabbing wounded limb, swearing a lot in place of taking an action.) This would get REALLY complicated REALLY quickly... but something I've considered.
6. Normal Stun multipliers are always applied AFTER defenses.
7. KA Body multipliers are after defenses, and the Stun multiple is based on the ROLLED damage, not the multiplied damage. (This helps with hand/foot shots being more "painful" but body is halved.)

Does this match your thinking on this?  

Thanks for your input Neil, it helps having someone to bounce this stuff off of.

1. Agreed but my percentage would be lower...say 65% of the time it works okay.
2. I am inclined to give a bonus to the Stun Multiplier just to give it some leeway.  A +2 to the Stun Multiplier on the Head would illicit a range of x3-x5 in standard games and x3-x6 in mine so that feels about right to me.  I like your idea of making a helmet the same as Hard Armor for this purpose.
3. In the case of the Stomach and Groin (I don't use Vitals since I feel that is ambiguous) I would be inclined to give it a +1 to the Stun Multiplier similar to the Head above.
4. I agree, though I will say that you don't often see people knocked out by shots to extremities (even in the movies).  I would say to use the Disabling/Impairing rules for extremities especially.  Here I would apply a -1 Stun Multiplier for a range of x1-x2 for standard games and x1-x3 for mine.  That gives it some difference but does skew it toward the lower end (as a 1 or a 2 on the die would result in a 1).
5. Disabling/Impairing would be a way to really address this in my opinion.  In my games you cannot Die instantly from shots to Extremities (though you can bleed out).
6. If you use multiples for them then I would agree.  If I were to use a set modifier I would apply it before defenses.
7. I can see the benefit of that but then I think you would have many more people getting knocked out by hand/feet shots.

I will put together a table of my suggestions and we'll see how it works.  At some point I am going to have to get a group together to playtest this stuff.  Let me know who is interested.

Regards,

T

Hit Locations

The RAW Hit Location tables work pretty well in most cases.  In my opinion they just need to be better defined and perhaps the damage could be adjusted.  Here is the current RAW Hit Location Table.

My personal opinion is that the STUNx, N STUN and BODYx are a bit too severe.  I think of STUN as the pain that one endures until they fall unconscious and to always assign a x5 to the Head and a x1 to the Hands seems unrealistic somehow. 

I personally have replaced the old 1d6-1 and the new 1d3 STUN Multiplier with 1d4 in my Heroic games.  In the past I have assigned a STUN Multiplier Modifier to the area.  For example if someone were hit in the Head the attacker would still roll 1d4 but would add 1 to the roll giving a range of x2-x5.  Is that too lenient?  Should it be +2?  Should it have a cap of the most that can be rolled on a die?  For example it could be made +2 but would still cap at x4 giving it a range of x3-x4.  Would buying up the STUN Multiplier add to this cap?

As for N STUN and BODY I think that they are also too severe but at the same time I can see the logic.  As I said in a post previously a .22lr round should be able to kill someone with just a single shot.  Given that I have assigned a 1d4 killing attack to the round this isn't normally possible.  Should I keep the x2?  Or should it be given some other modifier?  For N Stun I have normally just given a +1 STUN per DC to the roll for the Head, Stomach and Groin and a -1 STUN per DC to the Arms, Hands and Feet.

If I keep the Modifiers for N STUN and BODY should this damage be Before or After Defenses?

I know I am asking a bunch of questions but I would like the opinion of the gallery (well all 2 or 3 people that are reading it anyway) before I make a decision.

T

I think this is a good time to summarize what we have discussed thus far.  All of the options are designed to add a bit of realism (tongue in cheek) while keeping with the cinematic feel of a roleplaying game firefight.  I have modified some of the entries from their original presentation based on comments and my own thoughts.

Disclaimer: I am not mandating nor even suggesting that any of these ideas be used in your game.  I am merely presenting my opinion and ideas for your consideration and as possible seeds for changes you may want to incorporate.  Use them at entirely at your discretion.  I will not be held liable for any fallout that arises from the use or abuse of any of these ideas.  If you plan to play in one of my games in the future (provided I overcome my current blah attitude toward GMing) understand that I reserve the right to incorporate some or all of these rules into that game.  Your agreement to participate in said game is your binding word not to whine, complain or otherwise try to dissuade me from my set course of action.

1. Muzzle Energy Based Damage - Base Damage is directly linked to Muzzle Energy (in Joules)of Round.  This is subject to be altered based on Shape of the Round, Composition of Round (material) and/or Characteristics of the Round

   • Firearms Damage
     DC	Joules	Example	Kdamage
     1	50	Pellet Gun	1 pip
     2	100	.22 Long Rifle	1/2d6
     3	200	.380 ACP	1d6
     4	400	9mm, .45 ACP	1d6+1
     5	800	.357 Magnum	1 1/2d6
     6	1600	.44 Magnum, 5.56mm	2d6
     7	3200	7.62	2d6+1
     8	6400	.458 Win Magnum	2 1/2d6
     9	12500	.50 BMG	3d6

2. Killing Damage Intricacies - Breaks down incremental damage between Damage Classes for increased diversity of damage.

   • Killing Damage Breakout Points Kdamage Range 5 1 1 6 1 1 7 1 1 8 1d2 1-2 9 1d2 1-2 10 1d3 1-3 11 1d3 1-3 12 1d3 1-3 13 1d4 1-4 14 1d6-1 0-5 15 1d6 1-6

3. Armor Piercing Optional Use - Armor Piercing does not reduce the defense to half its value.  Instead it pierces through an amount of defense equal to the BODY damage rolled on the attack for a +1/2 Advantage.  Semi Armor Piercing is thus 1/2 of the BODY damage rolled on the attack for a +1/4 Advantage.  This can be made Standard Effect and therefore pierce through an amount of defense equal to the Damage Class of the attack at the Player/GM's option.
4. Pistol vs. Rifle Rounds - Rifle rounds act as Semi Armor Piercing vs. Soft Body Armor by default.  This is a characteristic of the Real Armor Limitation and does not qualify for an additional Limitation.
5. Body Armor - All Body Armor will use Sectional Coverage Rules based on the area that is armored.  Additionally the Requires a Roll Limitation will be used to define the amount of that body part covered.  Soft Body Armor will follow the write-ups in the RAW with the addition of the definition above with regard to Rifle Rounds.  Hard Body Armor will be constructed using the rules for Barrier.  This will mean that if a round does not penetrate no STUN damage will carry through.  A sample write-up follows
   • Trauma Plates - Level IV Ceramic:  Barrier 8 PD/8 ED, 2 BODY (up to 1m long, 1m tall, and 1/2m thick), Personal Defense (+0), Hardened (+1/4), Persistent (+1/4), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2) (60 Active Points); Sectional Defenses (Covers Locations 10-12; 36.57%) (-1), OIF (-1/2), Ablative BODY Only (-1/2), Requires A Roll (11- roll; -1/2), Half Mass (-1/2), Real Armor (-1/4) 14 Real Cost
6. Autofire Optional Use - Autofire is amended so that 1 additional shot will Hit the target for each point that the shot hits by.  This will also affect the cost of Autofire as follows: 2 Shots - +1/4 Advantage, 3 Shots - +1/2 Advantage, 5 Shots - +3/4 Advantage, Each doubling of Shots is a +1/2 additional Advantage.  When firing more than one shot the Range Modifier is doubled if the weapon is not mounted.
7. Multiple Attack Optional Use - Multiple Attacks will be done at a -1 OCV per shot after the first instead of the -2 in the RAW.  Range Modifiers are doubled as with Autofire above.  The number of Multiple attacks allowed is limited by weapon type (i.e. Revolvers - 2, Low Caliber Semi-Automatic - 4, High Caliber Semi-Automatic - 3, etc.).  Additionally each attack is performed individually, so while in the RAW if you miss the first shot you miss the rest, this will not be the case with this option.

That is what we have covered so far.  Your mileage may vary, use at your own risk.  Next up: Hit Locations, Grace Under Fire, Blowthough and Knockdown...

T

12 minutes ago, Surrealone said:

If you're the GM and you choose to adopt them, what about what your players are in for when they try to make sense of them?  I ask because players, too, must be familiar with the changes.  Thus, a GM's choice to add complexity adds it not only for the GM, but for that GM's players, too … and they might NOT know what they're in for … or might not want it once they find out.  (Heck, many players have trouble understanding/following RAW, let alone deltas from it.)

LOL the facetious side of me would say..."bah, players!  The bane to all of my wonderful plans."

On the other side, wait....I don't really have another side  

Seriously, most of the things that I have presented are not technically of my own creation (in spite of me thinking they were when I typed them here).  They are scattered about the books in optional rules sections.  Interestingly most of them are presented as ways of increasing realism  

I am all about making a game fun but if I am the one running it I have this ridiculous need for it to make some sense to me.  I am also an unapologetic tweaker when it comes to the RAW.  You know this, you have played in one of my games.  I don't think too many of my tweaks get in the way of having a good time but I could be wrong.

At any rate I suppose I should have posted a disclaimer on my first post.

I am not mandating nor even suggesting that any of my ideas be used in your game.  I am merely presenting my opinion and ideas for your consideration and as possible seeds for changes you may want to incorporate.  Use them at entirely at your discretion.  I will not be held liable for any fallout that arises from the use or abuse of any of these ideas.  If you plan to play in one of my games in the future (provided I overcome my current blah attitude toward GMing) understand that I reserve the right to incorporate some or all of these rules into that game.  Your agreement to participate in said game is your binding word not to whine, complain or otherwise try to dissuade me from my set course of action.

T

1 hour ago, Surrealone said:

You're the one trying to make things more realistic, not me. 

Ya, my mistake you're chill.

4 minutes ago, Surrealone said:

Accounting for the differences IS the added complexity, as a GM must account for RAW plus the delta.

And?  If I am the GM and I choose to adopt the changes then I guess I know what I am in for.

6 minutes ago, Surrealone said:

You're the one trying to make things more realistic, not me.  I'm the guy who was (earlier) trying to keep things simple for ease of gameplay … and -now- you pull this out?  I'm having difficulty swallowing that double-standard because either it's ok to keep things unrealistic/simple for gameplay's sake … or it isn't, right?  And if it is, then gameplay (not realism) should probably trump/rule since it was the deciding factor, right?

 

I'm not trying to be difficult or contrary, by the way -- I just don't see a point to all of the complexity you're adding if you're not going to go for broke and do it to its logical conclusion/extreme for the sake of realism … since anything less is still only a partially-baked result.

Dude, chill...it was a statement not an accusation.  As we all mentioned before, missing a lot ain't fun.  Frankly I am just trying to work within the system to address some of the perceived inadequacies.  Ultimately it probably isn't worth fixing since it works okay as it stands but if I can help someone improve their game why not try?  I am not proposing that any or all of what I put out there is used in any way shape or form.  I am just throwing it against the wall to see if it sticks. 

My solution actually addresses the issue you presented and helps with what RDU Neil is trying to do (get the characters to put shots down range).  I would probably suggest using a 10- Basic targeting breakpoint to begin with as well.  This would skew things a bit from the "you are supposed to hit" mentality to a more even outlook. 

Even I know that there is no perfect way to simulate reality in a roleplaying game.  As a GM I am generally looking for a certain "feel" in a game and I am not afraid to adjust the rules to get as close to that "feel" as I can.  Oftentimes, as you can undoubtedly attest, it is an ongoing series of adjustments.

I personally don't see the complexity you're speaking of.  I feel that the solutions that I have presented are no more complex than the original rules, just different.

On 7/13/2018 at 3:20 PM, Surrealone said:

I don't think increased rates of fire should do more damage.  Instead, I think increased rates of fire should ADD to an already low hit probability in order to improve it -- because that's how it basically works in the real world.  

 

i.e. A NYPD officer has an abysmal hit rate if fire is being returned, but s/he is statistically more likely to hit his/her target if s/he sends more rounds downrange at the target.  Thus, if we want to emulate that bit of reality, we need mechanics that improve hit probabability when multiple rounds are fired at a target.

 

Unfortunately, the autofire rules do the exact opposite by penalizing the hit rate when more shots are taken.  Multiple Attack does the same thing with its OCV penalties.  This is because the game's base mechanics try to make hits more likely than misses … which is completely backward for gunfighting.  So, if you want to add proper realism to gunfights, you need to adjust your house rules so that most shots are misses … and then rework autofire and multiple attack rules so that taking more shots will improve the odds of a hit rather than reduce them.

 

I am, of course, talking about aimed shots, here.  Spray&Pray (i.e. Suppression fire) entails no aim, so its hit rate should suffer despite the volume of lead going downrange.  That said, I've always felt its hit rate was set a bit too low.

I guess this is an example of Reality not making for very good gameplay.  If the rate that you cite is to be taken into a game you would start with a ~7- chance to hit in a gunfight if the target is returning fire and ~9- if they are not  Honestly the hit probability only goes up because you are firing more rounds.  For example if you have a 50% chance of one shot hitting and this is constant across multiple shots and you fire three shots you have a 92% chance of at least one of those shots hitting given the cumulative probability. 

Now this doesn't play out well in the Hero System because the chances to hit are severely lessened by the -2 OCV per attack modifier on Multiple Attack.  Let us take a combatant that has a base 11- chance of hitting if he fires one shot.  That is 62.5%, not bad.  If he instead decides to fire three shots (taking a -4 OCV) he ends up with a about a 41% chance of one of those shots hitting (not great).

So what if we change up Multiple Attack a bit?  What if we changed the OCV Modifier to only a -1 per additional shot?  Well then our combatant has the same 62.5% chance to hit the target with one shot but a better (75.6%) chance to hit with at least one of those three shots.  If this is done I would suggest the individual skills that offset the penalties become more expensive (say 20 points for Rapid Attack or Defensive Attack).  I do think that the native penalties for the Maneuver are still sufficient to balance it in most cases.

Incorporating the -1 per additional shot for Multiple Attack along with altering Autofire to hit once per point over the target's DCV would definitely encourage more shots down range. 

I encourage everyone to take a look at the Gunfighting section of Dark Champions 5e pg. 192.  It gives a lot of good suggestions to make Gunfights more realistic (incidentally both of the options that I mentioned, Autofire and Multiple Attack, are mentioned in there under the Storm of Lead heading).  I especially like the section on "Grace Under Fire" pg. 193.  This would go a long way to formalizing the "Adrenaline Rush" aspect of combat.  Of course it is yet another roll that must be made.

T

Here is one resurrected back from Enemies 1...Frizbe

A few more from Classic Enemies, Green Dragon, Thunder and Lightning.

And another favorite from CLOWN...Beuford The Bard

16 hours ago, Surrealone said:

 

If you're truly into making firearm use realistic, then the section of your text that I just quoted needs to be tossed out the window and completely reworked.  As evidence I cite a firearm accuracy study conducted of 247 (195 male and 52 female) volunteers. The study grouped the volunteers into 3 categories: novice (i.e. minimal/no experience), intermediate (i.e. recreational experience), and expert (i.e. completed law enforcement firearms training).  The study found that experts shot only 10% more accurately than novices and intermediates at 3-15 feet.  Here's a link to the study: http://www.forcescience.org/articles/naiveshooter.pdf

 

This becomes especially important when you pair it with a firearm evaluation of the NYPD's gunfight performance, as the NYPD is arguably the largest and best-trained police force in the United States, today.  In gunfights where fire was returned, these 'experts' have demonstrated an empirical hit rate of a meager 18%.  In situations where the officer fired and gunfire was NOT returned, the hit rate was still only a paltry 30%.  Here's a link to that report (you'll find these statistics on page 14 as labeled by the report, itself, not by the PDF page counter): http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_information/RAND_FirearmEvaluation.pdf

Given the foregoing, the hit rates you stated (which I quoted above) are WAY too high … and since your efforts are all about adding realism, if you're serious about your efforts, you need to dial your hit rates WAY down for experts … and then dial it down (by about 10% more) for intermediates and novices.  If that seems like it's going too far (e.g. "but that wouldn't be fun"), all I can really say to that is that you must not be serious about adding realism, since most rounds discharged in gunfights are (realistically) misses, not hits.

 

Surreal

 

P.S. This is exactly what people and states that try to impose magazine capacity limits fail to consider.  i.e. The FBI statistics database shows that most threats are stopped by 2 and change shots (which we'll round up to 3) … with the actual decimal value tending to vary based on the caliber being used.  Assuming an 18% hit rate for the best-trained law enforcement officer with, say, a 9mm -- that individual will need to empty the 15 round magazine from his department-issued Glock 17 if under return fire … to score 2.7 hits.  This should also help set your 'realism' expectation for making firearms more realistic in your games, since you're both supposedly making an effort to do that.  The link to the FBI database should be easy enough to find … if you care to do so.

Wow, total Buzzkill Surrealone .  Take realism tongue in cheek.  I still want the game to be fun.  I want the PCs to be scared of guns generally.  That keeps them from thinking that they can take on a proverbial army.  However if they are only hitting once every 4 shots that takes combat from a crawl to a near stop.  I do agree with Neil that having more shots fired is fun because you introduce the dynamic of changing magazines and such.  On the other hand if they miss too much combat gets very frustrating.  Perhaps introducing a damage increase for more shots without penalizing OCV would be a good way to encourage more shots downrange.  For example if a PC is firing at a mook that he wants to ensure is taken out he says I will use three shots at him and give him a bonus of +2DC to the attack making it a 2d6 attack rather than the 1d6+1 it would normally be.  Kind of like Boostable charges in the RAW.  The caveat being that you take a -1 DCV per shot fired after the first.  Thoughts on that?  You could also allow them to Rapid Fire it and really get them expending those rounds.

Maneuver             OCV      DCV                                 Damage/Effect                                    

Quickfire                 -0          -1/Additional Shot      +1DC/Additional Shot Fired (Max: 3) 

Well all things being equal and given that you have a normal person (3 OCV) that has at least some knowledge with the weapon they're using (Weapon Familiarity) they will hit another normal person (who is actively evading; DCV 3) 62.5% of the time.  That isn't bad odds in my book.  If you are talking about a Professional Soldier or Police Officer they will probably have at least one skill level and most probably a higher OCV (4 maybe?).  That increases their odds to nearly 84%.  Add an optic (A Red Dot sight is listed as +2 OCV and +10 vs. Range) and you are looking at 95% accuracy out to 250 meters (perhaps a bit of a stretch).  This also means that even by the RAW he will hit with all three shots of a 3 round burst 62.5% of the time.  As you get higher up the scale Heroes (and Villains) will inevitably have higher OCVs and DCVs which represents the cinematic part.  All said and done I think it is at least feasible.

Now my take on the range issue...  You really don't want to be too close with a gun.  Within a meter can be bad news as the target can step in nullifying the weapon.  The sweet spot is 2-4 meters as the shooter has enough time to pull the trigger before the target can close the distance.  Obviously this doesn't take into account the target being covered where any twitch means the attack succeeds.

I think we have made some pretty good headway in increasing the realism but I think that some of the cinematic flavor needs to be there for the game to be fun.

T

4 hours ago, RDU Neil said:

 

Really interesting on arrows not even doing a full d6 killing, since that is less than half what they typically stat a long bow out in Fantasy Hero games, etc. I'll have to look again, just to be sure. You aren't saying 1d6-1 then adding STR damage as per compound bow, right? You are saying 1d6-1 total damage? I'd always ruled 2d6 (1d6 is AP) in the past... roll two different colored dice, choose one to be the amount that is also subtracted from armor.

 

That puts the damage in the same range as a 5.56NATO round, which seems about right in terms of expectations of damage done to target. (Which raises another question... the 5.56 is generally not allowed or considered good for hunting deer or large game, but a compound or crossbow is... so what is going on with a bow/arrow that it does more damage/kills a medium or large animal more effectively, than a rifle round?

I wonder if, in the case of arrows, damage is done by more than just the energy transfer. There is the penetrating/cutting/twist of the arrow, and the head and shaft actually imbedded in the body. Hmmm... worth thinking over. If a modern hunting bow ends up doing less damage on average than a 9mm pistol, that just doesn't reflect reality. We are missing some factor in this formula.

I was strictly speaking of the kinetic energy of the arrow corresponding to 1d6-1.  I agree that this is low and should be increased by a DC or so to represent the sharpness/cutting aspect of broadhead arrows (plus it is just downright cinematic).  If you decided to place the limitation on the defense then adding a couple of DC is within reason (I don't know if going up to a full 2d6 is warranted however).  This is where you start to get into some serious stuff with regard to ballistic dynamics and such.  It is very difficult to account for everything in ammunition.  Just an increase of 10 grains (.65g) can change the ballistics of a bullet significantly and that is before you begin to speak of shape and composition.

With all of that said, the Muzzle Energy to Damage Classes is a starting point and not an exact science.  It does give us a good place to start from.  Accuracy is even more important since a .22lr shot to the head IS realistically a kill shot even though it may only do 1/2d6 killing damage.  I guess you have to strike a compromise between realism and playability.

On 7/3/2018 at 9:46 AM, RDU Neil said:

Another question... knives, broadhead arrows, flechettes, etc.  Semi AP or Full AP vs. soft armor?

That would be dependent on the armor.  Many soft armors are now manufactured with metal fibers interwoven to protect vs. bladed attacks.  If it isn't then they would be more susceptible and get Semi AP or only half defense as I presented previously (this could be a -1/4 Limitation on the Armor).

Since you brought it up, Arrows are generally pretty effective vs. Soft Body Armor.  Arrows generally travel at about 300-400 feet per second.  The entire arrow usually has a mass of about 400 grains or .0259kg.  This, when plugged into our formula, gives an arrow about 150j of energy.  Checking our chart that equates to about a 1d6-1 killing attack.  Now to take into account the sharpened point and barbs you may want to either increase the DC of the attack or add Semi AP to it.  But even with Semi AP it is relatively unlikely that an arrow is going to pierce Level IIIA armor (in fact it will only do so on a roll of 6).  In order to increase this I would suggest incorporating both Semi AP and the Half Defense for the armor (unless it is interwoven with Metallic Fibers as I mentioned).

T