Legsweep

[archermoo]

Re: Legsweep

 

Wow, I'm flashing back to the D&D forum...

 

Being prone is not that big a deal, you can just stand up and attack again. And, it happens all the time. Knockback (or knockdown), martial throws, grab & throw (STR or TK), cange environment, etc. It's not like D&D with it's Attacks of Opportunity. How does FRED handle half DCV with levels? Are the levels halved, also, or just your DCV from DEX? Can you take 'penalty skill levels' for 'DCV while prone?'

 

Flash also reduces your DCV, and is not so easy to recover from. A Grab or Entangle reduces your DCV, and you have to break out, not just stand up. Coordinating a DCV-reducing manuver with a big attack is not a strange or unreasonable tactic.

 

The halving is basically the last step.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Legsweep

 

The halving is basically the last step.

 

Correct. Halving is always done last, and always done only once.

[Jaxom]

Re: Legsweep

 

Being prone is not that big a deal, you can just stand up and attack again. And, it happens all the time. Knockback (or knockdown), martial throws, grab & throw (STR or TK), cange environment, etc. It's not like D&D with it's Attacks of Opportunity. How does FRED handle half DCV with levels? Are the levels halved, also, or just your DCV from DEX? Can you take 'penalty skill levels' for 'DCV while prone?'

 

Flash also reduces your DCV, and is not so easy to recover from. A Grab or Entangle reduces your DCV, and you have to break out, not just stand up. Coordinating a DCV-reducing manuver with a big attack is not a strange or unreasonable tactic.

 

Two points, one that I already made. Against a martial artist with a held action, the point is that you don't just stand up. He can contrive almost without fail to go twice before your next action.

 

Second, Flash and entangle have weak points. Lots of characters have some kind of flash defense which has no delay before being applied. Strong characters can break a STR-based entangle as a free action just like Acrobats can stand up as a free action. And of course both of those cost more points than a simple Martial Throw or Legsweep.

 

They're similar tools in the toolbox. The question is whether or not a cheap trick like Legsweep is overly powerful because it can be contrived to guarantee a prone opponent. I know I use it to devastating effect in our pulp campaign (which uses hit locations and a critical hit system) but since I have "Psych Lim: Won't touch gunpowder weapons (Total)" and the rest of the party likes .45s and Tommy Guns, it kinda balances out and our GM doesn't complain.

[Markdoc]

Re: Legsweep

 

In all of my games throughout history' date=' not a single person in my campaigns have ever selected this maneuver.[/quote']

 

Strange.... It's been a reasonably common maneuver in our games, though not a hugely dominant one.

 

Last year I introduced a new group to HERO System and apparently everyone in that group selected it and use it almost exclusively to other attacks. They play FH and are "ex-D20" converts.

 

Yeah, well, no surprises there - they're coming off "Improved trip" and "Knockdown", two powerful feats from D&D3.5 that let you knock someone down and then whack them while they're down.

 

Now I have a player in my Hero Central campaign with the maneuver (bought for his spear) and he just used it to rather devastating effect. Now, I've read it over but it seems that I'm doing it wrong.

 

The maneuver gives a +2 OCV and -1 DCV and, I'm assuming auto targets the lower hit locations. Now normally you get a - to OCV to target this area and I was wondering if that +2 from the maneuver was designed to counter that negative or is that negative ignored?

 

As I understand it, no. You could choose to play it that way, but most GMs allow a "leg hit" with neither bonuses or penalties. If you're using hit locations, then yeah, the maneuver bonus would cancel the low strike penalty. Note that using a low strike gives an enhanced chance of stamping on someone's foot, so it's not all good in terms of damage

 

Now he has this maneuver with his spear and I've always imagined it being done with the blunt end. Well, he did it with the bladed end, worked out to be a 2d6K targeting the lower body (thigh specifcally) and lopped off the poor suckers leg.

 

Can this maneuver be used with the "blade" of a weapon?

 

Technically speaking, there's no reason why not - but in my games I ruled that "stabbing someone in the leg" was a strike and had to use a strike maneuver. People routinely used staves or the butt of a spear to sweep peoples' leg out from under them though.

 

The only reason I'm asking is that I can absolutely see this as a WAY overpowered maneuver and I just want to be sure that we're using it correctly.

 

It is, in fact, a very powerful maneuver - perhaps the best bargain martial arts maneuver there is. KS has it right, as usual - putting your opponent prone is undervalued as a martial art component. It gives you a significant advantage, particularly when hit locations are being used.

 

If you were to build 'Legsweep' as you would any other power, keeping all of the same modifiers, what would it look like?

 

I'm seriously debating building all martial maneuvers as regular powers rather than the seemingly very inexpensive method they currently have.

 

I'd say this is a sterling idea - since it's what I already do. Forget about using teleport or similar (or HA + Transform: Standing person to Prone person?). Legsweep is simply "Grab and throw prone".

 

To build the maneuver as it stands, you need +2 OCV (to offset the grab penalty), another +2 OCV for the maneuver itself, and +1DC. Depending on how you cost it, it could be anywhere from 13 to 25 active points (depending on whether you use 2, 3 or 5 point CSLs). Building in the -1 DCV is a bit hard, but can be either a minor side effect, or (my preferred method) simply a negative level at -5 points.

 

If you go this route, you can build martial arts as a simple multipower of attacks and defences. Someone's even done the math for you...

http://www.geocities.com/markdoc.geo/Gaming_stuff/martialarts.html

 

cheers, Mark

[jtelson]

Re: Legsweep

 

The "Target Falls" element is synonymous with "Throw".

 

If you look in UMA there is no entry for Target Falls in the element descriptions, and under the Throw element it says it is listed as "Target Falls" and other variations on the "Fall" theme in the maneuver list.

 

Wow I really need to re read the rule book.

An Acrobatics roll at -3 negates the falling down effects of a legsweep (or a throw), coupled w/ breakfall letting you stand up as a free action (If you lack or blow the Acrobatics roll) makes the fall element seem a lot less powerful.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Legsweep

 

The Fall Element is cool - but nearly as bad a monster as this thread makes it look.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Legsweep

 

Wow I really need to re read the rule book.

An Acrobatics roll at -3 negates the falling down effects of a legsweep (or a throw), coupled w/ breakfall letting you stand up as a free action (If you lack or blow the Acrobatics roll) makes the fall element seem a lot less powerful.

 

Ya, I said as much in an earlier post (page up, but quoted here again):

 

 

I think it could be argued in general that the effectiveness of the Target Falls element is underestimated by the MA rules. There is an option that the GM can allow a character to ignore throws of this nature with a Breakfall or straight DEX roll made by half, or an Acrobatics roll at -3, which you might want to consider. A character can also use some powers to resist throws; Clinging, weight by virtue of DI or Growth (or PysLim: Heavy), Flight, KB Resistance, Stretching, and Shapeshift all have the potential to resist some throws.

[jtelson]

Re: Legsweep

 

Ya' date=' I said as much in an earlier post (page up, but quoted here again):[/quote']

 

Sorry, you buried the lead and made it sound like an optional rule not the baseline (Page 399-400 5th Rev)

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Legsweep

 

Sorry' date=' you buried the lead and made it sound like an optional rule not the baseline (Page 399-400 5th Rev)[/quote']

 

That's because in the UMA, which is the origin of the subject line Legsweep maneuver and the book I was referring to, it is presented as an option.

[jtelson]

Re: Legsweep

 

That's because in the UMA' date=' which is the origin of the subject line Legsweep maneuver and the book I was referring to, it is presented as an [i']option[/i].

 

Ummm, Legsweep's a Martial Arts manuever from the core rules, I didn't have to touch an Ultimate book for this at all. Interesting to know that optionaly the baseline rule becomes an option. I find that oddly amusing.