Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

[caris]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

As we've pretty much shown to my satisfaction at least' date=' this is far more powerful than the MPA approach. Though perhaps offset by STUN Lotto double jeopardy.[/quote']

 

In this thread?

 

The increased active points would seem to indicate so, but I'm not really seeing what makes it superior. Except possibly, that one could buy 2pt CSLs for it. I could see a case being made somewhat if Active Point caps arent being used. Only incomparison to the powers being bought straight out. Edit - OK, I was misremembering Reduced Penetration, it isn't a Limitation I use often, and I think I have the 4th Ed version stuck in my head.

 

Multiple slots from the same framework are never allowed in an MPA according to the book' date=' only Powers in the same slot (which means they MUST be Linked and at least one cannot be used without the other). (At least in 5r) [/quote']

 

I wasn't referring to powers in the same framework. The character I was referring to had their Defenses and an Attack in an EC, and in a MP they had their movement powers and another attack. Both attacks were near the campaign max for damage. The original is that if the character is paying near full price for all the attacks, it isn't as big of an issue. When cheap or free attacks are mixed in than MPAs can become more of a problem.

[caris]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

It is one attack' date=' with two guns. Was my point.[/quote']

 

I knew that was your point, but it is based on the assumption that it only counts as one attack. From your statements, I suspect that your GM had the same assumption at that time as I did. Enough people playing the game have made that exact same assumption to lead me to beleive that the earlier editions failed to be sufficiently clear on the issue.

 

Which also gets back to the point, that even if it had been as clear as it is in 5th Edition, your GM would have still been in his rights to not allow you to fire two guns at once no matter how many John Woo films he had watched.

[Istaran]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

In this thread?

 

The increased active points would seem to indicate so, but I'm not really seeing what makes it superior. Except possibly, that one could buy 2pt CSLs for it. I could see a case being made somewhat if Active Point caps arent being used. Only incomparison to the powers being bought straight out.

 

In the MPA defenses are fully counted twice. In the 2x AP version with Reduced Penetration, defenses are counted twice only against BODY, not STUN. They generate the same BODY and knockback, but one generates more STUN. Also, while you get 'double jeopardy' for the STUN multiplier, the results of a 6 coming up are notably less severe in this case.

And I could be wrong, but I thought MPAs only stun a target if a single attack deals enough STUN past defenses. Reduced Penetration definitely does not have that restriction.

 

I wasn't referring to powers in the same framework. The character I was referring to had their Defenses and an Attack in an EC, and in a MP they had their movement powers and another attack. Both attacks were near the campaign max for damage. The original is that if the character is paying near full price for all the attacks, it isn't as big of an issue. When cheap or free attacks are mixed in than MPAs can become more of a problem.

Ah, okay. This is allowed by the rules. He paid for both attacks: The multipower pool cost at least as much as the attack on its own would have and he had a premium on top of that for having alternative powers to switch between. The EC + its attack power cost at least as much as the attack power alone. The overall discount from the EC is supposed to be a subsidy to characters with relatively tight coherent concepts.

 

The issue here wasn't MPAs being used in this way being unbalanced, it was that MPAs are designed to be balanced against CP but not against AP/DC limits. I'm thinking something like AP/DC of the biggest attack plus half AP/DC of each additional attack needs to be within the AP/DC limit or you disallow the MPA. At least require them to Sweep/Rapid Fire instead (which would be legal even if they paid for only one attack). (The half AP/DC is to compensate for the double dipped defenses. If the secondary attack is NND/AVLD they are getting about half the extra damage they would have gotten just adding the extra AP/DCs to thier main attack.)

 

Or maybe MPAs are fine with AP/DC limits used as is, but only if everyone is aware up front of this option and uses it more? Maybe everyone in your game should be using either MPA or Sweep or Rapid Attack on a regular basis. 5 cp (Rapid Attack skill, HTH or Ranged to suit) + 8 cp (+4 with Sweep or +4 with Rapid Fire) negates all the offensive penalties for a 3-shot Sweep or Rapid Fire; enough limited 5 pt CSLs (Only when using Sweep/Rapid Fire) can nullify the DCV penalties as well (GM permission required, as technically CSLs can only apply to OCV if they're limited, unless the GM makes an exception). None of this requires you to buy a second attack power, and it lets you take 3 shots at the campaign AP/DC max. Only penalty left is the first miss ruins the sequence issue.

[Adventus]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

AS to the end of str and hth attacks: You have to pay end for each attack in a MPA. i.e. so a total of 18 end in on phase not counting moving or any other end using power. The ruling is in TUB. This supersedes the ruling of only paying once per phase for STR.

 

Also, remember with MPAs, you do have to take the worst OCV modifier AND the worst DCV modifier from all the attacks and it applies to all of them.

[Fireg0lem]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

A lot of the iffy builds/examples of MPAs revolve around using multiple HAs and HKAs. For example, the infamous:

 

55 Strength

 

"Pinky" HA +1d6

"Ring Finger" HA +1d6

"Middle Finger" HA +1d6

"Index Finger" HA +1d6

"Thumb" HA +1d6

 

possibly with 0 End on the STR, in case the GM wants to make you pay 5 END per HA rather than 5 per MPA.

 

My fix is to, first, require that a player split STR between MPA'd attacks made in one phase, and second, evaluate attacks based on the option of MPAing.

 

With that, a player pays as much for 2 12-DC attacks as for a 24 DC attack, so it's less powerful, but more varied (and lower DC for the cap, of course), so I don't see it often. However, in a 15 DC game, I'd be fine with a character who had a 14 DC attack and a tacked-on 5-10 DC attack.

[Istaran]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

AS to the end of str and hth attacks: You have to pay end for each attack in a MPA. i.e. so a total of 18 end in on phase not counting moving or any other end using power. The ruling is in TUB. This supersedes the ruling of only paying once per phase for STR.

Okay, thanks for the tip. What's TUB?

 

 

Also' date=' remember with MPAs, you do have to take the worst OCV modifier AND the worst DCV modifier from all the attacks and it applies to all of them.[/quote']

This is unlikely to make a difference, except in the case of multiple manuevers. Especially if you are built with MPAs in mind. (Though it does limit the ability to use 3pt levels for frameworks with this. 3pt level for three attacks you like to MPA however works just fine.)

Powers do not typically have OCV/DCV modifiers.

[Adventus]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

Okay' date=' thanks for the tip. What's TUB? [/quote']

 

The Ultimate Brick

[Beast]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

you do realize that you are maxing out the body on the killing attacks

the bite should average 14 body not 24

and each if the claw attacks average 7 body

and I'm not sure where you are getting +30 for stun with levels(I know you can add I believe 5 pt levels for added Dc's in lieu of a to hit bonus)

 

also on the knock back your best hit the bite will average 14 body and +2 for the other 2 attacks but then you have to subtract 3d6 for a killing attack

or go with a 12 body tail attack with a +2 and have to only subtract 2d6

 

I have never used multiple power attack

and the GM's I play with generally don't like them

 

 

 

Dragon:

STR: 30

Bite: HKA 2d6

Claws: HKA 2d6 (reduced penetration)

Tail: HA +6d6

 

MPA: costs 18 END or 12 END? Either way it does 3 hits for 12 DCs each off a single non-penalized attack roll.

Now add 20 3pt levels (Bite, Claws, tail): against a dodgy target you will just plain hit; against an entangled target you add +30 STUN to the HA and +10 BODY (and the resulting STUN) to each of the HKAs. (okay, so all your above-average rolls get clipped, but that's part of the point.. ) It's also almost certain to do knockback (14 minimum BODY per HKA, with each fairly likely to do a full 24 BODY. Even 3d6 is unlikely to stop that from knocking back.. in fact 13-14" KB is to be expected!)

 

Average roll damage:

Bite: 24 BODY, 48 STUN (rolled a 3 on multiplier)

Claws: 12 + 12 BODY, 72 STUN ( rolled a 4 on multiplier)

Tail: 12 BODY, 72 STUN (rolled 3.5 per die, +30 from levels)

= 60 BODY - PD - 3x rPD (might not kill, but it should be felt)

= 192 STUN - 4x PD (and despite being broken up, it's quite likely to STUN as well). With the double-jeapardy STUN lotto, you can easily have a single hit for 120 STUN.

 

So.. is this all as crazy as I think it is?

[Beast]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

for coolness effect yes by all means

if you hit it may even look like multiple wounds and I won't even count the extra rounds as charges spent

but the damage will be as if you hit with 1 round unless you have rapid fire or an auto fire weapon

 

 

You should have seen the expression on my face when I said I wanted to fire my two guns at once (Heroic game) as one attack and was told "Er' date=' you can only attack with one weapon at a time" ... I was like "Have you SEEN a John Woo movie?! Tell me I can't do that...."[/quote']

[Istaran]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

you do realize that you are maxing out the body on the killing attacks

the bite should average 14 body not 24

and each if the claw attacks average 7 body

and I'm not sure where you are getting +30 for stun with levels(I know you can add I believe 5 pt levels for added Dc's in lieu of a to hit bonus)

 

also on the knock back your best hit the bite will average 14 body and +2 for the other 2 attacks but then you have to subtract 3d6 for a killing attack

or go with a 12 body tail attack with a +2 and have to only subtract 2d6

 

I have never used multiple power attack

and the GM's I play with generally don't like them

 

In Heroic games, 2 CSLs (3pt or higher) can be traded for +1 DC.

 

In Superheroic games, 2 CSLs (3pt or higher) can instead be traded for +3 STUN on a normal attack or +1 BODY on a Killing attack (before STUN multiplier). In both cases, the damage is maxed at the existing max for the dice. Given I was putting 180 AP toward attacking, I assumed Superheroic was more appropriate and went with those rules.

 

In an MPA this is on each hit, but the CSL must cover all of the attacks used.

 

The fact that the CSLs are hitting the limit of the dice on an average roll in this case, means you aren't even getting your full bang for your buck with them, since they are quite likely to be clipped.

[Beast]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

ok I see now you are mixing normal dice with a standard effect

 

but what you have are 3x60 active pt attacks not 1x180 pt attack

since you will be going up against the target's defenses 4times(1 of the attacks being reduced penatration)

 

why have 20 3pt CSL's(unless the dragon has a 2 dex and even that would be way high for most games)

 

In Heroic games, 2 CSLs (3pt or higher) can be traded for +1 DC.

 

In Superheroic games, 2 CSLs (3pt or higher) can instead be traded for +3 STUN on a normal attack or +1 BODY on a Killing attack (before STUN multiplier). In both cases, the damage is maxed at the existing max for the dice. Given I was putting 180 AP toward attacking, I assumed Superheroic was more appropriate and went with those rules.

 

In an MPA this is on each hit, but the CSL must cover all of the attacks used.

 

The fact that the CSLs are hitting the limit of the dice on an average roll in this case, means you aren't even getting your full bang for your buck with them, since they are quite likely to be clipped.

[Beast]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

so at best you could add 10 body to 1 of the killing attacks or 30 stun to the tail attack,since you can only add the CSL's to 1 attack

and there would be no added bonuses to hit

you cannot use levels to do 2 things in the same phase

such as using a csl for both ocv and dcv

or a +1 overall for ocv and perception

 

if you split them up evenly you will get +3 body on the bite(4d6 hka)6 levels

+9 stun on the tail attack(6 levels)

and +2 on each side of the claw attack(reduced penatration)8 levels(I threw the 2 remainder levels here since they would fit)

 

so now the average would look like this(I used average rolls for the regular attack and added standard effect for the CSL's

Bite 4d6+3KA(17 body 42 stun)

claws 2x2d6+2KA(9 body 22.5 stun)

tail 12d6+9 (15 body 51 stun)

 

 

In Heroic games, 2 CSLs (3pt or higher) can be traded for +1 DC.

 

In Superheroic games, 2 CSLs (3pt or higher) can instead be traded for +3 STUN on a normal attack or +1 BODY on a Killing attack (before STUN multiplier). In both cases, the damage is maxed at the existing max for the dice. Given I was putting 180 AP toward attacking, I assumed Superheroic was more appropriate and went with those rules.

 

In an MPA this is on each hit, but the CSL must cover all of the attacks used.

 

The fact that the CSLs are hitting the limit of the dice on an average roll in this case, means you aren't even getting your full bang for your buck with them, since they are quite likely to be clipped.

[Vondy]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

Why not just allow two Attack Rolls against one target as a Full Phase Action with two different Powers/Equipment.

 

ya don't even have to add the Stun together like the current MPA rule.

 

I like it!

[Markdoc]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

AS to the end of str and hth attacks: You have to pay end for each attack in a MPA. i.e. so a total of 18 end in on phase not counting moving or any other end using power. The ruling is in TUB. This supersedes the ruling of only paying once per phase for STR.

 

Not really. The core rules are still the core rules. Everything in the ultimate series (or genre books, for that matter) are GM's-call optional extras.

 

cheers, Mark

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

The problem with allowing unpenalised multiple attacks is simply that you can put your opponent down faster. END is an issue but only sort of - to put your opponent down you'd need to hit them that many times anyway, so you'd be spending at least that much END anyway, but it would take longer and you'd be exposing yourself to more danger. It rapidly becomes a question of who can launch the most attacks in a single phase and the majority of hits will be one-shot kills (or KOs).

 

I would suggest that all multiple attacks be dealt with the same way in Hero.

 

We have ways to mutliple atatck now: let's list them.

 

Sweep: 1/2 DCV, full phase, cumulative -2 OCV, one miss=remaining shots miss

Rapid fire: 1/2 DCV, full phase, cumulative -2 OCV, one miss=remaining shots miss

 

The Rapid attack skill reduces the time to a half phase action.

 

The two weapon fighting skill reduces DCV penalty to -2, ignores the offhand penalty (heroic games) and the first -2 OCV penalty.

 

I'm thinking we get rid of the MPA rules and simply say that you can rapid fire or sweep with different attacks. In fact I'd go one better and say that sweep and rapid fire needn't be seperate maneouvres. I might apply an additional -2 OCV if you are mixing ranged and melee attacks. Let us call the maneouvre the Multiple Attack Maneuvre.

 

Mixing ego based and dex based attacks is more problematic. I'd want to preserve the 'single roll' principle, but perhaps you could use a single roll and apply it to seperate totals. You need to do that if you are firing at different opponents anyway, I don't see a problem. If you are mixing ego and dex attacks I'd also apply a seperate -2 penalty to OCV.

 

Single maneouvre, single rules, pages saved for other crunchy goodness. Bootiful.

[Istaran]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

so at best you could add 10 body to 1 of the killing attacks or 30 stun to the tail attack,since you can only add the CSL's to 1 attack

and there would be no added bonuses to hit

you cannot use levels to do 2 things in the same phase

such as using a csl for both ocv and dcv

or a +1 overall for ocv and perception

 

if you split them up evenly you will get +3 body on the bite(4d6 hka)6 levels

+9 stun on the tail attack(6 levels)

and +2 on each side of the claw attack(reduced penatration)8 levels(I threw the 2 remainder levels here since they would fit)

 

so now the average would look like this(I used average rolls for the regular attack and added standard effect for the CSL's

Bite 4d6+3KA(17 body 42 stun)

claws 2x2d6+2KA(9 body 22.5 stun)

tail 12d6+9 (15 body 51 stun)

 

If a character has Combat Skill Levels he can apply to a multiple power attack, and he uses them to increase the attack's damage, the increase affects all attacks that are a part of the multiple-power attack.

If it did not affect all of the attacks, I would have skipped the CSLs. It is the fact that they add to each attack that convinced me to add them to try and see if I could make an MPA that is too powerful. It seems like it's only too powerful if you use it as a way to bypass AP/DC caps, not as compared with other uses of the same character points.

[Markdoc]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

The problem with allowing unpenalised multiple attacks is simply that you can put your opponent down faster. END is an issue but only sort of - to put your opponent down you'd need to hit them that many times anyway, so you'd be spending at least that much END anyway, but it would take longer and you'd be exposing yourself to more danger. It rapidly becomes a question of who can launch the most attacks in a single phase and the majority of hits will be one-shot kills (or KOs).

 

I would suggest that all multiple attacks be dealt with the same way in Hero.

 

We have ways to mutliple atatck now: let's list them.

 

Sweep: 1/2 DCV, full phase, cumulative -2 OCV, one miss=remaining shots miss

Rapid fire: 1/2 DCV, full phase, cumulative -2 OCV, one miss=remaining shots miss

 

The Rapid attack skill reduces the time to a half phase action.

 

The two weapon fighting skill reduces DCV penalty to -2, ignores the offhand penalty (heroic games) and the first -2 OCV penalty.

 

I'm thinking we get rid of the MPA rules and simply say that you can rapid fire or sweep with different attacks. In fact I'd go one better and say that sweep and rapid fire needn't be seperate maneouvres. I might apply an additional -2 OCV if you are mixing ranged and melee attacks. Let us call the maneouvre the Multiple Attack Maneuvre.

 

Mixing ego based and dex based attacks is more problematic. I'd want to preserve the 'single roll' principle, but perhaps you could use a single roll and apply it to seperate totals. You need to do that if you are firing at different opponents anyway, I don't see a problem. If you are mixing ego and dex attacks I'd also apply a seperate -2 penalty to OCV.

 

Single maneouvre, single rules, pages saved for other crunchy goodness. Bootiful.

 

Yep. As far as I can see this is all positive, with no negatives in sight. The only change I'd make is mixing OCV and ECV, which I think muddies things a bit. Since this "multiple attack" is supposed to reflect a single attack utilizing more than one power (not multiple different attacks: that's what SPD is for), I'd seperate them and keep the "one roll" principal. The second reason for doing that is that it decreases the chance of just blazing away in the hopes of rolling a good hit.

 

cheers, Mark

[Istaran]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

The problem with allowing unpenalised multiple attacks is simply that you can put your opponent down faster. END is an issue but only sort of - to put your opponent down you'd need to hit them that many times anyway, so you'd be spending at least that much END anyway, but it would take longer and you'd be exposing yourself to more danger. It rapidly becomes a question of who can launch the most attacks in a single phase and the majority of hits will be one-shot kills (or KOs).

 

I would suggest that all multiple attacks be dealt with the same way in Hero.

 

We have ways to mutliple atatck now: let's list them.

 

Sweep: 1/2 DCV, full phase, cumulative -2 OCV, one miss=remaining shots miss

Rapid fire: 1/2 DCV, full phase, cumulative -2 OCV, one miss=remaining shots miss

 

The Rapid attack skill reduces the time to a half phase action.

 

The two weapon fighting skill reduces DCV penalty to -2, ignores the offhand penalty (heroic games) and the first -2 OCV penalty.

 

I'm thinking we get rid of the MPA rules and simply say that you can rapid fire or sweep with different attacks. In fact I'd go one better and say that sweep and rapid fire needn't be seperate maneouvres. I might apply an additional -2 OCV if you are mixing ranged and melee attacks. Let us call the maneouvre the Multiple Attack Maneuvre.

 

Mixing ego based and dex based attacks is more problematic. I'd want to preserve the 'single roll' principle, but perhaps you could use a single roll and apply it to seperate totals. You need to do that if you are firing at different opponents anyway, I don't see a problem. If you are mixing ego and dex attacks I'd also apply a seperate -2 penalty to OCV.

 

Single maneouvre, single rules, pages saved for other crunchy goodness. Bootiful.

 

Well right now we have.. assuming, say a DEX 30 and a 60 AP attack, you can spend 5 pts for Rapid Attack to make Sweep/Rapid Fire a 1/2 phase. Spend 8 pts for +4 OCV with Sweep or Rapid Fire. Buy 9 5pt DCV levels limited to Only while Sweep/Rapid Fire DCV penalties apply (what kind of lim is that? Less so for a character that sweeps all the time?).

That's 58 pts before whatever lim we get on the DCV levels. Now when Sweeping for 3 attacks, you have no to hit penalties, no time penalties, and no DCV penalties (10 from DEX + 9 = 19. 19 / 2 = 10 (Hero math))

Or for 60 pts before lims you can buy a second 60 AP power. If you MPA with them both it takes a 1/2 phase, has no OCV or DCV penalties (except for OCV levels being pricier). The difference: for the MPA you only roll once, no two rolls to miss on. For Sweep/Rapid Fire you have to roll thrice, but can mix it up (trip disarm and throw, attack three opponents, or just blast thrice). Also you are getting three attacks for the price of two. And wierdly, the cost scales based on your DCV, rather than the actual power of your attacks.

The MPA person has to pay for a whole other attack.

 

Again the MPA only seems to be a problem when it's allowed to bypass AP/DC caps that the rest of the campaign adheres to.

(And I especially don't like the idea of slapping a bunch of penalties like Sweep and Rapid Fire have on something like HKA: Knife + Drain(REC): Poison, or EB: Electric Blast + Drain(DEX): Electric disorientation when they're specifically bought as Linked.)

[Markdoc]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

(And I especially don't like the idea of slapping a bunch of penalties like Sweep and Rapid Fire have on something like HKA: Knife + Drain(REC): Poison' date=' or EB: Electric Blast + Drain(DEX): Electric disorientation when they're specifically bought as Linked.)[/quote']

 

Right, but I wouldn't do that either. Linked attacks are not MPAs - at least not in my book. They're a single attack that can have two effects.

 

cheers, Mark

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

for coolness effect yes by all means

if you hit it may even look like multiple wounds and I won't even count the extra rounds as charges spent

but the damage will be as if you hit with 1 round unless you have rapid fire or an auto fire weapon

 

Two Weapons.

Two Attack Rolls (two chances to hit/miss).

Damage is not added together (applies to defenses separately).

Take a Full Phase.

 

This is NOT unbalancing. I've been using it in play for a decade at this point.

 

It's not a "Fifth Edition MPA" it's "Attacking With Two Weapons At Once"

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

Not really. The core rules are still the core rules. Everything in the ultimate series (or genre books, for that matter) are GM's-call optional extras.

 

cheers, Mark

That change was supposed to have gone into 5ER, but was missed. It's a core rule. (Can't find the cite at the moment.)

[caris]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

That change was supposed to have gone into 5ER' date=' but was missed. It's a core rule. (Can't find the cite at the moment.)[/quote']

 

Forgive me, but statements like that want me to slam my head into the table. The core rules are the published core rules. FAQs, errata, clarifications from Steve, stuff published in other books are not the core rules. Even if they were intended to be published in the main book, and just "missed". When they get 6th published, and if they don't miss it again, than it is a core rule.

 

Until that time it is just official rules that not everyone will have or should be expected to know about.

[Markdoc]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

Forgive me, but statements like that want me to slam my head into the table. The core rules are the published core rules. FAQs, errata, clarifications from Steve, stuff published in other books are not the core rules. Even if they were intended to be published in the main book, and just "missed". When they get 6th published, and if they don't miss it again, than it is a core rule.

 

Until that time it is just official rules that not everyone will have or should be expected to know about.

 

Yeah, pretty much. It sounds fairly sensible to me, but it's not a core rule. I know the rules, pretty well (or so I thought) and I'd never heard of this before.

 

Edit: I do have TUB, and I've seen this rule there, but I just checked agin: there's nothing to suggest it should be treated as core.

 

cheers, Mark

[Istaran]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

Right, but I wouldn't do that either. Linked attacks are not MPAs - at least not in my book. They're a single attack that can have two effects.

 

cheers, Mark

 

The problem with this again is that it makes Linked an advantage that saves you points.

If we did have punative MPA rules, maybe Linked between two attacks becomes a -0: Pro is you take no MPA penalties, Con is you can't use them seperately.

 

Also, as I've pointed out, for comparable points right now you can either buy a whole 'nother attack to attack with two powers at once (MPA) or buy off the penalties to Sweep and use the same attack three times with the only downside being the multiple attack rolls. If someone pays straight up for a whole 'nother attack (as opposed to making it an MP slot) do they need to be put even farther behind the person who instead buys off the Sweep penalties?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multiple Power Attacks: How much is too much?

 

Well right now we have.. assuming, say a DEX 30 and a 60 AP attack, you can spend 5 pts for Rapid Attack to make Sweep/Rapid Fire a 1/2 phase. Spend 8 pts for +4 OCV with Sweep or Rapid Fire. Buy 9 5pt DCV levels limited to Only while Sweep/Rapid Fire DCV penalties apply (what kind of lim is that? Less so for a character that sweeps all the time?).

.....................

 

The thing that boosts up your cost calculation enormously is the DCV thing. Probably worth something as a limitation, depends how often you use it, but you'd need 10 levels, I think, as the levels are also halved for DCV. Other than that you've just spent 5 points on rapid attack and 8 on OCV levels, and if you buy 2 weapon fighting for 10 poitns the DCV penalty drops to a straight -1 so the cost is 5+8+10+10(with a limtiation) or 33 points.

 

For your MPA you need two attack powers. That gives you options you wouldn't have with the sweep set up: an EB and a ranged drain, for example - so the target has to have good ED and PowDef to resist you or the second atatck could be a flash which works differently again. So you are getting a lot more from those 60 points than just cancelling out combat penalties. In addition, in an EC, you are only spending 30 additional points for that full 60 AP attack.

 

End of the day we work on a 3d6 system, which means that a -2 penalty to OCV is probably going to bite as lot harder. A -2 penalty, if your attack was hitting on a 11- reduces the chance to hit from 62% to 37%, and that is important because, well, look at an average game and assume that the atatcks are both damaging:

 

(I'm making assumptions, but not unreasonable ones)

 

Damage = DCx3.5

Def = DCx2

Stun = DCx5

 

So in a 12DC game, you get (42-24)=18 stun through defences (STD) per hit, and two hits gets you 36 STD. that doesn't add for stunning, but it cuts the number of hits to take an opponent down from 60/18=5 to 60/36=2.

 

You spend 60 extra points and take your opponents down over twice as fast. Looked at that way, it is a pretty good investment.

 

Also if the attacks are both KAs the stun lottery becomes far more likely to come up trumps and that only has to happen once to be a turning point event.

 

Finally, coming full circle to your point, if I see a character sheet with lots of PSLs or even extra CSLs that substantially boost the combat level, I want to know why. My assumption is going to be that it is harder to hit with two weapons at once than one and I'll want a damn good explanation for why it is not in your case, and even then I might not allow it. I've got no problem with you taking down opponents fast but I want you to feel the risk. MPAs are just too easy.