Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

[Greywind]

Working on different ideas. I know there are a lot of complaints about KA and the Stun lottery.

 

Has anyone considered doing optional on the Stun? What I'm thinking is normally, you roll the KA damage, then roll the Stun X. Consider instead rolling Stun X only against the amount of effective damage from the KA.

 

2D6 KA, average 7 Body, 21 Stun. Against someone that has resistant defenses, let's say one level of Combat Luck, 3 rPD, we now have 4 Body, 12 Stun.

 

At the very least, they won't be hammered by a freight train with the Stun X.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

So if you do no body, you do no stun?

 

Won't work.

 

Makes resistant defenses too effective. 15 points of attack entirely neutralized by 9 active points of defense? Broken.

[Greywind]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Not necessarily. Something based more off of attack definition, rather than a blanket. There are somethings that inherently have more of an impact. That actually gets reflected in attacks that have a modifier to Stun X.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

In short - your proposal requires the rewrite of every hero and villain ever published if you mean to retain any semblance of their current effectiveness.

 

No thanks.

[Vulcan]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Actually, it would only require a rewrite for charcters who currently depend on killing attack - unless you plan on reducing the level of rDEF for all characters...

 

The STUN lotto is one of the single most broken things in the HERO System. Looking for a fix for this should be pretty high on everyone's list of priorities. I'm not certain this is it (if nothing else because it's not all that realistic - cops wearing kevlar vests often get the wind knocked out of them even when the bullets don't penetrate, for example), but surely some solution can be found.

[Greywind]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

In short - your proposal requires the rewrite of every hero and villain ever published if you mean to retain any semblance of their current effectiveness.

 

No thanks.

1) No it doesn't

 

2) Rules are going to be rewritten anyways

 

3) "Current effectiveness" only relates to Wolverine/Punisher clones that don't have any compunctions about killing anyways.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

its been suggested before.

 

 

 

 

My feeling is for Supers it gives you that shrug off bullets etc thing for affordable prices and makes guns not a great deal. Classic invulnerability is better modeled. Depending on the feel you're going for this could be great or not so great.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I use a Flat 3 for the StunX... has worked so far nicely.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

How about changing the Stun Multiple from 1d6 to 2d6 averaged? A max STUN x would only occur 1:36 instead of 1:6.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

The problem with killing attacks is that you are multiplying two volatile values together. It isn't a good way to simulate reality, on any level, as far as I can see (I know there are those who disagree).

 

The problem is compounded by the idea that if you have any resistant defence, then all your non-resistant defence stops stun.

 

OTOH we don't want to have to change everything, do we? Well, personally I don't care if we do, but I can see how that might be unattractive to some.

 

I have tried using the stun multiplier (I changed it to 1/2d6+3) on Body through defence and it is OK but means that KAs are completely ineffective against most bricks.

 

Good, I say.

 

Now the other thing you could do is look at the volatility. Change the DCs of KA to normal attack rolls, so a 3d6 KA becomes a 9d6 NA.

 

Then apply your resistant defence to the Body damage and 2xrDEF to the stun.

 

EXAMPLE:

 

A 12DC (4d6) KA against 12 rPD: 4d6KA becomes 12d6NA, averaging 12/42.

 

Applied to 12rDEF, 12 Body damage -12 DEF = 0 Body through defences.

 

42 Stun damage - (2xDEF = 24) = 18 Stun

 

So, that is basically what you'd expect. It means that KAs are all but useles against high rDEF, and very effective against lightly or unarmoured characters. Agaisnt average defences there is little difference between a normal and a killing attack.

 

Good, I say.

 

Moreover, whilst you do have to change the way you apply killing damage you don't have to change everything. Characters relying on combat luck against massive killing atatcks will be in for a shock though.

 

Good, I say.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Actually, it would only require a rewrite for charcters who currently depend on killing attack - unless you plan on reducing the level of rDEF for all characters...

 

The STUN lotto is one of the single most broken things in the HERO System. Looking for a fix for this should be pretty high on everyone's list of priorities. I'm not certain this is it (if nothing else because it's not all that realistic - cops wearing kevlar vests often get the wind knocked out of them even when the bullets don't penetrate, for example), but surely some solution can be found.

 

The Stun Lotto is easy to fix. 5 points buys 1d6 KA. Roll it like normal damage except:

 

(a) Subtract half the dice (rounded up) from the STUN

( 1-5 is 1 BOD; 6 is 2 BOD (or 1 is 0 BOD, 2-4 is 1 BOD, 5-6 is 2 BOD)

 

No other rules change. Volatility gone. Average STUN drops off a bit (1.38 STUN on 12 DC compared to the current method).

 

This keeps the Killing mechanic while removing the Volatility mechanic.

 

Alternatively, change normal attacks. You get 1d6 for 15 points. Add the dice and subtract 1 per 2d6 to determine BOD done. This is the same average BOD a normal attack currently generates, although the maximum is reduced (when's the last time you rolled all 6's on a normal attack anyway?)

 

Roll 1d6 and multiply it by BOD to determine STUN. Now it's volatile like a killing attack. 12DC's normal damage rolls 4d6 (average 14 - 2 = 12 BOD), and multiplies it by 1d6 (average 3.5 x 12 = 42). The average STUN and BOD are unchanged. Maximum BOD is reduced and maximum STUN increased markedly. Now normal attacks are just as volatile as killing attacks.

 

Now you have three choices for each attack:

 

- No Volatility (standard effect)

- Volatility (1d6 per 5 points)

- High Volatility (1d6 per 15 points and multiply by a STUN multiple)

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

You can certainly balance stun and Body between normal and killing attacks, but that makes no real sense to me: why should it hurt less? The only answer is because it has to balance somehow.

 

I'm not keen on 'increased Body' attacks because they reduce the utility of entangles and force walls. I'd rather see the attacks as having parity situationally: in some cases KAs will be better (for instance when the target lacks significant resistant defence), in others, normal attacks will be better.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

You can certainly balance stun and Body between normal and killing attacks, but that makes no real sense to me: why should it hurt less? The only answer is because it has to balance somehow.

 

I'm not keen on 'increased Body' attacks because they reduce the utility of entangles and force walls. I'd rather see the attacks as having parity situationally: in some cases KAs will be better (for instance when the target lacks significant resistant defence), in others, normal attacks will be better.

 

KA is already an increased BOD attack. It averages 1 extra BOD per 6 DC. I agree pushing it any higher would be problematic for "only takes BOD" challenges, but the combined higher average and higher volatility already incorporates that problem to some extent.

 

Put a 20 PD Force Wall in the path of a group of characters who max out at 12 DC. How many 4d6 KA's will it take to break the Wall? How long will they be there if they have to use an EB instead? Both have the same maximum 24 BOD, but the volatility of the KA allows it to approach that maximum far more often than the EB will.

[GoldenAge]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I use a Flat 3 for the StunX... has worked so far nicely.

 

Me too. No problems for years and years (decades even)!

 

Combat runs MUCH faster too.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

KA is already an increased BOD attack. It averages 1 extra BOD per 6 DC. I agree pushing it any higher would be problematic for "only takes BOD" challenges, but the combined higher average and higher volatility already incorporates that problem to some extent.

 

Put a 20 PD Force Wall in the path of a group of characters who max out at 12 DC. How many 4d6 KA's will it take to break the Wall? How long will they be there if they have to use an EB instead? Both have the same maximum 24 BOD, but the volatility of the KA allows it to approach that maximum far more often than the EB will.

 

KA is already an increased BOD attack as you say - and I'm not keen on that

 

If you put a 20 PD force wall in front of a group of characters with 60 point attacks that seems like a strong indication that they should find another way around, or get creative: a pushed haymakered 12d6 attack gets you 18d6, and I'd guess 3 or 4 of them should see you through, on average.

 

If it is also a 20 ED force wall then it is a 100 point power - it SHOULD be massively more effective than a 60 point power.

 

Generating a lot of BODY is not really a problem in Hero even with normal attacks. We just don't need increased Body attacks IMO.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

Me too. No problems for years and years (decades even)!

 

Combat runs MUCH faster too.

 

Depends what you consider a problem: why should a 4d6 flame attack vary so much in the damage it manages? A 4d6 attack averages 14 Body but can easily and routinely manage a range of 10-18, which means stun varies from 30 to 54.

 

I agree, combat will go much faster: people get stunned a lot more. You might think that is a good thing. Others might not.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I actually saw a decrease in the number of times Characters were Stunned when dropping to Flatx3.

 

Since it's volatile you get really low as much as you get really high.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I've always felt that an attack should do less stun if it doesn't do body. Maybe one multiplier less if there's no body done?

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I actually saw a decrease in the number of times Characters were Stunned when dropping to Flatx3.

 

Since it's volatile you get really low as much as you get really high.

 

The average should be the same, but you should see more characters getting stunned unless your average CON+DEF was particularly low (i.e. below average STUN).

 

Any result above goes up 3 at a time: if your 'STUN number' is (say) 47 (25 CON, 22 DEF) you will rarely get a normal attack that high, but any KA of 16+ should do it.

 

Low results will not stun, of course, but then the closer to average normal results probably wouldn't stun much anyway. It has certainly been my experience - even with a flat x3 - that you get stunned a lot more.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I've always felt that an attack should do less stun if it doesn't do body. Maybe one multiplier less if there's no body done?

 

That is not a bad notion: maybe 1d6-2 (min 1).

[SteveZilla]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

I've always felt that an attack should do less stun if it doesn't do body. Maybe one multiplier less if there's no body done?

 

That would make calculating the damage from a KA have yet another step in determining how much damage it does. At present I would not be very receptive to changing only one type of attacks in such a significant way.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

That would make calculating the damage from a KA have yet another step in determining how much damage it does. At present I would not be very receptive to changing only one type of attacks in such a significant way.

 

 

I get the 2nd part of your objection. What I don't get is how 1d6-2 is an extra step from 1d6-1.

[DocMan]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

If someone hits you with a sword and your armor stops it, you know you've been hit. Lots of stun.

 

If someone hits you with a sword and you have no armor, you can have your arm chopped off before you feel any pain. Low stun.

 

That makes the stun lottery seem pretty accurate to me. You could however make a case that the stun lotto should be weighted toward the high end.

 

Doc

[ghost-angel]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

accurate, but is it gameable and is it fun?

 

More to the point - is it Cinematic?

[Greywind]

Re: Killing Attacks vs Stun Lottery

 

If someone hits you with a sword and your armor stops it, you know you've been hit. Lots of stun.

 

If someone hits you with a sword and you have no armor, you can have your arm chopped off before you feel any pain. Low stun.

 

That makes the stun lottery seem pretty accurate to me. You could however make a case that the stun lotto should be weighted toward the high end.

 

Doc

This I don't necessarily agree with.

 

We are modeling comic book/cinematic situations. A guy wearing hard armor gets hit with a sword and the armor takes the blow, there is little or no Stun effect, because the armor effectively stopped the blow.