Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

[Agent X]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Looks like velocity will continue to add to damage in move throughs and move bys thus creating a time-honored balancing issue for character creation: the really fast, strong guy will often exceed damage caps.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

I think the advantage would in theory be being able to use two powers at the same time. If you aren't normally allowed to do so, it seems odd that a Limitation would let you.

 

One of the many arguments in the Great Linked Debate.

 

I suppose the way I see it is that, with a 'hard' linked power, you are buying a single 'new' power with multiple effects, so I do not see it as an issue of using two powers.

 

If we look at this, assuming that we are running with similar rules to what we have at present, using 2 powers together will be a full phase (not unreasonable as a single attack is a half phase), -2 OCV (4 points to correct) and 1/2 DCV (which is quite expensive to correct for some superheroes but might be less so under 6e). If there are skills like the Autofire Skills, but instead MPA skills, what you do is pay a premium to be able to use powers together without additional restriction.

 

That may or may not seem fair from a point efficiency point of view but it makes a great deal of sense from a concept realisation point of view: you are not prevented from building the concept you want, and the concept we currently use with MPA characters will not be the only option.

[Vurbal]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Aside from the concerns already mentioned by others about MPAs I'm quite happy about these changes. I'll have to wait until I can actually play 6E to decide if I need a house rule for MPAs or not.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Yeah. I hate to always sound so, "doom and gloom." Bad habit. I love the idea of combining Sweet and Rapid Fire and such. That's something I've allowed as a house rule myself most of the time. I wonder if there's more that's new about combining the two different kind of attacks, like if there's anything about handling Ranged attacks within HTH range, if Missile Deflection and Reflection has been made more consistent with Block as well, etc.

 

Also, I can't wait to see the new rules for using objects as weapons! That's something that definitely needed improvement and had a very wide open range of possibilities for improvement. A great place for innovation.

[incrdbil]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Looks like velocity will continue to add to damage in move throughs and move bys thus creating a time-honored balancing issue for character creation: the really fast' date=' strong guy will often exceed damage caps.[/quote']

 

Eh, thats why you just have to shug off a too strict adhereance to damage caps, or simpy make sure move throughs/bys stay exceptional moves. If a move by, move through, or passig strike is a primary attack of a character, then you can get strict on the limitations.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

First' date=' I’ve moved Blazing Away and Hurry to the Advanced Player’s Guide. They’re fun, but not crucial enough to leave in the core rules.[/quote']

No biggie. Blazing Away is pretty much useless anyway, except for mooks like Stormtroopers that you don't want to hit anything. Hurry is nice, but I can wait for the APG.

 

Second, in the interest of consistency and ease of learning, I’ve taken Rapid Fire, Sweep, and Multiple-Power Attack, broken ’em down into pieces parts, and recombined ’em into a single Standard Combat Maneuver, Multiple Attack.

I share the sentiments others have said here. The extra flexibility is great, but Multiple Powers that I've paid full price for shouldn't give me a penalty.

 

A) 20d6 EB costs 100 points and can be fired without penalty.

10d6 EB plus 5d6 Drain costs 100 points and I have to be at 1/2 DCV, and -2 OCV, and take a full phase?

 

I hope there's more to these rules that Steve hasn't yet mentioned that doesn't impose this blatant unfairness. Note, that we don't know for sure that this is the way it'll be for MPAs, so it may be premature for me to worry about it. But if this is the way the rule will be than

 

Other that that part, I love it.

 

As for actual new Combat Maneuvers, 6E has: Choke, ...Shove, ... Strafe, ... Throw, ... Trip,

I've been wanting these for a long time, particularly non-Martial Shoving.

 

On top of all that fun, a related thing I did was to examine and revise the rules for using objects as weapons, ...

Sounds good.

 

(In a related note, objects now have PD and ED, rather than just DEF, which I think improves the verisimilitude of the game. This also applies to things like Entangles and Vehicles.)

Hooray! No more burning rocks!

 

I wonder whether objects can have non-resistant defenses, too. I hope so. It would mean no more breaking ropes with baseball bats.

[Lucius]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

 

How would you design Strafe under UMA?

 

 

P 99, Ranged Martial Arts, already mentions the possibility of "importing" elements from Hand to Hand Martial Arts.

 

Full Move is a 3 pt element. 3 pts is the minimum cost of a martial maneuver.

 

Season to taste.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

And a seasoned palindromedary

[The Main Man]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

I wouldn't even "design" Strafe; I just allowed Move-By/Through to be used with Ranged Attacks.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Um, Move-By/Through both take into account Velocity when figuring damage so it's a little more than just allowing them with ranged attacks, isn't it?

[Lucius]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

While I find it easy to imagine a gunman firing at me while running forward full tilt (although I'd prefer not to imagine that) I find it hard to believe that his momentum adds anything to the damage of the bullets.

 

On the other hand, if it's a spearman throwing javelins while charging, that might seem more reasonable...

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I'd rather imagine a palindromedary

[Sean Waters]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

While I find it easy to imagine a gunman firing at me while running forward full tilt (although I'd prefer not to imagine that) I find it hard to believe that his momentum adds anything to the damage of the bullets.

 

On the other hand, if it's a spearman throwing javelins while charging, that might seem more reasonable...

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I'd rather imagine a palindromedary

 

I think we go wrong by trying to be too generic. A 'strafe' maneouvre, designed to alow a ranged attack to be used during a full move, should not add to damage. In cases where damage adding would be sensible (like the thrown spear) then it would make sense to build the spear with +2 DC of damage (only whilst using the 'strafe' maneouvre/immediately after a full half move).

 

The main point of 'strafe' presumably is that it allows you to move after attacking in the same phase?

[Agent X]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Eh' date=' thats why you just have to shug off a too strict adhereance to damage caps, or simpy make sure move throughs/bys stay exceptional moves. If a move by, move through, or passig strike is a primary attack of a character, then you can get strict on the limitations.[/quote'] I don't think that's the only option. Haymaker was given a flat dice bonus. I see no reason why velocity couldn't be capped.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

I don't think that's the only option. Haymaker was given a flat dice bonus. I see no reason why velocity couldn't be capped.

 

This is an interesting point, and I hope it will be addressed in the damage adding rules in 6e. How damage should add depends entirely on how it is supposed to work. I would argue that there is a real element of exponential damage here: simply adding gived skewed results. It would make sense to take the higher of velocity or STR damage and add a small amount (say a maximum of +4d6) depending on the value of the other contributor to damage.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

This is an interesting point' date=' and I hope it will be addressed in the damage adding rules in 6e. How damage should add depends entirely on how it is supposed to work. I would argue that there is a real element of exponential damage here: simply adding gived skewed results. It would make sense to take the higher of velocity or STR damage and add a small amount (say a maximum of +4d6) depending on the value of the other contributor to damage.[/quote']

 

That's an interesting idea. Or something similar to the way you can currently add two or more characters' Str together for a task (add their lifting capacity and then go back to the logarithmic point scale to see what the effective Str is). I'd rep if I could.

[Netzilla]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Another option, if you're worried about velocity damage, wold be to go back to the idea that damage is exponential rather than linear (I know, it occurs both ways in the system; never mind that now). Then you could tie the bonus damage to the Range Chart, giving you the following (using the 5e Range Chart):

 

Velocity    0-4 hexes

Oh, wait, we're using meters now.

 

Velocity          0-8m    9-16m    17-32m    33-64m    65-128m
--------          ----    -----    ------    ------    -------
Move Through DC    +0       +2       +4        +6        +8
Move Through OCV   -0       -2       -4        -6        -8
--------------------------------------------------------------
Move By DC         +0       +1       +2        +3        +4
Move By OCV        -0       -1       -2        -3        -4

 

So, a 30 hex (60m) Move Through that used to be +10DC would now be +6.

 

Huh. I may have just created a new house-rule for my next supers campaign.

[Boll Weevil]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Overall I like these changes. I really like giving objects PD/ED. Nice. I was also bothered by the fact a normal guy with a baseball bat didn't do any more damage than had he punched (lest he buy +X HA). Good add.

 

I am looking forward to seeing the treatment of Throwing. I just hope this comes with a complementary held/abort to action called Catching which I felt the old rules never adequately explained. I have built several characters adept at catching things with a modified Missile Deflection.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

I think we go wrong by trying to be too generic. A 'strafe' maneouvre, designed to alow a ranged attack to be used during a full move, should not add to damage. In cases where damage adding would be sensible (like the thrown spear) then it would make sense to build the spear with +2 DC of damage (only whilst using the 'strafe' maneouvre/immediately after a full half move).

 

The main point of 'strafe' presumably is that it allows you to move after attacking in the same phase?

 

Strafe could also allow a high velocity character to close and still attack, reducing range penalties by more than the stradfe penalty (whatever that might be).

 

The spear would be an HKA with STR. Maybe it should be possible to use HTH maneuvers with HKA's such that the Move Through gains range with the Spear.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Strafe could also allow a high velocity character to close and still attack, reducing range penalties by more than the stradfe penalty (whatever that might be).

 

The spear would be an HKA with STR. Maybe it should be possible to use HTH maneuvers with HKA's such that the Move Through gains range with the Spear.

 

There are many ways to build a spear (and a flame attack and a short sword...), but I would argue that if you were building an attack that increased with velocity, then a limited linked attack (or however you chose to build it) would work well.

[The Main Man]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Um' date=' Move-By/Through both take into account Velocity when figuring damage so it's a little more than just allowing them with ranged attacks, isn't it?[/quote']

 

Well, from a game design standpoint, I'll have to give you that one.

 

I house ruled the concept (sans velocity damage of course) about a year or so ago and it's worked fine.

 

I will also add that I was once asked what the point of using Move-Through with Ranged attacks is, for which I have two answers.

 

1) A player could move towards their target, hoping to shoot them down and move past them in the same Full Move.

 

2) They can move away from their opponent while still attacking, milking those Ranged PSL's for every point that they're worth.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Strafe could also allow a high velocity character to close and still attack, reducing range penalties by more than the stradfe penalty (whatever that might be).

 

The spear would be an HKA with STR. Maybe it should be possible to use HTH maneuvers with HKA's such that the Move Through gains range with the Spear.

 

Or run the heck away while tossing a pot shot over your shoulder. Heh.

 

Neat idea about HTH maneuvers using an HKA or HA with Ranged. May not apply to all weapons or all maneuvers, but it's an interesting one to ponder for some cases.... Rep if I can.

 

I've often allowed Move Bys with ranged attacks, but not Move Throughs (a Move Through doesn't make much sense, as I see its primary purpose being to ram into someone doing damage and knocking them back). I just applied the OCV and DCV penalties without modifying damage. There's still reason enough to do it now and then just for the Full Move and attack.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

There are many ways to build a spear (and a flame attack and a short sword...)' date=' but I would argue that if you were building an attack that increased with velocity, then a limited linked attack (or however you chose to build it) would work well.[/quote']

 

That sounds pure from a game mechanics perspective - but that's coming from the guy who thinks that, if you want a bigger HKA because you are strong, you should buy extra HKA that Locks Out your STR.

[Lucius]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

I think we go wrong by trying to be too generic. A 'strafe' maneouvre, designed to alow a ranged attack to be used during a full move, should not add to damage. In cases where damage adding would be sensible (like the thrown spear) then it would make sense to build the spear with +2 DC of damage (only whilst using the 'strafe' maneouvre/immediately after a full half move).

 

The main point of 'strafe' presumably is that it allows you to move after attacking in the same phase?

 

I agree. I was just trying to think of when adding damage might make sense, and it looks like an "edge case" probably best covered other under rules (i.e. by considering the spear a Hand to Hand attack to which STR and velocity can add)

 

I also like your idea of comparing STR to velocity and using the higher for damage base, and adding damage based on the other....

 

Lucius Alexander

 

House of the Palindromedary

[casualplayer]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

If Sex Ed officially puts paid to the Great Linked Debate and the MPA confusion, I will name my nextborn child after it. Such a great accomplishment should qualify you for the Nobel Peace prize.

 

MPAs have never made sense to me and feel ill-defined because there are A) way too many published characters that are designed not taking that ability into account, many of which have power structures specially designed to compensate for the idea that you can only launch one power per phase and how could anyone ever have survived fighting Dr. Destroyer or Mechanon if they could alpha strike you with every offensive power they have every phase? Maybe burning more END in a phase than you have CON should stun you to keep things under control?

 

Why don't I have my Sex Ed yet? Pretty please.

[The Main Man]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

Maybe burning more END in a phase than you have CON should stun you to keep things under control?

I had an idea like that once too.

 

I still think that it would be neat.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Sixth Edition Showcase #2: New Combat Maneuvers; Objects As Weapons

 

That sounds pure from a game mechanics perspective - but that's coming from the guy who thinks that' date=' if you want a bigger HKA because you are strong, you should buy extra HKA that Locks Out your STR.[/quote']

 

Should STR add to attacks at all?

 

2d6 RKA: no range - 20 points

+2d6 RKA: no range, linked STR - 15 points

 

35 total for a 4d6 KA - not so very different from what we pay at present, and similar in effect (and if you could get the last bit linked tot he bottom 30 STR, practically identical).

 

It is not even that complex a build.

 

Hmm. Run with that: Maybe KA should be a 10 point power, and comes with neither 'range' nor 'STR adds damage' (In fact you can not BUY STR adds damage - buy more damage and limit it)