Hero System ability design

[whswhs]

So here's another puzzle: I'm looking at creating a combat robot as an NPC. It seems to me that such a robot ought not to be susceptible to telepathy or mental attacks or the like—in general, to EGO attacks. I don't see anything along these lines in the 6th edition Basic Rulebook. When I look back at 4th edition Champions, it suggests that automata should have EGO of 0 and be defined as immune to EGO attacks as a consequence. But that's -20 points to buy down EGO in 4th, or -10 in 6th. in other words, it seems that the robot is getting paid -10 points to be immune to an entire class of attacks!

I'm perplexed at the game logic of this. And I'm wondering about other ways of representing it. Looking at Life Support, I see that immunity to all forms of poison costs 5 points, and immunity to all diseases costs 5 points. So maybe immunity to all telepathic interaction with other minds should cost 5 points, or 10?

Alternatively, we could say that a robot that can be reprogrammed by the methods we now use for computers has a different form of EGO, one that doesn't respond to telepathy but does respond to jacking in and wi-fi and such, and that this is a 0-point change of mode. Champions doesn't seem to have that concept, but maybe it should be introduced.

[Chris Goodwin]

In the full 6th edition core rulebooks, there's a rule called "classes of mind". Mental powers would be defined as affecting one class of mind by default, the options being human, animal, machine, or alien, with others defined by the GM as needed. It's assumed that a character's mental powers default to their own class of mind unless the player decides otherwise; a human character's animal telepathy or a cyberpath's computer telepathy wouldn't affect humans by default. Adding classes of mind would cost additional points.

Alternatively, we could say that a robot that can be reprogrammed by the methods we now use for computers has a different form of EGO, one that doesn't respond to telepathy but does respond to jacking in and wi-fi and such, and that this is a 0-point change of mode. Champions doesn't seem to have that concept, but maybe it should be introduced.

This is basically classes of mind. As the GM you can decide.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Chris Goodwin

In the full 6th edition core rulebooks, there's a rule called "classes of mind". Mental powers would be defined as affecting one class of mind by default, the options being human, animal, machine, or alien, with others defined by the GM as needed. It's assumed that a character's mental powers default to their own class of mind unless the player decides otherwise; a human character's animal telepathy or a cyberpath's computer telepathy wouldn't affect humans by default. Adding classes of mind would cost additional points.

This is basically classes of mind. As the GM you can decide.

Hmmm. I think that's the version I want; I'm glad to hear it exists.

I would define the classes differently: On one hand, putting humans and (sapient) aliens together as sapient beings; on another, adding a class for spirits. But that's basically a worldbuilding decision.

Thanks!

[whswhs]

A further thing I've looked at is armor that only covers some hit locations. In particular, I wanted a rule for hitting weak points in armor at a penalty to hit. There's a rule for giving armor the Activation limitation if it only partially covers the wearer, with the activation number based roughly on the probability of hitting the specified locations. But when I looked at the To Hit penalties, they seemed to have a rather random effect! There's a -8 penalty to hit the head, which happens randomly 10 times in 216; to hit the vitals, which happens randomly 21 times in 216; and to hit the feet, which happens randomly 4 times in 216. At the same time, hitting the hands happens 10 times in 216, but has a -6 penalty. (All this is from 4/e Champions.)

I also notice that hitting the chest has a -3 penalty, which seems kind of high. I'd assume that you would commonly aim roughly for the center of mass, which would amount to targeting the chest, and thus that doing so would be no more difficult than hitting the person, or not much more. I'm used to GURPS, which has a -0 penalty to hit the torso; that always made sense to me.

So to compensate for both of those, I first noted that hitting the chest on a random hit location roll happened on a rolled 10 or 11, or 54 times out of 216. Any other location had a smaller probability. I then assumed that the base probability of hitting a person was 11 or less, which is rolled 135 times out of 216. The number 135 is 2.5 x 54. So now I noticed that a hit to the vitals happened on a rolled 13, which would come up 21 times out of 216. Multiplying 21 x 2.5 gives 52.5. That's fairly close to 56, which is the chance of hitting on an 8 or less. The difference between 11 and 8 is 3, so I gave the chest a -0 penalty and the vitals a -3 penalty.

To figure the activation number, on the other hand, I use the base value of 21/216. That's very close to 20/216, which is the chance of rolling a 6 or less, and implies an activation number of 6. Extrapolating from the table of activation numbers, I'd guess that that's a -3 limitation.

So let's say that I want hitting the weak spot in armor to be about as hard as hitting the vitals. That's about 20 chances of 216. It leaves 196 chances of 216, which is activation on a 14 or less, for a -1/2 limitation on the armor. If you're going by random luck, you bypass the armor if it fails to activate. But if you're intentionally targeting the armor, you have a -3 penalty to hit, and if you make the roll at that penalty, you bypass the armor; if you don't, you miss entirely—presumably your shot glances off or something.

[Chris Goodwin]

Originally Posted by whswhs

So to compensate for both of those, I first noted that hitting the chest on a random hit location roll happened on a rolled 10 or 11, or 54 times out of 216. Any other location had a smaller probability. I then assumed that the base probability of hitting a person was 11 or less, which is rolled 135 times out of 216. The number 135 is 2.5 x 54. So now I noticed that a hit to the vitals happened on a rolled 13, which would come up 21 times out of 216. Multiplying 21 x 2.5 gives 52.5. That's fairly close to 56, which is the chance of hitting on an 8 or less. The difference between 11 and 8 is 3, so I gave the chest a -0 penalty and the vitals a -3 penalty.

You have quite possibly done more analysis of the hit location table than its original designer did.

To figure the activation number, on the other hand, I use the base value of 21/216. That's very close to 20/216, which is the chance of rolling a 6 or less, and implies an activation number of 6. Extrapolating from the table of activation numbers, I'd guess that that's a -3 limitation.

So let's say that I want hitting the weak spot in armor to be about as hard as hitting the vitals. That's about 20 chances of 216. It leaves 196 chances of 216, which is activation on a 14 or less, for a -1/2 limitation on the armor. If you're going by random luck, you bypass the armor if it fails to activate. But if you're intentionally targeting the armor, you have a -3 penalty to hit, and if you make the roll at that penalty, you bypass the armor; if you don't, you miss entirely—presumably your shot glances off or something.

There's an optional rule from years ago that would let an attacker take a -1 penalty to reduce the armor's activation roll by -1. In light of your analysis I might make that a -2 or more to activation per -1 penalty. But I think your analysis is good as is.

Up through 5th edition there was an ability that has sometimes been a Skill, sometimes a Talent, sometimes a Power, known as Find Weakness. It would let you use your Phase to roll to find weak spots; each successful roll would halve the target's armor, only against this character. The reduction was iterative, so two successful rolls would quarter their defenses, a third would reduce them to 1/8, and so on. These are actions that would otherwise be used to attack the target though, which might be unsatisfying. The ability has been recreated as a "naked Advantage" in 6th edition, applying Armor Piercing to one of the character's attacks with a successful roll, which might also be unsatisfying.

Bill, I do seem to recall that you played Hero in the 4th edition era? If you still have your 4rh edition core rulebook, you can use the full sectional defenses rules from there; I think they haven't changed since then. That probably won't change your analysis, but it might give you more options at least.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Chris Goodwin

You have quite possibly done more analysis of the hit location table than its original designer did.

That's quite a compliment!

Up through 5th edition there was an ability that has sometimes been a Skill, sometimes a Talent, sometimes a Power, known as Find Weakness. It would let you use your Phase to roll to find weak spots; each successful roll would halve the target's armor, only against this character. The reduction was iterative, so two successful rolls would quarter their defenses, a third would reduce them to 1/8, and so on. These are actions that would otherwise be used to attack the target though, which might be unsatisfying. The ability has been recreated as a "naked Advantage" in 6th edition, applying Armor Piercing to one of the character's attacks with a successful roll, which might also be unsatisfying.

I was actually speculating about letting weak points be identified with a Tactics roll, and then targeted.

Bill, I do seem to recall that you played Hero in the 4th edition era? If you still have your 4rh edition core rulebook, you can use the full sectional defenses rules from there; I think they haven't changed since then. That probably won't change your analysis, but it might give you more options at least.

I do indeed have that rulebook, and it was my inspiration for this whole analysis. The logic of the activation roll being proportionate to the range of hit locations covered struck me as compelling. But then I tried to apply it to the Hit Locations table and the results seemed incoherent, so I did the analysis over from scratch.

[Anthony]

There's also an official chart for limited coverage in 5th edition (the 'armor coverage table'), which is probably the same as 4e (can't find my 4e ATM), but it's in the equipment chapter rather than the powers chapter so it may not be obvious to look for.