Ok, it appears that no one is going to catch the problem with 5th Edition Dive for Cover that posed in the last article. Not unexpected, really. I don't think I have many readers who are really into that system.
As a said in the previous article's comments, Dive for Cover is a straight up Dex Roll (with a -1 per hex of distance you're 'diving'). It was originally only intended for use vs. Area Effect attacks.It was sort of neat as it provided a active defense against AoE attacks that would under normal conditions ignore target DCV and couldn't be blocked. It was also very genre in many cases (such the shout of 'grenade!' in any military setting).
I stated that 5th Edition screwed up this ability when it allowed it to be used against normal directed ranged and melee attacks.
Why?
Let's answer that by means of an example.
In 5th edition, let's check out a normal beat cop (DEX 11, +1 Skill Pistols) shooting at a Hydra thug (also DEX 11, no skills applied to DCV) from a range of 3". The chance to hit is 11+4+1-4 or a 12-.
The Hydra thug decides to dive for cover, and only needs a hex. It's an 11- with -1, or a 10-. He has a 50% chance to avoid the normal beat cop.
Now let's see the ulimate expression of human combat ability (Captain America for Marvel based settings) as he attempts to whack the same thug with a toss of his shield also at a range of 3".
He has a DEX of 25 with 6 combat levels, for an OCV of 8 + 6 or 14. 11 + 14 -4 gives him a 21- or less on 3d6 so he can't miss.
Which is fine, that's basically the way it goes in the comics.
However... The Hydra thug decides to dive for cover, and only needs a hex. It's an 11- with -1, or a 10-. He has a 50% chance to avoid the attack of Captain America.
Really.
The reason is because the Dive for Cover defense is completely unmodified by the abilities of the attacker.
The game result is marked:
1. Genre is broken as comman thugs are avoiding attacks from the greatest superheroes in the campaign as if they are normal people.
2. Actual combat is lengthened as the GM is now able to increase the 'life span' of all his agents in battles- just drive for cover for any that are attacked. Half the time it means the superhero must use at least one follow up attack on the same target- and that allows any remaining agents an additional (in effect) free shot.
Horrible game design. And worse, an unneeded change. The system already had Dodge to help in defense of this type. Long pulled a number of things like this in 5th, and I fully expect 6th to full of them.
To be honest, I feel the only thing Long does in HERO is build things- judging from his rules, he doesn't seem to play.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Yeah, I'd say that's a mistake - and something which should definitely have been picked up in playtesting. From my own HERO days, Dive for Cover as-written (to avoid Area Effect attacks) worked prefectly when. Expanding it to cover other attack types was wrong.
Good catch!
To continue our conversation from the last thread I think there's a fix here.
What is Dive for Cover? Is it a dodge with movement attached? I'd say that's a fair assertion, so why not handle it that way with a caveat that without a related split action acrobatics check the character ends up prone at the end of the movement...
Simple, and it eliminates the problem you're pointing out while keeping the potential to do cool acrobatty stunts for those with the skills to do so.
A fix is easy enough. For my own campaigns I just rolled back Long's change as a house rule to the way it worked in 4th- Dive for Cover is only a valid defense vs. AoE attacks.
I don't see a need for a special rule to represent the extreme acrobatic dodge. If I did it would be on the individual character basis and individual characters could buy it aa a 'power' or ability.
I could make it another quiz in fact.
How would you in 5th edition construct automatic movement for a character when he Dodges as an abort given they can always half move and dodge if that want that as their normal action?
Well that's ultimately it. If the system is built on solid enough fundamentals it shouldn't need magical things like grabbing your opponent and jumping out of the way to be have special reality-bending rules. That's ultimately the problem when designers don't understand what it is they're actually trying to model. So I guess this is one of the few times we're in agreement. Huh. It's cloudy out so I can't see what the star alignment is, but it must be portentous.
Post a Comment