Called Shots, Zany Actions & Wrestling maneuvers?

[kevperrine]

a few questions on these topics...


#1. When attempting a specific Wrestling maneuver (such as "Wield Them") must you follow and complete the "basic" general Wrestling rules BEFORE making the specific rule rolls for the Maneuver?


#2. Specifically for "CALLED SHOTS" (but also for Zany Actions) ... reading the base rules for Called Shots, then experiencing them in play - it came to me to wonder... Are these rules basically HOW to do things you could also (or players usually think to do with a...) Hero Die Power Stunt WITHOUT needing to spend any Hero Dice or Point resources?
You basically need to hit on the attack by 10+ and it allows what I read as Power Stunts - such as pulling a rug over a villain's eyes, which could also equal a "Confusion" Power Stunt with a Hero Die.

#3. With Called Shots... The rules aren't very detailed and a little to open for me. They caused about 15 minutes of discussion on ideas of HOW to "handle" what the player wanted to do... and we still didn't have a definitive answer.
Hence my question above.... that's what we sort of went with.


#4. The BIG question on Called Shots (and Zany Actions) was "what do you want to do?" ... (in our example):
"I want to jump on the robot's back and tear it's helmet or rip it off to BLIND the robot"
So...
Rather than forcing the player to NEED to spend a Hero Die to simulate a Power Stunt to get the rule-effect to BLIND the villain... I suggested the Narrator handle it as a "Called Shot" (since it seemed to be similar to the 'pull the rug over' example).
Our Narrator was still *concerned* with this not being *fair* to the rules (not the "spirit" of the rules, but rather - not being fair as a way to always just have to "GM Fiat" an outcome). Our Narrator wanted to figure out a fair and balanced way for the RULES to handle it. He liked the idea of using the Called Shot idea, but still wanted MORE definition. Since the "default" effect for a Called Shot is only a +10 Damage if the PC-Hero hits on the attack by 10+. Since the extra damage was NOT what the player really wanted (he wanted to blind or damage the robot's ability to see/fight).

I suggested this:

- if the PC-Hero hits on the attack by more than 10 to 20...
- treat this effect like a "Confusion 1" Power Stunt (-2 DP)
- if the PC-Hero hits on the attack by more than 20 to 30...
- treat this effect like a "Confusion 2" Power Stunt (-4 DP)
- if the PC-Hero hits on the attack by more than 30+...
- treat this effect like a "Confusion 2" Power Stunt (-2 MP)

Each for either: 3 pages or until the villain figured out a way to stop the effect (like "Snap Out of It", etc...)



I would REALLY like alot more explanation and ideas for HOW to handle the Called Shot and Zany Actions... How to handle them in balance with other rules, not simply GM Fiatting an outcome or random decision on how to handle roll-checks.

Are they essentially the same idea as Hero Die Power Stunts but with a required 10+ roll to hit on the attack?
And if so...
Is my idea for steps of 10+ for a better effect a fair/balanced idea?

Are there better solutions?
How would you handle my example (or other examples of Called Shots and Zany Actions)?


Thanks!
-kev-

[BASHMAN]

#1 You have to have them grappled first. When you grapple, it takes your turn *unless* you succeeded by 10 or more; then you may immediately perform a move like that.

#2 In a way; I usually use the Minor Hindrance / Bonus rules a lot to wing it in those situations; that is what they are for. I wouldn't think you'd need a Hero Die to pull that off; a Hero Die for a power Stunt is more like a power you can use over and over again for an entire scene; and if I were to Power Stunt confusion, I'd do Confusion 2 (-4 Dice Penalty) with a large area effect; something much more worthy of spending a die on.

#3 I'd use the following house rule:
You make a called shot for 10, that is -2 Dice Penalty (Minor Hindrance). You make a called shot for 20, that is a -1 Multiplier Penalty / -3 Dice Penalty (victim's choice). Note you have to MAKE the called shot; so it is much harder to make it by 20, and it is "all or nothing". Also, remember that Confusion eventually ends; you get to make a Mind check to break free of it each turn. You need to give the victim a similar chance to get out of the effect. So I'd let you put a bucket over a robot's head to blind him, but not pop his eyeballs out with a crowbar, as that would be permanent, and FAR more powerful than simply using Confusion.

However, the Narrator *IS* the Narrator; sometimes they will get to use "GM Fiat" if they think that's what feels right in the game, or that the ability would be abused. Also remember it's a 2-way street; you may regret it when villains are doing called shots to perma-blind your Hero.

I do like the idea of steps for called shots beyond just +10, and in fact, this was a new idea I have planned already to coincide with the Awesome Powers issue that will focus on Intense Training powers.

[kevperrine]

So I'd let you put a bucket over a robot's head to blind him, but not pop his eyeballs out with a crowbar, as that would be permanent, and FAR more powerful than simply using Confusion. .

So, "not letting" a player do/try something isn't really something I've ever wanted to take away as the GameMaster. If the PC-Hero tries it (with fair/balanced effort) and does significantly well enough, I'd "allow" it and figure out how to best and fairly/balance the rule effect for it.

That said.
It has been known to happen (popping out a robot's eyeballs with a crowbar) ... so how COULD that be handled fairly with rule effects if the PC-Hero did exceptionally well?

And would the robot then (later) have the chance to "fix" the situation ...
OR maybe if they couldn't, they could get a "permanent" disadvantage of some sort - such as rewarded with an extra Hero Die each session while dealing with the "complication"?

Hmmm...
This makes me think, would it be a good new rule addition to make something that can happen as an IN GAME "change" to the character (PC or NPC alike) that is a tough complication or setback (or call it a good name).
Meaning...
Everything (in comics) seem to be reversible over a story arc, several issues, or at most 2-3 story arcs.
So...
Why not have the option for a villain (or hero... OR plot/story point!!) "mark" the opponent in some way. Gaining that extra Hero Die PER game session (issue) until "fixed" (also in-game).

This "mark" wouldn't be able to be purchased with character points or xp. Or bought off after the fact. But rather it could ONLY be gained IN-GAME at a critical point in action, combat or the drama of story.
Something EITHER the Narrator OR the player suggests, as a "mark"... If both agree. This "mark" is a major character defining condition or situation, that the player (or villain NPC) must deal with... in return they get an extra FREE Hero Die each new Issue.

So... This could be an In-Game thing such as:

- Bain breaking the Batman's back!
- Doomsday killing Superman
(in these cases, the player makes a new - lesser or less experienced version of the PC-Hero namesake and must play that for "xx" game sessions. Gaining the extra free HD, as long as the new version is sufficiently harder to introduce or play in-game.

other ideas...
- a PC-Hero's arm is severly broken (or ripped off!) incurring a major hinderance permanently (until "fixed" in-game somehow), again gaining the extra HD per issue. (Winter Soldier)
- a PC-Hero is blinded... deadened, etc...

Or even "DRAMA" ideas, such as...
- the PC-Hero has permanent major hinderance to ALL die rolls due to mental stress: from the death of a girlfriend (Gwen!), to the loss of a job, or even to making/revealing that a "love interest" is actually a major villain! (Terra/BeastBoy).


The player (or even player group) and the Narrator could figure out a "redemption" plan to "fix" this problem. Whether getting a mechanical arm replacement or taking down (and holding back from killing!) the villain that killed your girl.

Then the player's "mark" (and hinderances) is removed, and the Hero Die perhaps replaced with an appropriate Advantage (like a new contact that fixes the hero's arm or whatever).


My point.
I like the idea of "permanently" (as much as that is in comic book terms) "marking" a character that sometimes (albeit rarely) happens to comic superheroes.
Something that is LASTING and (more importantly) interesting to the character development and the story. But also something the player wants to have happen (some players wouldn't LIKE this major hinderance rule effect at all, so hence - the player and narrator agreeing on the outcome).

But also something that can ONLY ever happen (or be granted) as an IN-GAME story point. Something that's a major problem (ie. the minor/major hinderance to all rolls) but also benefits the PC or villain with the additional expansion of ability and excellent time for creativity with the additional reward of an extra Hero Die per issue (or more).

Maybe even up the (temporary) extra Hero Die reward per issue to 1, 2, even 3 or more depending on the severity of the "mark".

I could see developing this rule and making a list of ideas for suggested "stages" of HD rewards and hinderances for the in-game story challenges.

thoughts?

I do like the idea of steps for called shots beyond just +10, and in fact, this was a new idea I have planned already to coincide with the Awesome Powers issue that will focus on Intense Training powers.

I was thinking.
If making this rule, I would either do it with a +10 addition or maybe a +5 addition. So either succeeding by:

+10 (for -2DP), +20 (for -4DP), +30 (for -1MP), +40 (for -2MP), etc...

OR
+10 (for -2DP), +15 (for -4DP), +20 (for -1MP), +25 (for -2MP), etc...

Thoughts?

[BASHMAN]

I do like this "permanent (temporarily)" status effect idea; there may be an article in there. The real question is how to implement it in a way that is fair.

Something I had in mind for Honor + Intrigue is allowing the *target* of an attack declare the attack to be some crippling, long lasting injury in exchange for reducing the amount of damage they take. So in your example Batman's player said "Okay, instead of dying from that 150 damage hit I just took, can I declare he broke my back?"

This same system would apply for people getting their eyes cut out, severe scar on the face, etc. Things with a permanent effect.

Obviously, such a system only works *within* the "lethal combat" rules -- I can see a player saying "Okay that hit will take me to -60 Hits; instead I'll opt for horrible scarification, with your permission." if the alternative was death.

[MrJupiter]

This is a great idea. As Kev alluded to earlier, it is something that happens all the time in comics. Stuff like this could be great ways to evolve a character.