Okay, I'm interested in knowing how close folks follow to the combat rules.  Do you do everything straight by the book?  Do you have some things you've tossed out?  Did you totally revamp the system?

For the purposes of this, combat rules include everything from the combat table, to level vs level, to range, to facing, to knock-out %, etc...  Basically, everything.

I almost feel like I cheated, as I voted that we don't modify it at all.  The truth is we use the combat system entirely as written.

We have a modified Experience Point chart, though, so the bonuses for varying level are much less (so we might have a -1 where the rulebook had a -5 or something).

Other than that, we use the rulebook as written for combat.  The powers vs. powers chart, Power spent for facing changes, the range chart (which hardly ever comes into play), velocity bonuses (if applicable), HtH chart as shown, powers as shown in the rules, 4x knockout if a head shot, unconsciousness (and incapacitated) rules as written, etc.

Oh, and our Evasion is different than what they show.  So we're probably 85-90% of the entire V&V combat package as shown in the rulebook (not enough for me to consider it to be much in the way of "changes").

When I played tabletop, we used almost all of the combat rules as written.

Doctor Foom wrote on Dec 16^th, 2009 at 7:00pm:


It sounds like you no longer play tabletop. How does that work? Do you have a different table? Or do you wing it on the fly. I've heard of some DMs doing that.

Majestic wrote on Dec 19^th, 2009 at 1:32pm:


Even if you don't sit around a literal table, do you still use the same combat table and roll dice? Or do you use a different system?

Or does the GM just wing it since there's no one around to see th die rolls anyway?

AslanC,

You only get your defense on the table if you have it activated unless it is a power that provides an automatic defense.  In some cases, such as Power Blast, it represents the defender blasting the attack before getting struck (and paying the PR for it).  In others, such as Flame Powers, it represents the defense being of a nature that protects from the attack.  Fire melting the ice before it strikes.

Well, in the movies anyway Bobby ended up on top in that confrontation.  Since they weren't really nemises as they were in the movies...

Quote:


Just use that base 11 table I emailed you.  That keeps the flavor of defenses affecting attack chance to hit - it actually keeps the proportion of the original.

Sure.  I had to take a screenshot of the excel file and post that, but here it is.  The excel version is also hosted on the yahoo group.  This one includes Darkforce Generation and Will, whcih were not on the original table, but added for my campaign.

Correct

Typically in the comics, a moderately powerful energy casting PC or NPC would have enough of a "field effect" around them to insure they would not be bothered by handguns, mere fists, etc. (Magneto, the Human Torch, etc. )

In V&V it is assumed this effect serves as a limited force field or deflection screen, making the NPC/PC harder to be hit on the front end.

That's how I understood it, back in the day.

P.S. Eric - thanks again. I was just looking at the items you'd sent today, in fact.

Yes, these guys did a good job of explaining what that reduction to 0 means (the effect that inspires such a low number).

Keep in mind that taking something to a "0" does NOT mean that they cannot be hit by that.

It simply means that - if you start out with an attack like a Power Blast - you're reducing that 16 down to a 0 (i.e., it's the equivalent of four Heightened Defenses, sort of).  But unlike Heightened Defense(s), where a character might duck or dodge out of the way, this huge minus simply reflects the attack harmlessly impacting on the field/energy/whatever.

So if you have a Magneto-type who is Level 16 attacking a level 4 hero, and he's got an Accuracy of +3 and he's trained five levels with his Magnetics, and in addition he's got a Heightened Expertise with his Magnetic Powers, then that 13 to 0 is suddenly no big deal.

I don't have my rulebook handy (and we don't use the Level vs. Level chart as shown), so - assuming it's something like a +6 due to Level, he still gets:

4 - from his Heightened Expertise
5 - from his training
6 - due to Level
3 - from his Accuracy

And he still has a "18" or less to hit rolling a 1d20.  Make his attack from above, which gives a bonus of +4, or even from the side (+2) and now - even though the opponent's defense has taken his "13" to a "0", he still only 'misses' (i.e., doesn't do damage to his target) on a roll of a "20".

Make sense?

Imaginos wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2009 at 6:14pm:


I knew one group that played this way, but have found nothing in the rules that hints that 'taking it to a "0" means you can't ever get a higher number than that'.

Hammer wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2009 at 7:50pm:


Yeah, some game systems don't allow that, and I guess I can understand.  The way I rationalize it is this:

A non-corporeal character in comics, like Kitty Pride or Vision (I suppose his might be Vibratory) can often solidify some of their body, often enough to grab someone or something.  I reason that that "1" (or other low number from an accurate combatant) is just their body being a tiny bit materialized.  In other words, even if MOST of the molecules are slipping through their body, perhaps a bit of the energy is getting through, or maybe 1 out of every 10 molecules is being impacted.

This logic doesn't work as well when you have someone who is so ghost-like that they can't even physically pick up a piece of paper (like Astral Projection), but for most cases it still makes a bit of sense.  As we talked about in another thread, the thing that does damage is usually the speed of an object (moreso than the brute force), so I can imagine that some kinetic damage could result from something passing through even a non-corporeal form, when it's fast enough.

For gameplay purposes, it still makes it fun when one has at least a tiny chance of hitting.  Even if you know you have to roll a "1", at least it gives you some hope.  Knowing that you can't possibly harm an opponent can be extremely frustrating.  Note that I don't think this should always apply; I think a good GM will occasionally throw an adversary at his or her players that is immune to all physical damage (perhaps due to magic or whatever).  But as "common" as non-corporeal, vibratory, astral, etc. characters are in V&V, it would mean a lot of frustration for many players.

At least in the groups I've played in, the majority have had physical characters (by physical I mean meat and potatoes superpowers as are rolled on the Powers and Skills tables).  If magic and/or psionic characters are common (and able to damage said ghostly foes), then it might not be as big of a deal for a particular GM.

We always played that you can modify zero. The other version never dawned on us.