Reacting to Grandstanding

[Cam]

I'll be sure to clarify this in the FAQ, but the If the Watcher character has no player opposition, and the Watcher would (if a player) normally roll against the doom pool, then no dice are rolled. The Watcher instead applies one of the characters traits directly as an effect die. This therefore allows an unopposed Watcher character to grandstand without rolling dice.

Cheers,
Cam

[salsa]

That's how they wrote the rule: the Watcher can add Effect Dice directly to the Doom Pool from a villain's action instead of inflicting Stress or creating a Complication. Then they say it represents the villain causing general chaos and mayhem, threatening innocents, or grandstanding.

I still fail to see how the rule indicates a Watcher Freebie in any instance. It doesn't say "instead of taking an action directly against a hero". It says: instead of inflicting Stress or creating a Complication. The Watcher wouldn't have the option to inflicted Stress or create a Complication from an effect die in the first place without going against a player's reaction roll.

That could be just an oversight (like the part in the book saying opportunities might create complications). It's probably meant to be in the lines of "instead of taking an action directly against a hero".

Which leads us to Cam's response:

I'll be sure to clarify this in the FAQ, but the If the Watcher character has no player opposition, and the Watcher would (if a player) normally roll against the doom pool, then no dice are rolled. The Watcher instead applies one of the characters traits directly as an effect die. This therefore allows an unopposed Watcher character to grandstand without rolling dice.

Cheers,
Cam

Just to make sure. By player opposition you mean directly targeting the players, right? Not just being in the same scene. If so, this is exactly how I've been doing it (since waaaay back then when the forum started and you mentioned the "just pick one trait and add it to the doom pool" rule). Because, if only grandstanding (say attacking the environment/civilians/etc), it involves an action solved by rolling against the doom pool hence no opposition.

[figurefour]

Okay, I might have been doing it wrong then. I didn't know they could react to actions that don't target them. The book says regular actions that would be covered by rolls against the doom pool are an automatic success for Watcher characters.

Yeah, as much as I hate to say it, you've been doing it wrong. That's the reason they are called "Reactions" and not "Defenses".

You can React to any Action that it makes sense for you to react to.

Personally, I do like it that way. Heroes already have a clear upper hand against watcher characters. They just spend a PP, watcher characters require more than just any die in the doom pool (expenditure is usually tied to the die type which makes it even harder to accomplish).

I'm not sure this is quite true. It's true for keeping an extra Effect Die, but that's only to balance out the fact that Stress has a much bigger impact on heroes than on villains. You see, lots of villains are only going to be in one scene so the Stress only matters in the short term. Casually slapping a d12 Stress on a hero hurts them for the next several scenes (unless the hero is Wolverine).

I know that in the long run it might balance itself but only on 1:1 fights. If the heroes outnumber the villain(s), chances are the villain(s) will lose (even if I get to 2d12, the damage is done and they are probably winning already). Which was never a problem for me in any other super hero games. I might be doing something wrong, but I don't think so.

Lots of the default villains are written up as minor characters, which makes them weaker than the heroes. If you're sending 90% of the villains in the books at a larger group of heroes, they are going to get their ass handed to them.

The only thing you're doing wrong is putting your heroes in easy fights.

Now, I think things are set up that way because you're SUPPOSED to be presenting the heroes with apparently insurmountable odds, but that they should mechanically have a chance of winning.

When have you ever read a comic about a group of heroes who outnumbered their opponent?

Now . . . Was that opponent someone like Galactus?

Don't expect Doc Ock and Bullseye to be able to take on the Avengers . . .

Grandstands is my way to even the odds. By letting the heroes react is just another roadblock on the tension climb. Again, this is IMHO.

Ummmm . . . No. Not at all. Grandstanding is a way to build tension for LATER. Grandstanding is actually a TERRIBLE action for a villain to take. They gain very little and they risk a lot.

If you are Grandstanding because you want your villain to have an extra die to roll, you should create an Asset instead.

If you are Grandstanding so they have that extra Doom Die to use for Invulnerable, use a negative distinction instead (villains seem to be built with this in mind actually).

The advantage to grandstanding is that it lets you build the Doom Pool for a DIFFERENT villain. Possibly a villain in another scene entirely.

Grandstanding isn't a secret trick that lets Armadillo stand up to Thor, it's a way to build tension in a scene.

I'm sorry but you lost me completely there. I've seen posts saying that I can for instance use area attack to create an explosion and have some of the targets take physical stress, some of them take knockback which is a complication and/or create assets (so, even if grandstand is considered an "asset" it would still apply). I don't see why I wouldn't reap the benefit of including the additional effect die to create grandstanding.

Those posts are wrong. Cam has clarified that an Area Attack has to be an attack targeting multiple people. So Stress and Complications are fair game, but you can't create 6 Assets (or add 6 dice to the Doom Pool) with an Area Attack.

[salsa]

Those posts are wrong. Cam has clarified that an Area Attack has to be an attack targeting multiple people. So Stress and Complications are fair game, but you can't create 6 Assets (or add 6 dice to the Doom Pool) with an Area Attack.

I never said I wanted to add multiple dice to the doom pool. I said main action = grandstanding, and remaining effect dice targeting the heroes.

Example: Attack hits gas pipeline exploding a whole block of a neighborhood. 1 die of grandstanding (which could be later or immediately used to create a new scene distinction) + some dice as physical stress for center of the explosion + knockback complication to remaining heroes at the edges of the explosion.

Anyways, Cam seems to have clarified part of the issue so far.

[Spatula]

When have you ever read a comic about a group of heroes who outnumbered their opponent?

Now . . . Was that opponent someone like Galactus?

All the time, unless you're counting mooks. It's the standard set up for most team book stories (team vs 1 big bad, probably with minions). And it's very rare that the big bads are on the level on Galactus.

Don't expect Doc Ock and Bullseye to be able to take on the Avengers . . .

Sure, but that's a power level thing. Doc Ock and Bullseye are threats for street-level heroes. The Avengers take on a higher class of threats.

[figurefour]

I never said I wanted to add multiple dice to the doom pool. I said main action = grandstanding, and remaining effect dice targeting the heroes.

I guess I misunderstood you. My mistake!

All the time, unless you're counting mooks. It's the standard set up for most team book stories (team vs 1 big bad, probably with minions). And it's very rare that the big bads are on the level on Galactus.

Galactus might have been a bad example. I was just trying to illustrate the point that when multiple heroes fight of against a solo villain, it's usually because that villain is MUCH more powerful than the heroes.

You can totally do that in MHR, but it's not what most of the datafiles we've seen are built for. I have no doubt that Doctor Doom or the Hydra Helecarrier (Whatever it was called. The Murdercarrier? Something like that?) could take on a group of appropriate heroes, but there's no one in Breakout who could do that.

Sure, but that's a power level thing. Doc Ock and Bullseye are threats for street-level heroes. The Avengers take on a higher class of threats.

Exactly. It's a power level thing for sure. Doc Ock is a fine threat for Spider Man, but if Spider Man has three friends . . . Well the fight is going to be over quickly.

I think the problem is that we haven't seen many villains who are built to be able to take on more than one hero at once. Most of them are strictly weaker than a hero who's supposed to be on about their level. Look at Wrecker and Thor. They're a classic match up, but Thor totally outclasses the Wrecker on paper. If you wanted to give Thor a tough fight, you'd probably have to throw half the Wrecking Crew at him. Which you SHOULD because it's AWESOME.

That's just my opinion though.

Edit: As soon as I hit post I realized it was the Hydra Terror Carrier. I'm not going to try to edit this to make myself look like less of an idiot though.

[Lee_Szczepanik]

Those posts are wrong. Cam has clarified that an Area Attack has to be an attack targeting multiple people. So Stress and Complications are fair game, but you can't create 6 Assets (or add 6 dice to the Doom Pool) with an Area Attack.

Yeah, I know what he said officially. I'm house ruling it though in our games. I disagree with that ruling, and see no problem in adding the effect dice to the Doom Pool from an area attack that succeeded against however many of my players I managed to roll higher than. Those players failed the reaction roll. Instead of affecting them directly, I'm going to narrate the collateral damage and building of tension to increase the Doom Pool.

I've been doing it this way, and it hasn't unbalanced anything at our table. If anything, it's allowed the Doom Pool to get those dice faster, which I then use to create new Scene Distinctions and then later raise them to Scene Complications, bring in surprises, and so forth. It's brought a lot of narrative tension to the stories, just like in the comics, and my group has thus far been very happy with it.

I'm just not going to spend half a session trying to build a Doom Pool through praying for players rolling 1's (my group tends not to do so, even on a d4 . . . it's why in Savage Worlds those d4's are the evil dice at our table, they Ace way too much), always using a Watcher distinction at a d4, or always having to activate Watcher character limit after limit. This method lets us get the Doom Pool built so we can use it in the narrative as intended.

Providing there are Watcher characters in a scene with Area Effect. Just as often, there aren't any of such. Or, the players miraculously all manage to win on the Reaction rolls against it.

Bear in mind, I'm not disagreeing with Cam in any sense except as it applies strictly to my table. I don't know enough about the back-end design of the system to be able to disagree in a more en masse format.

[Spatula]

Galactus might have been a bad example. I was just trying to illustrate the point that when multiple heroes fight of against a solo villain, it's usually because that villain is MUCH more powerful than the heroes.

You can totally do that in MHR, but it's not what most of the datafiles we've seen are built for. I have no doubt that Doctor Doom or the Hydra Helecarrier (Whatever it was called. The Murdercarrier? Something like that?) could take on a group of appropriate heroes, but there's no one in Breakout who could do that.

I think the problem is that we haven't seen many villains who are built to be able to take on more than one hero at once. Most of them are strictly weaker than a hero who's supposed to be on about their level. Look at Wrecker and Thor. They're a classic match up, but Thor totally outclasses the Wrecker on paper. If you wanted to give Thor a tough fight, you'd probably have to throw half the Wrecking Crew at him. Which you SHOULD because it's AWESOME.

That's just my opinion though.

Yeah, ok, I agree with that. Graviton is up there, although he's not too hard to stress out emotionally because of how his Unleashed SFX works. But he also benefits from having a power that isn't easily resistible.

Doom's writeup isn't capable of taking on an entire team and winning, IMO. And Thor's datafile is kinda nuts - between Invulnerable and Second Wind, it's basically impossible to defeat him on a physical level.

[figurefour]

Yeah, I know what he said officially. I'm house ruling it though in our games.

That's cool. I can point out what the rules are, but I can't make you follow them.

Yeah, ok, I agree with that. Graviton is up there, although he's not too hard to stress out emotionally because of how his Unleashed SFX works. But he also benefits from having a power that isn't easily resistible.

Indeed. Graviton might be the toughest villain in Breakout. He put some serious hurt on us when we fought him (which I believe might have even been three on one . . .) but that was near the end of the Act when everyone had stress and the Doom Pool was pretty big.

I must say, our Watcher has been really good about pacing the game with the Doom Pool. Particularly in Act 1 of Breakout.

Doom's writeup isn't capable of taking on an entire team and winning, IMO. And Thor's datafile is kinda nuts - between Invulnerable and Second Wind, it's basically impossible to defeat him on a physical level.

Well, obviously it depends on who's on the team. However, I think Doom is the closest we've seen yet. He can throw an OBSCENE amount of dice at something . . . Of course, he also comes with a built in army of minions . . .

When I played Thor and fought Wrecker I was pretty delighted to discover that we could literally keep punching each other FOREVER.

[KnightErrantJR]

When I played Thor and fought Wrecker I was pretty delighted to discover that we could literally keep punching each other FOREVER.

"Dirk Garthwaite, I feel like I could punch you for an eternity."

"I know, Thor . . . I know . . . "