M&M2e: No HP!? What were they thinking?

[Ranger REG]

It's one of the things about d20 modern that I dislike, is that you can have a tank walk through tons of pistol fire and keep getting scratched and have plenty of HP left over. HP is not right for that game, but a damage save might be better with a fair shot of being seriously injured.

I assume you do not like the Massive Damage Threshold stat (equals to Con score) added to d20 Modern HP system. To me, it's no fun, when I thought I could past a group of mooks only to fail one of my Fort saving throws when MDT calls for it many times. A hard lesson learned: Cover is your best friend.

On the other side of the fence ... HP gamers are offended?!?!?!!! And I thought the NWP gamers (who oppose the developmental Skill System in 3.0e) are the weirdest lot.

*shakes head in disappointment of this particular portion of the community*

 

[jezter6]

REG: I do like the MDT. I think that it adds a certain lethality to the game that is otherwise not there with high HP scores. The problem is, without feats and some specialization, a gun will not force those saves very often on anyone above average CON score. You get the elusive crit, which is only available 5% of the time, then on top of that you need to confirm that crit which lowers that percentage. And then, you still have to roll average or higher to force the save.

Instead of MDT, I'd like to see critical hits come by more frequently and more damage done overall, or lower HP counts for people because they're out of control.

I played a G.I. Joe game online a while back, and I had a tank (10 levels of tough) that just wouldn't be scratched. Sure, if I did 10 damage it would be cool to me, but it didn't affect him much, he still had 90 to go before he got worried.

But, with a damage save system (I prefer the old roll of letting the attacker roll the damage vs the defender's save instead of the defender rolling against the attacker's bonus), that damage roll can get dicey real quick with a missed save or two.

Sure, it may not hurt the first or second time they get hit, but when they're at a -2 to further damage saves, the more and more likely they are to go down. Instead of taking 20 full damage hits or a small chance at crit to take them down, a few well aimed shots in a row will take anyone down, level 1 or level 20.

 

[Desdichado]

I think it's just foolish not to include a small conversion for something so popular.

You're the first person I've ever even heard of that's using it (EDIT) for M&M. I wouldn't say it's popular at all.

Is this entire thread a troll? Green Ronin arrogant for not including a HP alternate rule? Where's that rolleyes smilie when you really need it?

 

[Dragonblade]

Well it's a good thing that the M&M damage save doesn't progressively penalize PCs then. Each wound only gives a -1 to future toughness saves, meaning that the character becomes more likely to be stunned or knocked unconscious the more his enemies beat on him. Nothing else is penalized: characters fight just as well after being pounded into the earth as when they're perfectly healthy.

The hero point mechanic for 2e was also designed to encourage the "villain pounds hero into the earth for a while, but hero comes back and defeats the villain in the end."

Oh I have no problem with the Toughness Save system in general. I'm not anti-Toughness save, just pro hitpoints when it comes to superhero games. Your right that the Toughness save doesn't unduly penalize the players. If it did, then I would be more against it. The thing I dislike about the Toughness Save is the randomness. It makes it harder for me to judge the lethality of and difficulty of an encounter when a single roll can potentially take out the villain or a PC.

When I DM I want to be able to say with a degree of certainty that a battle with a major villain will likely take X rounds and the PCs will all be Y HP away from death. I don't just arbitrarily want to determine the result because thats no fun for the players. I want some randomness and if the players get on a hot streak with the dice, I want them to be able to enjoy it. But I don't like systems where a single failed roll takes you out of the combat. And yes, I know its designed to work with hero points and thats fine. I just think hitpoints work better for the degree of control that I want over combat.

 

[Henry]

You're the first person I've ever even heard of that's using it (EDIT) for M&M. I wouldn't say it's popular at all.

Is this entire thread a troll? Green Ronin arrogant for not including a HP alternate rule? Where's that rolleyes smilie when you really need it?

While I'm not calling your thread a troll, (looks at Joshua with good-natured mean glare), I'll say that I've never seen anyone play the HP system from M&M, and I've only rarely seen evidence that people use it this way. I once was looking for character sheets for M&M and came up with a group of gamers with a web site and their characters used the HP system, so I know it's out there, just not prevalent.

 

[Staffan]

Having played M&M with it's damage saves, I have been trying to add damage saves to D&D for a long time, if only because I like the fact that once injured, you are both more likely to be injured, and also find other things (attacking) harder to do. But I like hit points too.

Unearthed Arcana includes a version of the Damage save mechanic from M&M.

 

[Greg K]

Unearthed Arcana includes a version of the Damage save mechanic from M&M.

Yeah, but the implementation was half baked (to be polite) at best

 

[EditorBFG]

Heck, from what my friend told me (I havn't touched M&M) it had sidebars and optional rules for many things. It was a toolkit book that made it suitable for many things.

Reading your post again, I think this perception is a part of your friends problem. M&M was not really a toolkit book, it was a fully realized and internally consistent role-playing game. Yes, it had some optional rules, like most rpg's do, but it was no more a toolkit than D&D.

Your friend's perception of the original book is, to my mind, false, and almost certainly not how the designers themselves saw the first edition. So, I think the designers would not have been looking to make the 2nd Edition a real "toolkit" because it was neither a consideration the first time nor a popular request the second time, and no one complained about a lack of modularity or a need for a book of selectable options rather than a role-playing game.

If you want the 2nd Edition of an rpg to continue a design philosophy from the 1st Edition that was illusory and never actually present in the first place, I think you are likely to be disappointed.

 

[Ranger REG]

REG: I do like the MDT. I think that it adds a certain lethality to the game that is otherwise not there with high HP scores. The problem is, without feats and some specialization, a gun will not force those saves very often on anyone above average CON score. You get the elusive crit, which is only available 5% of the time, then on top of that you need to confirm that crit which lowers that percentage. And then, you still have to roll average or higher to force the save.

Instead of MDT, I'd like to see critical hits come by more frequently and more damage done overall, or lower HP counts for people because they're out of control.

So, you want to make firearms more lethal than it already is by expanding their own threat range???

As for the many feats, I just blend some of them into the base firearms proficiency feat tree. That way you're capable of Double Tap (assuming you're using a semiautomatic weapon) with your Personal Firearms Proficiency feat, and Burst Fire (assuming you're using automatic weapon) with your Advanced Firearms Proficiency feat.

I played a G.I. Joe game online a while back, and I had a tank (10 levels of tough) that just wouldn't be scratched. Sure, if I did 10 damage it would be cool to me, but it didn't affect him much, he still had 90 to go before he got worried.

At least the game is faithful to the franchise, and not Rainbow Six with Snake-Eye in it.

 

[Ranger REG]

Where's that rolleyes smilie when you really need it?

Morrus considers rolleyes as offensive.