Steel Hearts (Ver. Zero)

House Rules for Kinetic Mecha Tactics · By SandroAD

Add to collection

Kinetic Mecha TTRPG Community Devlog

Steel Hearts (Ver. Zero) community

General Feedback (v0.132)

A topic by PistilWhip created Mar 28, 2024 Views: 248 Replies: 8

Viewing posts 1 to 4

PistilWhip245 days ago (3 edits)

Just gonna drop a bunch of points here in no particular order.

(1) More MEC Stat Involvement

Base Mobility contributes to Speed Sum, but no other Stats are involved on the MEC sheet. I’d like to see each Stat involved in MEC calculations. For instance:

DUR is given as the Stat for an improvised attack, but that should probably go to TOR.
Instead of Armor being base 12, maybe 10 + DUR?
Not sure about FIN.
The thing that stands out to me for ATU is max SYN, but you seem to have that specifically calibrated for “max SYN = Flash Action”, assuming no Unshackled perk.
Max Shields could be 3 + COM instead of 4 by default.

This would probably involve an audit of the existing Part Bonuses, to verify that numbers remain within the intended ranges. As with MOB and Speed, only the base amount of a Stat would count for these calculations, not Part Bonuses. Still drawing a blank with FIN, though.

(2) Why Integrity and not Max Armor?

The lack of symmetry between Shields/Max Shields and Integrity/Armor is a bit strange to me. It’s not a problem, per se, just a headscratcher.

(3) ATKs that cost multiple Actions

True Charge via the Hunter’s Great Sword and Giga-Blast via the Pirate’s Cannon-Arm have incentives for using them in the next Phase, assuming the Target is still in Range. I don’t like these because it removes agency from the player; certainly the game is meant to be played with teammates, and there are tools to restrain or manipulate enemy movement, but an individual player doesn’t have absolute control over when they’re allowed to use the Chance effects. It’s particularly bad for the Great Sword since it only has a Range of 2 and explicitly forbids Movement. The Cannon-Arm at least has a Range of 4-12.

What if these ATKs instead had Cost : 2 Action Points? This is a different kind of restriction that, to my mind, seems to be less dependent on the opponent’s cooperation while still having a significant opportunity cost. Could sprinkle in other clauses like it having to be your first Action in a Phase or that you haven’t Shifted or Moved via Stratagem. (Boosting might be fine, since it has a cost?)

This would open the door for other Stratagems down the road that can’t be used in one Allied Phase. 3-4 Action Points means it would only be usable in the second Allied Phase. Probably wouldn’t want to go higher than that, though. Either way, Boosting and free Shifts are probably a wrench in the works here, if the goal is to make MECs feel slow while they’re charging up, but that could perhaps be addressed with a (scaling?) Speed and Boost distance penalty if a Stratagem has non-zero charge? Requires more thought.

That’s all for this round. I’ll be back with more later. o7

SandroADDeveloper244 days ago

(1) MEC Stat Involvement (and why it got dropped)

So firstly, no one understood improvised attacks which is why it's getting a full page in 0.14 - The idea is you can use any stat, it's your reminder that this isn't a board game and you can do anything so feel free to just roll some dice and see what happens as long as the GM is cool with it.

DUR used to contribute to Armor for years and pretty much towards the final iteration I decided to cut it. Reason being it became an instant pick in a game with no healing - More Armor means more SYN you can pull for Overheats, more survivability, etc etc. Pair this with DUR usually having defensive stratagems and it was just a no-brainer. It's also why Shields got some late game counter-play.

I actually had played with COMs affecting shields for a while, but similarly the scaling felt... off. Not bad necessarily but not what I was going for. The game feels sufficiently complex as it is, so I didn't want to add too much scaling with stats (which is mostly where Perks come in to pick up some of that slack).

There were plans to strip out MOB from contributing to Max Speed which I still consider now and then, but a fair few things would need some rejiggering - It is a big outlier at this point so I honestly might do that.

(2) Integrity vs Max Armor -- So the reason here (which is hella subject to change) is the idea that people were getting confused what "losing armor" meant in the context of the fiction etc etc - TBH if I were to go through and change things I'd probably have Integrity / Damage as the two (or something to similar effect) - Or Max/Current Integrity etc - This is mainly a hold over of "Armor" having a lot of pre-existing connotations in games and why I'd honestly prefer to drop the term "Armor" altogether (Which I might!)

(3) So the whole idea with Chances is that they're gambles, and there's a reason those two Stratagems are exceptional (we like some ~variety~) - They're heavy set-up with heavy pay-off, but require a level of commitment that changes how you have to play (or requires you to wait for the right opportunity to strike / teammates to assist) - Both heavily favor actually using "Stuck" and other enemy movement manipulation stuff which is why I really like them!~ [[Plus in the case of Charged Slash you still get an attack out of it either way, you just get an extra damage blast and some movement if the enemy is close at the start of the next round -- Might need to clarify that better in the text]]

As for multiple Action Cost abilities I think that could be very neat for new MECs! (Though I'd have to consider balance and such) - There's a cool potential with 3-4 Action Cost abilities because (depending on how your cycle works out) you could theoretically do those in one phase buuuuut that lands in a realm of sufficiently fiddly that I probably wouldn't jump for it ((Similarly I'd require both Action Points to be spent at once to proc a 2 Action Cost Stratagem - Could be cool to combining a Flash Action and Normal Action to do one when you only have one Action Point))

Thank you again for all this awesome feedback!!

PistilWhip244 days ago (2 edits)

(1.1) Improvised attacks

Yep, I nearly missed improvised attacks myself. That was almost going to be one of the feedback points until I saw the mention snuck in at the end of the Improvise description, lol.

I will say, it should probably not do DMG equal to Hits, since that’s the going rate (i.e. the standard) for Basic ATKs and Stratagems. Basic ATKs generate +2 SYN to self and Stratagems usually have more going on, so there is still a distinction, but to me it wouldn’t quite feel like an improvised attack unless the DMG was lower.

Off the top of my head, I would consider [Each Double] = +1 DMG, to a minimum of 1 DMG, or else a base of 1 DMG with +1 per double. There’s higher DMG potential than the Summons who simply get 1 Action = 1 DMG, while not stepping on the toes of other ATKs. But maybe the +2 SYN of proper Basic ATKs is already value enough.

(1.2) MEC Stat Involvement

Alright, that’s understandable. Maybe in the future, Stat contributions can be the effect of specific Parts, Stratagems, or Perks. In the meantime, probably better to remove MOB from the Speed calculation, in the interests of leveling the playing field.

(2) Integrity and Armor

Maybe consider dropping both Integrity and Armor in favor of a new term, like Hull? There’s a certain elegance to having the three survivability stats being one syllable each: Shields, Hull, and Soak. Then you could have the parallelism between Max Shields and Max Hull.

(3) Chances

Some Chances are gambles, while others are totally within the players’ control. A Pilot can actively pursue e.g. the added Dice after Boosting for Blaze Rush → Diving In on the Heat Hatchet (Squire), or position themselves to include an Ally in the Blinding Flash AoE to trigger Beacon of Hope (Knight).

This is in direct contrast compared to the likes of True Slash and Charged Shot, which was the thrust of the original point. The player only has so much control over those, and while that does provide variety, I’d argue that it’s not necessarily the good kind of variety. At that point, I would almost rather see a different kind of keyword, if they’re going to be so completely different.

I can give a pass to the ones that require a Target not have an Effect or not have taken DMG because that’s something that can be controlled as a team simply by deciding Action order; the gameplay demands are fairly low. The Gambler High Roller gets a pass, too, since that’s the entire gimmick. Double Tap → Third Time’s the Charm (Ranger) leaves a bitter taste in the mouth to be “punished” for killing one Target with a good Roll.

For the ones that check for a mechanical Target (Shaman’s Ghost in the Shell and Warlock’s Built to Fail), I have mixed feelings. It’s thematic, but again, not really in the player’s control. The ones based on downing Targets, mhmm, I guess they’re fine since learning a given opponent’s approximate DMG tolerance is something the player can do.

But all the rest of the Stratagems I checked don’t demand opponent cooperation the way that True Slash and Charged Shot do. Again, it’s rougher for the former due to the short Range. And I acknowledged the opponent control tools and multiplayer cooperation in my original post. However, most everything else is something the player can choose to do self-sufficiently. For the ones that require a particular Effect on the Target, the player can include a way to apply the Effect on another Part of their MEC if needed and use their first Action in a phase for setup.

That’s why I wanted to try floating the idea of Stratagems with Action Point costs greater than 1. Even if using those Stratagems locks the Pilot out of other Actions for that Turn, that’s still a choice they make on their own.

SandroADDeveloper240 days ago

(1.1) Yeah I think you're still not quite understanding what improvised attacks are for (which is perfectly reasonable because they need a more thorough explanation as it's a wide umbrella). On the one hand it can be as simple as "My MEC lost all its attack parts, I slam into the enemy with DUR" at which point I might rule Hit = 1 DMG. It also might be something like a player saying "I shoot down some stalactites to slow down my enemy" for which I might rule that the player needs to get 8+ hits on a FIN roll and then they can cause Stuck and deal 3 Direct Damage.

The key words here are "I might rule" though - Improvised actions is where the system goes pretty hands off and asks for GM fiat to step in (After all, if it wasn't the sort of game that needed a GM it would just be a video game). Improvised Actions (and Attacks) is an explicit rule to say "You can use your actions for things that don't have an explicit rule."

(1.2) Yeeeeah I really should nix the MOB scaling... I'm not sure what you mean by Stat contributions can be the effect of specific Parts, Stratagems, or Perks - Since there are Perks and Parts that explicitly boost your Stats though? (Be it Shields, Armor, any of the core ones etc)

(2) Hull could work too (And I definitely prefer it to Armor, and it's vague enough to feel appropriate)

(3) I understand your argument, and were the goal of this game to have each part be more similar in utility then I might consider it, but you mostly lost me when you argue there's a bad kind of variety (To me the only bad variety is if a Part was like "Hey here's 10 billion DMG for free" not "Hey this part is hella niche" especially given there's nearly 200 of 'em having some mechanical outliers is good). The Chances aren't changing any time soon and I really don't think they need a separate keyword when their mechanics (a certain condition must be fulfilled for this side of the card to proc) all work the same. You're definitely allowed to dislike those parts or think they're too risky (heck I wouldn't feel like I was achieving my goals if people weren't split on how good certain parts were) but changing the keyword feels unnecessary TBH. [[And similarly if you feel "punished" by Third Time's the Charm, I'd advise taking another part - That Chance has a very strong anti-boss utility and the main component doubles as some nice mid-range ad clear - And at 5-2 the part is practically a steal]]

I really like their balance and niche as they stand. They have incredibly valuable effects ((True Charge essentially giving you an extra burst of movement + an extra attack on top of the DMG+move you got last turn from Charged Slash, and Giga Blast having an incredibly generous range)) and frankly, as someone who's played the game on both sides, Charged Slash is in an especially solid place (I used the crap out of it and has honestly been worried that it's too strong - especially with how fiercely it combos with Topple [especially if you have both charges up and Unrelenting, it's all but guaranteed] - Which trust me if you build into either of these abilities even as a single MEC you have more control than you may think - even if you have to work harder for it [[which is why they have a higher payoff]). Their Set-up to Pay-off ratio feels solid (if not comparatively generous) and if you're the kind of player who doesn't feel like it's worth it, that should be your signal to build into something else ((much like how I have players who try not to take abilities that operate off of doubles/triples instead of the ramps that scale off of dice)).

Inevitably there's going to be parts and mechanics that people want to see seasoned to their own personal taste and it's a reason I encourage GMs to make the MEC Shop their own if they feel there's something lacking, but when it comes to Chances I feel like those are in an especially good spot for how I run things at my table and the experience I was looking to craft. As always folks are welcome to mod the game to feel more "balanced" or however they want it, but for me the game feel is what's most important and all the Chances you mentioned feel like they're capturing their respective kinetics perfectly.

As an aside, I will warn you that if you're going into this looking for a balanced war-gamey strategic experience as opposed to grid-based turn-based stylish action house rules you're going to be sorely disappointed by what's on offer here. The game is unique, asymmetrical, and (especially when you start getting into all the wild stack order stuff you can do) pretty variable in the ways it lets you build and play. There's some parts that I've had some play-testers insist are actively useless and some (including ones you're suggesting are too unreliable) that I've been told are way too powerful and too reliable to be left in the game without nerfing them. Presently (minus some potential minion tweaking) I really think the parts/stratagems available are right where I want them to be, which definitely won't be for everyone, but for the people who it is for they'll feel just right.

PistilWhip239 days ago

(1.1) No, I understand the purpose and function of improvised attacks (and improvised actions broadly). I just don’t think that improvised attacks should be at the same starting line as Basic ATKs when it comes to DMG. Sure, there can be exceptions, and there can be Effect application, but improvised attacks shouldn’t be stepping on the toes of Parts that players paid for.

(1.2) A Stratagem might say, “Increase your current Shields by your COM”, for instance. There’s shades of this already with Stratagems that grant Shields based on Hits for some Stat Roll or other; that’s indirect scaling. The same could be done for Parts and Perks if direct scaling benefits were desired, which it seems like they’re not, but hey, house rules.

(3) We’ll just have to agree to disagree here. We draw the line of “acceptable mechanical outlier” in different places, which is fine.

SandroADDeveloper238 days ago

(1.1) Re; Improvised Actions (and again it's GM discretion so if you feel it adds some texture to your game to not run them like this go for it) - For me it feels like a more than worthy trade-off.

Basic ATKs are a keyworded ability that Generate Synergy for yourself and allies that can be proced by or help proc conditions on Stratagems and Parts (also to my memory each of them has an Element allowing for even more combo potential) - The "cost" Players pay in terms of Credits to get a Part usually gives them more than just a Basic ATK too.

Meanwhile for an Improvised Action a Player has to describe and set a whole scene that's interesting or convincing enough for me the GM to start handing them comparable DMG (and the GM would have to be in an extra generous mood to pepper in some SYN for the teammates) that still doesn't interact with the system as deeply as Basic ATKs - In all my years of running Improv Actions as described Improv Actions have almost always been used as a last resort when either a Basic ATK would be impossible (usually do to Part Breaks) or when a specific Effect needs to get slapped on that no one has a Stratagem up for. ((Or when something like "Scoop Up the Tank" or "Weld Myself to the Enemy" gets brought up that I'm like "OK this falls firmly in the "Other" Category.)) I also say this as someone who did a whole "hits and kicks" Basic ATK build on the other side of the table because there are some nasty part Combos between extra dice, switching elements, comboing into Stratagems etc - I love Basic ATKs and I would honestly be bewildered by anyone who thought an Improv Action was giving them nearly as much DMG (not to mention SYN) as I was shelling out with those builds.

If given all this a Player still felt they didn't want to use a Basic ATK vs just continuing to describe unique Actions for less combo-y DMG and no SYN to themselves, I'd honestly let them just keep using Improv Actions because it wouldn't meaningfully harm any balance I'm going for and would likely just lead to a lot of flavorful descriptions from that Player. If that Player ever complained they felt their Improv Actions weren't doing enough, I'd remind them an alternative utility exists :p And if any Player felt legitimately cheated by another player dolling out basic roll DMG for describing stuff I'd probably have a sit down with them about what they're actually looking to get out of the game and why they feel someone mildly succeeding via creativity is hurting their game experience and we'd try to figure something out.

(1.2) Oh I get ya! I mean yeah Stat Scaling just /is/ just how most Stratagems with Rolls work - A flat non-rolled bonus could be interesting but yeah that's less the flavor I'm going for because it'd probably be hell to balance appropriately. ((Unless different Parts gave you Hull based off different Stats which could be interesting, but also at that point every MEC is just operating the same and only nominally different which I'm already worried the game has too much of))

(3) Yeyeyey ~ It's different strokes for different folks - I think a LOT of Steel Hearts' mechanics (intentionally) grind up against a more BattleTechy idea of system balance and equilibrium which is absolutely not going to be everyone's flavor.

PistilWhip239 days ago

(4) “Additional” Equipped Parts

Currently there are two Parts that break the usual six-Part limitation: The Knight Core, which allows a second Option, and the Asura Core, which grants two more Arm slots. Since the latter is a Fabled Part, access to it is not guaranteed at any table, but the Knight Core is available to anyone so long as the Knight MEC isn’t specifically disallowed.

Point is, a MEC with one of these Cores can have 7 or 8 Parts equipped, so how are Part Breaks resolved for them?

The Knight Core is easy enough to adjudicate; the second Option Part becomes unavailable when the Core Breaks. No change to the Part Break roll is necessary in this case, though the second Option Part probably shouldn’t also be considered Broken. That is, that second Option remains functional and in inventory for the next open Option slot.

The same approach could be used for the Asura Core, with the second pair of Arms becoming unavailable (but not Broken) when the Core Breaks. This might be a bit punishing, though, so maybe only one of the extra Arms becomes unavailable if the Asura Core would Break? Then if the Asura Core is rolled again for a Part Break, the remaining extra Arm gets an actual Break.

If more of these “additional slot” Parts become available in the future, it might be worth adding a paragraph on how to handle these kinds of Break cases.

SandroADDeveloper238 days ago

So the way that I've ruled these Part Breaks ((Which will deffo be on the page that talks about Empty Part Slots)) is as follows:

When taking an Extra Part you must mark that Part as being attached to the Core. When Rolling a Part Break do so as normal, Extra Parts only become part of the equation if the Core is rolled. IF the Core IS rolled and Broken /all/ Extra Parts attached to it become inaccessible / unusable until Pilots perform a Repair.

For an even Scrappier Game: When the Part attached to an Extra Part breaks have the Pilot Call Evens or Odds for each Extra Part. If they are wrong the Extra Part also Breaks. If they're right it merely becomes inaccessible as described above.

While a bit punishing taking extra parts is incredibly powerful, so this feels like a fair trade-off. Breaks are supposed to really hurt when they start to go through putting Pilots into a potential death spiral, so losing access to all the Extra Gear you were able to bring makes sense to me.

PistilWhip238 days ago (1 edit)

Okay, so it more or less matches with intuition. I did forget to mention one Part, though.

The Knight Core provides +2 Armor : +1 DUR on top of any Stat Boosts the Options might have, and the Asura Core provides two Arm Slots that can have their own Stat Boosts as well. But the Dual-Core… doesn’t seem to do much?

It takes up a Core Slot and your Fabled Part allowance to give you +1 Core Slot and +1 Fabled Part allowance. That’s just back to square one, to my eye. The only use I can see is that it has a chance of taking the Break for the Core attached to it, which doesn’t inspire confidence. Is it meant to do anything else?

itch.io