Find Weakness

[Tech]

Unless I missed it in the 5th ed somewhere, I have a question with Find Weakness. If the Find Weakness if bought to affect all attacks, does the F.W. roll need to made once and the success or lack of it affect all attacks or does it merely allow any attack to roll to see if Find Weakness took effect? Does one roll do it all for all attacks or does each attack need a seperate attack roll?

[MisterVimes]

It can be bought several ways... like so:

<table border="0" cellpadding="0"><tr><td align="right"><b>Cost&#160;&#160;</b></td><td><b>Power</b></td><td align="right"><b>END</b></td></tr><tr><td align="right" valign="top">10&#160;&#160;</td><td><b><i>Single Attack: </i></b>Find Weakness 11- (Single Attack)&#160;</td><td valign="top" align="right"></td></tr><tr><td align="right" valign="top">20&#160;&#160;</td><td><b><i>Related Group of Attacks: </i></b>Find Weakness 11- (Related Group of Attacks)&#160;</td><td valign="top" align="right"></td></tr><tr><td align="right" valign="top">30&#160;&#160;</td><td><b><i>All Attacks: </i></b>Find Weakness 11- (All Attacks)&#160;</td><td valign="top" align="right"></td></tr></table>

Edited for Clarity.

If you have a Find Weakness that affects all attacks, you make the roll and henceforth (in that battle) the FW is in effect for all attacks.

[Monolith]

One roll does it all for all your attacks. So if you make it, every attack you have will get to work against the target's 1/2 DEF. If you fail the roll, it is the same: every attack you have has failed.

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by Monolith
One roll does it all for all your attacks. So if you make it, every attack you have will get to work against the target's 1/2 DEF. If you fail the roll, it is the same: every attack you have has failed.

While we're on this subject, Monolith, what are your thoughts on the subsequent rolls (and penalties) quartering and eighthing the DEF?

[Monolith]

Originally posted by MisterVimes
While we're on this subject, Monolith, what are your thoughts on the subsequent rolls (and penalties) quartering and eighthing the DEF?
I allow the subsequent rolls, but my house rule is that the second roll is a -5 (instead of -2), and then takes an additional -1 per roll after. Thus 11- for the first roll, 6- for the second roll, 5- for the third, ect.

I think the power is too cheap (especially for a single attack) for what it doess; and giving only an initial -2 on the second roll still guarantees success some 40% of the time. That is far more powerful than Armor Piercing (AP only divides once) with a Full Phase Limitation.

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by Monolith
I allow the subsequent rolls, but my house rule is that the second roll is a -5 (instead of -2), and then takes an additional -1 per roll after. Thus 11- for the first roll, 6- for the second roll, 5- for the third, ect.

I think the power is too cheap (especially for a single attack) for what it doess; and giving only an initial -2 on the second roll still guarantees success some 40% of the time. That is far more powerful than Armor Piercing (AP only divides once) with a Full Phase Limitation.

I ask because I have (at the moment) banned Subsequent rolls, I have a couple of FW/AP combos that might get much more broken if I allow subsequent rolls. But I like your house rule.

[Monolith]

Originally posted by MisterVimes
I ask because I have (at the moment) banned Subsequent rolls, I have a couple of FW/AP combos that might get much more broken if I allow subsequent rolls. But I like your house rule.
The house rule is not great, but it works. I would imagine if I had players with a FW/AP combo I would probably consider banning it as well. I have been pretty luck though. Most of my players have gamed with me for years, and the newer ones are learning the ropes from the old-timers, and thus do not create too many constructs which might give me a headache. :)

[Tech]

I know this has been brought up before, but isn't Find Weakness a bit powerful for the cost? I give this a bit of thought, based on:


One roll does it all for all your attacks. So if you make it, every attack you have will get to work against the target's 1/2 DEF. If you fail the roll, it is the same: every attack you have has failed.

Wouldn't it even up the cost slightly if the FW that is bought to affect every attack, that each attack must be separately rolled?

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by Monolith
The house rule is not great, but it works. I would imagine if I had players with a FW/AP combo I would probably consider banning it as well. I have been pretty luck though. Most of my players have gamed with me for years, and the newer ones are learning the ropes from the old-timers, and thus do not create too many constructs which might give me a headache. :)

It's really not TOO unbalancing because the AP-EB in question is kept under 60 AP and a lotof my baddies have taken to showing up with Hardened armor.

[Tech]

Mmmmmmm.... I guess you're right. AP can be easily nullified with hardened defenses. I do have one, repeat - one, character in my entire campaign that I'm aware of that has more than 1 level of hardened PD/ED. That character is mine, bwahaha! 3x hardened PD and ED! Sorry, I lost it there for a moment. Who wants to pay a +1 Advantage just to have APx2 on a single attack?

Hm, still... that makes me wonder even more if Find Weakness is a bit too powerful for it's cost...

[JohnathanChance]

This is just a thought here, I don't know if it works this way or not, but here is my idea on how to limit FW if you are having problems with it being too powerful. How about making Hardened defenses apply vs the effect of FW. In other words each level of hardening cancels one halving of armor, be it AP, Penetrating, or FW roll. Of course that might make Hardened Defenses a little too powerful:)
But that might tone things down a little, or a lot, who knows just me tossing out an idea for perusement:rolleyes:

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by JohnathanChance
This is just a thought here, I don't know if it works this way or not, but here is my idea on how to limit FW if you are having problems with it being too powerful. How about making Hardened defenses apply vs the effect of FW. In other words each level of hardening cancels one halving of armor, be it AP, Penetrating, or FW roll. Of course that might make Hardened Defenses a little too powerful:)
But that might tone things down a little, or a lot, who knows just me tossing out an idea for perusement:rolleyes:

True... but Lack of Weakness is REALLY cheap... and 5 Points of it will ruin a player's day.

[JohnathanChance]

Originally posted by MisterVimes
True... but Lack of Weakness is REALLY cheap... and 5 Points of it will ruin a player's day.

DOH!:o

Forgot about that one:D

You do have me there sir.

[BNakagawa]

I hate FW as written. way too effective, way too cheap.

If the Gm allows it, I love buying Lack of Weakness with Invisible Power Effect. So if the other guy misses the roll by the amount of Lack of weakness or less, he thinks he made it and will occasionally blow another half phase trying for the 1/4.

I also have a suggestion: Defenses bought IPE or, if armor, concealed, should not be subject to Find Weakness unless the FW guy has some way of perceiving them.

FW + UBO = yuck.

[DoctorItron]

Originally posted by Tech
I know this has been brought up before, but isn't Find Weakness a bit powerful for the cost? I give this a bit of thought, based on:

Wouldn't it even up the cost slightly if the FW that is bought to affect every attack, that each attack must be separately rolled?

Rolling separately for each attack might not even things out. Find Weakness can become *more* powerful if each attack is rolled for separately. Consider a character with 5 attacks in a multipower. Find Weakness for all attacks.

With separate rolls, the player gets 5 attempts to make the Find Weakness roll, instead of just 1. Sure, it takes 5 actions to do so, but the player will stop trying as soon as one of the rolls succeed. Using Find Weakness with a single roll, as written in 5th edition, only allows a single attempt - failure prevents any further attempts at Find Weakness.

In terms of evaluating combat effectiveness, I suggest looking at Find Weakness in the same light as the Armor Piercing advantage. An attack with Find Weakness is very similar to the same attack with an activation roll on Armor Piercing.

[Xandarr]

One thing that I have found takes a little bit of the sting out of Find Weakness is to use each successful roll sort of like a -1 limitation to the opponent's defense. In other words, the first FW makes the defense into 1/(1+1) or 1/2. The 2nd roll makes it 1/(1+2) or 1/3, the third roll makes it 1/4, etc. This reduces the use of FW usually down to one successful roll unless the target is extremely powerful and needs the additional checks.

Helpfully,
Steve

[Keneton]

I never had a problem with Find Weakness in my campaign because of its high cost on My Effectiveness Rating. Most PC's just avoid it. It can be good, but hey almost every chracter I have with high defenses also has a lack of weakness. Most martial artist should have it to avoid analyze style or analyze combat anyway.

Its no big deal for me.:)

[Aroooo]

I don't have my books with me (on vacation), but when you make a Find Weakness roll, does it not count against only one defense, not all defenses a character (vehicle) has? If I have Armor and a Force Field, the bad guy's FW must 'target' [apply] vs. one or the other, no?

Aroooo

[BNakagawa]

nope, it reduces all applicable defenses. Unless you bought the find weakness as only affecting one or some types of defenses...

[Aroooo]

Originally posted by BNakagawa
nope, it reduces all applicable defenses. Unless you bought the find weakness as only affecting one or some types of defenses...

So does that mean PD or ED defense? Is resistant defense treated as a different applicable defense in this context?

Aroooo

[JohnOSpencer]

I've thought of changing Find Weakness so that the first time you success gives the target 2/3 of his defenses, then 1/2, then 1/3, then 1/4, then 1/5...etc.

Any comments.

John Spencer

[BNakagawa]

Originally posted by Aroooo
So does that mean PD or ED defense? Is resistant defense treated as a different applicable defense in this context?

Aroooo

depends on the attack. If you bought your FW as applying only to your move through, then PD. If you bought it as applying only for your EB, then ED. If you bought it with all attacks, then the defense halved depends on what you hit your victim with.

[Alibear]

I've never had a problem with find weakness specifically. Maybe in conjunction with skill levels especially overall skill levels.

As someone pointed out lack of weakness IS cheap. Only one character that I played with had it, Bug, and his attacks were so piddling that he needed it to have any effect in combat at all.
I treat it the same as AP, ie roughly +1/2 modifier. Do I allow 12d6AP? Not so far. Do I allow Find Weakness with 60 str? Nope!

For me, Find Weakness is fine as is and I don't need to change it.

As ever YMMV.