If AVLD, why not DVLA?

[Fitz]

I've been doing some monster conversions from AD&D/D&D3e, and one of the clunkiest power constructions I'm forced into revolve around those critters that are immune to something - whether it be fire, swords, magic, or whatever. My options seem to be either to go with Desolid (only vs. blah) which I don't like conceptually and because you then have to fudge things like knockback and pay a lot more for all the critter's own attack powers, or to buy masses of Armour (only vs. blah) plus masses of Resistant Damage reduction (also only vs. blah) separately vs PD and ED.

The attack power modifiers NND and AVLD are perfectly good for building attacks that are irresistable except in certain circumstances, but there's no equivalent modifier for defences. I find this odd, since before the dawn of time (Hero System-wise) there's been a principle stated that for any attack there is a (cheaper) defence. Why not turn the attack modifiers around and have similiar mods that can be applied to defences?

[nexus]

Wouldn't that be a Defense with a Limitation?

Arrow Resistance: Armor (Or Damage Reduction) PD Only vs Arrows -1/2?

[Mark Taylor]

If these defenses are supposed to be irresistable to certain types of attacks (i.e. no amount of damage can penetrate them), on what basis do you define how much defense you have to buy to apply the modifier to?

With attacks, the attack does as much damage as you buy. By contrast, we are talking about a kind of infinite amount of defense. I don't see how it's directly comparable.

[Kristopher]

The classic method of doing limited defenses is 75% Damage Reduction, only vs ________________.

[Metaphysician]

Or, if you wan't to stretch things, 100% Damage Reduction ( 120 points ), Only vs X.

[nexus]

If these defenses are supposed to be irresistable to certain types of attacks (i.e. no amount of damage can penetrate them), on what basis do you define how much defense you have to buy to apply the modifier to?

With attacks, the attack does as much damage as you buy. By contrast, we are talking about a kind of infinite amount of defense. I don't see how it's directly comparable.

The suggested method is Fantasy Hero, IIRC, is too buy as much Defense as is required so that the maximum damage you'll encounter in the campaign can't get threw. Or the gm defines some level of Defense as "Invulnerable" for this campaign at whatever level he feels comfortable with. Its not perfect but its feasible.

The problem with using Invulnerability in Hero is that it doesn't quite fit into the metarules. Infinite defenses should, by the game's logic, cost infinite points more or less.

I've never been able to come up with a point cost for something like 100 Percent Damage Reduction that really felt right and I've thought about it alot since the difficulty of doing absolutes is on thing about Hero that troubles me.

[caris]

It is the return of the "Invulnerability" arguement.

I still look at this being a campaign design issue. If you want to allow immune to "x" in your campaign than you have to set up your campaign to allow it. Personally, I like to adapt the poison/disease option, and use LS with a price (which can be higher than 10pts) based on how common the item occurs as an attack, and than it i understood that all attacks that are of that SFX are assumed to have a -0 modifier that they do not affect characters with that form of LS.

That -0 modifier can work just as well, if you go with the Desolid route.

Either way, I would say that the best thing to do, is include a note in your campaign rules/house rules that you allow "immunity" to certain types of attacks.

[NuSoardGraphite]

I allow characters in my campaigns (certain one's of course) to purchase 100% Damage Reduction (80 for non resistant, 120 for resistant) vs a specific SFX (-1/2 to -1). Of course, this has to be bought vs Physical and Energy for true invulnerability.

I am wary of those who want to be completely invulnerable to a specific category of attack (Physical, Energy, Mental or Power) but I might allow it depending on the campaign and character concept (such as the character takes extra damage from other attack types)

Remember, just because its not in the book doesn't mean you can't do it....

[Mark Taylor]

The suggested method is Fantasy Hero, IIRC, is too buy as much Defense as is required so that the maximum damage you'll encounter in the campaign can't get threw. Or the gm defines some level of Defense as "Invulnerable" for this campaign at whatever level he feels comfortable with. Its not perfect but its feasible.

I remember reading that in Fantasy HERO. My main problem with it is that I have absolutely no intention of ever letting my players know in advance what the maximum amount of damage they are likely to encounter in my campaign is.

When I have needed an insurmountable defence against a limited type of attack in the past I have built it this way: Desolidification , Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2), Persistent (+1/2), Invisible Power Effects (Fully Invisible; +1) (120 Active Points); Only To Protect Against Limited Type of Attack (-1). Total Cost: 60 Points.

As it says on page 149 of 5ER (yes, all my page references will be 5ER from now on) "However, at the GM's option, a character with a limited form of Desolidification doesn't have to buy Affects Physical World; he can touch and affect the solid world automatically". As a GM I'm usually willing to take that option assuming the power is appropriate for the character and the type of attack it protects against is reasonably limited, because I don't think 60 points for total protection against a limited type of attack is unbalanced.

[nexus]

As it says on page 149 of 5ER (yes, all my page references will be 5ER from now on) "However, at the GM's option, a character with a limited form of Desolidification doesn't have to buy Affects Physical World; he can touch and affect the solid world automatically". As a GM I'm usually willing to take that option assuming the power is appropriate for the character and the type of attack it protects against is reasonably limited, because I don't think 60 points for total protection against a limited type of attack is unbalanced.

They made that offical? Great! Another reason to pick up Revised!

[caris]

They made that offical? Great! Another reason to pick up Revised!

Actually, it was official in regular 5th Ed. page 99.

[Fitz]

If these defenses are supposed to be irresistable to certain types of attacks (i.e. no amount of damage can penetrate them), on what basis do you define how much defense you have to buy to apply the modifier to?

With attacks, the attack does as much damage as you buy. By contrast, we are talking about a kind of infinite amount of defense. I don't see how it's directly comparable.

That's a good point, though it falls down with reference to Damage Reduction, since in that case you're paying a fixed price for a relative decrease in the damage you take.

[Fitz]

As it says on page 149 of 5ER (yes, all my page references will be 5ER from now on) "However, at the GM's option, a character with a limited form of Desolidification doesn't have to buy Affects Physical World; he can touch and affect the solid world automatically".

Aha! I must have skipped over that paragraph. That makes the Desolidification (vs. Magic SFX) route more feasible.

[nexus]

Aha! I must have skipped over that paragraph. That makes the Desolidification (vs. Magic SFX) route more feasible.

I missed in the original myself. Definitely got egg on my face.

[Mark Taylor]

Actually, it was official in regular 5th Ed. page 99.

Beat me to it.