Damage Negation!

[kjandreano]

I like the idea of Damage Negation, but the game mechanics make using it in play a big [CENSORED].
Does anyone have an idea to help with this?

[Dreamstreamer]

What about it do you like? What do you find frustrating?

[Kraven Kor]

Personally, I would only use Damage Negation (in the future; current campaign I'm not taking it away just yet) for a way to say "I am immune to X type of damage." Buying one or two levels of it "against everything" can be a pain; if you remember to use it, no big deal, unless dealing with advantaged attacks and :head asplode:

So, buying 20 DC's of Damage Negation vs. Fire for a Fire Elemental is "less hassle" than buying 2 DC's vs. all Physical Damage for Bulletproof Tony.

[kjandreano]

Like: A "the damage didn't get to me" / "I can ignore the little stuff" / etc. type of power in the system, it does that very well.
No Like: Having to calculate it / adjust dice rolled for attack / extra work for the GM to do (and remember about) before the attack is rolled, etc.

[Kraven Kor]

What about it do you like? What do you find frustrating?

My own feelings are that, first off, it is easily forgotten (not a problem "with the power or system.") Secondly, when dealing with advantaged attacks, to be balanced, you have to treat it the same way as adding damage classes to advantaged attacks; more on the fly math.

But I am not the OP.

[Sean Waters]

6.2.97 has a handy table for calculating DCs for advantaged attacks and it it pretty straightforward to do. If this is a problem that comes up a lot, bookmark it, and have everyone calculate their DCs of damage they normally do with an attack up-front. A little preparation can go a long way.

Also make sure that DN is being used right. Points notwithstanding, it is not a desperately effective defence: 1 damage class averages 3.5 stun and 1 body for normal attacks and 2 stun and 3 body for killing attacks. To accomplish that with normal purchases you need 3.5 normal defence (to cover the stun) and an extra half point to make one of the points resistant to cope with killing attacks, or 4 points per die, using averages.

In addition you get KB Resistance, which is probably worth slightly less than 1 point (2 points per 2m, physical or energy generally about half and half).

Mind you it ALSO reduces other damage, such as AVAD, penetrating and armour piercing damage, which is worth something, probably pushing the theoretical points total well over 5 per die.

OTOH, as it reduces the number of dice rolled, actual damage though defences becomes more volatile. Also, watch out for Body damage. Watch:

So. I'd assume that most people in a superhero game spend about 30 points on Physical Defence (or would get 30 points back if they reduced their PD to zero), assuming a 12 DC average game, to give 24/12 PD/rPD defences.

That is neat because 30 points divides by 5 nicely, giving 6DCs of Damage Negation and no defences.

Now, say you get hit with a 12DC average attack doing 42/12.

Defences as above let 14/0 through.

Damage negation lets 21/6 through.

Ouch. On the plus side you take less KB (almost certainly none as against an average of 10m) but, well, ouch anyway.

The points do not tell you that, do they? Theoretically a bargain. In fact, not so much, at least for a game with reasonably vanilla builds.

Yes, OK, there is probably a happier medium between the extremes, but still...

What DN does is makes it like you never took the damage. You don't feel it. You don't worry about lucky high rolls. It is the closest the game gets to actual invulnerability without cheating. It should be there because it adds something (something you COULD build anyway, but that is hardly the point - it would be really fiddly to do so). What DN is is a sop to the paranoid player and a gift to the GM. Generally you do not care if your villain takes Body damage: in fact it is nice to remind the players that their targets CAN take Body from a super-punch.

GM: OK, you hit. Roll damage but reduce it by 4DCs.
Player: Huh?
GM: How many DCs is your attack?
Player: Huh?
GM: OK, how many dice? Any advantages? M'K, that is 12 DC. Write that down. Now take 4DCs off that and roll what you have left. there is a table on page 97 of the second book to take into account your advantages.
Player: Huh?
GM: Er...do you have Damage Negation? I mean, you, not your character?
Player: Huh?
GM: **!!BOOM!! <Shoots player with a Colt Python at virtually point blank range>** You see? That's the point. It does not matter. You are not bulletproof.
Player: **drip...drip**

OK. You make a valid point: it is [CENSORED]

[Escafarc]

So far the only place I've used it for is armored vehicles and space ships.

[Kraven Kor]

Well, usually, people are going to combine standard defenses with DN.

In my current campaign, our elemental sorcerer has a Stoneskin spell, which is 2 Levels of Physical DN and 4 points of Resistant PD.

It is not overpowered or anything, just a bit of a hassle in this campaign.

[Hyper-Man]

One idea that was suggested when the power was first mentioned was just having all player die rolls be made where the GM can clearly see them for a time so they can then take alternating High & Low die rolls out to match the number of DNegation Dice (and roll 1 dice if it's an odd # of DN dice).

I used it as a framework slot that Costs End to Activate for my version of Superman. I think it's a great way to help model the often repeated theme of him getting knocked down by a evil scientist's death-ray (Continuous attack) only to eventually find a deeper resolve to get up and walk slowly toward it (ignoring the KB that originally sent him flying) and destroy the device.

[gojira]

Damage negation lets 21/6 through.

Ouch.

Based on that observation above I'd be tempted to say DCs = dice and forgo any complicated calculations for DCs. 4 levels of damage negation means you roll 4 less dice. Done.

[Mister E]

I can't find it in the books, right now, but my notes say that Reduced Negation ("RN"), added to an attack, reduces the effectiveness of Damage Negation by 1 DC for 2 character points.

It stands to reason that if DN [a counter-measure] is in the game, RN [a counter-counter-measure] ought to be, too.

So if you hate doing math, put a ton of RN on all your attacks, I guess. =P

[edit]:

Would be good for building "Cosmic Bullets" that treat Kryptonians the same way they treat everything else... by putting bullet holes in them.

[Hyper-Man]

I can't find it in the books, right now, but my notes say that Reduced Negation ("RN"), added to an attack, reduces the effectiveness of Damage Negation by 1 DC for 2 character points.

It stands to reason that if DN [a counter-measure] is in the game, RN [a counter-counter-measure] ought to be, too.

So if you hate doing math, put a ton of RN on all your attacks, I guess. =P

[edit]:

Would be good for building "Cosmic Bullets" that treat Kryptonians the same way they treat everything else... by putting bullet holes in them.

It would just be one more form of "rock, paper, scissors" like AP & Penetrating except that it only does any good when the target HAS the defense.

In my Superman example, the DN is not part of the character's "base" defenses.
To use it he has to dedicate a portion of his VPP that could otherwise be used for Offense, Movement or another defensive ability.

The biggest reason I still would like to get all the new Villain books for 6e is to see how common DN and its "counter" are in the CUniverse.

[Christopher]

I used it as a framework slot that Costs End to Activate for my version of Superman. I think it's a great way to help model the often repeated theme of him getting knocked down by a evil scientist's death-ray (Continuous attack) only to eventually find a deeper resolve to get up and walk slowly toward it (ignoring the KB that originally sent him flying) and destroy the device.

I would propably jsut make this as a "Contest of Power", as noted in he APG I, and allow him to start one phase later (asuming he wasn't stunned by the first hit and "kept stunend" in the following phases).

Based on that observation above I'd be tempted to say DCs = dice and forgo any complicated calculations for DCs. 4 levels of damage negation means you roll 4 less dice. Done.

1 DC = 1 die only works for Blast without advantages that affect the DC calculation (8D6 and 8D6, 0 END have the same DC as Endurance Advantages do not affect DC calculation).

The best things I can say is: Let the players write down both the DC and the DC/die ratio in advance. Or do it for NPC's, respectively.

[Hugh Neilson]

Like: A "the damage didn't get to me" / "I can ignore the little stuff" / etc. type of power in the system, it does that very well.
No Like: Having to calculate it / adjust dice rolled for attack / extra work for the GM to do (and remember about) before the attack is rolled, etc.

One approach, although it adds time and reduces the guarantees of DN, is to roll the DN dice and subtract from the attack dice. So you roll the 12d6 attack and the defender rolls his 3d6 of Negation, subtracting his STUN and BOD roll. If I were to use this approach, I'd still be inclined to have 6 DC's Negation simply negate any attack of 6 DC's or less (ie you're still completely immune, rather than a good roll by the attacker and a bad roll by the defender slipping some damage through).

Another approach, if you're OK with math on the fly, would be a proportionate reduction. You have a 12 DC attack, and the target has 3 DC's damage negation, so I will reduce the STUN and BOD by 25% for the Negation. This is then similar to Damage Reduction, except that it applies before defenses, but the end result should be similar to having the attacker roll less dice.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Damage Negation is great for representing invulnerability, and for this reason alone it should kept around.

I also like it at low levels to represent toughness; currently I am using it in a campaign for non-automaton undead (vampires and such). As Sean pointed out, it means more BODY damage gets through than with regular defenses, but it makes it hard to stun or knock out the monsters, so the heroes are more likely to kill than KO, which is just what I want. It also means that "mystic" weapons designed to kill undead are easy to make: just throw on a few levels of Reduced Negation. In my case it is easy to remember to use DN because in any given fight a fair fraction of the combatants have it. If I only had one hero that I had to keep track of that might be more problematic.

The other issue with DN is attacks with advantages, and that is more problematic. My recommendation is that you keep a chart handy to scale the attacks appropriately. If not, you can fudge it a bit; a +¼ advantage won't change the attack, a +½ drops it by a third, and a +1 by half. For low levels of DN it won't make that much difference.