Damage Negation vs. Other Defenses

[CanuckAmuck]

Maybe it's the scotch talking, or my still not being completely familiar with 6e, or why not both, but it occurs to me that -1DC of physical (for example) damage negation is, when it comes to soaking up 1d6 worth of STUN, effectively the same as 6 pts. of PD.  But the -1 DC of DN costs 5 pts. whereas the 6 pts of PD costs 20% more at 6 pts.

 

I'm sure I'm missing something, but on the extremely off chance that I'm not, this makes regular PD and ED noticeably less cost effective.  So apart from the need for rPD or rED, why buy PD/ED at all (assuming no campaign limitation on buying DR)?

[Ndreare]

Because it is more likely that the role will be 3.5 damage and you can consider it resistant. So far I haven't seen any game-breaking effect with damage negation except that it makes combat take longer as players have to think about what it's doing. It really models and invulnerabilities very well.

[Hyper-Man]

DN is really the new power on the block.  Combined with the all time low popularity of HERO/Champions it just hasn't had the game play testing that other constructs have.  The pricing is spot on - it's a mirror of Damage Class in STR/HA, Blast or KA.  GM's who use Active Point Caps of some kind usually count points spent on DN against Caps on Defenses.  It's a good thing to include in a combination of different defenses but it's not so good by itself since if it's the only significant or resistant defense a character has then any attack that exceeds the DN by way of raw dice or has the counter (the 2 point Reduced Negation option on Blast, HA and KA) will do BODY damage.

 

Here's a cost comparison that might illustrate better:

60    Standard Brick Defenses: Resistant Protection (20 PD/20 ED) - END=0

60    New Brick Defenses: Damage Negation (-6 DCs Physical, -6 DCs Energy) - END=0
    
60    Attack Powers: Multipower, 60-point reserve
6f    1)  Standard Blast: Blast 12d6 (60 Active Points) - END=6
6f    2)  DN Busting Blast: Blast 10d6, Reduced Negation (5) (60 Active Points) - END=6

 

Say you have a character with 10 normal PD & ED with either the Standard or New defenses listed above. 

The Standard Blast will do an average of ~12 Stun vs Standard and ~11 Stun vs. the New.

The DN Busting Blast will only do 5 Stun vs the Standard but will do ~20 Stun vs. the New (with even a slightly above average roll doing BODY).

 

re: Speed of use

 

The fastest way to handle DN is to just just cross off that many dice from an attack (with a STR/HA or Blast at least). If a GM want to keep it hidden just have the player(s) roll their full attack and secretly remove that # of dice from the roll by alternating between high and low dice up the total.

 

HM

[Christopher]

Maybe it's the scotch talking, or my still not being completely familiar with 6e, or why not both, but it occurs to me that -1DC of physical (for example) damage negation is, when it comes to soaking up 1d6 worth of STUN, effectively the same as 6 pts. of PD.  But the -1 DC of DN costs 5 pts. whereas the 6 pts of PD costs 20% more at 6 pts.

 

I'm sure I'm missing something, but on the extremely off chance that I'm not, this makes regular PD and ED noticeably less cost effective.  So apart from the need for rPD or rED, why buy PD/ED at all (assuming no campaign limitation on buying DR)?

Interestingly, the primary purpose of normal PD/ED is not to block the Stun damage. STUN is how you get knocked out, after all. How combats - in particular on the superheroic end - should be resolved. That is why "Takes no STUN" can be such a problematc power and has such a steep tradeoff.

The primary purpose is to Block BODY, so you do not get disabeled for much longer/loose the Character.

 

STUN recovery about once turn (2-4 actions on Heroic level; 5-7 on Superheroic). It fully recovers between combats and you could even take an extra Recovery. Loosing it is a fun and engaging mechanic.

BODY one every month. Outside of certain heroic games, you should never loose it to begin with.

 

And at stopping BODY, DN (and DR) fails utterly:

Against a 12 DC attack you only need about 12 PD to block an average normal damage roll and 24 PD to block any Body damage. Even if the enemy Haymakers and pushes that attack, the chances to take body damage are still slim.

DN would need 12 levels to block that body damage. And Haymaker would instantly get 4 average through.

[Surrealone]

BODY one every month. Outside of certain heroic games, you should never loose it to begin with.

What a boring assumption.  Loss of BODY is and can/should be a fun and engaging mechanic, as well -- especially at the superheroic level.  Look at Wolverine, Deadpool, etc. -- such characters would be far, far less interesting if they never lost BODY -- and they're at the superheroic level.

 

That's the only thing in your post with which I took issue -- and I couldn't let it pass -- because there's absolutely nothing wrong or bad or inappropriate about BODY damage being done in the game.

[Hugh Neilson]

I take no issue with the pricing, but have not seen it used much. As noted above, 5 points = 1 DC.

 

I think Damage Negation is an extremely useful ability for certain campaign styles. In the typical Supers game, everyone has enough PD and ED to block significant STUN, so a normal attack never does BOD. They typically have enough rDEF to be pretty secure against KA BOD. That covers golden to silver age, and a lot of bronze age, pretty well. But what if we want the bronze age stories like, say, the Thing fighting Champion (where, conscious and bleeding, he drags himself back into the ring, and ends up recovering in hospital). Or more Iron Age books where the Supers are invulnerable to conventional forces, but routinely kill one another with their Super Abilities?

 

ANSWER: Damage Negation. If you have 12 DC attacks and 20-25 defenses, no BOD gets through. An average hit does 17 - 22 STUN. If you have 12 DC attacks, 9 levels of Damage Negation and 3 rPD and rED, that typical attack now does 12d6 - 9 DN = 3d6, so averages 10.5 (7-8 STUN past defenses) and any above average hit punches at least one BOD through. In a Super vs Super battle, BOD will be done, and death will be a real possibility.

 

Want Combat Luck to allow some BOD to slip through? Build it with DN instead of defenses.

 

Like the current "no blood" model? Then leave DN out. But it's another tool in the toolbox to build any game you can imagine.

[Killer Shrike]

I wrote up a document on Damage Negation back when it was introduced. Here it is:

 

http://www.killershrike.com/GeneralHero/GeneralThoughtsOnDamageNegation.aspx

 

 

 

The main takeaway is that at lower damage numbers, DN is more efficient than normal PD but eventually normal PD out scales it. Versus killing damage, resistant defenses are overall the better (safer) bet. And generally speaking, relying only on DN is very risky but using it as part of a blended / hybrid mitigation strategy (i.e., have a mix of normal def, resistant def, and dn) is the better way to go.

 

A key thing that people (but not Hyper-Man!) often seem to forget to take into account when considering DN is the Reduced Negation Adder, which is a direct hoser and is priced at 2 pts / lvl vs 5 pts / lvl for DN. The efficaciousness of DN is directly impacted by the commonality of Reduced Negation attacks in the "meta" of the campaign. In grittier campaigns where power pools are not common and / or it is difficult to justify taking an attack with Reduced Negation, (and tangentially the number of dice of damage typically being thrown around is likely lower) a character with some amount of Damage Negation has an edge. In a more freewheeling setting such as most supers games where Multipowers are common, it is easy to justify adding a variant attack slot with Reduced Negation, and the number of dice thrown in the campaign in general will tend to be higher, Damage Negation is less advantageous. This is somewhat counter intuitive as Damage Negation at first blush seems more targeted at superheroic games.

 

 

 

On the subject of "invulnerability", DN is actually not very good at modeling that idea in my opinion, as characters that rely solely on DN tend to be very brittle. Similar to vehicles and DEF, the DN character will shrug damage under their threshold, but break very quickly against attacks that can bypass or overcome their threshold. This does not match my idea of "invulnerable". I find that a solid base of mitigation with Damage Reduction layered over it is better at modelling general "invulnerability" in actual play for the comic bookish form of "highly resistant to damage", and big chunks of hardened rDEF with an "Only vs...[something]" limitation are better at modeling "functionally unaffected by a specific sfx of damage" type of abilities for selective resistance. Absorption with the "as a Defense" advantage can also do good work here, particularly vs energy sfx where it models the typical effect of "fire guy is immune to fire damage and fire invigorates them" and of course esoteric power constructs can be bent towards this end such as wonky Desolid not really Desolid Only vs... builds and etc.

[Killer Shrike]

For my own part, I put DN to what seemed like good use in my HS6e campaign "Here There Be Monsters", an urban fantasy setting.   http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Concept.aspx

 

I used DN to model certain kinds of supernatural resistances for some (not all or even most) supernatural creatures, such as Vampires, Demons, and so on. This allowed me to use Reduced Negation on otherwise mundane weapons to model things such as being "sanctified" or "enchanted". Thus a gun firing sanctified bullets is effective vs such a supernatural creature who relies primarily on their DN to avoid mundane harm without having to make it have the same dice of effect as a tank canon.

 

For instance, the following iconics (starting level sample characters) have some interaction with this:

 

The Vampyrii Nikole http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Characters/Nikole%20Thrace.html has the following ability:

 

Vampyrii Resistance : Damage Negation (-5 DCs Physical, -5 DCs Mental) (50 Active Points); Damage-Based Endurance Cost (-1/2), Not vs Faith Damage, Or UV Based Damage (-1/2) 

 

Jimmy Chen http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Characters/Jimmy%20Chen.html has the following consecrated pistol:

 

Bowen Redhawk Revolver, Consecrated : Killing Attack - Ranged 2d6 (Reduced Negation (5)) (40 Active Points); STR Minimum 15 (STR Min. Cannot Add/Subtract Damage; -1 1/4), OAF (-1), Real Weapon (-1/4), Beam (-1/4), 8 clips of 5 Charges (-0) 

 

The Zoroastrian holy warrior Forosati http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Characters/Forosati%20Nik.html  has the following ability applied to her base strength which allows her to hurt many forms of supernaturals with her barehands and martial arts:

 

Blessed Strikes : +5 STR (Reduced Negation (4)), Variable Advantage (+1/4 Advantages; Limited Group of Advantages (Affects Desolid (Mystical), Armor Piercing, 1/2 Endurance, Autofire x3); +1/2) (Modifiers affect Base Characteristic) 

 

And the werewolf Beau Givens  http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Characters/Beau%20Givens.html   has the following ability in his wereform http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Characters/Beau%20Givens%20(Were).html 

 

Claws :  Killing Attack - Hand-To-Hand 1d6 (2 1/2d6 w/STR) (Reduced Negation (3)) (21 Active Points); Restrainable (-1/2)

 

 

The following NPC's also have similar abilities; Zazabu demons http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Characters/GMsVault/VenusMalefica/Zazabu%20Daemons.html have the following power:

 

Daemonic Resistance :  Damage Negation (-4 DCs Physical, -4 DCs Energy)

 

The witch Verity Blake  http://www.killershrike.com/HereThereBeMonsters/Characters/GMsVault/VenusMalefica/Verity%20Blake.html  has the following ability:

 

Inviolate Form : Damage Negation (-6 DCs Physical) (30 Active Points); Perceivable (Supernatural Awareness; -1/4) 

 

...and so on.

 

 

It worked pretty well in practice.

[Tasha]

It's also very useful in Supers games where Normal Weapons don't have much of an effect on Supers. Just assume that all supers come with 6 levels of Damage Negation only vs "Normal Weapons" as a freebie. Then most normal firearms won't harm supers at all. Big weapons like .50 MG's and Tank rounds start to do damage that could effect a super. Super Agent weapons are all assumed to have Reduced Negation on their attacks.

BTW When I ran Necessary Evil, the Aliens had technology that made Superpowers ineffective vs the Aliens. I assumed the aliens had 12 levels of Damage Negation. The PC's later got bracelets that had Reduced Negation on them. So they could be effective vs the Aliens.

It's a very useful ability. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

when it comes to soaking up 1d6 worth of STUN, effectively the same as 6 pts. of PD.  But the -1 DC of DN costs 5 pts. whereas the 6 pts of PD costs 20% more at 6 pts.

 

Its also resistant, so the cost is higher for rPD.  But because its a random amount.  It can absorb up to 6 but most likely will be 3.5, so you get a discount on the price.  I think Damage Negation was an unnecessary complication and addition nobody was asking for, but its somewhat useful in some build ideas.

[Christopher]

What a boring assumption.  Loss of BODY is and can/should be a fun and engaging mechanic, as well -- especially at the superheroic level.  Look at Wolverine, Deadpool, etc. -- such characters would be far, far less interesting if they never lost BODY -- and they're at the superheroic level.

 

That's the only thing in your post with which I took issue -- and I couldn't let it pass -- because there's absolutely nothing wrong or bad or inappropriate about BODY damage being done in the game.

While it does not fully match there, it still is close enough. I think the big issues here is realising that the bulk of the "healing factor" simply turns body into stun or outright negates the damage.

My Wolverine/Deadpool would look like this:

Increased PD/ED. Maybe limited to not stop stun damage (still hurts).

Minimal regeneration for the cases that some body goes through.

[eepjr24]

Increased PD/ED. Maybe limited to not stop stun damage (still hurts).

Minimal regeneration for the cases that some body goes through.

If by "minimal regeneration" you mean returning to full body after having his corpse cooked in ~1200 degree fire for hours... yeah, minimal should be fine. Or regrowing lost limbs. Or healing chopped off limbs by holding them in place for a couple minutes.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah for super high regen guys, in a Hero build its defenses that have the special effect "regeneration" for most cases.  They just regen so fast the damage is negligible or ignored.

[Hyper-Man]

It's worth noting that Damage Negation is different from all other personal defenses in that it also effectively provides Knockback Resistance because its effect happens before Knockback is determined.

 

HM

[Christopher R Taylor]

Pretty sure Damage Reduction also does that, but I'm not absolutely certain.

[Hyper-Man]

It's unique to Damage Negation.

 

from 6e1 page 183:

USING DAMAGE NEGATION
A character applies his Damage Negation to an incoming attack before applying his other defenses. Before the attacker makes the Effect Roll for his attack, he reduces it to account for the Damage Negation. (See the Damage Class table on 6E2 97 for an easy reference for the effects of removing DCs from attacks, depending on their base cost and/or Advantages.) The effect of the attack is then rolled normally and the character applies his regular defenses, Damage Reduction, and any other defensive abilities. Calculate the Knockback (if applicable) from the damage the attacker actually rolls, not from the DCs of the attack before Subtraction.

 

HM

[Killer Shrike]

Yeah, and AP and Penetrating and other secondary effects attached to the dice themselves. That's what I mean by "...secondary benefits of effect cancellation."

[Lucius]

Maybe it's the scotch talking, or my still not being completely familiar with 6e, or why not both, but it occurs to me that -1DC of physical (for example) damage negation is, when it comes to soaking up 1d6 worth of STUN, effectively the same as 6 pts. of PD.  But the -1 DC of DN costs 5 pts. whereas the 6 pts of PD costs 20% more at 6 pts.

 

I'm sure I'm missing something, but on the extremely off chance that I'm not, this makes regular PD and ED noticeably less cost effective.  So apart from the need for rPD or rED, why buy PD/ED at all (assuming no campaign limitation on buying DR)?

 

Yep. What you're missing is that -1d6 of Damage Negation IS NOT "effectively the same as 6 pts of PD."

 

If it were the case that every single die of Normal Damage rolled came up a 6, THEN your statement would be the case. But that die could come up with any number from 1 to 6. It would be more accurate to say that the Damage Negation is "effectively the same as from 1 to 6 pts of PD, depending on what the die of damage it blocks would have rolled."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that on average it's effectively the same as 3.5 PD.

[Christopher]

If by "minimal regeneration" you mean returning to full body after having his corpse cooked in ~1200 degree fire for hours... yeah, minimal should be fine. Or regrowing lost limbs. Or healing chopped off limbs by holding them in place for a couple minutes.

He only was killed that hard, because he had the regeneration to come back from it. Do the same to Cyclopse or 99% of all other Mutants and they just stay dead, so it was never done to them unless it was about them being killed for good.

Wierdly enough, Wolverines powers require him to get hurt badly every fight. "I am the best at what I do" does not really fit, unless you asume he means "fighting purely offensively because my superhuman defenses will take care of any damage".

 

Also are we certain that "having his corpse cooked in 1200 degree fire for hours" is not just the special effect to add more STUN to the STUN monitor, moving him lower on the Recover chart?

There actually cases where his healing factor was "canceled out" due to excessive Superhuman source damage. And you could still drown or starve him, unless his healing factor somehow can draw energy from some external other soruce (circumventing Conservation of Energy):

http://www.thegeektwins.com/2012/10/8-sure-fire-ways-to-kill-wolverine.html#.V9qiLDWWGMY

[Killer Shrike]

Yep. What you're missing is that -1d6 of Damage Negation IS NOT "effectively the same as 6 pts of PD."

 

If it were the case that every single die of Normal Damage rolled came up a 6, THEN your statement would be the case. But that die could come up with any number from 1 to 6. It would be more accurate to say that the Damage Negation is "effectively the same as from 1 to 6 pts of PD, depending on what the die of damage it blocks would have rolled."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that on average it's effectively the same as 3.5 PD.

 

Yes, and that is why probability and averages are important when doing analysis.

 

Also why the difference between 3d6, 4dF, and 1d6-1d6 are statistically relevant, to drag other recent quibbling over dice into memory. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Wierdly enough, Wolverines powers require him to get hurt badly every fight. "I am the best at what I do" does not really fit, unless you asume he means "fighting purely offensively because my superhuman defenses will take care of any damage".

 

I've always assumed his martial arts over time just became pure offense without bothering with any defense at all.  I doubt he feels a lot of pain because he heals so rapidly, and he is almost indestructable.  So he plows in face first and just rips stuff up, which is a very effective way of fighting, if you don't mind dying yourself.

[Surrealone]

I've always assumed his martial arts over time just became pure offense without bothering with any defense at all.  I doubt he feels a lot of pain because he heals so rapidly, and he is almost indestructable.  So he plows in face first and just rips stuff up, which is a very effective way of fighting, if you don't mind dying yourself.

Me, too.  But people here have already alluded to the fact that they would use something other than a high rate of Regeneration coupled with high CON and high STUN when modeling Wolverine and/or Deadpool -- and label it as a regenerative special effect.  I wouldn't, as this is something I categorically consider lazy building technique that is dependent on handwaving the SFX of one power as representative of the actual effects of another power.

[Christopher R Taylor]

There's nothing wrong with using a different build.  Its just in Hero you reason from effect to build, not concept to exact copy.  The special effect of him not being hurt very badly is regeneration; you can build that many ways, but the most direct and obvious to me -- the one that best simulates what's been depicted in the comics and movies -- is defenses, because they have the effect that's shown.  

 

You can build him differently than I.  But I can't even begin to conceive of why someone is being "lazy" for building it differently.  This is so easy online; to portray someone you disagree with not just as different, or even incorrect, but as something terrible and insulting.  Its not good enough to disagree, so often online we have to abuse and attack.  How's that help anyone?

[Ndreare]

There's nothing wrong with using a different build. Its just in Hero you reason from effect to build, not concept to exact copy. The special effect of him not being hurt very badly is regeneration; you can build that many ways, but the most direct and obvious to me -- the one that best simulates what's been depicted in the comics and movies -- is defenses, because they have the effect that's shown.

 

You can build him differently than I. But I can't even begin to conceive of why someone is being "lazy" for building it differently. This is so easy online; to portray someone you disagree with not just as different, or even incorrect, but as something terrible and insulting. Its not good enough to disagree, so often online we have to abuse and attack. How's that help anyone?

I agree completely.

For my own regenerating characters I normally have something like the following (in a 75 AP game).

 

+15rPD 15rED - Instant Regeneration

+20 Recovery - Healing Factor

1 Body Regeneration from death and limbs - Regeneration

 

Combined these effects make for a great healing/recovery based character.

[Surrealone]

You can build him differently than I.  But I can't even begin to conceive of why someone is being "lazy" for building it differently.  This is so easy online; to portray someone you disagree with not just as different, or even incorrect, but as something terrible and insulting.  Its not good enough to disagree, so often online we have to abuse and attack.  How's that help anyone?

Using a power that avoids damage to model Wolverine (who soaks the damage and regenerates) means you don't actually go through the motions/bookwork of computing the damage, subtracting it, then recovering it like you do with actual Regeneration (which, I remind you, is the power originally provided to model the rapid and automatic recovery of characteristics). 

 

i.e. A lot of the actual 'work' entailed with regeneration as an effect has been skipped/avoided.  I see skipping the very work that demonstrates Regeneration (i.e. actual loss of stats then rapid recovery thereof) as lazy and poor modeling of the effect -- because the bookwork that represents the regenerative effect was just handwaved away even though a more accurate representation (and a power dedicated to it) was clearly present/available.

 

Given that work was intentionally avoided by the builder when a more direct Power (which entailed such work) was present, 'lazy' was an appropriate word choice, since its very definition entails an unwillingness to work or expend energy.  (This is exactly the case when someone handwaves off the aforementioned bookwork in favour of a power that doesn't require it.)

 

​Example:

I could see using Damage Reduction to model regenerative BODY effects (i.e. SFX being that it's simply healed back quickly) -if- (and only if) there wasn't already a more appropriate power (Regeneration) to do so.  Damage Reduction doesn't actually have the character soak the damage and recover it, while Regeneration does.  Since soaking BODY damage and then recovering it quickly is what you're trying to model, why wouldn't you use the Power specifically designed for that???  Not quick enough for you?  Well, all powers have their limits -- buy more Regeneration at a rate you desire.  Can't afford it? Well, maybe there's a reason it's so expensive -- why are you using another power to dodge the cost?

 

​Since this has nothing to do with Damage Negation and I don't want to take this thread down a tangent any more than we already have (sorry folks, not intended!), I suggest we continue in private messages should you like to do so.