Jump to content

Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense


Tywyll

Recommended Posts

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

The "does body" advantage can be added to lots of otherwise inoffensive powers if the GM approves.

 

You also have to worry about Killing attacks bought "Based on Ego Combat Value" and as stated earlier, lots of AVLD killing attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

This brings up an interesting question. If a character with 10 Power Defense, none of it Resistant, is hit with an AVLD (vs Power Defense) Killing Attack, does the STUN from the Killing Attack ignore his Power Defense?

 

Without the Does BODY advantage, it won't obviously won't do any BODY, but what makes me wonder about the STUN is the fact that a character with, for example, no Resistant ED gets no defense at all against the STUN of a energy-based RKA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

Hello,

 

Completely true. KAs are resisted by resistant defense, and EGO based KAs are resisted by resistant EGO def (if the owner choose so). The same way an AVLD (flash def) RKA would be resisted by resistant Flash def, and even without the does body advantage, if NO resistant defense is present, there will be no defense for STUN either. This is at least how I understood (and am using) it.

 

regards,

 

Kloster

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

That' date=' is something I am not sure about: whether it is legal to buy a KA of any kind without Does Body. Mechanically, its the equivalent of buying EB, AVLD ( Resistant Defense ). . . unless you are doing it to shamelessly exploit the Stun Lottery.[/quote']

 

A sterling point! I think it probably is legal, but in my games it would have three STOP signs and at least two OH NO YOU DON'Ts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

A sterling point! I think it probably is legal' date=' but in my games it would have three STOP signs and at least two OH NO YOU DON'Ts.[/quote']

 

Under the official rules, attacks bought with BoECV and/or AVLD no longer do BODY and must therefore purchase Does BODY in order to do so.

 

In My Opinion, however, the STUN dealt by such attacks still ignores non-Resistant Defenses.

 

It is also my opinion that the base level of AVLD is too expensive for what it grants. I have a long standing house rule changing its value to +1 for No BODY or +2 for Does BODY, and it has worked well.

 

How likely are you to run into a "Killing" MD/PowD/FD attack? They're not impossible to justify; I've seen a few PC submissions with them. This is how Psylocke's Psychic Dagger (late 80's early 90's version) works, IMO -- the people it doesn't phase happen to have Resistant MD or belong to a different class of mind. I've also seen it used for Flash Defense-Smell to represent a type of nerve gas.

 

Now, if you don't mind a little rule twisting, you could create Killing versions of Flash etc by simply adopting the 3 DC = 1d6 mechanic; I toyed with a Flash that worked this way once, that is 15pts bought 1d6 and dealt BODY (and, for those rare occassions when it matters, used a Stun Mod for the STUN score*). In a way it worked better, since it's the BODY score that matters anyway. In a way it didn't, since it lead to wider swings in the chance score.

 

 

*As far as I know there are no times under the usual rules where the STUN score of a Flash matters -- but I have a standing "Physical Disadvantage" under which characters take STUN from Flashes. It works better than Susceptibility for characters that are vulnerable to sensory attacks. One of the PC's in my current campaign has this for light-based Flashes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

A sterling point! I think it probably is legal' date=' but in my games it would have three STOP signs and at least two OH NO YOU DON'Ts.[/quote']

Absolutely right. Just because the book says a rule construction is "legal" does not mean that a power designed to circumvent or exploit game mechanics is at all justifiable.

 

Our group has a rule of thumb which states that SFX trumps rule mechanics. This does not mean that we ignore the rules, but that a power concept must be descriptive and appropriate to a character before it can be used. This metarule requires a lot more depth of character concept than "he's a Brick" but it sure has made for a lot more fun in game play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

It is also my opinion that the base level of AVLD is too expensive for what it grants. I have a long standing house rule changing its value to +1 for No BODY or +2 for Does BODY' date=' and it has worked well.[/quote']

 

The only reason I can see is that NND +1 could use Flash Def or Pow Def. However, I don't see a major problem simply stating that NND's should be against non-defense powers, and attacks defended by defenses (like Flash Defense) should take AVLD instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

The only reason I can see is that NND +1 could use Flash Def or Pow Def. However' date=' I don't see a major problem simply stating that NND's should be against non-defense powers, and attacks defended by defenses (like Flash Defense) should take AVLD instead.[/quote']

 

Alternatively, NNDs vs Mental/Power/Flash Defense, unless they require a specific type of such, might be defined as falling under the +1/2 variant of NND.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Resistant Power/Flash/Mental Defense

 

Under the official rules, attacks bought with BoECV and/or AVLD no longer do BODY and must therefore purchase Does BODY in order to do so.

 

In My Opinion, however, the STUN dealt by such attacks still ignores non-Resistant Defenses.

 

It is also my opinion that the base level of AVLD is too expensive for what it grants. I have a long standing house rule changing its value to +1 for No BODY or +2 for Does BODY, and it has worked well.

 

How likely are you to run into a "Killing" MD/PowD/FD attack? They're not impossible to justify; I've seen a few PC submissions with them. This is how Psylocke's Psychic Dagger (late 80's early 90's version) works, IMO -- the people it doesn't phase happen to have Resistant MD or belong to a different class of mind. I've also seen it used for Flash Defense-Smell to represent a type of nerve gas.

 

Now, if you don't mind a little rule twisting, you could create Killing versions of Flash etc by simply adopting the 3 DC = 1d6 mechanic; I toyed with a Flash that worked this way once, that is 15pts bought 1d6 and dealt BODY (and, for those rare occassions when it matters, used a Stun Mod for the STUN score*). In a way it worked better, since it's the BODY score that matters anyway. In a way it didn't, since it lead to wider swings in the chance score.

 

 

*As far as I know there are no times under the usual rules where the STUN score of a Flash matters -- but I have a standing "Physical Disadvantage" under which characters take STUN from Flashes. It works better than Susceptibility for characters that are vulnerable to sensory attacks. One of the PC's in my current campaign has this for light-based Flashes.

 

 

Hello,

 

Completely true: You HAVE to buy 'does body' if you want to be able to do it.

It also legal not to do it (and akind, albeit different of AVLD vs resistant def).

But, as always, this HAS to be justified by concept, and the GM has the right to say NO.

I agree that not using Does body is (or more properly seems) a way to use the STUN lottery. I'm using it on a HKA, with does Body and a reduced STUN multiplier. It's a (very visible) psychic sword akind to the psy dagger used by Psylocke (in Mind Games, IIRC).

 

Regards,

 

Kloster

 

P.S. It's different because for BOECV RKA's, if there is a single point of resistant def, the whole def applies to STUN (as for regular RKAs). For AVLD (resistant def) EB, only the resistant part is applied both to STUN and BODY.

 

If those advantages are applied to HKA, not RKA, another difference also comes to mind: the difference of treatment about STR (Prorating advantages or not), and MA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...