commonality of unusual defenses

[Batman]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Tangent: I don't see the appeal of wiping out your players with agents; this is a superhero story. If ordinary agents are more powerful and cost effective than the heroes' date=' why have supers at all? Make the heroes lives tough, sure, but ordinary human Agents (in a standard campaign) with an endless list of defenses, 10+ OCVs and 12d6+ attacks just raise the question of why anyone cares what the PCs are doing.[/quote']

 

Normal [Tee Hee...I couldn't resist]: I think it'd be interesting to run a campaign that asks the question: why supers? A campaign where the supposedly all-powerful superheroes are almost brought down with humans with big toys is definitely humiliating, and full of interesting ways to take things. For instance, it looks like the animated Justice League series is going to go this way...true, the world governments are training their own supers, but take a look at Lex's power disruptor at the episode where the alternate-dimension JL'ers invade the Earth. If hardware like THAT got out into the black market, it could easily spell the end of supers as we know it.

 

This probably isn't appropriate for most people, but I definitely DO see possibilities with this in an Iron Age campaign.

[Kirby]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Interesting thread. When I started, I only worried about 'special' defenses after it affected me more than once in combat. The GM made us explain how we received the power. At least with flash defense (which I kept getting hit with) I was able to explain it as shade lenses in my mask.

 

After a while, when I started up new characters, especially bricks, I would try to give 5 points in mental, flash, and power defenses as well as lack of weakness. For some, I tried hardened defenses as well. The reason I did this was because our team(s) tended to always be attacked by people with these, except for those w/Find Weakness, but when they came around, they generally had 17- or better for finding, which means they usually found it twice, at least.

 

Some of my previous GMs tended to go overboard on NPC boons while simultaneously restricting the players. One case involved my PC who had a 1d6 HKA Armor Piercing w/Find Weakness of 11-. The GM said I wasn't allowed this because it was unbalanced and exploited different defenses. I said okay and altered it, changing the FW to another attack. When my FW was raised to 13-, he said I wasn't allowed to upgrade any more because that would be unfair. I said okay. Later on, it was discovered an NPC team member (the GM ran two) had a 3d6 AP HKA w/FW of 16-. I was very ticked off at this. Another player (team leader, and another GM) made his character with outlandish abilities that were rarely questioned. He was a Dark Champions clone of Captain America, his shield had a +1 variable advantage. When my character came in with the FW attack, his character was allowed to purchase defense against it. (He had designed his character specifically to be able to defend against all his teammates, along with his special shield.) When I raised my FW to 13-, I overheard him telling the GM he wanted to raise his lack of weakness from 5 to 10. The GM 'restricted' him to 6, which was annoying, because I wasn't allowed to raise mine past 5.

 

The other GM (who had the Cpt. America clone) in his campaign modified some of the VIPER 5-man teams into a specialized (as in "designed to take the city's hero group down") 6-man teams and gave them "invisibility belts" that gave them complete -no fringe- invisibility to the entire sight & sound groups. (None of us were ever allowed invisibility, by the way.) The VIPER teams never had weapons that did less than 8d6 EB, or 3d6 RKA. With one exception, we were never attacked by VIPER squads alone. Usually there would be a squad or two attacking us along with one supervillain for every PC present. The villains usually were built on more points as well. He couldn't understand why we were cynical about being attacked by them.

 

As for myself, I never upgraded VIPER when I used them. My thought was that it should take a 5 team to bring down one hero and weaken another. As a subtle effort (apparently, too subtle) to show this, I had an entire VIPER nest attack the PC team when they were visiting an NPC team (the Protectors). Even though I forgot to use 1/3 of the nest in combat (the heavy weapons at that), the PCs did quite well, though they eventually had to abandon the field (the Protectors' HQ).

 

I did create a Genocide experimental team of three people. Each had Normal Characteristic Maximums, 3-4 speed and no special defenses. Their one advantage was have 10-12d6 weapons with about five skill levels. They only attacked the heroes when it was three against one. Their funnest scenario was their introduction one when they were going after the feline mentalist. (The player never thought it necessary to raise her ECV past 7, and she had her reasons.) She had a 4d6 Ego attack and either she would miss them (with their 4 ECV) or when she hit, she would roll 10-12 stun. And she never attacked the same one twice in a row, either. That was a funny encounter, because they only had from 20-30 stun. (This is the same player, who, when attacking a generic normal (stats of 10, stun of 20) bad guy hit him for 6 stun TWICE before she rolled her k.o. attack of 10 stun.

[Kirby]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

One other thing. After I left the above group, I don't let any PC have both hardened defenses and lack of weakness; it's one or the other. I also tend to create a villain that can exploit a hero's (or the team's) weaknesses *after* I create a villain that the hero's/oes' special attacks are the villain's Achilles' heel.

 

Though, sometimes this doesn't go to well. I created a team called "The Achilles' Heel and each member had a special attack or FX that was the bane of one PC (on a team of 6) with the exception of the mage. ALL members of the team took 2x STUN & BODY from magic attacks along with 2x EFFECT from Magical flashes, NNDs, knockbacks, etc. Even when I explained to the mage that his attacks seemed to be doing much more damage than they should -including doing about 12 inches knockback on an 8 die attack- (and he knocked out two villains in the fight), he opted to be the 'group evacuator' and taken k.o.'d heroes out of combat. No one ever realized this. Oh well.

[Agent X]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Interesting thread. When I started, I only worried about 'special' defenses after it affected me more than once in combat. The GM made us explain how we received the power. At least with flash defense (which I kept getting hit with) I was able to explain it as shade lenses in my mask.

 

After a while, when I started up new characters, especially bricks, I would try to give 5 points in mental, flash, and power defenses as well as lack of weakness. For some, I tried hardened defenses as well. The reason I did this was because our team(s) tended to always be attacked by people with these, except for those w/Find Weakness, but when they came around, they generally had 17- or better for finding, which means they usually found it twice, at least.

 

Some of my previous GMs tended to go overboard on NPC boons while simultaneously restricting the players. One case involved my PC who had a 1d6 HKA Armor Piercing w/Find Weakness of 11-. The GM said I wasn't allowed this because it was unbalanced and exploited different defenses. I said okay and altered it, changing the FW to another attack. When my FW was raised to 13-, he said I wasn't allowed to upgrade any more because that would be unfair. I said okay. Later on, it was discovered an NPC team member (the GM ran two) had a 3d6 AP HKA w/FW of 16-. I was very ticked off at this. Another player (team leader, and another GM) made his character with outlandish abilities that were rarely questioned. He was a Dark Champions clone of Captain America, his shield had a +1 variable advantage. When my character came in with the FW attack, his character was allowed to purchase defense against it. (He had designed his character specifically to be able to defend against all his teammates, along with his special shield.) When I raised my FW to 13-, I overheard him telling the GM he wanted to raise his lack of weakness from 5 to 10. The GM 'restricted' him to 6, which was annoying, because I wasn't allowed to raise mine past 5.

 

The other GM (who had the Cpt. America clone) in his campaign modified some of the VIPER 5-man teams into a specialized (as in "designed to take the city's hero group down") 6-man teams and gave them "invisibility belts" that gave them complete -no fringe- invisibility to the entire sight & sound groups. (None of us were ever allowed invisibility, by the way.) The VIPER teams never had weapons that did less than 8d6 EB, or 3d6 RKA. With one exception, we were never attacked by VIPER squads alone. Usually there would be a squad or two attacking us along with one supervillain for every PC present. The villains usually were built on more points as well. He couldn't understand why we were cynical about being attacked by them.

 

As for myself, I never upgraded VIPER when I used them. My thought was that it should take a 5 team to bring down one hero and weaken another. As a subtle effort (apparently, too subtle) to show this, I had an entire VIPER nest attack the PC team when they were visiting an NPC team (the Protectors). Even though I forgot to use 1/3 of the nest in combat (the heavy weapons at that), the PCs did quite well, though they eventually had to abandon the field (the Protectors' HQ).

 

I did create a Genocide experimental team of three people. Each had Normal Characteristic Maximums, 3-4 speed and no special defenses. Their one advantage was have 10-12d6 weapons with about five skill levels. They only attacked the heroes when it was three against one. Their funnest scenario was their introduction one when they were going after the feline mentalist. (The player never thought it necessary to raise her ECV past 7, and she had her reasons.) She had a 4d6 Ego attack and either she would miss them (with their 4 ECV) or when she hit, she would roll 10-12 stun. And she never attacked the same one twice in a row, either. That was a funny encounter, because they only had from 20-30 stun. (This is the same player, who, when attacking a generic normal (stats of 10, stun of 20) bad guy hit him for 6 stun TWICE before she rolled her k.o. attack of 10 stun.

Sounds like you had an awful GM. I would have skated pretty quickly.

[Agent X]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

One other thing. After I left the above group' date=' I don't let any PC have both hardened defenses and lack of weakness; it's one or the other...[/quote'] That's sort of inflexible. Hard and fast rules like this are an indication that you don't like certain character concepts. This kind of talk turns me off of playing games with GMs who make statements like this.

 

Though' date=' sometimes this doesn't go to well. I created a team called "The Achilles' Heel and each member had a special attack or FX that was the bane of one PC (on a team of 6) with the exception of the mage... [/quote'] This doesn't sound like fun to play in to me.

 

I don't think the game is about point and counterpoint. You're the GM. If somebody is tossing points into hardened defenses and lack of weakness, there is a natural trade-off somewhere. There's no need to be this restrictive. As for designing villains, many players don't enjoy riddles that are contrived purely around their flaws. Once you've done that, there is a trust issue and players aren't going to stick their neck out and follow subtle hints. They are going to retreat and look at each other and frustratedly curse the experience.

[Kirby]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Sounds like you had an awful GM. I would have skated pretty quickly.

Well, this was Champions/Dark Champions related. We rotated through playing over a dozen games through five years, so it was more of a "I'll suck it up for now," kind of thing. For the GM of the Find Weakness, that was my 2nd of three PCs in the game. For the GM of the VIPER, we didn't always fight VIPER (maybe 1/4 to 1/6 of the time) and the other plots were good, some very decent and well-thought out.

 

Like all people, they had their failings, but these were just so blatantly obvious and they wouldn't acknowledge them.

[Metaphysician]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Generally, Exotic Defenses (for lack of a better term) tend to flop out right after a group gets completely waylayed by them, in my experience. One game I recall vividly, the entire group gets Area of Effect sight-flashed by a surprise move ... suddenly, the local optometrist had a run on 'polarizing contact lenses'. We ran into someone who had a huge AE END Drain, which up and wrecked us ... lots of Power Defense woven into costumes. Just about everybody fears Mentalists (Probably more than is deserved), so everybody buys Mental Defense.

 

I'm torn on it. Looking at most superhero teams, most people don't have Flash Defense, Power Defense is almost nonexistant (though Mental Defense is probably fairly common). On the other hand, you kind of wonder WHY some of these teams haven't invested in something like that ... shielded costumes or special contact lenses, because when stuff like that DOES hit them, it's usually devastating.

 

On the other hand, to expect to completely nullify a 6d6 Drain, you need to drop 21 points (active points, at least) on Power Defense. 12 points for a 12d6 Flash. 19 (assuming a 10 EGO) Mental Def for a 6d6 Ego Attack. That's a lot of XP. If someone buys the minimum level (5pts), they're just getting a minor buffer against it; someone whose primary 'schtick' is a Flash, Adjustment Power, or Mental Powers is going to be hampered, but not completely hamstrung.

 

As far as the non-damaging Mental powers go, I think most people don't use them 'properly' (a subjective term at best). Using Mind Control and Mental Illusions takes more finesse than many players and GMs I've seen apply ... you're not using a hammer, you're using a scalpel. You don't Mind Control the PC into attacking his teammates ... you Mind Control him into carrying innocent bystanders to safety, which is MUCH easier.

 

There's also my personal evil favorite: Mental Illusion of them victim winning the battle after a long, hard fight. . . when in fact, he is simply standing their in his own little world. After all, don't all combatants *want* to win??

 

*eg*

[Metaphysician]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

A counter-example in comics is the Bat-Family' date=' who all share a common equipment load on top of their own unique preferences in utility belts or harnesses -- and in addition to the headset radios, bulletproof spandex, etc., one of those common loads is Sight Group Flash Defense in their Nightvision gear. Hearing Group Flash Defense earplugs are also common with those who like to use Sonic AVLDs, which is a lot of them.[/quote']

 

Don't forget Life Support: Self-Contained Breathing, for when the gas comes out. I think they also have their nightvision gear tuned to see through their own smoke screens, and the costumes are insulated against electricity.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

One other thing. After I left the above group' date=' I don't let any PC have both hardened defenses and lack of weakness; it's one or the other.[/quote']

 

Don't let your experience with bad GMs give you a knee-jerk reaction like that. Having a general principle in mind (e.g., generally speaking, a character should not be invulnerable) is a good thing. It is rarely wise to enact blanket bans on things rather than taking into the account the rest of the character, their background, and (this often goes overlooked) the player. Such bans are, in fact, a hallmark of bad GMs.

 

I also tend to create a villain that can exploit a hero's (or the team's) weaknesses *after* I create a villain that the hero's/oes' special attacks are the villain's Achilles' heel.

 

That sounds like a good technique. I think I'll try that next time I run.

 

Even when I explained to the mage that his attacks seemed to be doing much more damage than they should ... he opted to be the 'group evacuator' and taken k.o.'d heroes out of combat. No one ever realized this. Oh well.

 

Heh. Well, that can happen.

[Kristopher]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

There's also my personal evil favorite: Mental Illusion of them victim winning the battle after a long, hard fight. . . when in fact, he is simply standing their in his own little world. After all, don't all combatants *want* to win??

 

*eg*

 

Sure. And I'll use a 1d6+1 RKA, AVLD vs Power Defense, +3 Stun Multiplier.

 

After all, don't most combatants lack Resistant Power Defense?

 

[Kirby]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

That's sort of inflexible. Hard and fast rules like this are an indication that you don't like certain character concepts. This kind of talk turns me off of playing games with GMs who make statements like this.

Yes, it is; however, like the above post mentioned, this had become a habit because the GMs were creating villains that covered every defense we thought up. Since I've done this, I haven't had a complaint. I'll explain why to them and they agree with it. I also don't let PCs stock up on various defenses (such as the 'exotic ones') for their beginning characters nor do I let two PCs have the same "unique feature" about them. I don't allow two to start off with 15 points of wealth, nor two to be "the best X-type character." I like to find out where they want to shine and make sure the others don't step on them or overlap them.

 

 

I don't think the game is about point and counterpoint.

I don't either. But it is quite genre to have one villain team that exploits the hero team's weaknesses until the heroes figure out the secret. (Such an example of when the Justice League was 'beat' by Martians disguised as peaceful alien supers where Batman figured out their fear of fire.

 

 

There's no need to be this restrictive. As for designing villains' date=' many players don't enjoy riddles that are contrived purely around their flaws. Once you've done that, there is a trust issue and players aren't going to stick their neck out and follow subtle hints. They are going to retreat and look at each other and frustratedly curse the experience.[/quote']

In your opinion. Luckily, your views don't trump this previous group's preferences. We did enjoy subtle clues and mysteries. We didn't generally didn't enjoy straight forward scenarios, unless the previous adventure was taxing on us, or the "straight forward" scenario was but a small scene prior to the real story being told.

 

We've had an entire adventure consisting fo about 6 or so 6-8 hour sessions where we were trying to protect a normal female from a villain team. It turned out that the female we were trying to protect was actually their leader, and the wild goose chase we were on was actually a cover-up designed for her to succeed at something. Instead of retreating into turtle shells, we applauded the GM for his well-thought-out game. (This is the same GM who had the 6-man invisible VIPER team squads.)

 

Simply because it doesn't suit *your* tastes or your group's tastes, doesn't mean it can't suit my group's enjoyment.

[Kirby]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Don't let your experience with bad GMs give you a knee-jerk reaction like that. Having a general principle in mind (e.g.' date=' generally speaking, a character should not be invulnerable) is a good thing. It is rarely wise to enact blanket bans on things rather than taking into the account the rest of the character, their background, and (this often goes overlooked) the player. Such bans are, in fact, a hallmark of bad GMs.[/quote']

My personal preference is that the two combined would ruin a feel. I can see a martial artist having LoW, but not Hardened defenses, while I can see an energy projector having hardened defenses, but not LoW; I can see bricks having either or, but I prefer them to start out with only one. I would possibly make an exception for someone who wants to be a Juggernaut clone, but I'd have to see them write up a background first, possibly.

 

I did create a brick called the "cockroach" once. His specialty was that he had 2x hardened defenses, 10 points in LoW, PowD, FlashD, he had 75% Dmg Red/Resit for both PD & ED, and I *think* regeneration. His drawback was that he only had 30 STR (no martial arts). My concept was that he would take the licking, but he could generally only beat up the normals, rescue comrades & innocents and he was learning technology skills (he had 8- rolls on LOTS of skills).

 

That sounds like a good technique. I think I'll try that next time I run.

Thank you.

 

 

Heh. Well' date=' that can happen. [/quote']

Yeah. Since the players (except for the mage) never switched who they were attacking during the fight (which blew my mind considering they were being targetted for their weaknesses -and the villains admitted to being hired to eliminate the PCs), I never brought them back into the game. I had intended to try and bring them back, but kept putting them on the backburner for other plots.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

My personal preference is that the two combined would ruin a feel. I can see a martial artist having LoW...

 

Take a moment and see what you are doing: you are limiting the players to the types of characters you would create. Micromanaging the other players' characters is not good. It's a step on the road to Bad GMing.

 

(I know you won't listen to me now. But maybe down the road the light will come on.)

 

edit:

 

I won't pursue this subtopic on this thread any further. I am actually interested in the thread's nominal topic.

[Kristopher]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Well, sometimes you almost have to...some players are new to the system and insufficiently familar with the genre. So, you ask them what kind of character they want, and get a lot of detail, and build it it with them, explaining as you go.

 

Now, as for Hardened Defenses and Lack of Weakness, it's often the same concepts that most easily justify both.

[phydaux]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

How common are exotic defenses and enhanced senses... among your villains and NPCs?

 

Flash Defense Sight Group - Very Common

 

Mental/Power Defense - Practicly non-existant except for Mystics & Mentalists

 

Alternate Senses - IR Vision & UV Vision are all very common. Nothing else is unless it's "schtick" (ie Sonar for the villain with Super Hearing and sonic attacks, 360 Vision for the guy with Insect Powers, etc).

[Victim]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

My personal preference is that the two combined would ruin a feel. I can see a martial artist having LoW, but not Hardened defenses, while I can see an energy projector having hardened defenses, but not LoW; I can see bricks having either or, but I prefer them to start out with only one. I would possibly make an exception for someone who wants to be a Juggernaut clone, but I'd have to see them write up a background first, possibly.

 

I can see lots of actual force fields (not non-persistent armor like an ice sheath, but an energy barrier kind of thing) having Lack of Weaknes. The readily observable characteristics of the field generally won't be very useful (this one's purple) because the visual signature is just a by product of the energy field. Someone who bypasses armor by picking apart joints and connections is going to have a tough time against TK shield or energy barrier. Granted, specialized senses might have an easier time against forcefields (hence, a limitation on the LoW). Similarly, the same energy field might not care about normal AP characteristics. Again, the TK barrier might not care about razor sharp Adamatine claws that can cut through anything if it just sucks away their momentum/KE. Of course, it's a bit of a reach for that TK to have good ED, but whatever.

 

Similarly, I can see alot of MAs with lots of combat luck, which is hardened.

[phydaux]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

I can see a martial artist having LoW' date=' but not Hardened defenses, while I can see an energy projector having hardened defenses, but not LoW; I can see bricks having either [/quote']

 

Am I the only one who will take a character with 20 PD & ED and only harden the first 10 points?

 

that said, I usually only give Hardened Defenses to Bricks & Blasters, and I've never given a PC LoW. Heck, I usually only give it to master-level NPCs.

 

Come to think of it, I never give anybody Find Weakness unless they are a master-level villain, either.

[Chuckg]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Am I the only one who will take a character with 20 PD & ED and only harden the first 10 points?

 

Nope. Starguard has Hardened Resistant on 10 PD and ED... and then a non-Hardened 20 PD/ED Force Field.

 

If she gets her defenses up, she's durn near railgun-proof. But even caught with them down... she's still tough to kill, just not tough to KO.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

Am I the only one who will take a character with 20 PD & ED and only harden the first 10 points?

 

No, mainly because I do not like unnecessary complications.

 

that said' date=' I usually only give Hardened Defenses to Bricks & Blasters, and I've [i']never[/i] given a PC LoW.

 

I don't think I have, either, but it's not that I am averse to it. It just hasn't been something I have ever seen a need for.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

I've never had Lack of Weakness on a PC, because I've never seen a GM use Find Weakness.

[Chuckg]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

I've never had Lack of Weakness on a PC' date=' because I've never seen a GM use Find Weakness. [/quote']

 

*I* have. Last week, the enemy martial artist made 2 Find Weakness rolls in a row vs. our mentalist / martial artist, and then proceeded to kick the crap out of him while he was at 1/4th defense.

[CBikle]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

In one Champs scenario, an NPC villain(may have been 3rd edition Green Dragon)engaged in small talk with one of the PCs (was basically noncombat time) and was able to reduce one characters total PD to 1/8th its value.

 

When he finally struck, the PC took a pretty good amount of body and was pissed because he couldn't figure out why.

 

One nice thing about FW is that you can use it during noncombat time, if you're reasonably sure you're going to be fighting soon.

[Rapier]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

That's my fault.

 

Most of my villains and NPCs are built around my comfort zone. I've never really been involved in a heavy martial arts campaign (either through Champions, DC, FH or anything else) so have never really had much experience with the Find Weakness (or LoW).

 

BTW, this is one of the cons about having a single long-term GM. But this I can fix. I will make an effort in the next 4 games to include at least 1 NPC with Find Weakness.

 

I also don't very often use NPCs that have attacks that work vs Power DEF.

 

Mental DEF and Flash DEF are pretty common in my games, but I would imagine those are the two most common uncommon defenses.

 

Lately, mostly from impetus from another thread, I've been working to put effort into using more of the rules/system than I normally do. I think it will help me to stay more interested and get more excited (not to say that I'm not interested or excited right now), and the players could use a little shaking up. I've let them get fat and lazy lately.

 

:Sets his GM-Wake-Up-Call Alarm:

[phydaux]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

One nice thing about FW is that you can use it during noncombat time' date=' if you're reasonably sure you're going to be fighting soon.[/quote']

 

Yeah. Like I said, I usually only give my Master-Level NPCs Find Weakness.

 

Then I have them strike from ambush with a Called Shot to the head.

 

Nothing beats one-punching the team brick, then doing a Presence Attack.

 

"Sixty... Seventy... Seventy-three. According to the chart in the book, your character pees his Power Armor."

[Rapier]

Re: commonality of unusual defenses

 

"Sixty... Seventy... Seventy-three. According to the chart in the book' date=' your character pees his Power Armor."[/i']

My very first GM once used the phrase, post PRE attack, "You abort to shat yourself."