Knockback Reduction

[tinman]

Forgive me if this has been covered in 5E or 5ER, I'm at work and going from memory.

 

How much would you charge if a player wanted 50% KnockBack Reduction for a character? The special effect is that he absorbs kinetic energy (ties in with his other powers).

 

I'm inclined to go with the non-resistant cost for a single category of Damage Reduction and just charge 20 points for it, but I wanted to poll the groupmind to see if anyone had any better ideas.

 

To give you an idea of the usefulness of this ability in my campaign most of the attacks in are falling in the 15-24 DC range, but Killing Attacks are more common at the higher DC levels than Normal Attacks. He would likely get more benefit from just spending 20 points on Knockback Resistance, but he prefers the flavour of using Reduction instead.

 

Thanks/

[Tech]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

Mm, I'd be willing to go with that. I might also write it up as:

 

Knockback Resistance -20", can only resist up to half of the inches of KB done

[tinman]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

Mm, I'd be willing to go with that. I might also write it up as:

 

Knockback Resistance -20", can only resist up to half of the inches of KB done

 

Nice, pretty much the same effect. He could probably get by with -10 without losing any effectiveness and save points too.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

I'd be more likely inclined to go with just Knockback Resistance, the number of inches bought determines how much kinetic energy he can absorb overall. Which means sometimes he won't get knocked back at all.

 

I would steer away from an overall 50% reduction. But that's me.

Otherwise, 20pts sounds pretty fair, not overly abusive.

[tinman]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

I'd be more likely inclined to go with just Knockback Resistance, the number of inches bought determines how much kinetic energy he can absorb overall. Which means sometimes he won't get knocked back at all.

 

I would steer away from an overall 50% reduction. But that's me.

Otherwise, 20pts sounds pretty fair, not overal abusive.

 

His whole power scheme is based on being able to absorb half the kinetic energy of any given attack or such like and use it himself. That's why he doesn't want an absolute value for it.

 

Tech's suggestion might be the best of both worlds.

[lemming]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

His whole power scheme is based on being able to absorb half the kinetic energy of any given attack or such like and use it himself. That's why he doesn't want an absolute value for it.

 

Tech's suggestion might be the best of both worlds.

Tech's suggestion is exactly what I would of posted.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

Tech's suggestion is awesome. To gauge how much you'd need, just make it equal to the standard DC of the campaign, or 2/3 the max DC of the campaign. You really wouldn't need -20" unless you have 20-30d6 flying around all the time. The Limitation would kinda low though, maybe -1/2 or even -1/4 depending how often all of the KBR gets used.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

Tech's suggestion is awesome. To gauge how much you'd need' date=' just make it equal to the standard DC of the campaign, or 2/3 the max DC of the campaign. You really wouldn't need -20" unless you have 20-30d6 flying around all the time. The Limitation would kinda low though, maybe -1/2 or even -1/4 depending how often all of the KBR gets used.[/quote']

 

Consider how often someone takes "double knockback" as well. As to the extent of the limitation, remember that it makes 95% of the purchase useless whenever only 2" knockback is rolled. It's a counterintuitive exercise, though - 18" with no limitation is useless in the same circumstances.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

Consider how often someone takes "double knockback" as well. As to the extent of the limitation' date=' remember that it makes 95% of the purchase useless whenever only 2" knockback is rolled. It's a counterintuitive exercise, though - 18" with no limitation is useless in the same circumstances.[/quote']

 

Which is part of my point. It shouldn't get a bonus, or an extra bonus, for remaining useless in a situation it would be useless in anyway.

[lemming]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

Which is part of my point. It shouldn't get a bonus' date=' or an extra bonus, for remaining useless in a situation it would be useless in anyway.[/quote']

Very True, but since you're taking some knockback in all cases there is argument for a limitation. Actually, I'm fine with a -1. Most of the utility of not getting back is not having to roll breakfall or getting up. (IMO)

[pinecone]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

I think I'd peg the lim at -1/2 that just sounds right to me...lose around half the usefulness, take 1/2 lim..... I'd likely suggest -15" KB Lim: only stops 1/2 the KB taken -1/2...cost 20 points.....

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

Very True' date=' but since you're taking some knockback in all cases there is argument for a limitation. Actually, I'm fine with a -1. Most of the utility of not getting back is not having to roll breakfall or getting up. (IMO)[/quote']

 

I think this is a good point. All this reduction saves you is half the damage from knockback (and ha;lf the distance to come back, I suppose). You are still knocked down whether you take 2" or 4" of knockback, meaning you need a half phase to get up, absent an ability you paid points for, and are at 1/2 DCV until you do. The damage factor is generally limited (how much knockback must a super take before damage is really a factor?. Being half DCV is always a pain.

 

That leads me to aree -1 is not excessive. Thanks, Lemming!

[Dust Raven]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

I think this is a good point. All this reduction saves you is half the damage from knockback (and ha;lf the distance to come back, I suppose). You are still knocked down whether you take 2" or 4" of knockback, meaning you need a half phase to get up, absent an ability you paid points for, and are at 1/2 DCV until you do. The damage factor is generally limited (how much knockback must a super take before damage is really a factor?. Being half DCV is always a pain.

 

That leads me to aree -1 is not excessive. Thanks, Lemming!

 

That is a good point. I would still think it really depens on how much KBR is bought and what the average DCs in the campain are. The value would be different if significently more or less were purchassed.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Knockback Reduction

 

Aside (as usual), but I often think KBR is overpriced. Costing it is not a straightforward exercise, but...

 

For -10 KRB (which would make you extremely unlikely to be KB'd, I'll give you) you could buy Breakfall + 2 and 13 points of PD. OK, not quite the same as you would be moving, but you'd be avoiding the damage and the knockdown effects, and the extra pd would make damage from KB something you would rarely need to worry about: and for that matter reduce the damage from half the attacks likely to knock you back!

 

I suppose you could (if you were a freak) buy it as extra DCV only to avoid the effects of KB: if you are hit but would have been missed with the effects of the DCV bonus, you take no KB. Actually that would be a really good construct for an elastic man type character: occasionally his centre of mass gets hit and he shoots backwards, but most of the time all you do is strertch a bit of him. So 5 points per level and then, what -1 or -1.5 as a limitation.

 

Frankly the thing about KB is not usually the damage as that is always going to be less by several dice than the opponent's attack anyway, it is the being prone bit that stings and, occasionally, terrain permitting, the falling off the edge of a cliff.

 

I appreciate that you could argue that if is too cheap then everyone will have it. Well not everyone buys breakfall and that is generally cheaper, so I doubt it.

 

...or have I overlooked aomething (again..... )