New Power: Invulnerability

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

I know it doesn't address the BODY-only aspect, but I've seen:

 

Damage Reduction, 100% - 80 AP

Damage Reduction, resistant, 100% - 120 AP

 

You could always apply a modifier such as "doesn't reduce STUN -1/2", and there you go.

Since Stun is on average 3.5X Stun, "Doesn't Reduce Stun" should be worth at least -1 and arguably more.

 

This DR version of invulnerability is simply not worth 60 points, much less 100 or 120. It's just not that useful in a typical Champions game; where BODY damage to bricks from typical physical and/or energy attacks is extremely rare.

[incrdbil]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

A small side note--be sure to award no points to vulnerabilities that do extra body toward the appropriate aspect you have purchased invulnerability.

 

Of course, I guess you could make a ruling saying the vulnerability means you get to ignore Invulnerability.

 

Another weaker form could be this: If the DC of the attack doesn't exceed the PD or ED of the subject (depending on what invulnerability type you have) you take no body. If the DC of the attack exceeds the PD, then the target takes a certain amount of body. (Make a chart listing how much gets through to suit you..time for dinner.)

[Vondy]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

Short answer? The Desolid-based version of invulnerabilty is awkward at best; ridiculous at worst.

 

With this I wholeheartedly agree.

 

It's also badly overpriced for its in-game value.

 

This is really genre dependent. If you only play one genre of supers and price it accordingly then I agree with you, but in grittier genres (Non-Super or Iron/Steel) that may not be the case. I get the impression, neither good nor bad, that you are primarily a silver-bronze age supers player and that your cost thinking is based on that.

 

I've never claimed this was anything more than a new tool in the toolkit to recreate a specific and rather narrow ability. I'd like to see some playtesting' date=' but nobody in our campaign has an appropriate concept to use this Power. It needs to be tested with a player character over the longterm.[/quote']

 

Fair enough. I, however, would like to see a costed, tested version of invulnerability that could be easily applied to multiple genres without clunky constructs.

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

This is really genre dependent. If you only play one genre of supers and price it accordingly then I agree with you' date=' but in grittier genres (Non-Super or Iron/Steel) that may not be the case. I get the impression, neither good nor bad, that you are primarily a silver-bronze age supers player and that your cost thinking is based on that.[/quote']Yes, I'm pretty much a Silver/Bronze Age gamer. I acknowledge that other genres and subgenres may be grittier and therefore Invulnerability may or may not not be appropriately priced in those specific types of campaigns. I think it is, but without playtesting in both mainstream campaigns and in edgier ones I have no basis to reevaluate cost. At this juncture I think it probably is appropriately priced for the majority of campaign types, but that's just a gut feeling. My suspicion is that in Iron/Rust Age and similar campaigns (which tend to be markedly darker and more lethal) it may be inappropriate to use at any price. However, since it is also a Stop Sign power, it could simply be forbidden by the GM or house-ruled to a higher cost in those campaigns.

 

In Silver Age campaigns I think the cost is fully in line with its utility. It's (deliberately) too expensive to buy on a whim even in Champions, and typical bricks seldom take damage from campaign-average attacks anyway given that most campaigns have damage caps far below the level needed to inflict damage on typical brick defenses. I've seen bricks go their entire career without taking a single point of BODY from "ordinary" physical and energy attacks; you have to "go exotic" on them and use Drains and the like to do BODY.

 

Fair enough. I, however, would like to see a costed, tested version of invulnerability that could be easily applied to multiple genres without clunky constructs.

As would I. Unfortunately, I'm not playing in an Iron Age campaign and have no plans (or interest) in playing in such a game simply to test Invulnerability. Several members here have expressed interest in using it; I'm hoping some of these can give us a playtest evaluation after using it for a while.

[zornwil]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

With this I wholeheartedly agree.

 

 

 

This is really genre dependent. If you only play one genre of supers and price it accordingly then I agree with you, but in grittier genres (Non-Super or Iron/Steel) that may not be the case. I get the impression, neither good nor bad, that you are primarily a silver-bronze age supers player and that your cost thinking is based on that.

 

 

 

Fair enough. I, however, would like to see a costed, tested version of invulnerability that could be easily applied to multiple genres without clunky constructs.

This is the fundamental issue, I agree, that the basic ability isn't so basic in that it's genre-dependent, even (IMHO) game-dependent in that it depends a lot on how play groups create their characters (and the power level of the PCs/NPCs). That's a contributor to thinking this simply cannot be systemic/oughtn't be (in HERO), although individual house rules and us sharing these is of course useful and even important.

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

You COULD make invulnerability genre, or even game dependent: take the damage cap in DC, multiply by a number (5 or 10 most likely for Body or Body and Stun) and that is what it costs to be invulnerable to either physical or energy damage. As the damage cap increases (if it does) then you need to spend more to be invulnerable.

 

Effectively in a 12DC game, thsi would make invulnerability to all Physical damage cost 120 points, which works well with the DR progression. In an 8DC game, the cost would be 80, in a 20DC game 200 etc, etc.

 

One of the problems I've always had with invulnerability is the lack of scaling - this addresses that, even if it may be (slightly) difficult to administer in practice.

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

You COULD make invulnerability genre' date=' or even game dependent: take the damage cap in DC, multiply by a number (5 or 10 most likely for Body or Body and Stun) and that is what it costs to be invulnerable to either physical or energy damage. As the damage cap increases (if it does) then you need to spend more to be invulnerable.[/quote']My version of Invulnerability explicitly excludes being applicable to STUN damage. It is intended solely to prevent BODY damage from gross physical or energy attacks.

 

Effectively in a 12DC game, thsi would make invulnerability to all Physical damage cost 120 points, which works well with the DR progression. In an 8DC game, the cost would be 80, in a 20DC game 200 etc, etc.

For that kind of price, it would be far more cost effective to just buy (campaign-average DC x 2.5) rPD and/or rED, then triple- or quadruple-Harden it and add the Limitation "Only vs BODY damage -1". I'm trying to create something that cannot simply be built with existing Powers and Advantages.

 

One of the problems I've always had with invulnerability is the lack of scaling - this addresses that, even if it may be (slightly) difficult to administer in practice.

Nothing else in HERO has scaling. I see no reason to start here.

[zornwil]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

Two issues -

 

1 - the approach a couple posts above requires that there are caps, and creates some tracking and so on around this, as well as recosting as the campaign evolves/PCs get more powerful/NPCs get more powerful, or a static game only

 

2 - to the issue of scaling, I think that HERO scales in many ways and it's the EXCEPTIONS (DR, Desol, Invis) that don't. I have mentioned elsewhere approaches to this, such as simply applying the analagues of Armor Piercing and Hardened to such abilities. However, that's off-track and can be looked up elsewhere so won't get into further response here.

[Vondy]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

 

As would I. Unfortunately, I'm not playing in an Iron Age campaign and have no plans (or interest) in playing in such a game simply to test Invulnerability. Several members here have expressed interest in using it; I'm hoping some of these can give us a playtest evaluation after using it for a while.

 

In truth, I'm not a big fan of Iron Age games, either. I know it sounds weird, because people generally assume the Freedom Patrol game was Iron Age, but despite a somewhat darker tone and more guns, it wasn't. It didn't fit nicely into those kinds of categories. Some might call it Steel Age, but that doesn't fit, either. Gritty pulp noir espionage atomic tabloid horror in the 1950's leavened with superheroes? Too long.

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

Gritty pulp noir espionage atomic tabloid horror in the 1950's leavened with superheroes?

Hey, I'd play in it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

Two issues -

 

1 - the approach a couple posts above requires that there are caps, and creates some tracking and so on around this, as well as recosting as the campaign evolves/PCs get more powerful/NPCs get more powerful, or a static game only

 

It also requires those caps apply to all characters, which is quite rare in my experience. I've seen a lot of games where there are DC maxima for PC's, but there are mega-villains whose attacks exceed the caps considerably. Having allowed "invulnerability", it should not be overridden because Dr. Destroyer has a bigger than campaign cap attack.

 

2 - to the issue of scaling' date=' I think that HERO scales in many ways and it's the EXCEPTIONS (DR, Desol, Invis) that don't. [/quote']

 

Those exceptions can and do cause problems. Damage reduction for a 75+75 character is a lot pricier than for a 200 + 150 character, for example. It's also normally more effective for the latter than the former, as the attacks thrown against the higher point character are normally bigger.

 

An absolute Invulnerability would suffer from a similar issue, I expect, that it would be unaffordable for lower point characters and, at some point, become near-mandatory for high point (Galactic level) characters.

 

Treb's proposal is a bit unusual in wanting only "can't die" invulnerability rather than "can't be KO'd" invulnerability. To me this would be a "stop sign" in that it would need to be considered in light of the specific campaign. In a Silver Age Supers game, death is unlikely in any event, so it's not a problem, but then it probably shouldn't be very expensive either. In a gritty Fantasy game, this would need to be much more restricted, if allowed at all.

 

However, it would be much more palatable than a character who can't take Stun, the next logical step of any "invulnerability", as the character who can't take STUN is much tougher for the GM to deal with.

 

The character who can't take STUN but can take BOD is probably the worst case. It throws down a gauntlet - "Well, if you want to defeat my character, you have to kill him".

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

It also requires those caps apply to all characters, which is quite rare in my experience. I've seen a lot of games where there are DC maxima for PC's, but there are mega-villains whose attacks exceed the caps considerably. Having allowed "invulnerability", it should not be overridden because Dr. Destroyer has a bigger than campaign cap attack.

 

Those exceptions can and do cause problems. Damage reduction for a 75+75 character is a lot pricier than for a 200 + 150 character, for example. It's also normally more effective for the latter than the former, as the attacks thrown against the higher point character are normally bigger.

 

An absolute Invulnerability would suffer from a similar issue, I expect, that it would be unaffordable for lower point characters and, at some point, become near-mandatory for high point (Galactic level) characters.

 

Treb's proposal is a bit unusual in wanting only "can't die" invulnerability rather than "can't be KO'd" invulnerability. To me this would be a "stop sign" in that it would need to be considered in light of the specific campaign. In a Silver Age Supers game, death is unlikely in any event, so it's not a problem, but then it probably shouldn't be very expensive either. In a gritty Fantasy game, this would need to be much more restricted, if allowed at all.

 

However, it would be much more palatable than a character who can't take Stun, the next logical step of any "invulnerability", as the character who can't take STUN is much tougher for the GM to deal with.

 

The character who can't take STUN but can take BOD is probably the worst case. It throws down a gauntlet - "Well, if you want to defeat my character, you have to kill him".

I wouldn't allow a character (PC or NPC) who couldn't take STUN. Even Superman, literally the poster child for invulnerability, can be hit hard enough to Stun and always could be even back in his campy 70's days.

 

My Invulnerability is just a tool to allow a certain type of toughness. Since characters with it could still be killed with Drains and other types of Powers, it would require several additional powers to create a truly unkillable character - and as a proposed Stop Sign power, I would strongly recommend GM's never allow a character to be unable to be killed.

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

Gritty pulp noir espionage atomic tabloid horror in the 1950's leavened with superheroes? Too long.

You just need a spiffy acronym...

[Southern Cross]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

"Atomic Horror with Superheroes!:thumbup:"

[Patriot]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

I may have missed it , but wouldn't the 30Point Invulnerability just be a cost break for bricks??? They won't need to buy damage resistance any more?

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

I may have missed it ' date=' but wouldn't the 30Point Invulnerability just be a cost break for bricks??? They won't need to buy damage resistance any more?[/quote']Maybe, but that hardly seems unbalancing. Many bricks get their resistant defenses from Armor or Force Field; and this suggested Invulnerability provides no protection against Stun.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

A lot depends on the defense levels. All this really does is allow a fixed price to purchase "cannot take BOD". Whether 30 points is a reasonable price depends on the scale of attacks in the game.

 

Thinking on it, this gives a better bargain to Martial Arts Man, who relies on DCV and has 10 defenses then to Tough Guy who has 35 PD and 35 ED. Both get unlimited defenses against BOD for 30 points, but Tough Guy wasn't going to take any BOD from normal attacks anyway - MA Man has effectively benefited from bonus PD and ED, BOD Only, as well as resistant defenses.

 

Rather than take this approach, I'd suggest allowing a character to purchase Armor, BOD only at, say, a -1.5 limitation (+5 Armor, BOD only costs 10/2.5 = 4 points, a bit more than buying Damage Resistance on defenses you don't have, since you also get protection from normal BOD). This would scale - you need a lot less in a game of 6 DC attacks, and a lot more in a game where 20 DC is the norm. Mix in the Absolutes rule from FH, and a character buying enough of these defenses to be immune to BOD from the biggest expected attack is deemed invulnerable to BOD damage.

[tesuji]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

other than a notice about how this trait applies when a character has a breakable focus, i like the idea. i do think it fairly overpriced as the character will still need routine level defenses for handling stun damage..

 

consider buying regen of 1 body a turn costs 7 cp and buying say +18 extra body (nfc) costs 31 cp, the same price as 30 cp invulnerability for ONE TYPE PD or ED, and can practically accomplish the same thing in terms of "effectiveness gained".

 

Certainly as a builder of characters, before i would pay an additional 60 cp for "invuln to body" for my supers, i would look very strongly at the regen plus "36 extra body" leaving the bonus figured stun in play as an alternative.

 

I think the better pricing for a supers game might be more along 15 cp per category.

 

Also, FYI for most invulnerable concepts i would require a kill - one sfx which ignores the invulnerable like superman and magic for instance.

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

Maybe' date=' but that hardly seems unbalancing. Many bricks get their resistant defenses from Armor or Force Field; and this suggested Invulnerability provides no protection against Stun.[/quote']

 

They do at present but if they didn't have to worry about taking Body they could just buy extra PD and ED at a -1/2 (not v BODY damage).

 

Assuming a brick has +20 pd and ed, that will cost them 27 points as opposed to 60, if they were going to buy it as armour.

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

"Atomic Horror with Superheroes!:thumbup:"

 

Or you could re-arrange to Atomic Superhero Horror and get the acronym ASH. And if you add Gritty Espionage Noir, you get GEN ASH, which sounds like it ought to mean something to someone.

[tesuji]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

They do at present but if they didn't have to worry about taking Body they could just buy extra PD and ED at a -1/2 (not v BODY damage).

 

Assuming a brick has +20 pd and ed, that will cost them 27 points as opposed to 60, if they were going to buy it as armour.

 

Well looking at the OP values its 30 pts for each PD and then ED so...

 

brick 1 buys +20 armor for 60 and is virtually invulnerable to body damage.

brick 2 pays 27 for the pd/ed not vs body (tho justifying the lim seems iffy for many concepts) and then pays 60 cp for invulnerability for pd and ed for a 87 net cost.

 

doesn't seem like a deal.

 

if we cut the price in half as i suggest the prices drop to 60 for armor vs 57 for invuln assuming the lim is approved. So to me the pricing at 15 cp per category s much closer to accurate than the 30 cp per category.

 

if we add in an sfx required which voids invuln as a default, then the 57 vs 60 seems dead on to me.

[Trebuchet]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

It was never intended to be a deal - Invulnerability was intended to enable characters to recreate a specific capability: being completely immune to taking BODY damage from any physical and/or energy attack. It wouldn't matter if the attack is 20d6 or 200d6; he still takes zero BODY from it.

 

There are any number of ways to build campaign-specific virtual invulnerability.

[Kenn]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

They do at present but if they didn't have to worry about taking Body they could just buy extra PD and ED at a -1/2 (not v BODY damage).

 

Assuming a brick has +20 pd and ed, that will cost them 27 points as opposed to 60, if they were going to buy it as armour.

 

No. Because a limitation that isn't limiting isn't worth anything. If a character cannot take BODY damage the limitation not vs BODYdamage, for said individual, is -0.

 

What if someone buys Drain vs this Invulnerability power?

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

It was never intended to be a deal - Invulnerability was intended to enable characters to recreate a specific capability: being completely immune to taking BODY damage from any physical and/or energy attack. It wouldn't matter if the attack is 20d6 or 200d6; he still takes zero BODY from it.

 

There are any number of ways to build campaign-specific virtual invulnerability.

 

I think that is my problem with the idea. You mention in the original post that Superman is virtually the poster child for invulnerability, and yet we had a story line where he was beaten to death by physical force. That is the problem with absolutes of any stripe - I'm not sure they really exist even in the source material. That makes campaign specific virtual invulnerability far preferable to my way of thinking - it allows for the occasional blip outside the margins.

[Sean Waters]

Re: New Power: Invulnerability

 

No. Because a limitation that isn't limiting isn't worth anything. If a character cannot take BODY damage the limitation not vs BODYdamage, for said individual, is -0.

 

.............

 

And there we will have to agree to disagree. To my way of thinking if you have bought a power that makes your limitation not worth anything you shoudln't be penalised - the injunction is there to prevent you getting something for nothing, not to make you pay twice.