Is Find Weakness mispriced?

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

I scanned that one as well as 4th ed. Dark Champions. I'll dig further tonight.

 

The current 5th edition re-incarnation of Piercing is in Dark Champions, pg 96.

 

Works pretty much the same way as it did before. Effectively an adder for attack powers that removes defence points. It's certainly a good candidate for building a Find Weakness power if you're looking for alternatives to the Find Weakness in the rules.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

So the whole thing now reads:

 

Find Weakness (Talent)

 

2 character points to reduce a target's defences by 1 point on a successful activation roll of 14-

The reduction ONLY applies for the attack it is bought for. See below for the cost per level if additional attacks are required.

2 Points for 1 Attack

3 Points for 2 Attacks

4 Points for 4 Attacks

5 Points for 8 Attacks

6 Points for All Attacks

 

I thought you wanted more choices. Why would you then set the starting activation roll at such a high level, precluding an 11-. or even 8-, base roll? Perhaps we should start with no activation roll, and apply the limitation "activation roll" as normal, but that means the base power could be used an unlimited number of times.

 

Can I buy this for "all pistols" or "all bladed weapons"? How?

 

Each attempt takes a half phase action

 

Is it permissable to attempt twice in a phase against the same targets? Against different targets?

 

Subsequent further reductions can be made if a further activation roll (suffering -2 per attempt) is made

 

How long do they last? Does my Eidetic Memory character remember the weaknesses from prior encounters?

 

If an attempt is failed it cannot be repeated against that target until the GM gives permission for a repeat attempt.

 

Should there be guidance for when such a repeat attempt is permitted? For greater choice, perhaps the default should be 24 hours, but you may use the "reduced repeat rate" advantage available for Healing.

 

You cannot buy more than 10 points of defence reduction with this power without GM permission

 

That seems rather arbitrary. 10 points is huge in a typical Fantasy game, and much lower powered in a high end Supers game. Maybe it should be a Cuation Sign power and leave it at that.

 

Find weakness reduces both normal and resistant defences but reduces the normal defences first and cannot reduce any defence below 0.

 

Why does it reduce normal defenses first? This makes it less useful for, say, an assassin. Again, you wanted more choice, didn't you?

 

The talent is sense linked and you must define a (usually targetting) sense that the talent works through. If you are denied the use of that sense you cannot use this talent.

 

Can I define an Unusual sense, making it less likely I will be denied access to this power? Perhaps the cost should vary with the likeliness the Sense will readily be taken away, but then the character has paid extra points to have an unusual sense. Maybe the rule should be it MUST be targetting to avoid smell-based FW ("It says usually").

 

The activation roll is reduced on a 1 for 1 point basis by the power 'Lack of Weakness'

 

Fair enough.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

1. Get rid of the normal/resistant distinction and have the power' date=' as a base, halve all defences.[/quote']

 

How about replacing the normal/resistant distinction with vs STUN or vs BOD. An attack designed to KO may not ideally strike at the same location as an attack designed to kill. This also eliminates the "FW makes the character a killer" issue, since FW: Stun won't cause any extra BOD.

 

This would also be workable with your "reduces defenses directly" model.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

It seems like a lot of work is going into making a new type of drain mechanic that only affects the user's attacks. Wouldn't an improved variation of Analyse Style that could provide more and more OCV bonus (possibly limited) vs. a target accomplish the same thing when combined with Hit Location rules?

[Robyn]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

A disclaimer: I have not read the thread. I skipped to the last page to see if the discussion had branched off into something else, or was still about Find Weakness.

 

OK' date=' big gun: how do your targetting laser and dimmok sfx explain the differentiation between normal and resistant defences, and their having to be targetted seperately?[/quote']

 

On the topic of exactly explaining the mechanics, I was thinking about tweaking the mechanics slightly. Normally, after failing a Find Weakness roll, further uses must be discontinued for a while, but the character can still attack using the cumulative (to date) effects. How to make the entire accumulated effect go away if a roll is failed?

 

My first thoughts on this are that an Opposed Skill Roll can be used (defender has 0, effectively being equivalent to normal FW roll), and a Shapeshift (only to foil Find Weakness) would Trigger on the success of the OSR, or in other words when the attacker failed their FW roll. My next thoughts are that the Shape Shift might be a Trigger (when FW is used), requiring an Activation Roll (opposed RSR with attacker applying their FW roll), which seems similar to some Saving Throw builds. Attacker rolls FW, applies their result to the FW power and the Shapeshift RSR (might need to handwave that this roll applies to both), and if they fail Shapeshift takes everything away.

 

Thought for the day: if Find Weakness is rebuilt as an Advantage, what would happen if it were taken as a Naked Advantage?

[schir1964]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Thought for the day: if Find Weakness is rebuilt as an Advantage' date=' what would happen if it were taken as a [i']Naked[/i] Advantage?

If Find Weakness were an advantage it would be useful to make it Naked Powe Advantage when you want to apply it to groups of attacks based on SFX.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Can I buy this for "all pistols" or "all bladed weapons"? How?

I don't know how Sean will answer this question, but here is how I would handle it.

 

I'm presuming the context is for Heroic level games where weapons (attacks) don't cost character points.

 

If the GM rules that a Player may purchase 2 or 3 Point Skill Levels with "All Pistols", then that would count as 1 Attack Type.

 

If the GM rules that a Player must purchase 5+ Point Skill Levels with "All Blades", or purchase subcategories separately like "All Swords, All Knives, All Great Swords", then each subcategory would count as a separate Attack Type and would be purchased as a 4 Attack Types.

 

But it is up to the GM to determine what an "Attack Type" is.

 

Just My Humble Opinion

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Rough Draft for the concepts (in other words... don't bug me about costs! (8^D))

 

Initial Purchase of Find Weakness (4- Activation) [Reduces Target's Defenses by 1]

Activation Lever may be increased by paying extra.

Reduction Level may be increased by paying extra.

 

Base level with one attack and only useful for the character who purchased it.

 

Guidelines

First attempt at Find Weakness on a target's defenses (Base Roll Purchased)...

 

If Attempt Succeded:

Character has found a weakness in the target's defenses and may use his attack to take full advantage of that weakness. The character retains this advantage in subsequent phases until the end of the turn. At the end of the Turn the effect of Find Weakness Halves (Half Effect) for each successful attack made. At One Minute after a successful Find Weakness activation, the effect is halved again. At Five Minutes the effect is halved, and so forth. Once the effect reaches 1 Reduction the next time increment reduces the effect to zero. The character may make additional Find Weakness rolls at any time to maintain/restore the Full Effect of Find Weakness. If the additional activation was successful the maintained/restored. If the additional activation failed, the effect continues to degrade as normal, and then the rules for a failed attempt is applied.

 

If Attempt Failed:

Character has failed to find a weakness in the target's defenses and gains no advantage. Character must wait until the end of the Turn in order to make another attempt again, but with a penalty (-2 Per Failed Attempt). If the second attempt failed then the character must wait 1 Minute before another attempt is made, and so forth.

 

Thoughts?

 

- Christopher Mullins

[zornwil]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Around 150 posts ago I mused about piercing being deleted and find weakness being retained.

 

I think piercing showed up in Champions III.

Sounds right, but I thought the question was about the recent revival of Piercing.

 

I never agreed with eliminating Piercing, back then, though I can understand it more now. I think Sean's build might rationalize both in a way that comes together and is mechanically-consistent.

[zornwil]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

It seems like a lot of work is going into making a new type of drain mechanic that only affects the user's attacks. Wouldn't an improved variation of Analyse Style that could provide more and more OCV bonus (possibly limited) vs. a target accomplish the same thing when combined with Hit Location rules?

To me, the advantage the other way is that you can ignore the "limit this to -10" rule and easily scale it as much as you like. You can't really do that with OCV/Hit Locations.

[zornwil]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Hmmmm...

 

Some of the comments have inspired me about a completely different structure and ruleset for this... (8^D)

 

Rough Draft for the concepts (in other words... don't bug me about costs! (8^D))

 

Initial Purchase of Find Weakness (4- Activation)

Each additional purchase/level increases Activation by one.

 

Base level with one attack and only useful for the character who purchased it.

 

Guidelines

First attempt at Find Weakness on a target's defenses (Base Roll Purchased)...

 

If Attempt Succeded:

Character has found a weakness in the target's defenses and may use his attack to take full advantage of that weakness. The character retains this advantage in subsequent phases until the end of the turn. At the end of the Turn the effect of Find Weakness Halves (Half Effect) for each successful attack made. At One Minute after a successful Find Weakness activation, the effect is halved again. At Five Minutes the effect is halved, and so forth. Once the effect reaches 1 Reduction the next time increment reduces the effect to zero. The character may make additional Find Weakness rolls at any time to maintain/restore the Full Effect of Find Weakness. If the additional activation was successful the maintained/restored. If the additional activation failed, the effect continues to degrade as normal, and then the rules for a failed attempt is applied.

 

If Attempt Failed:

Character has failed to find a weakness in the target's defenses and gains no advantage. Character must wait until the end of the Turn in order to make another attempt again, but with a penalty (-2 Per Failed Attempt). If the second attempt failed then the character must wait 1 Minute before another attempt is made, and so forth.

 

Thoughts?

 

- Christopher Mullins

I missed what the advantage is? Is it halving defense? Or is it discretionary, environmentally/GM-driven based on player success and SFX? How do you make a greater effect?

[zornwil]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

I don't know how Sean will answer this question, but here is how I would handle it.

 

I'm presuming the context is for Heroic level games where weapons (attacks) don't cost character points.

 

If the GM rules that a Player may purchase 2 or 3 Point Skill Levels with "All Pistols", then that would count as 1 Attack Type.

 

If the GM rules that a Player must purchase 5+ Point Skill Levels with "All Blades", or purchase subcategories separately like "All Swords, All Knives, All Great Swords", then each subcategory would count as a separate Attack Type and would be purchased as a 4 Attack Types.

 

But it is up to the GM to determine what an "Attack Type" is.

 

Just My Humble Opinion

 

- Christopher Mullins

I don't think that's necessary, I'll answer directly in my post to Hugh.

 

PS - also, I think it creates an unnecessary contortion of the skill area mechanic that isn't really used with powers like this.

[zornwil]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

I thought you wanted more choices. Why would you then set the starting activation roll at such a high level' date=' precluding an 11-. or even 8-, base roll? Perhaps we should start with no activation roll, and apply the limitation "activation roll" as normal, but that means the base power could be used an unlimited number of times.[/quote']

 

I think the 14- makes more sense given the method, and you can decrease or increase that with a simple Adder.

 

Can I buy this for "all pistols" or "all bladed weapons"? How?

 

I would make the general tweak of using the SFX-based Advantage levels as with Adjustment Powers. This answers all such queries + # of powers more or less.

 

Is it permissable to attempt twice in a phase against the same targets? Against different targets?

 

Good question, no real thought on my part, just wanted to mention it should be clarified, though I expect it should be okay, given it's not halving, to be done multiple times and multiple targets as a non-attack half phase action.

 

How long do they last? Does my Eidetic Memory character remember the weaknesses from prior encounters?

 

I think that's SFX-based and GM-construed. Against a character who makes no attempt to alleviate the weakness found, this might just continue indefinitely. It makes a lot of sense to me.

 

Should there be guidance for when such a repeat attempt is permitted? For greater choice, perhaps the default should be 24 hours, but you may use the "reduced repeat rate" advantage available for Healing.

 

Ideally, sure, a discussion of what's abusive (such as the above eidetic memory against a physical weakness that can't be fixed by the character).

 

[qujote]That seems rather arbitrary. 10 points is huge in a typical Fantasy game, and much lower powered in a high end Supers game. Maybe it should be a Cuation Sign power and leave it at that.

 

I agree, but I also find it easy to disregard and set a bar accordingly. I would probably allow it to go way down.

 

Why does it reduce normal defenses first? This makes it less useful for, say, an assassin. Again, you wanted more choice, didn't you?

 

Maybe you can declare it either way first or if that's too abusive an Advantage or Adder? I think this is a minor tweak you can figure out in playtesting, anyway.

 

Can I define an Unusual sense, making it less likely I will be denied access to this power? Perhaps the cost should vary with the likeliness the Sense will readily be taken away, but then the character has paid extra points to have an unusual sense. Maybe the rule should be it MUST be targetting to avoid smell-based FW ("It says usually").

 

Personally, as a house rule, I'd remove a strict sense-base and leave it to reasonable sensible SFX ("I'm really smart"), but as a rule that probably does need to exist in the system, maybe it's +5 or +10 for Non-targetting and +10 or similar for Unusual and so on. I think there are some guidelines with Senses that could be reused. Again, likely an easy tweak.

 

But all good points to refine.

 

I wonder about some of these better ideas and if people would willingly employ a playtest and direct results back?

[schir1964]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

I missed what the advantage is? Is it halving defense? Or is it discretionary' date=' environmentally/GM-driven based on player success and SFX? How do you make a greater effect?[/quote']

I was going off the basis of what Sean created with the reduction being an adder to the Find Weakness roll. You pay for the level of the roll and the level of the reduction.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[zornwil]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

I was going off the basis of what Sean created with the reduction being an adder to the Find Weakness roll. You pay for the level of the roll and the level of the reduction.

 

- Christopher Mullins

I'm confused, sorry - I'm still missing the "level of the reduction"? How much are defenses deflated when FW is successful, in your new version of this/

[schir1964]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Rough Draft for the concepts (in other words... don't bug me about costs! (8^D))

 

Initial Purchase of Find Weakness (4- Activation) [Reduces Target's Defenses by 1]

Activation Level may be increased by paying extra.

Reduction Level may be increased by paying extra.

 

Base Level is with one attack and only applies to the character who purchased it.

 

Guidelines

First attempt at Find Weakness on a target's defenses (Base Roll Purchased)...

 

If Attempt Succeded:

Character has found a weakness in the target's defenses and may use his attack to take full advantage of that weakness. The character retains this advantage in subsequent phases until the end of the turn. At the end of the Turn the effect of Find Weakness Halves (Half Effect) for each successful attack made. At One Minute after a successful Find Weakness activation, the effect is halved again. At Five Minutes the effect is halved, and so forth. Once the effect reaches 1 Reduction the next time increment reduces the effect to zero. The character may make additional Find Weakness rolls at any time to maintain/restore the Full Effect of Find Weakness. If the additional activation was successful the maintained/restored. If the additional activation failed, the effect continues to degrade as normal, and then the rules for a failed attempt is applied.

 

If Attempt Failed:

Character has failed to find a weakness in the target's defenses and gains no advantage. Character must wait until the end of the Turn in order to make another attempt again, but with a penalty (-2 Per Failed Attempt). If the second attempt failed then the character must wait 1 Minute before another attempt is made, and so forth.

 

Thoughts?

 

Addendum: I've changed it to be more clear. Hope this helps.

 

- Christopher Mullins

[zornwil]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Ah, thanks!

[schir1964]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

I'm confused' date=' sorry - I'm still missing the "level of the reduction"? How much are defenses deflated when FW is successful, in your new version of this/[/quote']

Basically, I'm going the opposite direction with this construct.

 

A single successful roll gives the character the maximum effect that can be achieved with Find Weakness (Normal Find Weakness requires you to make multiple successful rolls to achieve the maximum effect).

 

- Christopher Mullins

[schir1964]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

I'll shut up now and let Sean get back to dominating this thread. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[zornwil]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Ha, I'm just not commenting because I really have to get off-line shortly plus I need to think more about it, although honestly my knee-jerk reaction still favors Sean's build.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Rough Draft for the concepts (in other words... don't bug me about costs! (8^D))

 

The costs are a key part of the construct. For example, the activation level must be raised with points, so an 11- roll must cost at least +7 if we are to have 1 point gradations. The defense reduction must be enhanced with points, so we need an extra 9 points to boost the reduction to 10. That's 16 points, plus the initial purchase, which looks like it's getting a lot more expensive than the current model. Rather than pay 20 points, say, to reduce the target's defenses by 10, why not spend those points on +4 damage classes, and average an extra 14 STUN?

 

Initial Purchase of Find Weakness (4- Activation) [Reduces Target's Defenses by 1]

Activation Level may be increased by paying extra.

Reduction Level may be increased by paying extra.

 

A 4- activation roll is practically useless. Maybe we should start at, say, 8- for the cost of 5 points and work our way up from there.

 

Base Level is with one attack and only applies to the character who purchased it.

 

Guidelines

First attempt at Find Weakness on a target's defenses (Base Roll Purchased)...

 

If Attempt Succeded:

Character has found a weakness in the target's defenses and may use his attack to take full advantage of that weakness. The character retains this advantage in subsequent phases until the end of the turn. At the end of the Turn the effect of Find Weakness Halves (Half Effect) for each successful attack made. At One Minute after a successful Find Weakness activation, the effect is halved again. At Five Minutes the effect is halved, and so forth. Once the effect reaches 1 Reduction the next time increment reduces the effect to zero. The character may make additional Find Weakness rolls at any time to maintain/restore the Full Effect of Find Weakness. If the additional activation was successful the maintained/restored. If the additional activation failed, the effect continues to degrade as normal, and then the rules for a failed attempt is applied.

 

If I pay on a linear basis to add defenses reduced, why do they fade geometrically? Why does it halve for each successful attack made? Is the weak point getting toughened up?

 

If there is to be a time-based fade rate, it seems reasonable it should be possible to buy that time increment up. Perhaps the base rule should be a fade rate each turn, and it can be bought up.

 

If Attempt Failed:

Character has failed to find a weakness in the target's defenses and gains no advantage. Character must wait until the end of the Turn in order to make another attempt again, but with a penalty (-2 Per Failed Attempt). If the second attempt failed then the character must wait 1 Minute before another attempt is made, and so forth.

 

Does a failed roll take away the results of previous successful rolls? What does a failed roll mean to the ability to roll again to stop/reverse the fade rate?

 

Looks like this removes the ability to enhance the result by achieving more than one success. How would one purchase the ability to enhance the effect by succeeding multiple times?

 

Overall, I think I prefer Sean's approach. Mind you, I have no major issues with FW as it stands either, so I don't see a great deal of point changing it.

[Willpower]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

OK, got a chance to look at FREd again, and so I am now at a greater competency to address this question. No where in the rules does it say that you have to choose between which defenses Find Weakness will affect. The closest it comes to the matter is saying that Find Weakness works against all types of defenses, including Force Fields or Force Walls. I believe that is pretty close to verbatem what it says in the book. No where else does it even address such a statement. That being the case, you do not have to differentiate between normal and resistant defenses. It works the same as Armor Piercing does, it affects all your defenses at once. The only difference is that with Armor Piercing, if one of your defense types is hardened then that type is not affected, where the rest are. LOW on the other hand will prevent FW from working all together, so it essentially helps ALL of your defenses, and not just a particular one it is applied too.

 

And before you go into the AP rules, on how they work against normal or resistant defense, it is based off of the attack in question, so it will work appropriately based on the attack. No need to choose there either, except for which attack gets AP

 

 

OK' date=' big gun: how do your targetting laser and dimmok sfx explain the differentiation between normal and resistant defences, and their having to be targetted seperately?[/quote']

[Willpower]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

I already replied to this, but since I have now had a chance to go over the rules for it again, I will readdress. I originally stated I would agree with this wish, but this wish is not needed as this is already the way FW works.

 

SO can we reach an idea of how we would like to see it?

 

Here's my wish list:

 

1. Get rid of the normal/resistant distinction and have the power, as a base, halve all defences.

 

[Willpower]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

Yes, I understand what you are meaning Chris. What I had given was a SFX explanation for the given question. However it was not needed, as you do not need to choose between defense types as was indicated by the question.

 

For the Targetting Laser System would simply be able to find the sweetspot if you will on all sorts of targets. Tanks, Humans, etc. The Di Mok FW on the other hand would not be able to affect things without discernable anatomies, such as a Tank, so it would have to have the appropriate Limitation to reflect this.

 

I think what Sean was asking for was the rationale (SFXwise) for why the Laser that can find weaknesses in Tank Armor, but does absolutely nothing vs Human Skin.

 

What rationale would explain that or what SFX by description would work that way?

 

Just Trying To Clarify What I Think Is Being Asked (But Could Be Wrong)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[Willpower]

Re: Is Find Weakness mispriced?

 

It does' date=' unfortunately - a relatively recent innovation. It groups normal and damage resistance defences in one group and other resistant defences in a seperate one, which makes no real sense in game as pd+damage resistance can look and feel exactly the same as armour or even force field powers from an sfx pov - they are only distinguished mechanically. That bit definitely has to go.[/quote']

 

Where in the fifth edition rulebook is this mentioned? As I just looked through the rules, and found it no where in the description for the FW ability. In my opinion, if it is not in the rulebook it does not exist. If it is a supplement, it exists, but only as an optional rule, not as cannon.

 

 

To be honest I had not anticipated it getting to that length of time but it kinda makes sense: maybe the weakness is just really hard to find ont hat particular individual. The way I had envisaged it working was that any significant gap reset the counter, so in practice you'd never get past the '1 turn' mark in any given combat, and it was just trying to create mechanics that were easily explicable and adapted. Mind you it might make sense if you could chose when you build the power which option you want to take.

 

Yes, in other games systems I have tried such situations were commonplace. There was a power in the old MSH RPG that allowed a character to mimic any power that they had ever witnessed being used. Talk about a book keeping nightmare. I suppose you could cap it at around the 1 turn end level, but then you have just taken an ability that you and many others are trying to say is broken, and making it even more powerful. I could see that it might make sense SFX-wise to do so, but I do not really see it as making any more sense than the way it is currently used. I mean if you can try again, what is the SFX basis for their being a progressive period that you cannot try?

 

The thing i think we need to look at is some measure of the effectiveness of the (FW+ATTACK) gestalt: FW clearly makes the attack more effective and is of no use at all in isolation. I was not suggesting that we should treat (FW+ATTACK) active points as a cap necessarily, just that it was a consideration when considering whether to allow a power, or more importantly a synergystic whole. I think that the effects of synergy have been overlooked in Hero to a large extent with too much concentration on the unbalancing effects of individual powers: a superhero with 45 strength, or 26" of flight or 27 DEX, or 4x5 point combat levels might not raise eyebrows, but concentrate them all together in one character and you have someone who can do 18d6 movethroughs at an effective OCV of 8, which is plain nasty.

 

Ok, not making it a cap is fine. Since it isn't one now. So we are back to it being a GM call. Which is fine for me. I do understand what you are talking about synergistically. The actual rules makes no way to cap them in that fashion. When Hero tried to redesign Champions with a new system named Fuzion, they implemented something called a Rule of X, which attempted at doing that. It did work to a certain point, but in truth it standardized characters more than capped them. Which was the one thing about the Rule of X I didn't like. Don't get me wrong, I do like it. I just do not like following it by the letter. In Fuzion it led to people very specializing their powers. Since you could build skills for attacking (HTH, Ranged, as well as more specialized skills for particular attacks) it caused people to have different levels of attacks, along with different levels of skills for those attacks so they could manipulate the Rule of X. When it came to that, it actually hindered the game rather than helped it. I think it is better to just have a GM who understands how the game works, and can spot areas where synergy would lead to unbalancing affect. For instance if you want to really overwork your own example, try giving that character with 45 Str, 26" flight, and 27 Dex a passing strike manuever. Now he can do all of that to greater effect and takes no damage to boot, and with fewer penalties. That is why I always disallow the MA Passing Strike type manuevers in my Supers games.