Normal-proofing your Bricks?

[Wanderer]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

I'd probably call that suite of senses a -1/4 IPE' date=' same as a flash supressor, in that the source of the power isn't immediately visible, but the effect is. That is, as a build using a non persistant power for the base, barring some form of IPE there should be a visible SFX that lets you know that SOMETHING is going on with the target. All the listed sense effects are only detectable AFTER the target has already been hit.[/quote']

 

I see your reasons, too and actually, I realize more and more this is something of a controversial argument where each side has good reasons. Barring some authoritative ruling from SL, I'd probably choose whether to tack the IPE modifier on invulnerability power constructs according to the opnion of individual GMs and player groups.

[Squall]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Sigh up a rope.

I...what's that even mean? Seriously? I'm sorry if you're having a bad day or something, but there's no need to take it out on the people that're commenting on the conversation you started, and then go tossing together words at random and throwing the freaky not-sentence at me over it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

I can't believe people are still having a hard time grasping "Normal" as an ORIGIN' date=' I was NEVER talking about a normal guy off the street. Learn to read for crying out loud.[/quote']

 

If a BRick (or other archetypes) can casually make themselves immune to anything a Normal can do, and there is no countervailing advantage to the "Normal as an ORIGIN" archetype, soon there will be no "Normal as an ORIGIN" characters anyway.

 

As I read your comments, you want your Thing or Hulk inspired character to be immune to anything my Daredevil or Moon Knight inspired character can throw at you. Wht would anyone play the latter knowing that, in this game anyway, the former is so much more powerful?

 

My very simplistic questio earlier was that, if you're going to have Bricks with defenses so high that the "Normal Human" characters can't ever harm them, what advantage will you allow to those "normal humans" to retain that origin as a viable archetype? Will they be permitted, even encouraged, to have a DCV so high that no Brick can ever hit them, so that each archetype will be completely unable to ever damage the other?

 

That may very well emulate certain scenes in the comics. However, I don't think it's a desirable state of affairs from a gameplay perspective. No one wants to play the character who is incapable of accomplishing anything.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

I can't believe people are still having a hard time grasping "Normal" as an ORIGIN' date=' I was NEVER talking about a normal guy off the street. Learn to read for crying out loud.[/quote']

 

We get it, but it honestly doesn't make much sense.

 

Origin is just SFX, and as such it's not something you can truly "block" or "proof" again.

 

If the GM hands two new players a list of powers (EB, Teleport, flight, etc) with the exact same builds and says "build your characters around these," you will end up with two characters who have the exact same build but different special effects. One might a wizard woken up from a buried castle while the other is a guy who manipulates the energy between atoms (whatever). There is no way to "proof" against their origins. Sure, in some cases you can guard against specific special effects (Life Support and a few immunities I think, such as Fire, or Sonic based attacks, etc) but like all origins, Normal containts many special effects. I could hit you with a fire extinguisher, actually spray you with the fire extinguisher, douse you in gasoline and light a match... etc. You can't proof against that, at least as an absolute, which is what you are asking for.

 

Basically, the origins are fluff, and you can't stop fluff.

[OddHat]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Speaking as a moderator, personal attacks are a violation of the Rules of Conduct.

 

This is a useful thread on an interesting issue. Please keep things civil.

[Wanderer]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

We get it, but it honestly doesn't make much sense.

 

Origin is just SFX, and as such it's not something you can truly "block" or "proof" again.

 

If the GM hands two new players a list of powers (EB, Teleport, flight, etc) with the exact same builds and says "build your characters around these," you will end up with two characters who have the exact same build but different special effects. One might a wizard woken up from a buried castle while the other is a guy who manipulates the energy between atoms (whatever). There is no way to "proof" against their origins. Sure, in some cases you can guard against specific special effects (Life Support and a few immunities I think, such as Fire, or Sonic based attacks, etc) but like all origins, Normal containts many special effects. I could hit you with a fire extinguisher, actually spray you with the fire extinguisher, douse you in gasoline and light a match... etc. You can't proof against that, at least as an absolute, which is what you are asking for.

 

Basically, the origins are fluff, and you can't stop fluff.

 

Sorry, I have to heartily disagree about this. Origins, ultimately are the same thing as SFX (actually, they are meta-SFX, since one origin can jusitify several different SFX, but they are the same kind of thing), and being able to nullify or shield against an SFX is a pretty big conerstone of pretty much any superheroic game system. If you can affect the "magic" or technological" SFX, you can do the same with the normal SFX. It's just anything that is labeled as a superpwer. For weapons and armor, it's even already covered by the Real Weapon/Armor label.

[Metaphysician]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

The problem is, "normal" isn't a SFX so much as a lack of one.

 

I could see, for example, defenses that work against, say, "anything without a magic SFX", but I can't really see defenses that work against "anything lacking an SFX." Everything has an SFX. You really have to define it in positive terms, and there's too many different things that a "normal" could have to do so.

 

( "normals" often have Extreme Skill, Martial Arts, and Gadgetry SFX; what conceivable ability could act against all three, without affecting anything else? )

[Manic Typist]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Sorry' date=' I have to heartily disagree about this. Origins, ultimately are the same thing as SFX (actually, they are meta-SFX, since one origin can jusitify several different SFX, but they are the same kind of thing), and being able to nullify or shield against an SFX is a pretty big conerstone of pretty much any superheroic game system. If you can affect the "magic" or technological" SFX, you can do the same with the normal SFX. It's just anything that is labeled as a superpwer. For weapons and armor, it's even already[/quote']

 

Of course you can, but as I pointed out, a "normal" origin is a kind of... variable special effect. Metaphysician makes pretty much the same point.

 

Can you build a defense listed as "Only vs. Attacks of Variable SFX?"

 

 

Seriously? I don't know.

[Wanderer]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Building a defense against Normals is rather easy if your self have an SFX that allow you to break or defy "science as we know it". Reality-warping mutants, magic, psi, divine power, chi, etc. Your powers works by rewriting or warping reality, normal tech works by the usual laws of physics that your powers bypass, so it works on a metaphysical level inferior to your defenses and it is totally ineffectual against them. The same reasoning can be made for punches from a highly trained normal. I concede that this reasoning becomes rather fuzzy when it concerns super-science based heroes, but otherwise it works like clockwork.

 

On a second thought, I may add that such a reasoning works very fine in those superheroic swettings, like the CU, where true super-science, like all superpowers, are made real by a cosmic loophole ("magic") and not by a more refined grasp of the "true" mundane laws of science. And there is a very definite metaphysical divide between superpowers and super-tech and mudane technology. In a setting like the Cu, you may define the "Normals" SFX as "all the stuff that works in the ages when there are no supers or mages around".

[Metaphysician]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Except in just such a setting, "normal" superheroes probably tap into the same force, just in a more subtle manner. After all, +4 DC martial arts and skill lists longer than entire university staffs aren't exactly mundane, either.

[Wanderer]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Except in just such a setting' date=' "normal" superheroes probably tap into the same force, just in a more subtle manner. After all, +4 DC martial arts and skill lists longer than entire university staffs aren't exactly mundane, either.[/quote']

 

Exceptions may be made when it is plain that the physical and/or mental capabilities of the supposed normal go way beyond normality. Although is such cases I'd prefer, and probably, require that a non-normal SFX label be done to keep the distinction clear (this guy think of himself as a super-intelligent normal, but he's actually a super-smart mutant, or this guy think of itself as a highly-trained athlete, but has actually awakened his mystical inner chi potential).

[casualplayer]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

While I avoid the grief that most seem to be feeling here by mandating that to be a normal, unenhanced human in my superheroic games Normals actually take have to take NCM, somewhat similar to the ever-popular Phys Lim: Mutant, I realize that not everyone is as fond of NCM as I am. Maybe before we can progress anymore on this we need to come up with an in-game definition of Normal?

 

I offer as a definition of "Normal" no Powers other than Talents and increased Movement and no abilities greater than NCM. Of course the game has evolved to where Batman is actually "Teleporting" up the fire escape rather than having extraordinary Leap, Acrobatics and Stealth, so that makes my definition problematic. Does Stealth so good it's actually bought as Invisibility make you un-normal?

 

I also like the Real World limitation as a badge of Normality. It lets me target defenses specifically to that limitation. Joe Schmoe's Real World Smith & Wesson doesn't even scuff Captain Abs but Ankylosaur's grenades can rough him up a bit.

 

We might also want to take a look at the definition of "Proof," because that pesky word always leads to trouble. Defining "Proof" as Takes No STUN is an impossible goal. I curse the day that concept was ever introduced into the game. Visualizing it more as "Unlikely to be Stunned, Unable to take more BODY than can immediately heal" gives you something to work with.

 

Now we can have some options, and if we didn't value options we would play a different game. Putting CON above the best STUN result for the level of damage you are concerned about makes for a nice invulnerable feel. 48+ CON will put you out of range for <8d6 attacks without even considering defenses, and if they're doing more than 8d6 their normalness is in question anyway. You can have Regeneration/REC that puts you back together as fast as a Normal can dish it out. Or you can take my earlier suggestion of Damage Reduction for Real World damage, where the damage is diminished to a manageable or negligible level. A combination of these would likely work best, if your goal is to be Normal-proof.

[Wanderer]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Just to wrap around a side line to the main discussion, I've asked Steve, and it appears that yes you do need IPE (SFX Only) if you wish your invulnerability power to be unconspicous and undetectable BEFORE one gets hit. Otherwise, anyone, just by looking at the guy, may somehow realize that he is super-tough. Therefore, if you wish your brick/energy projector to play the Clark Kent charade, you have to churn out the points for IPE (SFX Only), too.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

I'm sorry, what's IPE (SFX Only)?

 

I thought IPE already specifically dealt with SFX....

[Wanderer]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

I'm sorry, what's IPE (SFX Only)?

 

I thought IPE already specifically dealt with SFX....

 

For simplicity's sake, let's assume the case where IPE covers all senses, even if you can do it just for one or a few senses. Basically, there are three versions of the Advantage, the default one (-1) hides the SFX manifestation of the power when it's used, and its source, but not its effect on the target (I fire a laser blot from my gun, the beam is invisible, the gun is silent and unconspicous, but the victim feels the damage and onlookers notice it but they do not know from where it came, unless they have clues different from the power itself), the halved (-1/2) value covers either the SFX manifestation or the source (the beam itself is invisible and silent, so it gets no attention, but the gun is noticeable, so the victim and observers can reasonably guess who shot him, or the beam makes light and noise, but the gun is subtle), the double (x2) value hides the effects on the target as well (the beam and the gun are invisible and silent, the victim feels the damage, but to onlookers he looks just fine...until he drops knocked out or dead).

 

For defense powers that are constant by default (or upgraded to Persistent), IPE (SFX Only) is generally fine since it makes the defense totally unconspicous until and unless it's challenged by an incoming attack. My Force Field is totally skintight, invisible, and silent (no noticeable SFX), so there's no way you may notice I have it in ordinary circumstances, unless you try to punch me and notice something is stopping your blows or preventing them from doing any significant damage (effects on target are visible) and you realize that it is caused by some power of mine (source is visible).

 

Hope that clarifies things.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Speaking as a moderator, personal attacks are a violation of the Rules of Conduct.

 

This is a useful thread on an interesting issue. Please keep things civil.

 

Thanks, but I didn't take any real offense to Squall's attacks. They were pretty mild.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

That may very well emulate certain scenes in the comics. However, I don't think it's a desirable state of affairs from a gameplay perspective. No one wants to play the character who is incapable of accomplishing anything.

 

That's an interesting perspective. Why does "can't damage the hulk with my punch" equal "incapable of accomplishing anything"?

 

Let's say your MA can toss out 10 DCs of damage. Let's say some bricks have 40 PD. Ok, you aren't hurting that brick with your MA attack at 10 DCs. Maybe you can use some Knock out gas to weaken him, or Martial Throw him so someone with higher damage and lower CV than you can get a shot in. Perhaps you can use Teamwork to boost damage? Or you could buy tactical abilities to boost your teammates ala Batman. So, you're never entirely useless even in combat.

 

Even if you were totally ineffectual in combat versus another character, how many combats are one on one? Most heroes and villains fall somewhere in the "medium" category in most of their abilities, including damage and defenses. Everyone should be able to find someone to attack in most melees.

 

Of course, if you *did* get stuck effectively sitting out a combat session, it'd suck. Combat takes a big chunk of a game session, and that's interaction you're missing out on. I'd say that keeping you involved is the GM's job, and being anal about power limits to too great of a degree isn't the best solution, though it's definately one solution.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Here's one idea I had the other day, though it's very rough, and there are similar systems, like Rule of X, that may do it better.

 

You could set up a matrix of Damage/Defense/CV/Speed. That gives four categories. Assign four power levels to the four categories:

 

PL Dmg Def CV SPD

1 08DC 10 08 3

2 10DC 20 09 4

3 12DC 30 10 5

4 14DC 40 11 6

 

At a basic level, you could allow one of DMG/Def/CV/SPD from each power level. For example, you could have a MA with:

 

10 DC Dmg

10 Def

10 CV

6 SPD

 

Or a Blaster with:

 

14 DC Dmg

30 Def

4 SPD

8 CV

 

Or, you could take it a step futher and say 1+2+3+4 = 10 pts worth of power levels and let the players mix it up.

 

My numbers here are mostly bogus, and may not work in actual practice. The chart doesn't take into effect more elaborate power constructs for example. Given that the numbers are probably bad and the matrix is simplistic, here's how I arrived at the numbers:

 

DC based on typical range of damage found in Champions, without regard to modifiers.

 

Defense based on the next PL being able to effectively negate the one below it. So, at PL 3 you have 30 Def, which effectively stops the *average* damage from a PL 2 attack (35 average), while still letting some Stun through. Of course, the inverse is also true.

 

CV was taken by looking at all of the sample 350 pt characters in Champions and adding up their base CV + Skill levels. It turned out to be a very tight range.

 

SPD was set with the idea that a lower speed campaign would make balancing a little easier. It could have been 4-7 to allow for speedsters having a rank to shoot for over Martial Artists, but you can still build a formidable Speedster using power constructs and skill levels.

 

Anyway, for all the length of this post, it's still a very rough idea. But it's one that could allow for a little bit wider range than the standard suggestions in the book while maintaining a bit of balance.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

That's an interesting perspective. Why does "can't damage the hulk with my punch" equal "incapable of accomplishing anything"?

 

Are you discussing normal-proofing "that very rare Brick who is so powerful he can regularly take on entire teams of Supers and/or the mobilized forces of the army" - which is the class I would place the Hulk in - or normal-proofing "My PC Brick who will be one member of the team with the Martial Artist"?

 

In the former case, this is simoly a very powerful adversary whom my MA lacks the capacity to damage. In the later, my question is "What's the tradeoff?" You use the example of capping an MA at, say, 10 DC and allowing the Brick to have 40 DEF so the MA pretty much can't inflict damage. Are you OK with the Brick being capped at a 7 OCV, and the MA being permitted a 15 DCV, such that the Brick is virtually incapable of damaging the MA, similar to the MA's virtual inability to damage the Brick? An inability to hit the MA seems like it should be no more frustrating than the MA's inability to damage the Brick

 

Let's say your MA can toss out 10 DCs of damage. Let's say some bricks have 40 PD. Ok' date=' you aren't hurting that brick with your MA attack at 10 DCs. Maybe you can use some Knock out gas to weaken him, or Martial Throw him so someone with higher damage and lower CV than you can get a shot in. Perhaps you can use Teamwork to boost damage? Or you could buy tactical abilities to boost your teammates ala Batman. So, you're never entirely useless even in combat. [/quote']

 

So basically, you want a system where the MA is permitted only to play a supporting role in combat. Why should every MA be required to have gadgets (knockout gas) in order to be useful? Is it somehow more "realistic" that this normal human can toss a 1 ton behemoth like the Hulk to the ground? Besides, since when do those big, high DEF bricks have CV's that make them tough to hit anyway?

 

Now, the idea that characters can trade off, such that your Brick might have very high Defenses, but be restricted to average damage for the game, and lower than average OCV/SPD (ie if you want one ability to exceed the norm, another must suffer) seems much more reasonable, in my view. But if the end result is character archetypes who are basically invulnerable to one another, I'm not sure that's an improvement to the game.

 

Part of the issue is that the player characters are all at the same point level. The Hulk and Daredevil aren't. A better comarison might be Nighthawk and Luke Cage circa 1975 in the Defenders. Luke is tougher than Nighthawk, but still can be damaged by Nighthawk. Nighthawk's faster than Luke, but can still get tagged. The two are competetive - and I think that's what players want from their characters.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Are you discussing normal-proofing "that very rare Brick who is so powerful he can regularly take on entire teams of Supers and/or the mobilized forces of the army" - which is the class I would place the Hulk in - or normal-proofing "My PC Brick who will be one member of the team with the Martial Artist"?

 

The first type should be built on a higher point total. This is about stretching the boundries of "everyone must be equally capable in combat" for a bit of variety. For the record, I'm fine with the way Champions is presented, where everyone has a shot at a fair fight with everyone else. It represents the middle ground that most comic characters tend to fall in. This thread is just for the sake of discussion of what's possible.

 

In the former case, this is simoly a very powerful adversary whom my MA lacks the capacity to damage. In the later, my question is "What's the tradeoff?" You use the example of capping an MA at, say, 10 DC and allowing the Brick to have 40 DEF so the MA pretty much can't inflict damage. Are you OK with the Brick being capped at a 7 OCV, and the MA being permitted a 15 DCV, such that the Brick is virtually incapable of damaging the MA, similar to the MA's virtual inability to damage the Brick? An inability to hit the MA seems like it should be no more frustrating than the MA's inability to damage the Brick

 

You must have missed a slew of combat options here. The two can interact. If the MA goes all out offensive, he SHOULD be able to avoid almost all damage from the high defense type brick. Look at how many comics examples of this there are of the light fighter simply trying to bait or lead the bigger, tougher opponent into a more strategic position. Agile versus Strong is a pretty classic comic standoff, isn't it?

 

So basically, you want a system where the MA is permitted only to play a supporting role in combat. Why should every MA be required to have gadgets (knockout gas) in order to be useful?

 

I never said either of these things, and you're not addressing any other point made in that section. Also, if we're building PCs, you shouldn't be in combat with the guy who's on YOUR OWN TEAM to start with, and any GM with a sense of fair play won't be tossing 40 Def bricks at your group on a weekly basis. Let's just stick to false dilemma situations and stay inside the box. As I said, I like the default box well enough, so no harm in that.

 

Is it somehow more "realistic" that this normal human can toss a 1 ton behemoth like the Hulk to the ground?

 

Actually, most real life MA techniques aren't terribly useful if your opponent has a huge strength advantage. You don't see skinny girls putting 250 pound body builders in wrist locks every day anyway. However, it's entirely in genre for someone to throw a character that has a huge STR advantage. First of all, "leverage" becomes magical in many comics settings. If you want more realism, you can simply say that the brick was tricked into overbalancing themselves and tripped or stumbled as a result. The throw maneuver doesn't mean you have to flip the other guy over your shoulder, does it? I know you know the answer to that one, so I don't know why you're bringing it up?

 

 

Besides, since when do those big, high DEF bricks have CV's that make them tough to hit anyway?

 

Who ever said they did? I don't know what you're talking about. CV is definately one of the classic tradeoffs for high Defenses. If you have a Def/Damage gap in the brick's favor, you should have a CV/Speed gap in the MA's favor, in general. This is the core of the problem with "Martial Bricks" being somewhat overpowering. By taking a middle road on CV/SPD and high primary attributes, then combing them with some Martial Maneuvers, you get a god-awfully combat effective character. Even those guys are in genre, however (Spider-Man for example, or any one of DC's speedy uber bricks). These middle road guys are the ones lacking in tradeoffs. With the current recommended power levels for a 350 game, they have no real competition on the melee front.

 

 

Now, the idea that characters can trade off, such that your Brick might have very high Defenses, but be restricted to average damage for the game, and lower than average OCV/SPD (ie if you want one ability to exceed the norm, another must suffer) seems much more reasonable, in my view. But if the end result is character archetypes who are basically invulnerable to one another, I'm not sure that's an improvement to the game.

 

As I said, the idea was rough. However, it's in genre, and it makes some interesting alternatives to the Martial Brick types. I think the game has enough combat options to help in this regard, and powers can help as well.

 

 

Part of the issue is that the player characters are all at the same point level. The Hulk and Daredevil aren't. A better comarison might be Nighthawk and Luke Cage circa 1975 in the Defenders. Luke is tougher than Nighthawk, but still can be damaged by Nighthawk. Nighthawk's faster than Luke, but can still get tagged. The two are competetive - and I think that's what players want from their characters.

 

I think that the Nighthawk/Luke Cage scenario you suggest is a happy middle ground, and I think it works well for a game. As I said, this is just to stir up some ideas for allowing something out of the ordinary. Again, I like the status quo, but it's also fun to kick around some alternative concepts.

[assault]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Also' date=' if we're building PCs, you shouldn't be in combat with the guy who's on YOUR OWN TEAM to start with,[/quote']

 

Aside from Mind Control situations, when they Berserk, when you are fighting their Evil Twins or Interdimensional Counterparts, in Danger Rooms, or when they just plain annoy you, anyway...

 

Actually, your own team mates are often going to be amongst your most common opponents.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

The first type should be built on a higher point total. This is about stretching the boundries of "everyone must be equally capable in combat" for a bit of variety. For the record' date=' I'm fine with the way Champions is presented, where everyone has a shot at a fair fight with everyone else. It represents the middle ground that most comic characters tend to fall in. This thread is just for the sake of discussion of what's possible. [/quote']

 

I have no problem with characters taking tradeoffs - "very tough, but slow and not to accurate" is one alternative. Where I would have a concern is where the game is structured on a basis that the Brick can be immune to MA attacks due to high defenses, but the MA gets no counteracting advantage, such as the huge CV advantage that can stalemate the two (ie MA can't damage Brick and Brick can't hit MA). That standoff can make the game interesting. Only allowing the "brick half", however, so the Brick's immune to damage but still gets to hit the MA fairly easily, just makes the MA useless.

 

I never said either of these things' date=' and you're not addressing any other point made in that section. Also, if we're building PCs, you shouldn't be in combat with the guy who's on YOUR OWN TEAM to start with, and any GM with a sense of fair play won't be tossing 40 Def bricks at your group on a weekly basis.[/quote']

 

If the norm is for Bricks to be invulnerable to attacks by "normals", however skilled, then it shouldn't just be my Brick teammate who is immune to attacks at that level. The opposing team's Brick should generally have similar defenses. So it will be a pretty common occurence.

 

And this is where the problem can really kick into high gear. If Bricks get a typical defense range of 35 - 40, and other archetypes get, say, 20 - 25 with no compensatory advantages in other areas, Bricks simply rule the game. If, on the other hand, that 40 DEF Brick has weaknesses in other regards, it just balances the game differently.

 

However, I'd call our 40 DEF Brick and our 18 DCV martial artist "highly defended". They should both be lacking advantages in some other area. For the MA, typically it's damage inflicted. Where does the Brick lose out to balance things out?

 

Who ever said they did? I don't know what you're talking about. CV is definately one of the classic tradeoffs for high Defenses.

 

You suggested the MA help out by placing that high DEF brick at a DCV disadvantage. My question was how that's useful when he's probably already at a DCV disadvantage.

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

Aside from Mind Control situations, when they Berserk, when you are fighting their Evil Twins or Interdimensional Counterparts, in Danger Rooms, or when they just plain annoy you, anyway...

 

Actually, your own team mates are often going to be amongst your most common opponents.

 

Shh...

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

 

If the norm is for Bricks to be invulnerable to attacks by "normals", however skilled, then it shouldn't just be my Brick teammate who is immune to attacks at that level. The opposing team's Brick should generally have similar defenses. So it will be a pretty common occurence.

 

Does every team have a brick? Are all bricks created equally? And even if every brick in the universe was MA-proof, that's not the only type of character you should be running into, so is it really an issue?

 

And this is where the problem can really kick into high gear. If Bricks get a typical defense range of 35 - 40, and other archetypes get, say, 20 - 25 with no compensatory advantages in other areas, Bricks simply rule the game. If, on the other hand, that 40 DEF Brick has weaknesses in other regards, it just balances the game differently.

 

You're making a lot of absolute statements here. The ranges of nothing are fixed. We're not talking about DnD, and Archetypes aren't fixed classes. You continue talk as if I've offered no suggestions of balance whatsoever, which is patently false. Remember Thor vs. Supes in the JLA/Avengers crossover? "Where I come from, the dial goes up to eleven!" I'm just talking about options for adding numbers to the dial.

 

However, I'd call our 40 DEF Brick and our 18 DCV martial artist "highly defended". They should both be lacking advantages in some other area. For the MA, typically it's damage inflicted. Where does the Brick lose out to balance things out?

 

Why not make some suggestions, then? I have, and since you've ignored them, I'd like to hear yours. Not that I don't respect your role as Devil's Advocate, but this is leaning toward wheel spinning.

 

You suggested the MA help out by placing that high DEF brick at a DCV disadvantage. My question was how that's useful when he's probably already at a DCV disadvantage.

 

I can't believe you can't see how it's useful. Let's put it this way: Who can damage the brick when he's on the ground? Your highest damage team member, right? Typically, that's someone with low to moderate CV to compensate, perhaps your own brick? Given the tight range of CVs suggested by the sample characters and the table in the book (7-11 and 7-13 respectively, IIRC), halving anyone's DCV is a HUGE advantage in a fight. Are you telling me that you don't understand the concept? I'm not buying. I've seen plenty of your posts, and I have an idea of your grasp of game mechanics, and I think it's a pretty solid one. So, what gives?

[Manic Typist]

Re: Normal-proofing your Bricks?

 

 

For defense powers that are constant by default (or upgraded to Persistent), IPE (SFX Only) is generally fine since it makes the defense totally unconspicous until and unless it's challenged by an incoming attack. My Force Field is totally skintight, invisible, and silent (no noticeable SFX), so there's no way you may notice I have it in ordinary circumstances, unless you try to punch me and notice something is stopping your blows or preventing them from doing any significant damage (effects on target are visible) and you realize that it is caused by some power of mine (source is visible).

 

Hope that clarifies things.

 

So, at the (+1) level, the defense power creates an obvious manifestation. A flash of light, noise, obvious resistance, etc.

 

At the (+2) level, it has no indicators at all beyond the fact that the target isn't taking damage. "I hit him as hard as I could, and he didn't budge!" "Bullets just bounce right off of him!!!!"

 

Right?