Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

This is true to some extent. Of course, Thunderbolt could do knockback into a wall, in which case you'll be wishing that Field had some PD, and Ogre (well, a smarter Ogre...) could rip out a high tension power line to attack you with.

 

And we have no issue with multiple attack MP's, which can swap between various defense types they affect with ease.

 

Knockback at this level can easily be handled by the base defense. And there isn't always a convenient high tension power line to attack with.

 

In general, defense trumps offense. For example, a character who has a 50% chance to hit his foe but a 1% chance of being hit will do FAR better on average than someone who has a 99% chance to hit his foe and a 50% chance of being hit. Once you make yourself nigh invulnerable either through defenses or DCV, the battle is pretty much a foregone conclusion.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Knockback at this level can easily be handled by the base defense. And there isn't always a convenient high tension power line to attack with.

 

In general, defense trumps offense. For example, a character who has a 50% chance to hit his foe but a 1% chance of being hit will do FAR better on average than someone who has a 99% chance to hit his foe and a 50% chance of being hit. Once you make yourself nigh invulnerable either through defenses or DCV, the battle is pretty much a foregone conclusion.

 

Wel, if one character has 36 defenses and a 3d6 attack and the other has 18 defenses and a 6d6 attack, the battle isn't going to end at all...

 

I agree that the implications of high overall defenses are significant. Try making a "well nigh invulnerable" character in Hero. Remember, also, that the concept here is a character who may be able to be invulnerable to one attack type, but not to all attack types at once. Given the prevelance of attack multipowers, I'm not sold on the idea that the defense multipower is likely to make the character nigh invulnerable.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

I thought the aversion to the defensive MP came about from players trying to put exotic defenses in it (okay, maybe only legal with GM permission nowadays, but years ago things were a bit looser). So if you had a character with even a small MP (say 15pt pool) with Lack of Weakness, Flash, Power, and Mental Defense in it, maybe along with small PD/ED Force Field, then you could render yourself highly resistant if not immune to lots of unusual attacks and NNDs for a paltry number of points.

 

Of course you won't find that now, but the GM still has to be careful of VPPs that try to do the same thing.

 

___________________________________________________________

Rich people scare me. They can already evade taxes. - Grim Reaper

[GAZZA]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

I don't see any reason not to have variant defences in a Multipower. Of course the caveat is that they're less useful than attacks - when you're using an attack multipower, it is (by definition) your phase. It may not be your phase when you want to change your defence slot - you may have to abort, for example.

 

But yeah, I can't see why that shouldn't be allowed.

[Force]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

The example becomes worse if the character starts throwing in 1 pt Power' date=' Mental, and Flash Defense slots that give +15 of the relevant defense.[/quote']

 

While not forbidden by the rules, you can only put these in a mp with special permission from a gm.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

While not forbidden by the rules' date=' you can only put these in a mp with special permission from a gm.[/quote']

 

Not if you make them force field slots. Force field is a standard power.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Wel, if one character has 36 defenses and a 3d6 attack and the other has 18 defenses and a 6d6 attack, the battle isn't going to end at all...

 

I agree that the implications of high overall defenses are significant. Try making a "well nigh invulnerable" character in Hero. Remember, also, that the concept here is a character who may be able to be invulnerable to one attack type, but not to all attack types at once. Given the prevelance of attack multipowers, I'm not sold on the idea that the defense multipower is likely to make the character nigh invulnerable.

 

 

If the attacker has a multipower with both physical and energy attacks, then the defender can't optimize. If the attacker only has 1 type of attack, he's screwed.

[GAZZA]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

If the attacker has a multipower with both physical and energy attacks' date=' then the defender can't optimize. If the attacker only has 1 type of attack, he's screwed.[/quote']

I'm not clear on why.

 

If the campaign guidelines are (say) 12 DC and 30 DEF, then a multipower such as:

 

Force Field MP, 40pt reserve [40]

40 PD Force Field [8-m]

40 ED Force Field [8-m]

 

is against those guidelines, so that's no problem.

 

On the other hand, if even under the best possible circumstances the guideline is still met (halve the multipower above, and assume 10 PD and 10 ED from other sources), then some guy with a 12d6 Energy Blast and no physical attack isn't exactly screwed - he's just not as well off as if he had physical and energy (or flash and energy, or NND and energy, or whatever). It isn't really surprising that someone with multiple types of attacks is more versatile than someone who isn't.

 

The case where someone throws up something like:

 

Force Field MP, 40pt reserve [40]

20 PD Force Field [4-m]

20 ED Force Field [4-m]

20 Mental Defence Force Field [4-m]

20 Power Defence Force Field [4-m]

20 Flash Defence (sight) Force Field [4-m]

 

doesn't exactly terrify, either. Few attackers will be totally reliant on something defended only by flash or power defence (and if they are, then they are shut down just as handily by anyone with 20 Power/Flash defence "normally" as well). Mentalists might indeed only have Mental Defence defended attacks, but any target with 20 mental defence is hard to hurt if you happen to be one of those mentalists - and this defender has to leave himself open to one of your buddies in order to defend himself against you.

 

I'm sure some sort of abusive constructs can be made with this idea, but I don't think it's innately awful any more than an "all attack" multipower is - less so, because of the timing issue (you'll either be aborting a lot, or else have to take a guess that you'll be wrong about on occasion).

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

If the campaign guidelines are (say) 12 DC and 30 DEF, then a multipower such as:

 

Force Field MP, 40pt reserve [40]

40 PD Force Field [8-m]

40 ED Force Field [8-m]

 

is against those guidelines, so that's no problem.

 

ASIDE: This is why I hate hard and fast campaign guidelines. If a 30 PD and 30 ED is not abusive, it's tough for me to imagine having a 40 PD and a 15 ED as being abusive. The hard and fast "guideline" suggested above simply says "No, take 30 PD and 30 ED every time".

 

ON TOPIC: I fully agree with the rest of your post. If my game had a 30 PD/ED guideline, and a player presented me with the above Multipower for a character with, say, 10 PD and 10 ED, I'd consider it carefully. He can have campaign guideline defenses, plus optimize to PD and ED. If the Multipower were reduced to 30/30, or he had 5 PD/ED, I'd be more inclined to accept it. He can beat the guideline on one side, but only at the cost of being more vulnerable on the other side AND being below the campaign guideline when splitting his defenses equally. Alternatively, if he made the 40 PD/ED slots Ultras, I might also accept it with 10/10 PD/ED.

[GAZZA]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

ASIDE: This is why I hate hard and fast campaign guidelines. If a 30 PD and 30 ED is not abusive' date=' it's tough for me to imagine having a 40 PD and a 15 ED as being abusive. The hard and fast "guideline" suggested above simply says "No, take 30 PD and 30 ED every time".[/quote']

I don't really disagree with the thrust of this, but I would imagine I'm not alone amongst GMs in pushing players who have PCs with high PD/ED to have correspondingly lower DCV, damage, or what not.

 

But yeah, "hard guidelines" should be a contradiction in terms. I might try using the effectiveness rating from DH3 as a more flexible sort of guideline.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

I'm not clear on why.

 

If the campaign guidelines are (say) 12 DC and 30 DEF, then a multipower such as:

 

Force Field MP, 40pt reserve [40]

40 PD Force Field [8-m]

40 ED Force Field [8-m]

 

is against those guidelines, so that's no problem.

 

On the other hand, if even under the best possible circumstances the guideline is still met (halve the multipower above, and assume 10 PD and 10 ED from other sources), then some guy with a 12d6 Energy Blast and no physical attack isn't exactly screwed - he's just not as well off as if he had physical and energy (or flash and energy, or NND and energy, or whatever). It isn't really surprising that someone with multiple types of attacks is more versatile than someone who isn't.

 

The case where someone throws up something like:

 

Force Field MP, 40pt reserve [40]

20 PD Force Field [4-m]

20 ED Force Field [4-m]

20 Mental Defence Force Field [4-m]

20 Power Defence Force Field [4-m]

20 Flash Defence (sight) Force Field [4-m]

 

doesn't exactly terrify, either. Few attackers will be totally reliant on something defended only by flash or power defence (and if they are, then they are shut down just as handily by anyone with 20 Power/Flash defence "normally" as well). Mentalists might indeed only have Mental Defence defended attacks, but any target with 20 mental defence is hard to hurt if you happen to be one of those mentalists - and this defender has to leave himself open to one of your buddies in order to defend himself against you.

 

I'm sure some sort of abusive constructs can be made with this idea, but I don't think it's innately awful any more than an "all attack" multipower is - less so, because of the timing issue (you'll either be aborting a lot, or else have to take a guess that you'll be wrong about on occasion).

 

 

Not all campaigns have hard caps. You haven't really responded to my point that attackers reliant on 1 attack form such as bricks, martial artists, most weapon masters, and many blasters are screwed vs this type of multipower. In fact, it looks like you're agreeing.

 

The difference between the multipower structure and someone with Power/Flash/Mental defense "normally" is that it costs only 1-4 pts for lots of protection in the multipower vs full price if bought straight. And that's a pretty huge difference. In my sample multipower, it costs only 1 pt to gain 15 pts of mental defense.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

FYI, I asked a related question in the rules forum last year.

 

Multipowers and variable defense Force Fields

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50652

 

Hi Steve,

 

Is there a specific rule against combining different reserve levels of slots 2 and 3 below? (Similar to the one regarding stacking Force Walls)

 

Cost POWERS

60 Multipower, 60-point reserve - END=

12m 1) Defense Power (normal): FF (30 PD/30 ED) (60 Active Points) - END=6

6m 2) Defense Power (split-example 1): FF (30 PD) (30 Active Points) - END=3

6m 3) Defense Power (split-example 2): FF (30 ED) (30 Active Points) - END=3

12m 4) Attack Power: EB 12d6 (60 Active Points) - END=6

12m 5) Movement Power: Flight 30" (60 Active Points) - END=6

Steve answered:

There's no rule against it. The GM might object on the ground of possible abusiveness, however. (Though I should note that it looks to me like the 12 points spent on Slot #1 are wasted, since using slots 2 and 3 at full strength accomplishes the same thing.)

So Steve is essentially conceding that given a multipower reserve like:

60 Multipower, 60-point reserve

 

with the following slot:

12m 1) Defense Power (normal): FF (30 PD/30 ED) (60 Active Points) - END=6

 

can be instead be purchased and used independently or together as:

6m 2) Defense Power (split-example 1): FF (30 PD) (30 Active Points) - END=3

and

6m 3) Defense Power (split-example 2): FF (30 ED) (30 Active Points) - END=3

 

To make arguments against a 60 PD slot is really just an argument about hard caps which is a separate issue imo.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Not all campaigns have hard caps. You haven't really responded to my point that attackers reliant on 1 attack form such as bricks' date=' martial artists, most weapon masters, and many blasters are screwed vs this type of multipower. In fact, it looks like you're agreeing.[/quote']

 

Defenders reliant on only one type of defense are equally screwed vs a multipower with an array of attack types. If I have high normal PD and ED, but my opponent has a multipower with an EB, RKA, Sight Flash, AVLD vs Sight Flash, Ego Attack and STR Drain, I'm just as screwed as the Mentalist going up against a character with a Multipower slot that holds +40 Mental Defense.

 

The difference between the multipower structure and someone with Power/Flash/Mental defense "normally" is that it costs only 1-4 pts for lots of protection in the multipower vs full price if bought straight. And that's a pretty huge difference. In my sample multipower' date=' it costs only 1 pt to gain 15 pts of mental defense.[/quote']

 

That attacker gets his extra attacks for 6 points each, assuming no limitations and 13 DC's.

 

[Just pointed out to me - POST #8,000 No wonder I have so much work on my desk...]

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Defenders reliant on only one type of defense are equally screwed vs a multipower with an array of attack types. If I have high normal PD and ED' date=' but my opponent has a multipower with an EB, RKA, Sight Flash, AVLD vs Sight Flash, Ego Attack and STR Drain, I'm just as screwed as the Mentalist going up against a character with a Multipower slot that holds +40 Mental Defense.[/quote']

 

That gets back to the whole Defense trumps Offense factor. If the attacker is using his multipower to attack the defenders weaker defenses, presumably the defender can be fighting back effectively at the same time. If the defender uses his multipower to make himself nigh invulnerable, he can take apart the attacker at his leisure. As I stated before, a character who has a 50% chance to hit his foe but a 1% chance of being hit will do FAR better on average than someone who has a 99% chance to hit his foe and a 50% chance of being hit. It's simply the dynamics of how the game works and how attack interacts with defense.

 

 

 

That attacker gets his extra attacks for 6 points each, assuming no limitations and 13 DC's.

 

Well, defenses are significantly cheaper than attacks because you generally have to purchase multiple types. If you can optimize the defense against a specific attacker, that dynamic breaks down. 1 pt of defense generally blocks 5/3.5 or 1.43 pts of attack for a standard attack, or 2.86 pts of attack for something like ego attack. So points in a spot defense are magnified compared to points in spot attacks.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

That gets back to the whole Defense trumps Offense factor. If the attacker is using his multipower to attack the defenders weaker defenses' date=' presumably the defender can be fighting back effectively at the same time.[/quote']

 

Unless he has to keep aborting to optimize his defenses. Yes, "Only One Attack Man" is unable to defeat "Optimized Defense Man" if the latter is prepared. He's also unable to defeat anyone whoi always has the level of defenses against his attack that Optimized Defense Man can muster when prepared.

 

If I would allow a player to have a 5/5 PD/ED and a multipower of +40 PD and +40 ED Force Field, I should be equally willing to allow a character with 45 PD and 5 ED. Both will be tough for a 50 STR Brick to beat.

 

Well' date=' defenses are significantly cheaper than attacks because you generally have to purchase multiple types. If you can optimize the defense against a specific attacker, that dynamic breaks down. 1 pt of defense generally blocks 5/3.5 or 1.43 pts of attack for a standard attack, or 2.86 pts of attack for something like ego attack. So points in a spot defense are magnified compared to points in spot attacks.[/quote']

 

How do you optimize against an opponent with 2 or more attacks, affecting different defense types? A Martial Artist with a 15 DCV is pretty secure battling an Energy Projector with a 6 OCV. Hopefully, that isn't the only matchup either character will ever see!

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Unless he has to keep aborting to optimize his defenses. Yes, "Only One Attack Man" is unable to defeat "Optimized Defense Man" if the latter is prepared. He's also unable to defeat anyone whoi always has the level of defenses against his attack that Optimized Defense Man can muster when prepared.

 

If I would allow a player to have a 5/5 PD/ED and a multipower of +40 PD and +40 ED Force Field, I should be equally willing to allow a character with 45 PD and 5 ED. Both will be tough for a 50 STR Brick to beat.

 

The person with 45/5 straight can only fight one type of foe. The dude with a multipower would annihilate in a one on one, bricks, martial artists, most weapon masters, many blasters, mentallists, people who depend on power attacks, etc. And with a balanced slot in his multipower like in my example, he'd do just fine vs foes with multiple types of attacks.

 

Big huge difference between the fixed 45/5 and the multipower.

 

 

How do you optimize against an opponent with 2 or more attacks, affecting different defense types? A Martial Artist with a 15 DCV is pretty secure battling an Energy Projector with a 6 OCV. Hopefully, that isn't the only matchup either character will ever see!

 

I specifically stated throughout this thread that the character would crush anyone who depended on a single attack type (a good chunk of the super population). I'm not sure why you're bringing in someone with 2 attacks vs difference defense types. And what does the 15 DCV MA have to do with what was quoted?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

The person with 45/5 straight can only fight one type of foe. The dude with a multipower would annihilate in a one on one, bricks, martial artists, most weapon masters, many blasters, mentallists, people who depend on power attacks, etc. And with a balanced slot in his multipower like in my example, he'd do just fine vs foes with multiple types of attacks.

 

Big huge difference between the fixed 45/5 and the multipower.

 

Some difference, to be sure. That's why, as a GM, I would probably require the Multipower character be less defended overall (or inferior somewhere else) to the fixed 45/5 defense character. But he'd also likely face a lot of opponents who have the ability to mix up their attacks, whether that be single opponents with multiple attack forms, or teams of individuals with different single attack forms.

 

If your game consists primarily of one on one cage matches, maybe this is a problem - or maybe it means offense must be designed to enable the character to attack more than one defense type if he is to be effective.

 

I question whether your concern is more related to the low cost of adding a MP slot than it is with whether those slots are offensive or defensive.

 

And what does the 15 DCV MA have to do with what was quoted?

 

I snipped the "only hits 1% vs hits 50%" discussion - sorry. But, just like I would expect that 15 DCV MA to crush that 6 OCV Blaster AND the guy who can have a 45 PD to trash the 50 STR Brick, I would expect they will each face opponents that are not so easy for their particular power set to crush. If I didn't expect that, why would I approve their characters? I don't think that Defensive Multipower is markedly harder to deal with than an Offensive Multipower.

[GAZZA]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Not all campaigns have hard caps. You haven't really responded to my point that attackers reliant on 1 attack form such as bricks' date=' martial artists, most weapon masters, and many blasters are screwed vs this type of multipower. In fact, it looks like you're agreeing.[/quote']

No, I specifically did respond: they're not screwed, just not as flexible (no surprise there). A 12d6 attack is more than capable of hurting someone with 30 DEF. Sure, if they can switch to a 12d6 energy attack and take advantage of much lower DEF they're going to to better - but that doesn't mean that the guy who can't do that is screwed.

 

The difference between the multipower structure and someone with Power/Flash/Mental defense "normally" is that it costs only 1-4 pts for lots of protection in the multipower vs full price if bought straight. And that's a pretty huge difference. In my sample multipower, it costs only 1 pt to gain 15 pts of mental defense.

And the other difference is that you have to take a 0 phase action to switch it on, which you don't have to do if you buy it outside the multipower. That, too, is a pretty huge difference: you often don't know you need mental defence until you're the victim of such an attack. You might be able to abort to switch it on, but you're taking a chance.

[GAZZA]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

The person with 45/5 straight can only fight one type of foe. The dude with a multipower would annihilate in a one on one' date=' bricks, martial artists, most weapon masters, many blasters, mentallists, people who depend on power attacks, etc. And with a balanced slot in his multipower like in my example, he'd do just fine vs foes with multiple types of attacks.[/quote']

Much the same way someone with a sufficiently flexible attack multipower containing Energy Blasts, RKAs, NNDs, Drains, and so forth would do against most defenders.

 

If the attacker type is allowed, I can't see what the problem is with the defender.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Some difference, to be sure. That's why, as a GM, I would probably require the Multipower character be less defended overall (or inferior somewhere else) to the fixed 45/5 defense character. But he'd also likely face a lot of opponents who have the ability to mix up their attacks, whether that be single opponents with multiple attack forms, or teams of individuals with different single attack forms.

 

If your game consists primarily of one on one cage matches, maybe this is a problem - or maybe it means offense must be designed to enable the character to attack more than one defense type if he is to be effective.

 

I question whether your concern is more related to the low cost of adding a MP slot than it is with whether those slots are offensive or defensive.

 

My game consists of one on one matches, many on many matches, one on many matches, etc. In some subset of cases X, the multipower dude is no worse off than a regular defender. In (1-X) cases, he crushes.

 

 

I snipped the "only hits 1% vs hits 50%" discussion - sorry. But, just like I would expect that 15 DCV MA to crush that 6 OCV Blaster AND the guy who can have a 45 PD to trash the 50 STR Brick, I would expect they will each face opponents that are not so easy for their particular power set to crush. If I didn't expect that, why would I approve their characters? I don't think that Defensive Multipower is markedly harder to deal with than an Offensive Multipower.

 

There are a lot more opponents where the multipower defender will crush. Anyone who depends on 1 attack form which is a fairly large chunk of the super population. Much larger than a 6 OCV blaster in a world with 15 DCV martial artists.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

No' date=' I specifically did respond: they're not screwed, just not as flexible (no surprise there). A 12d6 attack is more than capable of hurting someone with 30 DEF. Sure, if they can switch to a 12d6 energy attack and take advantage of much lower DEF they're going to to better - but that doesn't mean that the guy who can't do that is screwed.[/quote']

 

If the attacker is spending the exact same points on multiple defenses, he probably has 22 PD/ED. The defender with his defensive multipower and 12d6 attacks is going to be taking down that attacker much quicker. And that's only if you have a hard cap of 30 on defenses. Many GMs do not. Increase that spot defense to 40 and the 12d6 becomes fairly ineffective.

 

And the other difference is that you have to take a 0 phase action to switch it on, which you don't have to do if you buy it outside the multipower. That, too, is a pretty huge difference: you often don't know you need mental defence until you're the victim of such an attack. You might be able to abort to switch it on, but you're taking a chance.

 

Somehow at a cost of 1 pt for +15 mental defense or +15 power defense, that's a cost I'm willing to live with.

 

Much the same way someone with a sufficiently flexible attack multipower containing Energy Blasts, RKAs, NNDs, Drains, and so forth would do against most defenders.

 

If the attacker type is allowed, I can't see what the problem is with the defender.

 

Again as I've explained before in this thread, 1 pt spent on defense generally counters 1.43 pts spent on offense for regular attacks or 2.86 pts spent on something like ego attack. Conversely, 1 pt spent on attack only counters .7 pts spent on defense or .35 pts if it's an ego attack.

 

The balancing point is that usually you have to purchase multiple defenses to cover your bases. This dynamic becomes completely skewed if you have a defensive multipower.

[GAZZA]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

If the attacker is spending the exact same points on multiple defenses' date=' he probably has 22 PD/ED.[/quote']

Unless of course he's using a multipower of them as well...

 

Increase that spot defense to 40 and the 12d6 becomes fairly ineffective.

In precisely the same fashion as anyone else having a 40 defence does.

 

(about the need to abort...)

Somehow at a cost of 1 pt for +15 mental defense or +15 power defense, that's a cost I'm willing to live with.

Fair enough; I wouldn't be:

• You have to abort, and you can't always do so.
  
• Having aborted, you've just wasted a phase. So at the very least the attacker has avoided one of your attacks in return for attacking you, and if he rolls well he might even squeeze some damage through. Bonus! If he is as flexible in attack as you are in defence, then you will never be able to attack him (assuming equal SPD) unless you decide to not abort-and-switch-defences... at which point you're going to be taking the brunt of whatever he's throwing at you.
  
• If you're talking a many-on-many match up (not an uncommon situation) then every time you switch defences to avoid A's exotic attack you leave yourself open to B's more mundane attack (or perhaps you leave yourself open to energy while protecting against physical).

Fact of the matter is that barring some sort of house rule there's absolutely nothing illegal about this construct - and it really doesn't seem abusive enough to me to require such a house rule.

 

Again as I've explained before in this thread, 1 pt spent on defense generally counters 1.43 pts spent on offense for regular attacks or 2.86 pts spent on something like ego attack. Conversely, 1 pt spent on attack only counters .7 pts spent on defense or .35 pts if it's an ego attack.

 

The balancing point is that usually you have to purchase multiple defenses to cover your bases.

Err, no, the balancing point is that defences are supposed to be cheaper than attacks. Indeed, if the prevalence of exotic attacks was such that defences were no longer cost effective you would probably have to argue for a reduction in their cost.

 

This dynamic becomes completely skewed if you have a defensive multipower.

Then by inference if you don't have defensive multipowers, anyone using an attack multipower is exploiting this ratio in the opposite direction.

 

My first 12d6 Energy Blast costs me 60 points; you can pay 60 * 0.7 = 42 points on defences to counter that. But then my second 12d6 Energy Blast (this one against Physical) costs me only 12 points (change the construct to a 60 point multipower with 2 6 point ultra slots), and yet you'd need another 42 points of defence.

 

If the argument "But you can only use one at a time" is valid for attacks... then why not for defences?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

My game consists of one on one matches, many on many matches, one on many matches, etc. In some subset of cases X, the multipower dude is no worse off than a regular defender. In (1-X) cases, he crushes.

 

There are a lot more opponents where the multipower defender will crush. Anyone who depends on 1 attack form which is a fairly large chunk of the super population. Much larger than a 6 OCV blaster in a world with 15 DCV martial artists.

 

Every character has (or should have) an Achilles' heel. A high DCV character is a difficult opponent for characters with lower OCV and no attacks that target areas or ECV. A character with no mental defense is easy prey for a mentalist. That same mentalist has difficulty dealing with a target with mental defense, or an automoton. The high DCV character is ready prey for a character with 1 hex AoE attacks. A character with only one type of attacks is a powerhouse against an opponent who lacks the appropriate defense, and pathetic against someone who has high defenses in that area. A character who can be strongly defended against any one attack form suffers against opponents with multiple attack forms. A large number of soft targets with potent weaponry is much more effective against a character whose powers don't facilitate attacking multiple targets in a single action than against a character with effective area effect attacks. A character with Darkness devestates characters lacking enhanced senses, and an NND is either very powerful or utterly useless.

 

Yes, there are opponents against which a character with the ability to become nigh invulnerable to a single attack type is extremely powerful. It doesn't make him any more unbeatable than any of the other poor matches described above. And all of these highlight the need for the GM to consider the abilities of his PC's in designing reasonable opposition.

 

Facing a character off, one on one, against an opponent his usual tactics are utterly useless against often makes for a very good story - can our hero get creative, or is he useless against an opponent he can't simply punch out?

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Unless of course he's using a multipower of them as well...

 

If everyone has the same multipower, then no problem. However, that is not going to be the case.

 

In precisely the same fashion as anyone else having a 40 defence does.

 

Not in precisely the same fashion. The person without multipower who has 40 def either spent gobs more points to have 40/40 or he's permanently going to be at a huge disad if he's at 40/15 and gets attacked by the wrong attack. The multipower dude has the best of all worlds, a PD slot, ED slot, and balanced slot. He'll crush both Brickman and Laserman whereas your 40 def person crushes Brickman but gets annihilated by Laserman.

 

(about the need to abort...)

 

Fair enough; I wouldn't be:

• You have to abort, and you can't always do so.
  
• Having aborted, you've just wasted a phase. So at the very least the attacker has avoided one of your attacks in return for attacking you, and if he rolls well he might even squeeze some damage through. Bonus! If he is as flexible in attack as you are in defence, then you will never be able to attack him (assuming equal SPD) unless you decide to not abort-and-switch-defences... at which point you're going to be taking the brunt of whatever he's throwing at you.
  
• If you're talking a many-on-many match up (not an uncommon situation) then every time you switch defences to avoid A's exotic attack you leave yourself open to B's more mundane attack (or perhaps you leave yourself open to energy while protecting against physical).

Fact of the matter is that barring some sort of house rule there's absolutely nothing illegal about this construct - and it really doesn't seem abusive enough to me to require such a house rule.

 

You don't have to abort if you're expecting the attack. Do your characters ALWAYS get the drop on the PCs? And if the multipower dude catches Egoman or Powerman by himself, he crushes them for a grand total of 2 pts.

 

Err, no, the balancing point is that defences are supposed to be cheaper than attacks. Indeed, if the prevalence of exotic attacks was such that defences were no longer cost effective you would probably have to argue for a reduction in their cost.

 

That's simply an assertion. In actual gameplay, the balancing factor is that characters have to buy up both PD and ED. If there was simply Defense, then it would be too cheap at 1 pt per point.

 

Then by inference if you don't have defensive multipowers, anyone using an attack multipower is exploiting this ratio in the opposite direction.

 

My first 12d6 Energy Blast costs me 60 points; you can pay 60 * 0.7 = 42 points on defences to counter that. But then my second 12d6 Energy Blast (this one against Physical) costs me only 12 points (change the construct to a 60 point multipower with 2 6 point ultra slots), and yet you'd need another 42 points of defence.

 

If the argument "But you can only use one at a time" is valid for attacks... then why not for defences?

 

1 pt in the defense multipower gives you +10 mental defense. That counters +29 pts of Ego Attack on average or +14 pts of Mind Control. That same point spent on an attack multipower gets you either +1d6 Ego Attack or +2d6 mind control which counters only 3.5 or 7 pts spent on defense.

 

If you can't see the massive discrepancy in this, there's no point in further discussing the issue.

[Gary]

Re: Attacks OK Defenses No Way?

 

Every character has (or should have) an Achilles' heel. A high DCV character is a difficult opponent for characters with lower OCV and no attacks that target areas or ECV. A character with no mental defense is easy prey for a mentalist. That same mentalist has difficulty dealing with a target with mental defense' date=' or an automoton. The high DCV character is ready prey for a character with 1 hex AoE attacks. A character with only one type of attacks is a powerhouse against an opponent who lacks the appropriate defense, and pathetic against someone who has high defenses in that area. A character who can be strongly defended against any one attack form suffers against opponents with multiple attack forms. A large number of soft targets with potent weaponry is much more effective against a character whose powers don't facilitate attacking multiple targets in a single action than against a character with effective area effect attacks. A character with Darkness devestates characters lacking enhanced senses, and an NND is either very powerful or utterly useless.[/quote']

 

Multipower dude doesn't have an Achilles Heel. That's the whole point of the defensive multipower.

 

Yes, there are opponents against which a character with the ability to become nigh invulnerable to a single attack type is extremely powerful. It doesn't make him any more unbeatable than any of the other poor matches described above. And all of these highlight the need for the GM to consider the abilities of his PC's in designing reasonable opposition.

 

There are lots more foes where defensive multipower dude is nigh invulnerable than your typical unbalanced defense dude.

 

Facing a character off, one on one, against an opponent his usual tactics are utterly useless against often makes for a very good story - can our hero get creative, or is he useless against an opponent he can't simply punch out?

 

This statement has nothing to do with defensive multipower dude.