Suseptibilty vs. Vulnerability

[Cygnia]

In terms of Disads, what are the pros and cons from one over the other, be it from a role-playing standpoint, a mechanics standpoint, a GMing standpoint and/or a player's standpoint?

[Talon]

Re: Suseptibilty vs. Vulnerability

 

Most importantly, Vulnerability only works against things that cause damage of some sort (i.e., Attack Powers). If a character takes damage from something else, that's Susceptibility.

 

Susceptibility is nice because it lets you choose the effect level and frequency, so you can model "can only be out of water for X hours" for pretty much any value of X.

 

Vulnerabilities can be nasty because multiplying damage totals can result in a lot of damage. I played a character at a con with "2x STUN from physical attacks"; one bullet and she was at -45 STUN.

 

I prefer (both as a GM and a player) to point people toward Susceptibility since it's a "kinder" disad most of the time. Vulnerability is good for villains with an Achilles heel, and it does make sense for some PCs.

[braincraft]

Re: Suseptibilty vs. Vulnerability

 

Also, Vulnerability only increases damage taken. Susceptibility can be used to simulate other effects, such as a Drain (all Kryptonian Powers, when in the presence of green rocks), or a Transformation (Major, Into a Bloodthirsty Demon, when without sealing amulet).

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Suseptibilty vs. Vulnerability

 

Susceptibility also allows for characters who take a small, predictable amount of damage from a given effect, either over prolonged exposure or from instantaneous contact with an effect (such as an attack), while Vulnerability can lead to whopping damage from one attack. So, if you prefer a character who can be whittled down over time, Susceptibility works better. If you want the character to have a chance to be put down by a single attack, Vulnerability is the way to go.

[casualplayer]

Re: Suseptibilty vs. Vulnerability

 

Vulnerability is "hurts everyone, but me moreso" and Susceptability is "hurts no one but me." They often go hand in hand, as the amphibian can only stay out of water for a short period of time without experiencing pain (Susc) and is highly vulnerable to dehydration from heat/fire/dessication/vacuum (Vuln.)

 

You can give your whole non-super world Vulnerability (BODY&STUN) to Superpowers and suddenly the casualties and wreckage mount. It makes the supers more Super! without unbalancing the interaction of the powered. It takes Normals right out of the equation, but it does let Hulk Smash without having to ratchet his STR up to triple digits.

 

There was the old Mystic Masters suggestion of giving all non-magic users Vulnerability to Magic to crank up the immensity of magical powers. I have seen that one crop up in games every so often but can't say I care for it. Some do similar for Mental Powers and, likewise, I don't care for it unless all players benefit from the change.

 

I use Susceptability a lot as a pseudo-Side Effect, largely because I had access to Susceptability long before Side Effect was introduced and I prefer the granularity and flexability of Susc. I was shouted down mightily when I suggested this as a solution to a problem once (player wanted to know how to make a EB that burned STUN as well as END) so I think I'm a lone voice in the woods on this one. Boy, that hardly ever happens.

[BNakagawa]

Re: Suseptibilty vs. Vulnerability

 

Vulnerabilities can be taken to things other than damage to model some classic interactions of sfx.

 

A vampire could be built with a x2 vulnerability to presence attacks that used faith as a basis. This way, the classic use of a crucifix (by a believer) would have a decent chance of working, even if the potential victim was just a normal with an 8 PRE.

 

An iron golem might have massive KB resistance but maybe it wouldn't work and the golem might have x2 KB from magnetic attacks.

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Suseptibilty vs. Vulnerability

 

So yeah. That should accurately explain the difference.

 

Glad I could help!

[Psylint]

Re: Suseptibilty vs. Vulnerability

 

Vulnerabilities are dicey. In many campaigns, folks tend to gravitate towards the caps, that is to say, that almost all characters have the maximum amount of damage allowed for that campaign. In such circumstances an attack that leverages a vulnerability is often devastating, and often in the case of my characters (who, for concept reasons, rarely have more than 10 resistant defense) fatal.

 

By contrast, a susceptibility will hurt, but tends to leave the character alive and awake enough to do something about it.

 

What I prefer to do is limit my defenses against X effect rather than take the disadvantage vulnerability, e.g. (Jack Frost has 20red but the last 10red is limited Not against fire/heat). Then when I get hit with the evil X power, it hurts a lot more, but isn't as often fatal.

 

Peace