AVLD vs. NND

[Citizen Keen]

Help me, someone, please. I've looked over it a couple times, and I cannot for the life of me figure out what the differences are, in layman terms. Someone please explain it to me?

 

-cK

[OddHat]

In the examples below, the attacker's 6d6 always rolls 18 stun.

 

6d6 NND vs. Flash Def hits Bob. Bob has no flash def. He takes 18 stun

 

6d6 AVLD vs. Flash Def hits Bob. Bob has no flash def. He takes 18 stun

 

6d6 NND vs. Flash Def hits Mister Mirrorshades. MM has 10 Flash Def. He takes no stun

 

6d6 AVLD vs Flash Def hits Mister Mirrorshades. MM has 10 Flash Def. He takes 8 stun.

 

An NND is blocked entirely by the appropriate def, including unusual defenses. An AVLD is only partially blocked, and (iirc) must be applied against Power Def, Flash Def, or Mental Def (may be wrong on this last bit).

[Blue]

Simply put, if your attack is bought NND and the person you are striking actually has that defense, then they take NO DAMAGE AT ALL. If they don't have the appropriate defense, then the damage ALL GOES THROUGH.

 

If your attack is AVLD and the person you attack has the appropriate defense, then they subtract the defense from the damage you do. If they don't have it then they take all the damage.

 

 

(As a result, NND attacks can be odd things like "Target has Life Support" or "Target has gravity powers", whereas AVLD attacks can only be actual defenses, like Power Def, Ego Def, Flash Def, and if your GM is generous, Lack of Weakness, Knockback resistance)

[Killer Shrike]

All the above, plus from a design perspective NND is more open ended, allowing more unusual all-or-nothing type powers. AVLD is more corner case in its application, but is used to model things like Sonic Attacks vs FD Hearing or a Drain INT which is bought to represent Psychic Surgery, vs Mental DEF instead of Pow DEF, etc.

 

AVLD is more expensive bcs its not all-or-nothing where as NND has Exclusion clauses that totaly avoid harm.

[Col. Orange]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

...or a Drain INT which is bought to represent Psychic Surgery, vs Mental DEF instead of Pow DEF...

 

Interesting, I would have thought vs. Mental DEF rather than Power DEF would be a -0 Limitation. In our games Mental DEF is more common than Pow DEF (it seems easier to justify - "I've trained with telepaths to sheild my mind" vs. "I'm from Krypton"). Plus Mental DEF gets a bonus of one fifth your EGO, so you end up with more DEF for your points.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Col. Orange

Interesting, I would have thought vs. Mental DEF rather than Power DEF would be a -0 Limitation. In our games Mental DEF is more common than Pow DEF (it seems easier to justify - "I've trained with telepaths to sheild my mind" vs. "I'm from Krypton"). Plus Mental DEF gets a bonus of one fifth your EGO, so you end up with more DEF for your points.

its a +3/4 Advantage rather than the usual +1 1/2.

 

Although as an aside unless you are enforcing a house rule, you dont need any particular SFX to get PowDEF. Its just a resistance to Adjustments and has no greater significance that would require an unusual origin to have it.

[Col. Orange]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike

Although as an aside unless you are enforcing a house rule, you dont need any particular SFX to get PowDEF.

 

I see what you mean. Well, at least I can see a super/heroic normal having it with the SFX "Tougher than most" - Its believable that our old veteran is more resistant to Dr. Necropolips' Death ray than, say, the DNPC mother in law.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Col. Orange

Interesting, I would have thought vs. Mental DEF rather than Power DEF would be a -0 Limitation. In our games Mental DEF is more common than Pow DEF (it seems easier to justify - "I've trained with telepaths to sheild my mind" vs. "I'm from Krypton"). Plus Mental DEF gets a bonus of one fifth your EGO, so you end up with more DEF for your points.

 

My general rule (which is not the official rule, I know) is that switching between unusual defenses (Power, Mental and Flash) is not an advantage. It's silly to have to pay +1 1/2 to make your Flash work against mental or power defense. If it fits the conception, pick a different unusual defense.

 

An energy blast acts against PD or ED - your choice. Why should unusual attacks carry an extreme cost to change to a different unusual defense?

[Lord Liaden]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

My general rule (which is not the official rule, I know) is that switching between unusual defenses (Power, Mental and Flash) is not an advantage. It's silly to have to pay +1 1/2 to make your Flash work against mental or power defense. If it fits the conception, pick a different unusual defense.

 

An energy blast acts against PD or ED - your choice. Why should unusual attacks carry an extreme cost to change to a different unusual defense?

 

I agree that +1 1/2 would be too much, however IMO the +3/4 Advantage for switching between unusual defenses is not unreasonable. The issue as I see it is one of bypassing an opponent's preparations for a certain type of attack. For example, someone who's invested in polarized goggles to protect against blinding light Flashes may have no way to stop someone from directly deadening the sight receptors in his brain (Flash AVLD Mental Defense).

 

That being said, I think that I would prefer +1/2 rather than +3/4 in this case, but I'm not crying over it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

I agree that +1 1/2 would be too much, however IMO the +3/4 Advantage for switching between unusual defenses is not unreasonable.

 

A STUN drain costs 10 points per d6. An ego blast costs 10 points per d6. Why should it cost an extra 7.5 (or 5) points per d6 to have them act against the other defense?

 

Might as well just make that Drain "based on ECV", and get the ability to target against mental defense with no range modifiers for a paltry 2.5 points per die more.

 

If the cost of making an ordinary EB work against Flash, Mental or Power defense is no different, regardless of which defense is chosen, how is it hugely advantageous to switch the defenses?

 

Yes, Sunglass Man will actually be blinded by my Flash vs Mental Defense, but not a single Egoist will. Who is it more advantageous to blind? Probably the guy whose powers all have range = line of sight!

[Lord Liaden]

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

A STUN drain costs 10 points per d6. An ego blast costs 10 points per d6. Why should it cost an extra 7.5 (or 5) points per d6 to have them act against the other defense?

 

Might as well just make that Drain "based on ECV", and get the ability to target against mental defense with no range modifiers for a paltry 2.5 points per die more.

 

If you want no range modifiers, you might want to pay for Ranged on that Drain.

 

Originally posted by Hugh Neilson

If the cost of making an ordinary EB work against Flash, Mental or Power defense is no different, regardless of which defense is chosen, how is it hugely advantageous to switch the defenses?

 

Yes, Sunglass Man will actually be blinded by my Flash vs Mental Defense, but not a single Egoist will. Who is it more advantageous to blind? Probably the guy whose powers all have range = line of sight!

 

An Egoist might be blinded by it, depending on the amount of Mental Defense he has, and how large the AVLD is.

 

Normally only a very high-tech campaign might have Mental Defense as common as Sight Flash Defense, so overall this change is likely to be advantageous. Despite many RPGers' lip service to "concept over point efficiency", most players are really only going to make a change from one exotic defense attack to another if they anticipate that it's going to be to their advantage given the campaign parameters. If it's advantageous, it should be paid for accordingly.

 

There could be many campaigns where the specific example I gave would carry no practical benefit; that's true of any standardized Advantage. I think that the default AVLD value is a good standard for something that would be to the player's benefit, but if you foresaw no gains in changing the exotic defense an attack worked against in your campaign, I for one would certainly support making it a +0 Lim in that case.