damage negation v. damage reduction

[drsid]

I am having a bit of difficulty grasping the difference between these two powers. Are they essentially different ways of achieving a similar effect, or am I missing something? When would you use one versus the other?

 

For example, lets say I want to build a kevlar vest for a police detective. Would I use damage negation or damage reduction?

[Sidetrack]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

Similar effects that vary a bit as you as you walk up the damage class ladder. To me, a kevlar vest would simply be Resistant Protection.

[lemming]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

I am having a bit of difficulty grasping the difference between these two powers. Are they essentially different ways of achieving a similar effect, or am I missing something? When would you use one versus the other?

 

For example, lets say I want to build a kevlar vest for a police detective. Would I use damage negation or damage reduction?

 

Damage is done in this order:

• Damage Negation reduces number of dice rolled
  
• Defenses subtract from the roll
  
• Damage Reduction reduces damage taken
  

 

So if Fire Blaster with a 12d6 Blast comes up to Agent X who has these defenses

• 20 ED
  
• 2 levels of Damage Negation (fire)
  
• 50% Damage reduction
  

 

Fire Blaster first subtracts 2 dice from his roll, leaving 10d6

FB rolls 10d6 with 35 Stun, and 10 Body

Agent X subtracts 20 from the totals, so no body taken, and 15 stun

Agent X then subtracts 8 more stun for the Damage reduction.

 

Agent X takes 7 stun

[Daltwisney]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

A Kevlar vest is a form of Armor, and usually built as Resistant Protection, rather than Damage Reduction or Negation.

 

Damage Reduction in its most basic form represents someone or something that 'feels less pain' than a person without it. They don't necessarily have defenses (such as PD or ED) that are more powerful than others, they simply suffer less effect from damage past those defenses, typically making them harder to Stun or Kill.

 

Damage Negation represents the ability to completely ignore Damage up to a certain threshold. The benefit is most easily seen in regards to Killing Damage.

A 2d6 Killing attack won't penetrate 12 resistant defense, but you'd need 36 Total Defense (PD or ED, depending on the attack), to completely avoid taking Stun. 6 DCs of Damage Negation means the Damage from the weapon is lowered by 6 DCs (usually equal to 2d6 Killing Damage), thus the damage is never rolled, and the character doesn't need that higher PD or ED to avoid potential Stun.

 

Negation can be VERY powerful.

 

Resistant Defense can be compared to Armor,

Damage Reduction can be compared to Toughness,

Damage negation can be compared to Invulnerability.

 

These are rough parallels, and by no means the only interpretations.

[drsid]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

thanks for the detailed explanation. This helps me understand things much better!

[dmjalund]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

don't forget the difference on how Knockback is treated

[drsid]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

I have to say, given the density of the books, one thing that would help in the power section, particularly with regard to the issue of damage reduction v. negation, would have been to include a sidebar of how damage works. In fact, I have printed out Lemming's quick description and stuck it in that section of the powers for a later reminder. It is such a succinct and clear description of the damage progression and the place of powers in the scheme of things.

[ghost-angel]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

At the most basic - Damage Negation will be more effective against low DC attacks, and Damage Reduction will be more effective against high DC attacks.

 

While Daltwisney's comparisons are definitely the most common, I don't recommend thinking about how Powers work in terms of SFX. It's a dangerous mode to get into, don't lock yourself into thinking that Damage Reduction (or Negation) can't be used for body-armor just because it's not common.

[drsid]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

At the most basic - Damage Negation will be more effective against low DC attacks, and Damage Reduction will be more effective against high DC attacks.

 

While Daltwisney's comparisons are definitely the most common, I don't recommend thinking about how Powers work in terms of SFX. It's a dangerous mode to get into, don't lock yourself into thinking that Damage Reduction (or Negation) can't be used for body-armor just because it's not common.

 

I agree and I am trying to make a concerted effort to avoid looking at powers in terms of SFX. Some things, though, can be hard to conceptualize without some touchstones as it were. The examples in the book and DaltWisney's comparisons give some idea of how to think about things.

[Matt Holck]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

Physical Damage Negation is like Physical Defense

The value subtracts from the damage taken by the character.

 

Physical Damage Negation subtracts from the number of dice rolled to determine the damage before the dice are rolled.

Physical Defense subtracts from the amount of damage determined after the dice are rolled.

 

Both are linear in their response as both directly subtract from the damage taken.

They are very good at absorbing low and medium amounts of damage

 

 

 

Here I take a taken where a character with no PHYSICAL DEFENSE

but 30 points of either DAMAGE REDUCTION or DAMAGE NEGATION

and what the average stun is the character will take per die damage struck with

 

 

                                             Average damage taken after applying    
DAMAGE        Average    6 levels or 30 points of physical            30 points for 1/2 physical
DICE         damage           DAMAGE NEGATION                             DAMAGE REDUCTION
1             3.5                   0                                            1.75
2             7                     0                                            3.5
3             10.5                  0                                            5.25
4             14                    0                                            7
5             17.5                  0                                            8.75
6             21                    0                                           10.5
7             24.5                 3.5                                          12.25
8             28                   7                                            14
9             31.5                10.5                                          15.75
10            35                  14                                            17.5
11            38.5                17.5                                          19.25
12            42                  21                                            21
13            45.5                24.5                                          22.75
14            49                  28                                            24.5
15            52.5                31.5                                          26.25
16            56                  35                                            28
17            59.5                38.5                                          29.75
18            63                  42                                            31.5
19            66.5                45.5                                          33.25
20            70                  49                                            35
21            73.5                52.5                                          36.75
22            77                  56                                            38.5
23            80.5                59.5                                          40.25
24            84                  63                                            42
25            87.5                66.5                                          43.75
26            91                  70                                            45.5
27            94.5                73.5                                          47.25
28            98                  77                                            49
29           101.5                80.5                                          50.75
30           105                  84                                            52.5

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

I would note that Damage negation stacks much better with conventional defenses. Adding 20 PD to 50% damage reduction only reduces damage taken from a typical hit by 10.

[Sean Waters]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

I think of it this way: Damage Negation (and also PD, ED, Resistant Protection etc) are defences: you get hit and they reduce the amount of damage that is applied to your characteristics (STUN/BODY).

 

Damage Reduction is not a defence. It is, effectively a multplier to your CON, STUN and BODY (and arguably REC too) against certain sorts of damage. For instance if you have 50% damage reduction against fire , that effectively doubles the amount of stun you can take from fire.

 

Although mechanically they are both expressed as a reduction in damage taken, what is ACTUALLY happening is an effective increase in your ability to TAKE damage: except with TINY amounts of damage, DR will never stop you being hurt, it just means you can take more hits before dropping.

 

There is also no counter to damage reduction: resistant DR even affects 'NND' types attacks, whereas 'defences' can be countered (AP, NND, Reduced Negation). There is a limited exception to this: IIRC Penetrating attacks are not reduced by DR, at least not the bit that penetrates. not sure why that needs to be an exception, but there you have it.

[Lucius]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

You know, I seem to remember going down this road before.

 

You keep saying things like this

 

Damage Reduction is not a defence. It is, effectively a multplier to your CON, STUN and BODY (and arguably REC too) against certain sorts of damage. For instance if you have 50% damage reduction against fire , that effectively doubles the amount of stun you can take from fire.

 

Although mechanically they are both expressed as a reduction in damage taken, what is ACTUALLY happening

 

ACTUALLY, what is ACTUALLY ACTUALLY happening is that the damage that gets through defenses is reduced by 25%, 50%, or 75%.

 

Yep, that does mean you can "take more hits before dropping." Taking a lot of PD or ED or other Defense will also mean you can "take more hits before dropping."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wants 100% Damage Reduction

[Sean Waters]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

You know, I seem to remember going down this road before.

 

You keep saying things like this

 

 

 

ACTUALLY, what is ACTUALLY ACTUALLY happening is that the damage that gets through defenses is reduced by 25%, 50%, or 75%.

 

Yep, that does mean you can "take more hits before dropping." Taking a lot of PD or ED or other Defense will also mean you can "take more hits before dropping."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary wants 100% Damage Reduction

 

True but there is a VERY low damage threshold with damage reduction: defences have a cut off point below which they are completely effective, above which they are increasingly less effective, whereas damage resistance, because it works in a fundamentally different way, doesn't: it is equally effective (although not equally cost efficient) against any level of damage. You actually get a far better idea of what is happening if you don't think of it as a defence. If you buy 3/4 DR (physical, mental and energy) Resistant, the effect is identical to buying 4 times as much Stun, Body, CON and REC, because it works against everything. This has consequences that thinking of as a defence will not reveal: having made an investment in DR, it is sensible to buy up Stun and (maybe) Body because you get so much more utility from them.

 

Although I like DR, and use it often, I think the system would be better off without it - the effect can be built using characteristics (possibly with limitations), and you get a much clearer idea of what the character is capable of withstanding.

 

Looked at another way, the 'ultimate defence' is extra Stun (and possibly Body) because it stops every kind of damage, no matter how it is generated: you can not bypass Stun or Body when doing damage. Of course the stunning mechanism rather breaks that analysis down, but it is an interesting place to look at.

[Sean Waters]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

If The Palindromedary wants 100% DR then The Palindromedary needs to buy The Advanced Players Guide.

 

APG: making 1 stun worth infinity.

[tesuji]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

I would note that Damage negation stacks much better with conventional defenses. Adding 20 PD to 50% damage reduction only reduces damage taken from a typical hit by 10.

 

thats true but thats really a misuse of dr.

 

If you have "typical defenses" buying dr is a bad investment. If your gm would allow you to spend an additional 30 pts on resistant energy defense on TOP OF your normal level defenses, buy an additional 20 defense.

 

Where dr works better, is more cost effective, is when combine with low defenses, where you let 40 damage thru and then reduce it by 20 by spending 30 pts on resistant dr thats where you break even with typical defenses.

 

I often used this with "tough guy" builds where a strong character had only 6-10 defense but DR to reduce it by half. At 6 defense vs a 42 stun attack (12d6 avg) he lets 36 past defenses and cuts that to a very manageable 18 stun loss, the same bleed thru as a 24 def character would get. (body loss is still an issue tho and some type of regen or high body score is usually good.

 

The trade off there is "the dr guy gets some body damage but the dr guy is relatively safe from "lucky shot" causing stun due to high damage, since its 2-1 for him. At 25 con the 24 def guy is stunned by an attack only 8 above average - 50 stun - but the dr guy starts getting stunned at 56 stun hits or thereabout.

[Lucius]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

 

Although I like DR, and use it often, I think the system would be better off without it - the effect can be built using characteristics (possibly with limitations), and you get a much clearer idea of what the character is capable of withstanding.

 

 

It can? Have you done it?

 

I seem to remember that last time we had this converation, I was the one to try it.

 

My conclusion was that no, you can't get the same effect, and even trying to do so is a lot more complicated.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that a major problem Damage Reduction DOES have, however, is that it doesn't " scale" - it's a flat rate regardless of whether you're more apt to meet 6d6 or 20d6 attacks.

[lemming]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

For NPC's I've done the conceptual Damage Reduction by multiplying STUN, CON, BODY, and REC, but that's just to eliminate a step. I think Damage reduction is a much cleaner way to write it.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

thats true but thats really a misuse of dr.

 

If you have "typical defenses" buying dr is a bad investment. If your gm would allow you to spend an additional 30 pts on resistant energy defense on TOP OF your normal level defenses, buy an additional 20 defense.

 

Well, a poor use anyway. And you likely don't need the full extra 20 to be resistant, so you can get an even higher defense against STUN damage.

 

Where dr works better, is more cost effective, is when combine with low defenses, where you let 40 damage thru and then reduce it by 20 by spending 30 pts on resistant dr thats where you break even with typical defenses.

 

I often used this with "tough guy" builds where a strong character had only 6-10 defense but DR to reduce it by half. At 6 defense vs a 42 stun attack (12d6 avg) he lets 36 past defenses and cuts that to a very manageable 18 stun loss, the same bleed thru as a 24 def character would get. (body loss is still an issue tho and some type of regen or high body score is usually good.

 

Assuming resistant defenses, the other character should have 26 defenses, and those would all be resistant. Practically, he can likely get by quite adequately with 20 rDEF (42 stun posits 12 DC's, and 20 rDEF will avoid BOD from all but the best rolls on 12 DC KA's, and an average roll on 15 DC KA's, which will get a lot of BOD through to the DR character - tradeoff is that DR is more effective against more exotic attacks like AP and AVAD/NND, of course). So he can spend the same 30 points on +14 rDEF and +9 DEF, for a total of 29. Bleed through from 42 is now only 13. Damage reduction is seldom cost effective at all when DC's are lower than this.

 

The trade off there is "the dr guy gets some body damage but the dr guy is relatively safe from "lucky shot" causing stun due to high damage' date=' since its 2-1 for him. At 25 con the 24 def guy is stunned by an attack only 8 above average - 50 stun - but the dr guy starts getting stunned at 56 stun hits or thereabout.[/quote']

 

DR also gets some protection from attacks normal defenses are less effective against. A 9 1/2d6 AP attack rolls an average of 33.5,so say 34. Defense Guy takes 19 STUN (34 - 15). DR Guy takes 15 (34 - 3 = 31/2 = 15), so he has the advantage. Against an NND, DR Guy cuts the damage in half while Defense Guy takes full damage. That's the tradeoff to DR Guy taking BOD, in my view. Of course, Defense Guy could buy more defenses with the points DR Guy invests in extra BOD and/or Regeneration.

 

None of this mitigates my point, though - Damage Reduction is most effective when purchased by a low defense character. On that, it seems we clearly agree. Different tools for different purposes.

[Sean Waters]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

It can? Have you done it?

 

I seem to remember that last time we had this converation, I was the one to try it.

 

My conclusion was that no, you can't get the same effect, and even trying to do so is a lot more complicated.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that a major problem Damage Reduction DOES have, however, is that it doesn't " scale" - it's a flat rate regardless of whether you're more apt to meet 6d6 or 20d6 attacks.

 

If you buy 1/2 DR Resistant (PH, EN, Mental) that is the same as doubling stun, body and REC (for STUN) and CON (for stunning).

 

So the DR costs you 120 points.

 

To make it worthwhile (and obviously costs have changed quite a bit in 6e), you need to spend...hang on...

 

1/2+1+(let's say)1/2+(let's say)4/5...that's what....3 4/5.... divide 120 by that...that's about 32 points. So, what were we talking about?

[Matt Holck]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

both damage negation and damage reduction works against armor pierce

[dmjalund]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

Damage Negation reduces knockback. I don't think Damage Reduction affects knockback at all.

[Matt Holck]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

useful in a head butting contest

[bigbywolfe]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

What is?

[Lucius]

Re: damage negation v. damage reduction

 

If you buy 1/2 DR Resistant (PH, EN, Mental) that is the same as doubling stun, body and REC (for STUN) and CON (for stunning).

 

So the DR costs you 120 points.

 

To make it worthwhile (and obviously costs have changed quite a bit in 6e), you need to spend...hang on...

 

1/2+1+(let's say)1/2+(let's say)4/5...that's what....3 4/5.... divide 120 by that...that's about 32 points. So, what were we talking about?

 

At the moment, I'm not sure what you're talking about, but sometime this weekend I plan to start us up a thread so we can stop hijacking this one.

 

We can let the headbutting contest hijack this one instead.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

useful in a head butting contest

 

What is?

 

A palindromedary. It can butt heads with two people at once.