NND vs Barrier

[Sean Waters]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

Just had a thought - Since a Barrier has PD/ED and BODY' date=' would a Mental Barrier have Mental Defence and EGO? [/quote']

 

No, I don't think so. 'Barrier' creates a physical object with BODY and/or defences, which can include (resistant) Mental Defence, but does not automatically. If a Barrier is hit with a Mental Blast, the mental blast will ignore it (and it will ignore the Mental Blast), unless it has Mental Defence in which case the damage total of the Mental Blast will be reduced but he Mental Defence of the Barrier. The Mental Blast will then continue on to the intended target, if there is anything left of it.

 

In no case (even if the Mental Blast has the 'Does Body' modifier) will the Body of the barrier be affected. A Mental Blast can never knock down a Barrier.

 

Of course there is nothing stopping you making a house rule that allows you to buy EGO for Barriers, that works just like Body does against 'physical' attacks. That might be quite sweet, in fact. There is no such thing as a Mental Barrier in the rules at present. Even if you bought a Barrier that JUST consisted of Mental Defence, it would still be affected by 'normal' attacks as a very fragile wall would.

 

This is all my interpretation of the rules, but I have been looking at these bits a lot recently

[Sean Waters]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

This is a very interesting question.

 

The way I'm reading 6e1pp169, while a Barrier can have Mental Defence, it doesn't look like it actually stops (say) a Mental Blast. I think that it merely subtracts from it. An example is probably warranted: let's say my Barrier has 5 PD, 5 ED, 5 BODY, and 5 Mental Defence (or Flash Defence, Power Defence, etc).

 

If I attack with a Blast or RKA, and do less than 10 BODY, then my attack is stopped by the Barrier (though if it did more than 5 BODY it will reduce the Barrier BODY for the next attack). But if I attack with a Mental Blast, I think it will still affect my (barrier protected) target - he'll just get an extra 5 Mental Defence. I am somewhat extrapolating from the "only to protect barrier" limitation here, possibly incorrectly. If I am wrong, and a Barrier can stop mental powers that don't do enough BODY to get through, then it is a perfect defence against most mental powers as none of them do BODY (one can of course construct powers that do). I'm a bit concerned about just how effective that would be. Of course such a barrier could still be brought down with normal attacks, but the possibility of something like a 10m long, 1m tall, 1/2m thick barrier with 12 BODY, 12 PD, 11 ED, and 1 Mental Defence as a 60 active point power, or something similar. (In other words, I'm hoping that diverting a single point of PD or ED to Mental Defence doesn't mean that you're invulnerable to any non-BODY inflicting mental powers).

 

The reason I would argue that you're not is because it isn't clear to me that Mental Powers need Indirect to target the person behind the barrier. It isn't, in fact, clear to me that mental powers are even affected by a barrier that has mental defence - they are described as working directly from one mind to another. It could be argued that the only reason to put Mental Defence in a barrier is to protect against exotic AVAD attacks that happen to target Mental Defence.

 

That is an interesting thought too - Mental Defence only for AVAD attacks...had not thought of that.

 

Bear in mind that you can TARGET anything you can perceive or guess the location of, with a physical or mental power. If there is something 'in the way' then (certainly with a physical attack) you have to break through to actually hit it. If you assume that Indirect is irrelevant to Mental Powers, as the book says, then your interpretation must be right - even a Barrier with Mental Defence will not impede a mental attack passing through it.

 

That feels wrong but is probably the only strict and literal interpretation. I personally would allow a Barrier with Mental Defence to defend someone inside it from external Mental Attack, as that makes more sense to me.

[GAZZA]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

Bear in mind that you can TARGET anything you can perceive or guess the location of' date=' with a physical or mental power.[/quote']

As I understand it, you can target anything with a physical power regardless of whether you can perceive it (obviously being able to perceive it will do wonders for your accuracy though ). I do not believe you can target something you cannot perceive with a targetting sense if you use a mental power. The Barrier description even alludes to this - if you make the barrier Opaque it will effectively protect you from many mentalists.

 

That feels wrong but is probably the only strict and literal interpretation. I personally would allow a Barrier with Mental Defence to defend someone inside it from external Mental Attack, as that makes more sense to me.

I don't really disagree; it feels strange that we have Mental Entangles as part of the core rules but no Mental Barriers. Even if I'm right, that opens up a nice opportunity for some enterprising youngster to create a power that will work in the desired fashion.

[Sean Waters]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

As I understand it' date=' you can target anything with a physical power regardless of whether you can perceive it (obviously being able to perceive it will do wonders for your accuracy though ). I do not believe you can target something you cannot perceive with a targetting sense if you use a mental power. The Barrier description even alludes to this - if you make the barrier Opaque it will effectively protect you from many mentalists.[/quote']

 

Up until about a week ago I would have agreed, but then I read 6.1.149:

If the character attacks a target he cannot perceive, but of whose location he’s reasonably sure, halve his OMCV. If he lacks LOS but has a fairly precise idea of where a target is (for example, he knows someone’s hiding in a particular closet or the trunk of a car), his OMCV might only suffer a -1 to -3 penalty.

 

I probably shouldn't be allowed near rule books, really. You've got to know roughly where to 'aim' - but then it is pretty much the same for physical attacks: indeed the rules are probably more generous than for physical attacks.

 

I don't really disagree; it feels strange that we have Mental Entangles as part of the core rules but no Mental Barriers. Even if I'm right' date=' that opens up a nice opportunity for some enterprising youngster to create a power that [b']will[/b] work in the desired fashion.

 

I think the old 'exotic force wall' rules could be adapted nicely...

[Fearghus]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

I have been paying close attention to this thread because this problem has occurred to me in the past. I am not certain that giving every no normal defense attack indirect for free is appropriate either though.

 

I have thought of various NND attacks I have built in the past. Most of them have been things like choke holds and stuff but I had one PC that had a wind blast attack that (forgive the pun) knocked the wind out of the victim. Basically it was that characters get away from me move. It is totally reasonable that the wind attack would b blocked by a normal barrier, on the other hand... the sheet of news print in the above examples should have been toast.

 

So after some though it occurs to me that maybe we shouldn't be house ruling the attack, but the barrier. Does a sheet of newsprint really have a whole point of body?

 

Maybe it is an object with zero body so any damage at all (even stun damage) destroys it? Maybe some fragile objects need an object form of the stun characteristic, and it is not destroyed until it's stun is used up? I am not certain of the answer here, but I just thought I would throw this idea out there. Though this could be opening a can of worms because then NND attacks could be used against fragile objects which doesn't make sense for some special effects either. After all why should a sonic scream that does stun damage to people with loud noise be able to have any effect at all on the sheet of news print?

 

In the end I think this is a case where you have to reason from special effect. Maybe apply certain other advantages or limitations to a power based on that special effect. building exotic attacks is always tricky because of the advantages and limitation that the special effect may imply anyway.

[Sean Waters]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

Perhaps for the wind blast, a 4d6 Blast linked to the NND, specifically there to shred relatively fragile barriers.

 

The sonics are more of an issue, but that ight be a case where Indirect makes sense: perhaps a limited version of Indirect that only works against certain objects.

 

You could do it with sfx, but I'm wary of expanding that too much.

 

Ooh - how about this:

 

5d6 NND Blast: 50 points

PLUS Does Body on 2d6: +10 points (only v inanimate targets that cold logically be damaged by sonic vibration) -1: 5 points total

 

So for 55 real points (60 active) you have an attack that can destroy minor barriers (and, for that matter, focuses, which is why the limiation is not higher), and does very reasonable stun against targets.

[ghost-angel]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

This entire thing can be solved easily: Don't let "Barrier" be a valid defense for Attacks Versus Alternate Defense (with or without All Or Nothing) and let the SFX sort that one out as needed.

 

I know one power in the Powers Books defines specifically as "Barrier surrounding the target" (bubbled) amongst the defenses.

[Markdoc]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

This entire thing can be solved easily: Don't let "Barrier" be a valid defense for Attacks Versus Alternate Defense (with or without All Or Nothing) and let the SFX sort that one out as needed.

 

Which is, in fact, exactly what we do

 

cheers, Mark

[Sean Waters]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

This entire thing can be solved easily: Don't let "Barrier" be a valid defense for Attacks Versus Alternate Defense (with or without All Or Nothing) and let the SFX sort that one out as needed.

 

I know one power in the Powers Books defines specifically as "Barrier surrounding the target" (bubbled) amongst the defenses.

 

Barrier can't be a valid defence against a NND unless it does Body, because barriers automatically stop NNDs. Like I say, if you want to rule that NNDs ignore barriers, fine. It can't just be done with sfx as sfx can only cover minor modifications to the power, and indirect would be big enough to amount to a bona fide advantage. I mean, why limit this to NND: a microwave blast could logically pass through a wall to fry the guard on the other side (depending on what the wall is made of). You wouldn't (I presume) allow sfx to cover that though - firing through walls without damaging them is why we have indirect.

 

I'd still prefer to deal with it by building it properly though, to reflect what the power can actually do. Mind you if all you do is let an attack circumvent thin panes of glass and sheets of paper, no biggie.

[ghost-angel]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

If you're building Microwave Blasts you should be modeling it properly to begin with as Indirect. I consider it an invalid argument.

 

You can shoot over 1m tall barriers, around them, add LOS to a Power and only get stopped by opaque barriers. Barriers are walls. Treat them like any chunk of environment. You don't normally allow "a brick wall" or "comfy chairs" as your AVAD defense either.

If it's a gas, and you have a small barrier, it can easily seep around, or over a tiny wall, around a chair, into a doorway. If it's got AoE on it, quite possibly just ignores the 2m long chunk of front facing defense.

 

If you've modeled your attacks (NND or otherwise) and your defenses correctly SFX interaction will make itself self evident and bypass the entire argument completely. The System still isn't your game's babysitter in 6E.

[prestidigitator]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

This entire thing can be solved easily: Don't let "Barrier" be a valid defense for Attacks Versus Alternate Defense (with or without All Or Nothing) and let the SFX sort that one out as needed.

 

I know one power in the Powers Books defines specifically as "Barrier surrounding the target" (bubbled) amongst the defenses.

Yeah. If you're going to do something like that, make the defense some kind of "barrier" (note the lower-case "B", as opposed to the name of the Power). (Some) powers that use Barrier might count, and SFX is going to dictate when and how. And yeah, it shouldn't be some defense that is already a defense against the power, so it had better be on a NND attack that has Indirect, or in some way apply to some relatively common circumstances that the (B/b)arrier wouldn't normally protect against.

[Sean Waters]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

If you're building Microwave Blasts you should be modeling it properly to begin with as Indirect. I consider it an invalid argument.

 

You can shoot over 1m tall barriers, around them, add LOS to a Power and only get stopped by opaque barriers. Barriers are walls. Treat them like any chunk of environment. You don't normally allow "a brick wall" or "comfy chairs" as your AVAD defense either.

If it's a gas, and you have a small barrier, it can easily seep around, or over a tiny wall, around a chair, into a doorway. If it's got AoE on it, quite possibly just ignores the 2m long chunk of front facing defense.

 

If you've modeled your attacks (NND or otherwise) and your defenses correctly SFX interaction will make itself self evident and bypass the entire argument completely. The System still isn't your game's babysitter in 6E.

 

You are absolutely right: barriers that you can aim round because they are not big enough to stop you doing that can't stop an NND any more than they can stop any other attack, if you aim around them. If that is what those example powers were talking about, then that is a perfectly valid NND condition.

 

For the sake of 'validity' forget microwaves, let's talk muju blasts (no, I have no idea what they are either): they can't pass through barriers if they are built as NND, and don't do Body, so 'barriers' is not a valid 'stop condition'. That is not because of any properties of muju waves, that is because NNDs can not pass through barriers. To be clear, I'm not talking about tiny barriers here: I'm talking about barriers that actually are between you and the target.

[dmjalund]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

I feel the next step is requiring us to buy Indirect on our Flashes to have them work through glass

[Sean Waters]

Re: NND vs Barrier

 

I feel the next step is requiring us to buy Indirect on our Flashes to have them work through glass

 

Well, no: Flash works though perceptually transparent media. Glass is perceptually transparent to many visual flashes BUT it is solid.

 

It is an interesting point though - how do you build a flash that does damage? Of course you can build a flash with 'Does Body', but then it does not do stun.

 

I imagine that you build an AVAD that is resisted by Flash defence. You then agree with your GM that it ignores stuff that would not stop a Flash. Or you build in Indirect with a limitation that it does not work against visually opaque materials (6d6 Flash = 30 points, Indirect (+1/2) = 15 points 'does not work against visually opaque materials' = -2, or 5 points.

 

Or you could create a modifier for Flash: does damage, What would that be? +1 for 'Stun only' or +2 for 'does Stun and Body'.

 

Matter for you.