Find Weakness

[KnightShade]

Nearly everyone in my group keeps getting on my case about using FW. I was in a campaign a few weeks ago, and out of 15 constructs (they were actually each based on 294 points, vs. 6 270ish PCs) and thanks to being able to take a few down to 1/8 Def with FW, I was able to take out quite a few of them with an RKA. Now we're starting a new campaign, and everyone is agaisn't FW saying it's to unbalancing. Some wanted to take it out of the game, the GM threatened to just give everyone a ton of lack of weakness. We finally settled on making it an attack power, so one you do it, your turn's over.

 

Does anyone else have more experience with FW? Is it really unbalancing? Any other suggestions for compromises I could suggest to them?

[McCoy]

My players have not found it unbalancing. Find Weakness is a half phase action, most of my players with FW would make their attempt, then reserve the half phase to dodge or block if they attracted someone's attention. Their phase comes around again, FW again, reserve half phase again. Third phase, FW again. Now the choice, attack with the half phase, and be a sitting duck in the case of a counterattack, or keep the defensive half phase and attack on the next phase. So unless your SPD is significantly higher than the others (in which case I would say that was the unbalancing factor, not the FW), you have not attacked for three phases while they did.

 

If you have not had to reserve half phases for defensive actions, if it's been FW & attack on every phase, your GM has not been properly shooting back. If you have a rep for one-shoting opponents, you should be everybody's target of opportunity.

[zornwil]

I rarely see it used by experienced players. But I'm not sure how you're getting to 1/8 exactly and if the rules are all being followed (no offense intended). It should have taken you, of course, 3 phases, and a lot can happen during that time (unless as McCoy suggested you have an aberrantly high SPD). And one failure negates the rest of the process. Range modifiers normally apply. With the cumulative -2 you've got to put a good number of points into this.

 

How consistently are you doing this? How many points did you sink into FW? How virulent is your attack/attacks with FW?

 

Also, what kind of villains does the GM build? Some villains will have little in the way of direct defenses, instead having Damage Reduction and lots of STUN. You won't do much to them but you won't know it until you start attacking.

 

Anyway, FW shouldn't really be that big a deal, normally.

[KnightShade]

In that campaign with that character, he had FW 13- with no range penalty. He also had a SPD of 7. The constructs had a speed of 5 and 10" of running, while I had 21" of TP. I was basically using FW on one, hold half phase, attack, FW again, hold half phase, etc. Quite honestly, the thing that was helping the most was the no range penalty.

[McCoy]

Originally posted by KnightShade

Quite honestly, the thing that was helping the most was the no range penalty.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by KnightShade

In that campaign with that character, he had FW 13- with no range penalty. He also had a SPD of 7. The constructs had a speed of 5 and 10" of running, while I had 21" of TP. I was basically using FW on one, hold half phase, attack, FW again, hold half phase, etc. Quite honestly, the thing that was helping the most was the no range penalty.

 

Well, if you rolled below 13, then below 11, and then below 9, without an intervening failure, I don't see why the big complaint. Unless your SPD of 7 compares to everyone else's SPD of 4 or something, but that seems highly unlikely.

 

Are you impossible to hit or something? Seems to me a villain would want to take you out as you got to your 2nd FW successfully, as McCoy essentially indicated.

[zornwil]

Originally posted by McCoy

 

Are you saying no range is an unfair advantage?

 

Or did your post just screw up?

[Gary]

Often, people count points spent on FW toward damage caps in a campaign. So if a campaign had a 60 pt limit, then a person would be allowed 60 pt attacks with no FW, or 50 pt attacks with 11- FW, or 45 pt attacks with 12- FW, etc. That would balance FW quite well.

[Hermit]

I haven't really had it abused yet. I think Gary might have a good suggestion though.

[Lupus]

I also like turning Find Weakness into a non-persistent power (will go away if stunned) or making it an attack action. Or both. I'd probably reduce the value of the power if I did that, though.

 

And I'd never allow it as part of an EC, regardless of concept, and definitely' enforce that if you switch away from its multipower slot, you lose the effects. That means you'll always pay full price for it.

[Trebuchet]

Since FW takes only 1/2 Phase, I have heard of groups who allow two FW rolls per Phase. So for example Find Weakness in Phase 2 twice; attack versus 1/4 DEF on Phase 4. Even most brick's defenses look pretty puny once they've been quartered. A third FW roll would seldom be cost effective; you're better off taking the shot to do damage IMO.

[Supreme Serpent]

A ) If the GM wants you to get rid of it or tone it down, do so.

 

B ) Is it still listed as a Talent in 5th ed? If so, it's a rare GM who will allow advantages on Talents, like No Range Mod. I've allowed limits on them to fit conception better (architect character getting FW "only vs structures" and such) but not advantages.

 

I haven't found FW generally to be too devestating in our games, but we do keep an eye on it - factor in the character's overall effectiveness, why they are having it, etc. Ok for Green Dragon w/his 8d6 martial strike, No-No for Grond with his 18d6 punch. All things relative.

[Theron]

I don't have a problem with FW. The increasing penalties offset its utility, IMHO. When the dice cooperate, it makes for some pretty spectacular/dramatic stuff, too, like when my martial artist took down the Superman-level villainess who'd hurt his lady-love with two kicks after FWing her down to 1/8th defenses.

[Lord Liaden]

Hmm... I'm not sure I would allow Find Weakness with No Range Penalty - that's one of the main limiting factors keeping the ability from being abusive, and it's pretty cheap. Also, the Power is not technically Ranged, it merely benefits Ranged Powers if bought for them. I think if I were to consider giving Find Weakness the No Range Penalty Advantage, I might require sticking Ranged on there as well. OTOH, I might allow the Telescopic Adder from Enhanced Senses to be added to it to offset some of the range penalty... I'll have to think about this.

 

I've never found this Power to be abusive, taking into account all the factors cited above on how it should be used. I should add that since Find Weakness reduces applicable Defenses, I treat it like an Armor Piercing Advantage on the Attack Power it applies to for purposes of assigning a Damage Class equivalent to that attack. Hence an 8d6 EB with Find Weakness would be treated as DC 12 as regards Damage Class caps or balancing opposing characters.

 

Of course, sometimes a player just rolls spectacularly well, which may have been the case with KnightShade. One flukey run of the dice would not make a good case for banning Find Weakness or giving Lack of Weakness to every other character, though. Also keep in mind that if the hero manages to be this effective in every combat, word will likely spread and the team's opponents will start targetting him first.

[lemming]

Why I no longer have Find Weakness:

I used to play in and run games with several characters running about with FW and they usually had a high speed.

The campaigns were also fairly high powered and we were used to many players. Except for very small games (2 or 3 people), most games had 6-8 players. So there tended to be a number of villians.

My worst character for abusing FW was Calico.

She had FW: 14- and three overall levels. There would usually be one or two villains that had heavy enough lack of weakness she'd have little to no effect. The ones that were very unlucky would get the equivalent of 1 PD, though getting someone down to 1/8 was good enough for mayhem.

She also had/has some psych lims such as "Toys with Prey"

She would knock out some villian and instead of going on to the next, she would sometimes wake them back up, just to knock them out again.

What's odd, she never directly killed anyone.

She let some villian die that someone else mortally wounded. She could of done paramedics, but she said he had died already.

And once in a con game, she got incredibly annoyed with another "hero", FW'd him while using seduction, then kneed him in the groin. IIRC, I had him down to 1/16.

 

Rambling again, I see. I just found FW too unpredictable and prefer other methods now.

[Theron]

As an alternative, I've seen some GMs require players to use Armor Piercing with an Activation Roll, which (unless taken multiple times), keeps the amount of Defenses reduced to a reasonable level.

[Hugh Neilson]

Originally posted by zornwil

Well, if you rolled below 13, then below 11, and then below 9, without an intervening failure, I don't see why the big complaint. Unless your SPD of 7 compares to everyone else's SPD of 4 or something, but that seems highly unlikely.

 

That is still 3 phases if you're 1/2 teleporting away (and you better be - a move through can stuill get you otherwise). You'd have to be pretty hot on the dice to succeed every time. The no range penalty is something I would consider very closely - I would probably require penalty skill levels instead, given the nature of Find Weakness, but it depends on the reason there is no range penalty..

 

As well, it sounds like none of the opponents had ranged attacks, or moving a bit further away wouldn't help you as much as it did.

 

Sounds like the scenario setup just happened to be one where your abilities were unusually useful.

 

One approach to tone down Find Weakness would be to increase the "additional halving" penalty, or just cap how many times defenses may be halved. One other poster mentioned that the character will get a reputation as "One Punch Man" and will quickly become the target of choice by opponents - a common ugly balancing provision for the "toughest guy on the team".

[JmOz]

I have up to now said that Find weekness counted as a 1/2 modifier to powers for point caps (In a 12 DC game you could only have an 8d6 EB with Find Weekness), but I like the idea of FW points tied to it. Will have to think about it

[Zed-F]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden

Hmm... I'm not sure I would allow Find Weakness with No Range Penalty - that's one of the main limiting factors keeping the ability from being abusive, and it's pretty cheap. Also, the Power is not technically Ranged, it merely benefits Ranged Powers if bought for them. I think if I were to consider giving Find Weakness the No Range Penalty Advantage, I might require sticking Ranged on there as well. OTOH, I might allow the Telescopic Adder from Enhanced Senses to be added to it to offset some of the range penalty... I'll have to think about this.

 

Find Weakness is a self-only power. I would think that it's basically a sensory-type of power -- after all, what you are really doing is looking for (or otherwise sensing for) weak spots in your target's defenses. I would say you need telescopic senses to offset range penalties, not No Range Penalty.

 

Hugh's suggestion of PSLs would be another possibility, and probably about the same cost.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I would agree with the comments that having Levels to offset range penalty is a *lot* more sane than using the "No Range Penalty" Advantage with FW. Turning FW into a line of sight power is just too abusive, IMHO, and it is also rather contrary to the idea of having to take time to study the opponent and detect weak spots in his/her/its defenses.

[Gary]

No range penalty with FW isn't terribly abusive if you count it toward campaign damage caps. The sample 13- FW with no range penalty costs 30 pts. That would reduce the attack linked with it to a 6d6 normal attack or 2d6 killing attack in a 60 pt campaign. Quite manageable.

[KnightShade]

As far as the character I was playing goes, he basically had the mutant power to manipulate quantum mechanics. Without going into too much detal, I have an article in an old Scientific American about being able to take a measurement without interaction (the whole Schroedinger's cat thing). The reason the no range modifier was there was because I was describing it, basically he was manipulating quantum particles to give him information without interacting with them, making the distance they are from him irrelevant.

 

Someone mentioned it being a Talent in 5e, but it's not, it's a power now. The average SPD for that game was about 5, although there were a couple 4s and a 6. I was the only 7. My new character I'm designing has FW, but doesn't have that advantage, but everyone still seems to think it's annoying.

[BNakagawa]

I dislike Find Weakness.

 

It is an orphan mechanic that exists nowhere else in the game system.

 

If just one PC starts to abuse FW, then every other PC, NPC and villain must either be retrofitted with LoW or be potential dogfood.

 

This is one case where the game system would be improved with the delete key. There are fairer ways of achieving this effect. FW is structurally flawed. LoW is nerfed. (what's up with that?)

 

$0.02

[lemming]

Originally posted by BNakagawa

If just one PC starts to abuse FW, then every other PC, NPC and villain must either be retrofitted with LoW or be potential dogfood.

Hmm, I wonder if one of the reasons is that Bryce and I were in common games at times. But the retrofitted dogfood argument is a nice way of putting it.

 

This is one case where the game system would be improved with the delete key. There are fairer ways of achieving this effect. FW is structurally flawed. LoW is nerfed. (what's up with that?)

Yeah, I prefer versions of piercing nowadays, though with a large stop sign.

The LoW that is done is pretty wacky. I can see why, but I'm glad I don't use FW in my game.

[pinecone]

I've never had a problem with FW...but I've always considered the points in FW to be part of the attack so a MA with a 8D6 attack and FW 13 is about as powerfull as a 12D6 to 14D6, and if they aren't a problem it's unlikely that FW will be either. Basicly FW is a kind of personal speed drain as you burn up phases doing nothing so you can thrash later,but if you are KO'd now...later never comes.I used to have villians deal with it by saying "That dude just stares at us and does nothing...Mentallist!!!" (it is pretty common to "dog pile on the mentallist") FW is one of the simplest ways to build "bat-clones" that are basicly human, yet somehow battle super foes and triumph. Espesially FW with all attacks ,but what does that cost 30 points for FW:All (11)?