A Riddle:

[McCoy]

Re: A Riddle:

 

A very defended character drawing fire could work' date=' if the GM doesn't tactically ignore him since he's no threat to the villain.[/quote']

For the designated decoy I would combine high defenses with a high presence and a taunting skill. Would be fun to rollplay.

 

GM: OK, Joe, you're up.

 

Joe (playing the DD): I break cover, make a half move, and yell "You guys couldn't hit a target as big as a Full Moon!" Then I turn, drop trow, and bend over.

 

GM: *rolls dice* The agents miss their EGO check, and are all aiming at your Zero DCV butt.

[Balabanto]

Re: A Riddle:

 

Just buy entangles. We've had several characters over the years throw well-timed entangles that have turned otherwise deadly encounters into joke disasters. It's totally possible to build "Wrap Em Up Like Shoes, Imelda" characters and succeed.

[Lucius]

Re: A Riddle:

 

Did someone call for a medic?

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]41410[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]41411[/ATTACH]

 

 

These posters by

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Copyright Palindromedary Enterprises

[Christopher]

Re: A Riddle:

 

A hero who actually views violence as a last resort? Unthinkable!

There is something less thinkable: A D&D character who can't act violent.

Even less thinkable: A D&D character that makes Violence impossible in an area around him/her.

 

And yet, the Book of Exalted Deeds had a "Vow of Nonviolence" and "Vow of peace". One of the effects was that (manufactured, nonmagical) weapons shattered on impact without doing damage. Arrows, Swords - that doesn't worked. But fists or a clud would, same with slingshot amunition.

 

Could be made as a Force field. A damage shield would only work after the attack did damage, so it still would require a decent defense. On the other hand a triggered attack could attack weaposn before they hit, but only works against what the cahracter could percieve with his normal senses.