psyber624 Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Re: Resistant mental defense? Yeah, I know. I just have a bit of rules lawyer in me so I like to know what RAW is, then as a GM i can decide if I agree or not... (and make it work however I wish in my games) Of course I cant really see myself allowing a RKA AVAD in the first place... but its the principle of the thing. Right? Right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Re: Resistant mental defense? Yeah, I know. I just have a bit of rules lawyer in me so I like to know what RAW is, then as a GM i can decide if I agree or not... (and make it work however I wish in my games) Of course I cant really see myself allowing a RKA AVAD in the first place... but its the principle of the thing. Right? Right? Right... RKA AVAD v Mental Defence (Does Body) would be a +2 advantage, so 4DCs costs 60 points: 1d6+1 Killing against mental defence is pretty nasty in most campaigns, moreso if the Body is resisted only by rMD. 2-7 Body and 2-21 Stun before defences, with a pretty flat probability curve for the Stun and a completely flat one for the Body. The volatiity of the Body damage is the real problem here, but it might be OK to shake up the players now and again with a nasty villain - not necessarily hard to beat, but with a hit they will remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyber624 Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Re: Resistant mental defense? k, official answer is that both STUN and BODY would be reduced by the non-resistant defense. Of course a GM may waive this if such attacks are common in his campaign (I guess a Scanners type campaign where killing with your mind is commonplace might be one example). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Waters Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Re: Resistant mental defense? k' date=' official answer is that both STUN and BODY would be reduced by the non-resistant defense. Of course a GM may waive this if such attacks are common in his campaign (I guess a Scanners type campaign where killing with your mind is commonplace might be one example).[/quote'] If I have one criticism of Hero - and I do - it is the reasonableness. Hero strives for balance, which is, theoretically, a good thing. Every ruling seems to be biased towards the least disruptive result, and, well, I've had enough: pick how stuff works and stick to it. If it seems to be horribly unbalanced, well, so what? Hero is a self balancing system. Trust the players, and we will all be better off. Even if you trust them to exploit every loophole, remember that the GM is a player too, and trust them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.