Lack of Weakness and Full Damage Resistance

[steriaca]

That is a creative (though expensive) way to do it.

 

Not sure I'd allow the AVLD though. How do you determine whether a given target has any weak points? What's to stop a player from saying, "Oh, my character's armor doesn't have any flaws. How? Well, he was extra careful when he made it."

Defense for the power: having a perfect body (40+ CON, 20+ BODY, special permission from the GM), being an "alien" physiologically (week spots in different places than 'normal'), being a deity (Not an avatar of one...a real deity), being a angel or demon (not possessed by one, real honest to goodness or honest to badness one). For objectd, being made out of certan materials which are hard to find in the campain workd (Unbelevablem, Undestructiam, Minthtal, Unnaturalem, ect), being an unbreakable focus which has not taken Body damage yet (once Body has been done, all bets are off).

[steriaca]

As for why an indestructible focus is vulderable onc body is done? Well, it was already damaged by the one way to destroy it and wasn't fixed, so the person with find weakness can explote the flaw in the structure.

 

Think Cap's shield.

[BoloOfEarth]

I could also see using Impenetrable defenses (or maybe Hardened + Impenetrable) as a stand-in for No Weak Points, whether for a person or object.

 

Interesting idea to have massive CON and BODY representing a "perfect body" for a person.  Kudos on that.

 

For objects, rare materials or Unbreakable Focus would work.  Though metagame-wise, any PC (or NPC for that matter) can have foci made from rare materials with no more effort than simply saying so in his writeup, plus GM approval.

 

That said, let's say Joe Patriot has an Unobtainium Shield but isn't the peak of human perfection himself.  Would that shield give him adequate defense from the Find Weakness?

 

(Understand that I wasn't trying to poo-poo the AVLD idea out of hand.  I'm just saying the defense(s) would need to be well-defined beforehand.)

[Hyper-Man]

I could also see using Impenetrable defenses (or maybe Hardened + Impenetrable) as a stand-in for No Weak Points, whether for a person or object.

 

Interesting idea to have massive CON and BODY representing a "perfect body" for a person.  Kudos on that.

 

For objects, rare materials or Unbreakable Focus would work.  Though metagame-wise, any PC (or NPC for that matter) can have foci made from rare materials with no more effort than simply saying so in his writeup, plus GM approval.

 

That said, let's say Joe Patriot has an Unobtainium Shield but isn't the peak of human perfection himself.  Would that shield give him adequate defense from the Find Weakness?

 

(Understand that I wasn't trying to poo-poo the AVLD idea out of hand.  I'm just saying the defense(s) would need to be well-defined beforehand.)

 

This reminds me of the many questions I raised in the 5e days about mixing the Hit Location rules with Find Weakness (It's a nightmare to consider btw!).

 

Here is the old thread:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/17232-do-you-allow-find-weakness-in-games-using-hit-locations/?hl=%2Bfind+%2Bweakness+%2Blocation

 

HM

[steriaca]

I could also see using Impenetrable defenses (or maybe Hardened + Impenetrable) as a stand-in for No Weak Points, whether for a person or object.

 

Interesting idea to have massive CON and BODY representing a "perfect body" for a person. Kudos on that.

 

For objects, rare materials or Unbreakable Focus would work. Though metagame-wise, any PC (or NPC for that matter) can have foci made from rare materials with no more effort than simply saying so in his writeup, plus GM approval.

 

That said, let's say Joe Patriot has an Unobtainium Shield but isn't the peak of human perfection himself. Would that shield give him adequate defense from the Find Weakness?

 

(Understand that I wasn't trying to poo-poo the AVLD idea out of hand. I'm just saying the defense(s) would need to be well-defined beforehand.)

Depends on who is the target of the find weakness attack. If he could get the shield up in time (preform a block), then no damage to eather. But if he can not...

[BoloOfEarth]

Depends on who is the target of the find weakness attack. If he could get the shield up in time (preform a block), then no damage to eather. But if he can not...

 

If he Blocks (or Deflects, or the extra DCV from the shield means the attack misses, or whatever game effect the shield is defined as having), the AVLD is a moot point, since the attack doesn't actually hit him.

 

I guess if the Shield provides additional Resistant Protection on an Activation roll, it would matter.  But with most typical game effects that come from a shield, it wouldn't come into play at all with the Find Weakness (unless the attacker wishes to target the shield itself, in which case it would be immune to the AVAD).  And I guess I've answered my own question, with assistance.  Thank you.

[Amorkca]

 

In the 6e Champions Powers, it changed to a modifier added to a specific power:

Add Armor Piercing (x2; +¾) for Force Blast (45 Active Points); Extra Time (makes whole attack take a Full Phase; -½), Only Applies Against Force-Fields (-½), Requires A PER Roll (-½). Total cost: 18 points.

(This used one of the Armor Piercing variants from the Advanced Player's Guide, allowing 1/2 defenses, 1/4, 1/8, etc. for an escalating Advantage value.)

 

 

 

Can someone confirm this? I don't have that book but can hunt around for it unless its available as a PDF!

[Surrealone]

I have a 5e character with 2pts of LACK OF WEAKNESS for force fields/walls as a racial ability.  He is a genetically-altered human with a mutation that allows him to manipulate forces/energy with the mind.  The basis for this LACK OF WEAKNESS is that the character crafts force fields/walls with the mind (rather than undergoing error-prone physical construction techniques, such as using technology to create fields) and, as a result, they are less prone to error-induced weak points.

 

​Hardened force fields/walls are things this guy already creates, with the LACK OF WEAKNESS being applicable in addition to the hardening.  Thus, suggesting hardened barriers and/or hardened resistant pd/ed won't cut it for a 6e implementation, as that's already going to be translated.

 

 

With that in mind, how would I simulate the above in 6e??  (Keep in mind that we're talking a 2pt racial trait, here -- meaning double hardening makes no sense, especially as a racial trait.)

[steriaca]

I have a 5e character with 2pts of LACK OF WEAKNESS for force fields/walls as a racial ability. He is a genetically-altered human with a mutation that allows him to manipulate forces/energy with the mind. The basis for this LACK OF WEAKNESS is that the character crafts force fields/walls with the mind (rather than undergoing error-prone physical construction techniques, such as using technology to create fields) and, as a result, they are less prone to error-induced weak points.

 

​Hardened force fields/walls are things this guy already creates, with the LACK OF WEAKNESS being applicable in addition to the hardening. Thus, suggesting hardened barriers and/or hardened resistant pd/ed won't cut it for a 6e implementation, as that's already going to be translated.

 

 

With that in mind, how would I simulate the above in 6e?? (Keep in mind that we're talking a 2pt racial trait, here -- meaning double hardening makes no sense, especially as a racial trait.)

Damage Negation or Damage Reduction linked to the Force Field/Force Wall. Damage is negated or redcued first, then reduced by the other protection. About 3d6 of Damage Negation can bounce bullets and stop normal knives. (Prehaps a Requiers A Roll limitation to keep it in check)

[bigdamnhero]

With that in mind, how would I simulate the above in 6e??

Depends on what attacks you're trying to defend against. (Defenses = cart; attacks = horse.) LoW was meant specifically to defend against Find Weakness, so the question is how (or if) the GM plans to replace that in 6e. If he's just using AP with Requires A Roll, as has been suggested here, then Hardened and/or Impenetrable already has you covered. If the GM expects a lot of AVAD attacks, then defining an appropriate defense is the key. If it's just a question of Lots Of Dice attacks, then Negation or Reduction might be the way to go.