Jump to content
MechaniCat

Poisons and Saving Throws

Recommended Posts

So I'm working on a Race Package that I intended to be resistant to Poisons and Disease, but found that Hero System (rather uncharacteristically) handles poisons very all or nothing. (and at a staggeringly cheap cost no less, with 10 points making you immune to everything)

I also didn't see an easy way to make saving throws in the system, which is to say, some way of making some character more resistant to poisons that others.

The biggest problem I see is cost. In a fantasy setting for example, Poison immunity can be a big deal. There are lots of monsters and animals that have poisons that are intended to be threatening to a PC, even a very powerful one. So making themselves immune to all poisons for 10 points means a new inexperienced character is immune to things that maybe even Hercules and such are afraid of.

I like saving throws for Poison because it give the PC a chance to shrug off a poison when they might not have seen it coming (perhaps it was in their drink) and it feels like it models immune systems pretty well which are themselves kind of all or nothing (you get sick or you don't).

That said I'm not really married to the idea of saving throws, but when Hero didn't have what I needed out of the box, I guess I just gravitated to what I know.

Using 6th Ed Hero.

 

So the question is this: How can one model having different reactions to poison at a cost that makes sense? Looking for some granularity, and for the poisoned character to determine the level of resistance. (and to use CON somehow because that poor stat doesn't seem to get much love)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"attacks with a specific Special Effect (e.g., magic, ice/cold)"

 

Honestly, if you want less than total immunity, Damage Negation (-1 DC) versus poisons seems pretty solid. It feels like maybe it deserves a Limitation for some kind of price break, but I don't know what to apply.

Another option is immunity to poisons, but with Requires a CON roll. You could model it after skill rolls, with more powerful poisons inflicting a penalty of -1 per 10 Active Points. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before you can model resistance to poison, you have to figure out how to model poison. Do you know yet how poison is going to work in your campaign?

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says if you roll your Trading Skill and save money on a purchase, that's a saving throw.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lucius said:

Before you can model resistance to poison, you have to figure out how to model poison. Do you know yet how poison is going to work in your campaign?

 

 

One idea that I've toyed with but never tried in a game is to build poisons as AVAD, where the defense is CON. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MechaniCat said:

So I'm working on a Race Package that I intended to be resistant to Poisons and Disease, but found that Hero System (rather uncharacteristically) handles poisons very all or nothing. (and at a staggeringly cheap cost no less, with 10 points making you immune to everything)

I also didn't see an easy way to make saving throws in the system, which is to say, some way of making some character more resistant to poisons that others.

The biggest problem I see is cost. In a fantasy setting for example, Poison immunity can be a big deal. There are lots of monsters and animals that have poisons that are intended to be threatening to a PC, even a very powerful one. So making themselves immune to all poisons for 10 points means a new inexperienced character is immune to things that maybe even Hercules and such are afraid of.

I like saving throws for Poison because it give the PC a chance to shrug off a poison when they might not have seen it coming (perhaps it was in their drink) and it feels like it models immune systems pretty well which are themselves kind of all or nothing (you get sick or you don't).

That said I'm not really married to the idea of saving throws, but when Hero didn't have what I needed out of the box, I guess I just gravitated to what I know.

Using 6th Ed Hero.

 

So the question is this: How can one model having different reactions to poison at a cost that makes sense? Looking for some granularity, and for the poisoned character to determine the level of resistance. (and to use CON somehow because that poor stat doesn't seem to get much love)

 

You have to distinguish between natural poisons and powered poisons.

 

It's only 10 points to be immune to normal poisons, which means things you'd encounter in the real world.  Snakes, spiders, plants, etc.  Even weird chemicals from a lab would be covered.  But it falls short of covering a poison that someone paid points for.  So in a fantasy setting, it won't prevent an attack by a wyvern, or a drow assassin.  It only provides immunity against the poisons that a character could get for free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poisons also have different effects. They attack the body differently, and part of the difficulty in treating a poison (or venom) in real life is knowing which one has been introduced to the system, because the antidote is often highly specific to the toxin. Thus, in Hero Terms, a defense against the effects of a poison will depend highly on its effects. However, it would be reasonable to assume that all real world poisons have AVAD vs. CON and are NND with the common defense being the appropriate Life Support. But as massey points out, magical poisons or "epic" poisons (those paid for with points by the creature/villain) aren't affected by Life Support (as a defense) unless specifically built into them as a Limitation.

 

Saving throws are perhaps best modeled as Limitations on attacks/spells/whatever that say something like, "Only delivers half damage if target makes successful CON roll," and so forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, massey said:

 

You have to distinguish between natural poisons and powered poisons.

 

It's only 10 points to be immune to normal poisons, which means things you'd encounter in the real world.  Snakes, spiders, plants, etc.  Even weird chemicals from a lab would be covered.  But it falls short of covering a poison that someone paid points for.  So in a fantasy setting, it won't prevent an attack by a wyvern, or a drow assassin.  It only provides immunity against the poisons that a character could get for free.

 

How do you build your poisons?  It's clearly not the way FRED does. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"immune to high heat" does not make a character immune to heat-based attacks.  I think the GM must decide how poison will work in their game.  Maybe all poisons must be nullified by LS: Poison Immunity.  If so, that is a limitation (on other than NND type poisons).  Maybe poison always Drains characteristics (that is where d20 moved) and we can simply make Poison an NND trading Power Defense for immune to poison.  If Power Defense is less common than immunity to poison, that would be a limitation rather than an advantage.  It's also more limited for being "any defense blocks the attack entirely".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gnome BODY (important!) said:

 

How do you build your poisons?  It's clearly not the way FRED does. 

 

However I want.

 

8D6 Hand Killing Attack vs PD -- "Poison touch".  That'll work.  Your 10 points of Life Support won't stop that.

3D6 Drain vs Body -- "Poison touch".  That'll work too.  You need Power Defense to protect against that.

4D6 Energy Blast NND Area Effect Continuous -- "Poison gas".  Defense is having LS: Breathing.  It's a special poison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MechaniCat said:

So I'm working on a Race Package that I intended to be resistant to Poisons and Disease, but found that Hero System (rather uncharacteristically) handles poisons very all or nothing. (and at a staggeringly cheap cost no less, with 10 points making you immune to everything)

I also didn't see an easy way to make saving throws in the system, which is to say, some way of making some character more resistant to poisons that others.

The biggest problem I see is cost. In a fantasy setting for example, Poison immunity can be a big deal. There are lots of monsters and animals that have poisons that are intended to be threatening to a PC, even a very powerful one. So making themselves immune to all poisons for 10 points means a new inexperienced character is immune to things that maybe even Hercules and such are afraid of.

I like saving throws for Poison because it give the PC a chance to shrug off a poison when they might not have seen it coming (perhaps it was in their drink) and it feels like it models immune systems pretty well which are themselves kind of all or nothing (you get sick or you don't).

That said I'm not really married to the idea of saving throws, but when Hero didn't have what I needed out of the box, I guess I just gravitated to what I know.

Using 6th Ed Hero.

 

So the question is this: How can one model having different reactions to poison at a cost that makes sense? Looking for some granularity, and for the poisoned character to determine the level of resistance. (and to use CON somehow because that poor stat doesn't seem to get much love)

 

 

A very simplistic way to put in "saving throws" for that one race is to required purchasing the 10 point immune to all poisons but have it activate on 11 or less.

 

For more granularity, I suppose weak poisons could be at 14-, medium poisons at 11-, and saves for strong poisons at 8- and package that together at the same cost as the 11- for everything would be.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Lucius said:

Before you can model resistance to poison, you have to figure out how to model poison. Do you know yet how poison is going to work in your campaign?

 

This is a good point. So I looked up some D&D classic Diseases and decided to try to build Mummy Rot. For those unfamiliar it's a disease inflicted by Mummy's that wastes the victim to dust over time. This is the stuff I came up with: 

 

Mummy Rot:

Drain CON 1d6 (10pts), Delayed Return Rate (Until Healed +2) Damage Over time (Base +1, Once a day -3x2 (must wait), Disease +1 (makes a CON Check), total -4), No Range (-1/2), Linked -1/2, LIM -5 Total: 5pts

 

Drain PRE 1d6 (10pts), Delayed Return Rate (Until Healed +2) Damage Over time (Base +1, Once a day -3x2 (must wait), Disease +1 (makes a CON Check), total -4), No Range (-1/2), Linked -1/2, LIM -5 Total: 5pts

 

HKA 2d6 (30 pts) (this would be the attack that inflicts the disease which the above are linked to)

 

Two Limitations/advantages of my own design in there: 

     "Disease". Damage over time can choose to take an infinite number of Increments. This advantage can only be taken under two conditions: the increment length is a day or longer, and there must be some way of removing the disease provided. Either a Roll, a reasonably available medicine, or reasonably available magic. If a roll is selected then it should be attempted before every effect. This is +1 more advantage.

     "Until Healed" Delayed Return Rate +2. Drain isn't healed until the rest of the disease is. Can only be taken if the power also has "Disease"

 

So with that write-up I've put the Saving Throw mechanic inside the new rules I made. Which I'm still leaning toward because it models both avoiding the disease (with an early roll success) and cutting it's effect time short (with a successful roll later on).

 

Curious what you guys think, and hope that my write up isn't to messy or hard to follow.

 

Notes:

"Disease" builds off the NND rules that don't give a huge cost increase for the all or nothing effect but require a special condition to counter the effect.

"Until healed" is built off the "absolute effect rule" section from 6E1 page 133, which to say that it is costed to be roughly a length of time so long that it might as well be indefinite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MechaniCat said:

 

This is a good point. So I looked up some D&D classic Diseases and decided to try to build Mummy Rot. For those unfamiliar it's a disease inflicted by Mummy's that wastes the victim to dust over time. This is the stuff I came up with: 

 

Mummy Rot:

Drain CON 1d6 (10pts), Delayed Return Rate (Until Healed +2) Damage Over time (Base +1, Once a day -3x2 (must wait), Disease +1 (makes a CON Check), total -4), No Range (-1/2), Linked -1/2, LIM -5 Total: 5pts

 

Drain PRE 1d6 (10pts), Delayed Return Rate (Until Healed +2) Damage Over time (Base +1, Once a day -3x2 (must wait), Disease +1 (makes a CON Check), total -4), No Range (-1/2), Linked -1/2, LIM -5 Total: 5pts

 

HKA 2d6 (30 pts) (this would be the attack that inflicts the disease which the above are linked to)

 

Two Limitations/advantages of my own design in there: 

     "Disease". Damage over time can choose to take an infinite number of Increments. This advantage can only be taken under two conditions: the increment length is a day or longer, and there must be some way of removing the disease provided. Either a Roll, a reasonably available medicine, or reasonably available magic. If a roll is selected then it should be attempted before every effect. This is +1 more advantage.

     "Until Healed" Delayed Return Rate +2. Drain isn't healed until the rest of the disease is. Can only be taken if the power also has "Disease"

 

So with that write-up I've put the Saving Throw mechanic inside the new rules I made. Which I'm still leaning toward because it models both avoiding the disease (with an early roll success) and cutting it's effect time short (with a successful roll later on).

 

Curious what you guys think, and hope that my write up isn't to messy or hard to follow.

 

Notes:

"Disease" builds off the NND rules that don't give a huge cost increase for the all or nothing effect but require a special condition to counter the effect.

"Until healed" is built off the "absolute effect rule" section from 6E1 page 133, which to say that it is costed to be roughly a length of time so long that it might as well be indefinite.

 

I like it.

 

But I think Damage Over Time already requires a "stop condition."

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Palindromedary Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, massey said:

 

However I want.

 

8D6 Hand Killing Attack vs PD -- "Poison touch".  That'll work.  Your 10 points of Life Support won't stop that.

3D6 Drain vs Body -- "Poison touch".  That'll work too.  You need Power Defense to protect against that.

4D6 Energy Blast NND Area Effect Continuous -- "Poison gas".  Defense is having LS: Breathing.  It's a special poison.

 

Unless, as GM, my ruling is the sfx of "poison" trumps all mechanics, so all "poison" sfx are blocked by that 10 points of Life Support.  That's no different than your SFX of Arrows being cheaper to deflect under pre-6e Deflection than bullets or laser beams.

 

16 hours ago, archer said:

 

 

A very simplistic way to put in "saving throws" for that one race is to required purchasing the 10 point immune to all poisons but have it activate on 11 or less.

 

For more granularity, I suppose weak poisons could be at 14-, medium poisons at 11-, and saves for strong poisons at 8- and package that together at the same cost as the 11- for everything would be.

 

If you want granularity, make the RSR a CON roll with the usual -1 per 10 AP (or per 5 or 20 AP if you prefer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lucius said:

 

I like it.

 

But I think Damage Over Time already requires a "stop condition."

 

 

Looking at DoT, we start with a +1 base advantage.

 

Then we ask how many increments - we are saying "unlimited", which is not by the book.  512 increments would be a +3 advantage.  That seems sufficient, if not conservative, given it only acts once a day.

 

1 + 3 = 4

 

Next, we ask how often - once a day reduces the advantage by -3, which we double if the power cannot be re-used until the first use runs out (in this case, you can't get more mummy rot - it lasts until cured, at which time you could be re-infected).

 

4 - 6 = negative 2

 

It needs a shutoff condition, which I would say the CON check covers.  I'd even allow a penalty to the CON check, as avoiding any impact on a standard CON check seems extremely limiting.

 

However, it does not need to extend the recovery period - no recovery starts until the DoT power runs its course, so until the Rot is cured, the Drains are permanent.

 

Finally, you get your defenses every time, so 6 Power Defense neutralizes the build.  Maybe we want "defenses only apply once", but that would double the advantage for having infinite increments, so that is now a +6 advantage, making the whole thing +1 instead of -2.  That is effectively +3 for making it NND.  I am thinking lacking normal biology is beyond rare in a fantasy game (I guess we might have some summoned undead or constructs) so let;'s call that 2 steps up the chart for +1, less 1/2 for NND = +1/2

 

I''m not sure whether DoT can fall to a limitation, by the way.  It seems reasonable - this power is not helping the mummy win a short-term combat.

 

Feels like this should also be 0 END, so what are we left with?  Maybe

 

Drain CON 1d6 (10pts), NND (see above) (+1/2), 0 END (+1/2), , so 20 AP (DoT is a limitation here); Damage Over time (Base +1, unlimited increments +3, Once a day -3x2 (must wait), (makes a CON Check), total -2), No Range (-1/2), Linked -1/2, LIM -5 Total: 7pts

 

Drain PRE 1d6 (10pts), same modifiers, so again 7 points.

 

I would either heavily penalize the CON roll or remove it entirely - certain magics can also shut down Mummy Rot, although it is a Curse, not a Disease, in later D&D editions, so tougher to shut down.

 

Or I would further limit the power for the ease with which it will be shut off.  An average PC will take no effect if his first roll is 12- (assuming CON 13+).  That's not the Mummy Rot I remember.

 

Actually, what is really missing that made Rot terrifying is its shut-down of all healing, magical or mundane, of any damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

Unless, as GM, my ruling is the sfx of "poison" trumps all mechanics, so all "poison" sfx are blocked by that 10 points of Life Support. 

 

Sure, but the GM can also rule that every 6 you roll is actually a 2.

 

Quote

That's no different than your SFX of Arrows being cheaper to deflect under pre-6e Deflection than bullets or laser beams.

 

Except one is specified that way in the rules and the other is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, massey said:

Except one is specified that way in the rules and the other is not.

 

I suppose that is true, at least in 6e.  6e does not provide separate costs for deflection of arrows, bullets or other missiles by SFX.  It does provide that:

 

1-5 Immunity: The character is immune to the effects of a particular drug, poison, disease, or similar substance. The exact cost depends upon the frequency and potency of the substance to which the character is Immune — the greater the effect of a substance, and the more often it is encountered, the more Immunity to it costs. For example, Immunity to Alcohol would be 2 Character Points; Immunity to any single common poison or venom would be 1 Character Point. Immunity to All Terrestrial Diseases or All Terrestrial Poisons costs 5 Character Points each.

 

So assuming the character paid his 5 points, and that your poison is not extraterrestrial, he would be immune in the rules.

 

Why do I suspect, however, that this is not what you thought you were saying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

I suppose that is true, at least in 6e.  6e does not provide separate costs for deflection of arrows, bullets or other missiles by SFX.  It does provide that:

 

So assuming the character paid his 5 points, and that your poison is not extraterrestrial, he would be immune in the rules.

 

Why do I suspect, however, that this is not what you thought you were saying?

 

Because you know how Life Support has always functioned, and you know you're splitting hairs trying to interpret it differently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So I'm working on a Race Package that I intended to be resistant to Poisons and Disease, but found that Hero System (rather uncharacteristically) handles poisons very all or nothing. (and at a staggeringly cheap cost no less, with 10 points making you immune to everything)

 

This is a bit of a misunderstanding of the rules.  The Life Support to be immune to poisons doesn't make you immune to all toxins, it just makes you unharmed by powers built with life support as the defense.  If they are just built as a killing attack, it does nothing.  I know this sounds crazy but bear with me a moment. 

 

In Hero you can build things many different ways, sometimes a dozen different ways.  That's because its designed to be flexible enough to let you do exactly what you want with your game and your character.  Poison can be built lots of ways: a drain, a killing attack, a blast, a transform, a change environment, etc.  And each of these can be built in various ways.

 

Life Support doesn't give you blanket immunity to all of a special effect, the powers have to be built to that special effect.

 

For example I can build poison darts as a 1d6 killing attack (AVAD: Life Support vs poison) and the life support will bounce it, take no effect.

But if I build it as 2d6 Drain Body, then the defense is now power defense.  Your life support doesn't protect against a drain, unless the power is specifically built "has no effect against life support" as a limitation.

 

Damage over Time, for instance, is a new build in 6th edition that is very useful for poisons: it causes damage in increments over a given time period (6 increments every 3 segments apart, for instance).  That's very poison-like, but it can be built in various ways as noted above.

 

The best way to build someone less affected by poisons is to either build about 10 points of power defense and life support which should cover most effects.  Another way would be to build a Damage Negation that is against poison (rather than PD or ED) which requires GM permission to do, but would be effective in negating part or all of any poison special effect.*

 

Also note that the rules say "Immunity to All Terrestrial Diseases or All Terrestrial Poisons costs 5 Character Points each" as in "these are poisons normally encountered in the world.  That would necessarily and by definition not include supernatural, cross-dimensional, or alien poisons for example.  Yes, it works on the Krait Viper, but not on Scorpions from Planet X (unless the GM rules that it does).

 

Quote

In my D&D-became-Fantasy-HERO tables I've added saving throws as a -1 limitation that becomes a skill/stat contest between the caster and the person affected by the spell which approximates the saving throw mechanic of D&D.

 

I built that in reverse, you can buy "saving throw" as an AVAD type attack so that it ignores defenses, but the victim gets a roll to ignore part or all of it, depending on how its bought.  Of course, you can buy AVAD as a limitation in some circumstances (if for example the defenses work normally and the victim gets a saving throw.

 

*A character could for some crazy reason buy reduced negation with his poison and counter some of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, massey said:

 

Because you know how Life Support has always functioned, and you know you're splitting hairs trying to interpret it differently?

 

Your own examples are of powers constructed with an SFX which has a logical Life Support defense, built to avoid that logic.  If Dwarves are resistant to all poisons and toxins, and your ability is a poison or toxin, then dwarves should be resistant to your power.  I would expect a GM to say so, if that is how his game is going to work, and require than any poison builds in that game include a limitation which addresses the manner in which poison will work in his game.  Maybe that means a limitation ("does not affect anyone with appropriate life support").  Or maybe, in his game, there will be no LS" Immunity to Poisons.  Instead, those who are resistant will buy Damage Negation against Poison, or Damage Reduction against Poison, or defenses that are only against poison.

 

I am, however, pointing out that pre-5e, the SFX you chose could make your ranged attacks more or less expensive to Missile Deflect, so there is precedent for your SFX dictating that other characters can have an easier, or a harder, time buying abilities that defend against it.  Your poison constructs are not different from the choice between bullets, arrows and lasers as SFX of a ranged attack in that regard.

 

8 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

This is a bit of a misunderstanding of the rules.  The Life Support to be immune to poisons doesn't make you immune to all toxins, it just makes you unharmed by powers built with life support as the defense.  If they are just built as a killing attack, it does nothing.  I know this sounds crazy but bear with me a moment. 

 

I would say, rather, that Life Support's purpose is to render a character resistant or immune to environmental effects, not to attack powers.  LS: Extreme Cold would make one immune to the chilling arctic wind, or even the frigidity of space, but not to a wizard's Cone of Cold, for example.  Some power builds, however, incorporate a limitation under which the power effectively becomes an environmental effect, and is negated by Life Support. 

 

If you build your Poison Drain, then the GM should be asking whether that poison is blocked by LS.  If so, then that should be a limitation.  Maybe that LS is so rare that it is a -0 limitation, but in that case I would not expect to see it very often over the course of a campaign.  Or maybe I don't allow LS: Poison, but instead allow defenses that only work against poisons, as described above.  That might mean all poisons in my game are required to be Drains/adjustment powers, and you buy Power Defense (possibly Limited to "only vs poisons") to resist it.

 

The player building the poison attack and the player building a resistance to poisons both need to know the ground rules to properly construct their characters.  If the GM allows a player to invest points to be resistant or immune to poisons, in my view that player is quite reasonable to expect their character will be resistant to, or immune to, poisons, not that once in a while this will work, but most poisons are "special poisons" that bypass his defenses and devalue the points he spent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I built that in reverse, you can buy "saving throw" as an AVAD type attack so that it ignores defenses, but the victim gets a roll to ignore part or all of it, depending on how its bought.  Of course, you can buy AVAD as a limitation in some circumstances (if for example the defenses work normally and the victim gets a saving throw.

 

This is how I've modeled it, but I do find the idea of sticking with the original mechanics (automatically hits, but you get a characteristic roll to avoid all/half of the effect).

 

How much of an advantage do you set that at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly a big fan of the 'saves' system, if we're gonna use anything like what D&D has. Con doesn't get any love, because all the stuff that made Con good are gone, you don't get stun, you don't get end, you get..... resistance to being dazed, and a better Con roll, which is pointless, because it doesn't come up nearly often enough to count as a point and it doesn't add defense anymore. So just regular defense costs the same amount per point and stops damage rather than allowing you to shrug it off.

 

Enough kvetching about the flaws of 6th edition, here's the important point to this: Your best bet would be to take power defense only vs poison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Not exactly a big fan of the 'saves' system, if we're gonna use anything like what D&D has.

 

Me either, but a full toolkit has all the tools in it, so this should be one of the options.  And it does have a magical feel to it.

 

Quote

I would say, rather, that Life Support's purpose is to render a character resistant or immune to environmental effects, not to attack powers.  LS: Extreme Cold would make one immune to the chilling arctic wind, or even the frigidity of space, but not to a wizard's Cone of Cold, for example.

 

That's a better way of putting it and helps make sense of the system.  Life Support isn't meant to be a defense against attacks, but a way of enduring environmental effects.  It can be a way of defending against attacks, but only if the attack is built that way.

 

Quote

How much of an advantage do you set that at?

 

I mis-remembered, upon looking it up its part of a "no normal evasion" advantage where the power is bought to always hit, unless the character accomplishes some kind of special defensive move (like dive for cover, wear a certain kind of thing, etc)

 

With this construct, the spell always hits, unless the target makes some sort of roll.

If this roll is one that all characters have at a normal level (such as a characteristic roll or perception roll), then the advantage is +1/2.

If the roll is an unusual one or one that characters normally only have as a familiarity (such as stealth or a magic skill roll), then the advantage is is +3/4.

If the roll is modified by -1/10 active points of the spell it is +1/4 more of an advantage.

If the attack deals half damage if the roll is made, but full damage if it is not, then it is an AVAD attack as well and is purchased through that advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:


Your own examples are of powers constructed with an SFX which has a logical Life Support defense, built to avoid that logic. 

 

Yup.  That's correct.  The purpose of that is to show that the GM has to figure out how poison works in their game before you can make a defense for it.  I didn't quote him, but I was trying to back up the two-headed camel's point a few posts above mine.

 

Quote

If Dwarves are resistant to all poisons and toxins, and your ability is a poison or toxin, then dwarves should be resistant to your power.  I would expect a GM to say so, if that is how his game is going to work, and require than any poison builds in that game include a limitation which addresses the manner in which poison will work in his game.  Maybe that means a limitation ("does not affect anyone with appropriate life support").  Or maybe, in his game, there will be no LS" Immunity to Poisons.  Instead, those who are resistant will buy Damage Negation against Poison, or Damage Reduction against Poison, or defenses that are only against poison.

 

 

100% on board with you here.

 

Quote

I am, however, pointing out that pre-5e, the SFX you chose could make your ranged attacks more or less expensive to Missile Deflect, so there is precedent for your SFX dictating that other characters can have an easier, or a harder, time buying abilities that defend against it.  Your poison constructs are not different from the choice between bullets, arrows and lasers as SFX of a ranged attack in that regard.

 

Of course, pre-5e, Life Support didn't have poison resistance either.  Life Support specified it didn't provide protections against attacks.  So we drop one special effect dependent defense and add another.

 

Quote

 

I would say, rather, that Life Support's purpose is to render a character resistant or immune to environmental effects, not to attack powers.  LS: Extreme Cold would make one immune to the chilling arctic wind, or even the frigidity of space, but not to a wizard's Cone of Cold, for example.  Some power builds, however, incorporate a limitation under which the power effectively becomes an environmental effect, and is negated by Life Support. 

 

If you build your Poison Drain, then the GM should be asking whether that poison is blocked by LS.  If so, then that should be a limitation.  Maybe that LS is so rare that it is a -0 limitation, but in that case I would not expect to see it very often over the course of a campaign.  Or maybe I don't allow LS: Poison, but instead allow defenses that only work against poisons, as described above.  That might mean all poisons in my game are required to be Drains/adjustment powers, and you buy Power Defense (possibly Limited to "only vs poisons") to resist it.

 

The player building the poison attack and the player building a resistance to poisons both need to know the ground rules to properly construct their characters.  If the GM allows a player to invest points to be resistant or immune to poisons, in my view that player is quite reasonable to expect their character will be resistant to, or immune to, poisons, not that once in a while this will work, but most poisons are "special poisons" that bypass his defenses and devalue the points he spent.

 

I agree with all this too.  I think we are on the same page, and just took a different method of illustrating it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...