unclevlad

We may see a major restart about the debate about pitching wear and tear. Shane Bieber (Cleveland) just underwent Tommy John...after 2 starts this season. And now...Spencer Strider (Atlanta) had an MRI showing UCL damage. He'll be re-evaluated soon. That's two #1 starters. Bieber has a Cy Young...in the Covid year, so a bit diluted, but he's been 4th and 7th too. Strider was 4th last year. This is the 7th such, already. https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/injury-report?groupby=injury And look how many pitchers got hurt last season, and are still questionable for '24. TJ recovery is 15-18 months. Then scroll down to the Elbow category. Lots of these are 15 day DL...not great, but not devastating. as long as they come back in something close to 15 days. But 7 of these (including Cole) are on the 60 day DL.

ROUGH night for the Red Sox. They're beating the Angels 5-1...altho the Angels have the bases loaded with 1 out now, in the bottom of the 6th, thanks to Sox mistakes...but... 2 players have been HBP, on their hands. One on a finger, one squarely on the back of the hand. They both stayed in, but there's a very good chance they'll miss some time. Oh, and the Angels just hit a slam to tie it....and as things would have it? One of their runners was HBP...on the hand. But the Sox' woes...SS Trevor Story dove for a ball in the hole, and landed badly. He was writhing in pain, and was taken out. Report's a shoulder injury, that's all...that might be anything from day to day all the way up to season-ending (torn labrum requiring surgery). Even a bad separation might mean 2-3 weeks. EDIT: final count, 5 batters got hit. Last two weren't in problem areas, thankfully. And it turned into a rather late night of things. The game started about 25 minutes late, as it was the Angels' home opener. (Shohei was acknowledged as one of the team's award winners, and reportedly got roundly booed. Can't imagine why........) Then the trainers had to come out 3 separate times. And it was a sloppy game...the HBPs of course, lots of walks, Sox had 3 errors.

But everyone knows the best corn is in Kentucky. What.....who cares about EATING it?????

Eh, probably the tea you had. Coffee Rules!!!

Raise Dead in D&D had a limit of 1 day per caster level, and the body had to be whole; it did NOT regrow missing limbs. Resurrection was 2 levels higher...and probably should've been elevated even more in 3E, when clerics went from 7 to 9 spell levels, but they probably chose to not break existing characters. Resurrection worked with any fraction of a body part. Both spells actually were also expensive...even if cast by a party member. 5000 gp for Raise, 10,000 for Resurrect. This was less than effective in practice, tho, because practically no one used the wealth/treasure rules as written, they gave out more. And there were rules about getting an NPC to cast spells for the party...it got expensive for normal spells, much less these two. The rules said, IIRC, that 7th level spells draw the direct attention of the deity, or at least of a high-end servant...who can darn well say NO. Which is a really good way for the cleric to hose himself...so he may need something more than mere money. There's no uniform approach; I'd call D&D's a middle-of-the-road approach, where the Schlock might be on the Trivial end, and "no, it can't be done" on the other...IIRC, Shadowrun.

Oh...important date just ahead! Sunday, April 7th is National Beer Day! Well, that ices my plans for tomorrow...chili supplies for Saturday, and of course good chili has to have beer in it.

Hadn't actually looked at the standings...mmmm... Winless: Mets and Marlins. Tigers came back from 3-0 down in a makeup game earlier, got it tied, scored 3 in the 11th. 1 win: Rockies, A's, White Sox. OK, as noted above, I don't think many people would be surprised if the A's challenged the record for most losses. The White Sox were a wet mess last year. The Rockies combine an exceptionally difficult home playing environment...it skews everything, and the effects, I've heard the former players say, can linger when you leave...with poor personnel choices. OTOH, ugh...Yankees are 6-1. It's seriously debatable how long that can last, given their starting pitching issues. Pirates are 5-1, but it's only 6 games...and they started well last year. Detroit's 5-0. And the Dodgers have actually lost 2. This might be one of their poorer stretches.... LORD, that lineup is terrifying.

IIRC, the setup where it became Really Sweet was a) fairly strong...35 END, IIRC. b) invisible Extra Limbs with Stretching...force limbs. Stretching had "does not cross intervening STR" because hitting them really wouldn't do anything. Might've also included Instant. c) Teleport d) force field e) TINY MP with 1 DC HAs (normal, AVAD Power Def, AVAD Power Def, does BODY); the rest of the damage was MA DCs. This also led to a Martial Flash attack...versus Power Def, IIRC. So the STR was personal END, the powers were END reserve. The stats gave a reasonable baselne END and REC to cover the STR, altho I think I bought it up *some*...but buying for the powers? Nope. For that, it's cheaper to buy the END reserve. I think I've also done it for...well, not wimpy mage types, but energy projectors rarely have *really* high STR. 15 STR is 200 kg; I looked around and lifting 2x your body weight is elite lifting...ergo, not super. This is for supers, and the background is, heroes are *trained*...and that includes extensive PT. So the 15 STR is still fundamentally appropriate...but clearly not exploiting figured stats. Then again, I'm setting up for higher-powered supers, I give myself points to play with. I dislike trying to fit competent at magic into a 200 point structure...because I really dislike running the standard stereotype. Monte Cook made comments in his Arcana Unearthed/Evolved books using a mage character, that I often loved, assaulting the D&D tropes. Mages have to carry packs and hike dozens of miles every day. They only have a couple spells per day at low levels. Yet they *ignore* basic PT and at least SOME weapons work? Even if it's common weapons? Plus, the other comment I loved was wearing robes. Huh? Oh, so advertise your strengths and weaknesses, and wear stuff that isn't exactly travel-friendly? And the last...I can't remember the exact quote, and it's a sidebar, so finding it is a pain, but it's something like A wizard who uses his magic only to slay monsters, while eating cold trail rations and sleeping rough, Does Not Get It. With all the power at his disposal, why endure privation? It actually echoes something I've felt, that's largely peculiar to D&D's incredibly limited magical approach...there's virtually no everyday magic. I *love* everyday magic. Mmm...sorry for the digression. We now return you to our regularly scheduled......if totally derailed...thread.....

Well, the local paper is the Sacramento Bee, so it's thematically appropriate. And Sacramento has a minor league team...they're gonna try to share the field, well, we'll see how well THAT works...the Sacramento River Cats. So it's all about the A-B-C's.... EDIT...amusing line from an article about the managers on the early hot seat...about Mark Kotsay, the A's manager.

I Hard to say 'no' to the extra REC, END, and STUN...especially because they were so expensive to buy up. It could actually be *cheaper* to buy an END reserve to cover certain things, rather than buy up the figured characteristics.

Mmm...that reminds me of something you might want. It's damage-based END costs for defenses...AVP I, page 62. You trade off END for STUN...so, ok, your head's not spinning per se, but after a while you just get beaten to exhaustion. It's a -1/2 limitation if it's 1 END per 5 STUN or fraction thereof, by the book...so it doesn't use the rounding rules. 6 STUN blocked? 2 END, not 1. It's a -1/4 limitation if it's 1 END per 10 STUN. You could use this with negation or reduction...at least to a degree. You might want a complex combo like this...I'm assuming 12d6... 10 defense 2 Negation (no limits) then 5 or 6 dice of negation that's STUN only, and damage based END cost; OR, 50% DR that's at least damage based END cost...may or may not be stun only The DR has the advantage that you don't get stunned...as long as you have the END to burn. When that's gone? Uh...oh.............. If you go with the DBEC on the negation, the trick would be, you'd want to count the pips, not just the BODY, because that can alter the END you have to spend. This isn't a case where I'd use "standard effect" principles. If that'd be a pain, then go with the DR. DBEC actually feels like it was made for DR. Note that there are details about how DBEC works that I haven't mentioned....

Well, not quite. 10 points of CON gave 2 ED, 2 REC, 20 END, and 5 STUN. That's 21 points...for +10 CON. And higher-STR martial artists, because they'd buy the DEX to get the free CV. That's the big one. The SPD increase was paid for...DEX is 3 points per in 5E, and that 3rd point directly pays for the SPD. it's the CV...6 points for +3 DEX gives +10 points for the CV. STR and CON actually gave about the same *net* freebies...STR gave PD, REC, STUN, and let's not forget, Leap. CON gave ED, REC, and STUN...and END. But the END boost is covered by CON's higher base cost. It's 2 per, not 1 per as in 6E, so +10 CON, in this sense, gives +11 in free characteristic points. +10 STR gives +15 in freebies...and selling back the Leap may well be rather painless.

uh...huh... And how long have the A's and Oakland been squabbling? For stuff like this...ONLY 7 years means it's near-panic time. This stuff NEVER resolves quickly. I can't blame the voters. The club gets the lion's share of the benefits...you know bloody darn well they'll raise ticket prices and parking fees and the like, and the overall benefit to the taxpayers is...pretty low.

I think buying such high CON was a holdover from figured characteristics, because that also bought you 6 REC, 60 END, and 15 STUN...and remember, those were much more expensive. REC was 2 per (1 per in 6E), END was 1 point for 2 (instead of 1 point for 5) and STUN is 1 point per. I also think some of this is part of the figured-characteristics trap, if you will...that you're getting *so much* for buying it up that it becomes your idee fixe. Cuz...remember...40 CON is still 60 points. When I consider 5E builds, it's something I've fallen into, for sure. I also question how well thought out many of those builds are. Because...fine, you'll never get stunned, but overall, you're likely a lot easier to KO. Yeah, you can take *one* 30-STUN shot...but the 2nd? And that's with figured characteristics. Without it, high CON's cheap-ish, sure, but its major bonus is adjusting your stunned threshold. OK, there's a small advantage for CON-based rolls, but those are unusual, and you get into diminishing returns after 14- anyway. The advantage of the high CON is, ok, you don't get stunned by *any* form of attack...a 30 CON means you're not stunned by a 7d6 Blast vs. Power Def...without needing the wonky rules related to Damage Negation and Reduction. (If I have 50% Energy DR and 25% Physical DR, which one applies versus the PowD blast?) But this only goes so far...again, it's not helping you absorb multiple strikes and stay upright. A PC can take the automaton abilities, but they're intended to model things you have to bash into smithereens, bone dust, or metal fragments. Takes No Stun is very expensive...and it triples the cost of defenses. You have to buy those to pretty much the same level as the 'normal' build...but at high cost. On top of the baseline TNS cost. I've played around with this a bit...in many cases in supers lit, the duplicator creates constructs, not biological duplicates. If they get obliterated...well, that's what they're for. I was even blowing off the Altered Duplicates, so long as the only real change was shifting the defenses to Automaton style, and possibly adding Life Support. IIRC...I never got something I was all that happy with, but that was some time ago. I've worked out a few more tricks since then, maybe I could get it to work.

RaR has enough options that I think we need some clarification about exactly what form of RaR you're asking about...and preferably, which edition. It'll be quicker than guessing the form you mean.

You don't have any choice. You automatically lose your next action; the only thing you can do is recover from getting stunned. If nothing else, it means you're losing the attack. Plus, until you can recover from being stunned, you're at 1/2 DCV. And, at the end of the phase you're stunned, all your Constant powers that aren't persistent *stop*. Were you flying? You're falling now. Bye-bye force field. Yeah, character SPDs are a whole nuther thread. Probably not even buried that much; IIRC it wasn't that long ago.

That DR works against even advantaged damage is a point in its favor...but also, probably an argument for *replacing* it. Because there is no counter. The value of its application against AVADs, which I personally REALLY dislike, is gonna depend on how often those attacks get used against the character. In both cases, tho...the lack of an effective response is also something to avoid. You make the case...that's why it's pricey. Note that applying it to a villain is much less of an issue, because the final point total for a villain is more flexible anyway. Actually...the hole for DR is autofire. Multiple hits will accumulate fast because each one is doing a decent amount. If I'm allowed 10d6 AF, and I can get 2 hits, considerably more will get through than if I have simple defenses or damage negation. Negation applies fully to each round, so it's 7d6 twice...call it 19, with 15 DEF. OTOH, 15 DEF reduces each 10d6 to 20 STUN...which drops to 15 each. If you're gonna go this way, then 50% DR tends to be the sweet spot, when DR is the anchor of your defenses. 25% is just too low, IMO, and 75% just becomes too expensive. You need *some* defense even with 75% No, this doesn't work. The relevant STUN computations are DR: 0.75 * (Nd6 - DEF) DN: (N-3)d6 - DEF Note that this is the STUN you take, so what you want to solve for is N such that DR < DN. So, 0.75 * (Nd6 - DEF) < (N-3)d6 - DEF Nd6 - DEF < 4/3* (N-3)dt - 4/3 DEF --> (4/3N - 4)d6 - 4/3 DEF Nd6 < (4/3N - 4)d6 - 1/3 DEF Nd6 < 4/3Nd6 - 4d6 - 1/3 DEF 4d6 + 1/3 DEF < (1/3N) d6 and finally 12d6 + DEF < Nd6. So with NO defense, they even out at 12d6. At 12 DEF, N rises to 15. At 12 DEF, you'll get 12 STUN past defenses at 7d6. So with DR, 10d6 - 12 is 23 STUN...so 17-18 gets past. Or to simplify a bit...DR and DN mean nothing for the first S dice, where S is the dice to saturate your base defenses. (So S = 4 for 14 DEF, just to keep things neat.) Then DR < DN when 0.75 * N < N - 3 --> N < 4/3N -4 --> N > 12 or 0.5 * N < N - 6 --> N < 2N - 12 --> N > 12 or 0.25 * N < N - 12 --> N < 4N - 48 --> N > 16 25% DR is only removing the equivalent of 1d6 for every 4 dice of damage...only the dice actually DOING something. The actual dice of the attack has to be higher, likely notably higher with the stronger DR. And there's the other side here, that these single-point computations don't capture...the average damage. For this, the base attack is 12d6 and the DEF is 14. Then for reduction, roll 12d6, and I believe the rounding is correct...it's computed as FLOOR(0.75 * AfterDefs + 0.49). FLOOR is the largest integer < the number...so FLOOR(0.75 * 17) is 12.75. +0.49 gets it over 13...so it's 13. OTOH, FLOOR(0.75*18) is 13.5...+0.49 is still 13.99 and so it's still 13. The number at the end is the total expectation, for all rolls...it's the average STUN taken. rolled damage % chance after defs after reduct expectation 27 0.26 13 10 0.026 28 0.41 14 10 0.041 29 0.61 15 11 0.0671 30 0.88 16 12 0.1056 31 1.23 17 13 0.1599 32 1.66 18 13 0.2158 33 2.17 19 14 0.3038 34 2.76 20 15 0.414 35 3.4 21 16 0.544 36 4.07 22 16 0.6512 37 4.73 23 17 0.8041 38 5.35 24 18 0.963 39 5.89 25 19 1.1191 40 6.3 26 19 1.197 41 6.56 27 20 1.312 42 6.65 28 21 1.3965 43 6.56 29 22 1.4432 44 6.3 30 22 1.386 45 5.89 31 23 1.3547 46 5.35 32 24 1.284 47 4.73 33 25 1.1825 48 4.07 34 25 1.0175 49 3.4 35 26 0.884 50 2.76 36 27 0.7452 51 2.17 37 28 0.6076 52 1.66 38 28 0.4648 53 1.23 39 29 0.3567 54 0.88 40 30 0.264 55 0.61 41 31 0.1891 56 0.41 42 31 0.1271 57 0.26 43 32 0.0832 20.7097 Now for 3d6 Negation, we do much the same, but I'm only rolling 9d6. It's simpler now...just subtract the DEF. rolled damage % chance after defs expectation 18 0.23 4 0.0092 19 0.39 5 0.0195 20 0.64 6 0.0384 21 0.98 7 0.0686 22 1.45 8 0.116 23 2.04 9 0.1836 24 2.75 10 0.275 25 3.57 11 0.3927 26 4.44 12 0.5328 27 5.32 13 0.6916 28 6.15 14 0.861 29 6.84 15 1.026 30 7.35 16 1.176 31 7.61 17 1.2937 32 7.61 18 1.3698 33 7.35 19 1.3965 34 6.84 20 1.368 35 6.15 21 1.2915 36 5.32 22 1.1704 37 4.44 23 1.0212 38 3.57 24 0.8568 39 2.75 25 0.6875 40 2.04 26 0.5304 41 1.45 27 0.3915 42 0.98 28 0.2744 43 0.64 29 0.1856 44 0.39 30 0.117 45 0.23 31 0.0713 17.416 So, 3 more STUN on average, at the 12d6 level. If you want to play with this, like change the DEF or change the dice...I copied the 2 left hand columns...the roll total and frequency...from AnyDice. Yeah, I'm skipping some of the VERY low probability cases...but 58+ on 12d6 is about 1/3 of 1%, and 46+ on 9d6 is about 1/4 of 1%. Same on the other end...26 or less on 12d6 is the same probability as 58 or more. Tiny. So...first 2 columns are just pasted in from AnyDice's Normal Distribution view, which has the exact distribution of each roll. After DEF just subtracts the DEF you picked. This is the STUN you take for the negation case; the dice were already removed. For the DR, the final STUN is computed using the FLOOR(0.75 * AfterDefs + 0.49), as mentioned above. Then Expectation is simply the STUN taken * the probability of the roll...and the total expectation, the average damage that will be taken, is the sum of the expectations of all possible cases. Last, you still have to concern yourself with the frequency with which you get stunned. Assuming 23 CON, it's at 24 net STUN. That's 46 STUN with the DR, 38 STUN with the DN. That's 28% vs 12.3%. And sure, if you go up to 15 or 16 dice...the DR will pull even, but you're facing 75 point attacks with about 35 points of defenses *that aren't even efficient*. That's why it doesn't matter to me...that, in itself, had DARN well be rare, because it's such a gross mismatch. That's not a good example. Those are plot device levels. But to take the points --they do very little BODY. --they also do very little STUN. OK, then a) lots of negation, mostly; a bit of armor, because the negation dice have to be less than the attack dice, so the armor makes up for it so BODY happens on a good roll. b) Significant armor, 75% DR. Because it's not just avoiding getting stunned, you have to consider getting KOd. At sane power levels, you may only drop the armor a couple points; you *might* be able to drop the DR to 50%. c) Significant armor and STUN-only Negation. This is the easiest to *tailor* to confidently get to what you want. Yeah, this is another angle. More generally, when you don't get hit as often...could be the energy projector at range 6, not just the martial artist with DCV 11. Here, getting knocked out is much less of a concern; the defenses want to be tailored to avoid being stunned, mostly.

NYT Op-ed was written a couple weeks ago now, but a "hey, have you seen this?" email just arrived. The lead: And just this week, Cyg posted the Weird History Channel's Gatorade vs. PowerAde video. Gatorade had that really good, effective, and catchy jingle. Yes, well, conflate the 2, and we have the New Republican Jingle... Sometimes I dream That he is me You've got to see that's how I dream to be I dream I move, I dream I groove Like Trump If I could be like Trump

The ONLY time I've considered DR is when I've got points to waste. It's that bad, mechanically. And ok, it's more options, but at the cost of system bloat. I don't think they'll eliminate DR either...but that's because there's extreme inertia to completely remove anything from prior editions. Tweak? Sure. Remove? Rare...unless it's just too messed up, like Transfer. DR isn't broken, it's just too rigid and inefficient to be anything but narrow, niche power. That's 50% DR. You're right...that's a viable approach for fringe attacks, particularly for characters with higher DCV and recovery. But start estimating how many hits the character can take before he drops...against more routine damage. You're studying only 1 specific aspect...getting stunned...and even at that, your own numbers show that you're only doing better when the attacks are significantly higher than usual. It might be interesting to do a detailed simulation, such as Grail suggested. A vs. B, where they're basically identical...except that A has reduction, while B has negation at equal points. Now run the combat, phase by phase. Let both attack at the same time; obviously going first would be huge. --each side rolls to hit...11- for both. Attacks will be equal, and *damage will be rolled.* For the negation, the dice just get removed before rolling. --if a character is stunned, he loses his next phase...so the other guy gets a free attack. --to throw in as much as possible, we'll include recoveries...both post-12 and, when necessary, after KOs --the winner is declared when an opponent is KOd...because that means 0 DCV for that phase, and he's taking 2x STUN automatically. Draws are of course possible, should both be KOd at the same time. I can't think of anything else...? But I might code this up. I am a purist, so I'll use a statistically good RNG, if I do, and run at least a few thousand 'combats'. Can probably parameterize it...base defense, attack strength, REC, even the basic attack roll they both use...as I said, getting hit more often should penalize the DR character, so it's a legit parameter. EDIT: oh, there's something. The fights start on 12, as usual...then let em run 2 full turns after that. If both are up, call it a draw. Need a termination condition in any case. So that means I need to set SPD...that can be another parameter to tweak, altho probably one of the last knobs I'd adjust.

Well, in system terms, Resurrection is just an adder (to Regen) in 5E and 6E. Your regen remains in place, kicking it at its defined rate. When you reach positive BODY, or when you're stabilized even tho at negative BODY, you wake back up. The rules state there should be a method to prevent the resurrection from happening...like the D&D troll, where you gotta burn it. Or a Highlander...cut off the head. Otherwise, there's no limit. The rules (6E1 274) also describe the character's state...no, he's not fully healed, but he starts getting normal Recoveries, and his regen continues. The price, the method...at GM discretion. It is a STOP sign adder, so even buying it with character points is not a given...especially in 5E, where it's cheaper. (The Regen itself is MUCH cheaper, the Resurrect less so, but still...it's 6 points less, IIRC.) To allow someone to resurrect someone else...that's "do what you want." In my experience, personal regen is *extremely* rare in all genres, for PCs and NPCs. Some monsters have it, or something close enough to it, but that's pure Plot Device. It's generally possible only in fairly high-magic fantasy...and even then, I think, it's rare in fantasy literature that isn't tied to, or inspired by, a gaming system. Garion did it twice in Eddings...once was a horse, which was setting it up so he could do it with Durnik...but that was plot device * prophecy * deus ex machina. I remember Joel Rosenberg's Guardians of the Flame series...which had ties to D&D, albeit loosely. One significant character had to be resurrected, and it was a HUGE!!! deal. In fantasy, it's usually connected to divine magic...and it's always just about the highest expression of divine power. In supers...geeze, I can remember 1 character whose major power was "personal statis." He activated the power, and his body simply did not change. Couldn't get sick, couldn't get poisoned. Damaged? FAST regeneration. Chest blown out...which happened at one point...his whole body would pull itself together in moments. And it freaked everyone out when it happened. Construct-style duplicators...not biological bodies, but essentially energy forms...it's the norm that blowing away one of the duplicates means nothing, as the progenitor can always make more. In Hero, it's easiest to say the dups have Resurrection, but I don't think many of us would consider it's the same thing. In high-tech fantasy...if resurrection is even possible, you're basically playing high-magic fantasy, substituting a blaster for a wand. Medicine is well-advanced, most of the time...so the notion of "dead" shifts. Brain death is the key...as it can be even now. A complete cardiac arrest isn't fatal...until the brain stops functioning. Before that, it's just dying; when brain activity ceases, it's Dead. I can't offhand think of a case where resurrection is possible...unless it's pure plot device, like Tony's Snap, or *maybe* a case where you have a god-like alien, or insanely, ridiculously advanced tech. (At which point, it's just high fantasy, IMO.) My preference is, bringing someone back from the dead in a game should be a campaign-level event...it should notably impact the entire storyline from there on out. If it's easy, and relatively low-cost...then where's the risk? Where's the dramatic tension?

Article this morning in The Athletic. The headline: Gambling has made ends of games miserable for college basketball benchwarmers. The example was when a kid made a 3 at the end of the game, so his team won by 28, rather than 25. The line was -26.5. Post-game? Spoilered for masked profanity... And apparently, this is the norm...particularly in cases like this, where the play changed the outcome insofar as the line bet...one of THE most common...was concerned. It's a pretty scary, ugly story. It may be paywalled...and unlike NYT, I don't see how to link it....but just in case.... https://theathletic.com/5384328/2024/04/02/gambling-college-basketball-players-substitutes-spread/?source=pulsenewsletter&campaign=9442176&userId=11136959

The Iowa-LSU basketball game...a rematch of last year's title game, drew...you want to sit down for this... Sitting? Good. 12.3 million viewers on average, with a peak of 16 million. From the Athletic, this was Bold mine. Story also notes that the follow-on UConn vs. USC matchup drew a tidy 6.7 million. These were Elite 8 games, too...not the title game, not Final Four.

I think the buildings that have this type of issue...well, the one I showed, *looks* older to me. And if you use Google Images, there's some others...they also do. That's important because Taiwan has implemented construction requirements to protect against this happening...as Japan and California have. BUT, it was more recent, so...older buildings might well be at risk. Fortunately, the death toll right now is only 9, and the tsunami advisories have been cancelled.

It's fine using the 12 DEF, the problem is, you can't keep that assumption forever as the damage scales up. A shorter analysis? 3 dice of negation basically subtracts 10 STUN, for this discussion. For the 25% reduction to subtract 10 STUN, you have to be taking 40 past the defenses. And in 6E, resistant negation also applies to AVADs, and Drain BODY and STUN...because it's clear, to me, that damage negation is intended to replace damage reduction. It's more incremental and it's more effective, barring the issues with the stun mults for hit locations or in 5E. To do "some BODY, but not too much"...be really careful with the KAs. The BODY of a normal attack will only rarely be more than 20-25% more than the dice rolled...more than 15 BODY on 12d6 should be uncommon. (The simplest way to get 15+ BODY is 3+ 6's, and no ones...that's about 20%.) So, something like 14 BODY defense is probably good enough...against normal attacks. The problem is, if you have 4d6 killing...that's the *average* BODY. It'll do 18+ about 16% of the time. OK, if full-DC KAs are *intended* to be a threat...someone with a big KA like that is a High Priority Target!!!...and it's unusual that this shows up? Then go with extensive resistant defenses, right around the average KA BODY. For the rest...STUN-only Negation. You have good granularity now, you can pick the amount to suit your needs. It is a bit more awkward, sure, but it isn't hard...with 12d6 and 5 dice negation? Roll 7 dice, count BODY and STUN; roll 5 dice, and count the BODY only, which is trivial. It should SAVE time, as counting the stun on 7 dice should be faster than on 12 dice. And if you want to simplify it, especially for KA STUN? Just subtract 3.5 STUN per die, rounding in the player's favor. So 5 dice negation? Knock off 18 STUN. Of course, if you have, say, 6 dice of negation? Then it doesn't matter, it's just 2 dice killing that gets negated. Simple.

LW: you're assuming a static level of defenses outside the DR or DN. If that base defense 12 changes, then the net results change...and if they go *up*, then DR does worse. That's the root problem with DR; it does best as a standalone defense, but it's not good enough to *be* a standalone defense. I don't care about how, with only 12 base defense, 25% DR compares to 3 dice DN. Why? Because that's totally unacceptably LOW defense, IMO. With the DN, you're facing 9d6 with 12 defense. So, 9d6 > 35 stuns you. You're stunned 22% of the time. With the DR, it's (12d6 - 12) * 0.75 > 23 12d6 - 12 > 92/3 --> 31 so 12d6 > 43 will stun you. That's 40% of the time. Those, for me, are both MUCH too high, and I suspect, 40% of the time would be too high for most of us. Against 12d6, with 3 negation, 14 defense would mean you get stunned on 38+ on 9d6, which is down to 12% of the time. With the 25% DR, it's 45+ on 12d6, which is still 34%. And we can take it further...by your own chart, the 25% DR draws even with the 3 DN at 15 dice...when you're taking 30 STUN each time. Your defenses are *insanely* out of whack, IMO. Against 15d6? I'd want closer to 20-22 defense...and my DR's effectiveness drops 2-3 points.