I honestly find the viewpoint of someone who would take such a silly catch totally alien. Like trying to understand Cthulu....
I mean that.
Again, the problem is not that people will necessarily take such a Catch. The problem is that anybody who doesn't is Playing The Game Wrong.
Forcing people to play Wrong makes things less fun for them.
I'm not joking. Mechanically speaking, a silly Catch is straight-up better than a sensible one. And the correct way to play a game is the way that makes you most likely to win. In character creation, winning means creating the most powerful character possible within the provided constraints.
You might not take character creation as a game in itself, and that's fine. But for everyone who does, this sort of imbalance is painful.
In any game I run and let a player be "invincible" there is a 100% chance at some point they WILL be hit by their catch at least once no matter how rare. No exceptions. No matter how silly. That said tehre is no reason to take something that doesn't fit the high concept. It won't make it come up that much more often, if at all.
That sort of works, but it gets kinda silly with the weird Catches.
And again, the problem is not that people will take Catches that don't fit their concepts. The problem is that people will be told by the game not to play concepts that don't justify suitable Catches.
I see no point in such a thing. Want to make Mab or The Almighty 100% invincible? : Their high concept alone could accomplish that. That is so inherent to their being it simply is .
I'm sorry, that doesn't work at all.
Wizards need Evocation to Evoke, regardless of concept. Aspects do nothing unless invoked or compelled.
If you want invincible characters, you need to give those characters invincibility Powers. (Or Stunts, I suppose...as if.)
For dramatic effect and story their will always be a way to hurt the thing the story calls to be fought.
I'm willing to compromise on this to the extent that an option be listed to inviolve a way to hurt someone who is 100% invincible. You can even have the baseline power as written not require that +0 catch equivalent.
We already have All Creatures Are Equal Before God. And nobody can ever be immune to social attacks. And Aspects can do anything.
What more do you want?
Ignore TINS, it's a separate issue. One we should discuss separately.
I stand by the idea; that I can't take a custom power serious if it truly allows for 100% invincibility. I can't be the only one.
There is a reason for many years and even now GM's groan when a player says "Hey! I found this on the internet and want to play it or have the power etc."
I think we balance most of this stuff pretty damn good, but I have never met a GM (as far as I know) that would look at a power as viable once they saw it allowed 100% invincibility.
I have to admit that having a Power not taken seriously by some dude over the internet doesn't bother me. If I've done my job right, that's enough for me.
I guess I have a bit of Pretentious Artist in my makeup. I feel beholden to abstract principles of game design, not people's prejudices.
PS: If we put an appropriate cost on full invincibility, then no player in any normal game will be able to afford it. That is right and proper, because full invincibility is more powerful than everything a normal PC should be able to afford put together.
The question is, how much is perfect invulnerability worth?