ParanetOnline

The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Taer on June 13, 2011, 07:32:21 PM

Title: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Taer on June 13, 2011, 07:32:21 PM
Does anyone other than me find this power largely inappropriate in the game?

For example, let's say I'm designing some kind of a BBEG. I want for him to be extremely badass, tougher than even Mythic Toughness. Because of God-mode, there just isn't any place for designing any other super-Toughness powers. Why even bother? God-mode is available. I can't ever have a Toughness power cost more than -7 Refresh because -8 is invulnerable.

It's also placed in some highly unsatisfying places in the book. For example, Ogres have Physical Immunity to magic. I mean, does that seriously mean that an Ogre could basically walk into a meeting of the entire White Council and the thousand or so wizards could unload enough magic to level a city and he'd just shrug it off? GM Fiat here is not really a satisfying solution.

Sure - I can get that Ogres are very tough against magic. But they're also nowhere near heavyweights, they shouldn't get to laugh in the face of the entire Council if they unleash their full power.

Similarly, some other creatures I don't think deserve Physical Immunity. Sure, the Loup-Garou is badass. Sure, it could rip apart an entire police department. So, can it survive a nuke? Ten? Fifty? The full might of Queen Mab if she doesn't use some sort of a Catch-satisfying ability?

Again, GM Fiat is not a good solution. As a GM, I can already do anything. The rules in the book are there to tell me what I should and should not do.

So, opinions on this? If you share my opinion, did anyone come up with some sort of a custom power for other high-end Toughness abilities?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: tetrasodium on June 13, 2011, 07:46:32 PM
Does anyone other than me find this power largely inappropriate in the game?

For example, let's say I'm designing some kind of a BBEG. I want for him to be extremely badass, tougher than even Mythic Toughness. Because of God-mode, there just isn't any place for designing any other super-Toughness powers. Why even bother? God-mode is available. I can't ever have a Toughness power cost more than -7 Refresh because -8 is invulnerable.

It's also placed in some highly unsatisfying places in the book. For example, Ogres have Physical Immunity to magic. I mean, does that seriously mean that an Ogre could basically walk into a meeting of the entire White Council and the thousand or so wizards could unload enough magic to level a city and he'd just shrug it off? GM Fiat here is not really a satisfying solution.

Sure - I can get that Ogres are very tough against magic. But they're also nowhere near heavyweights, they shouldn't get to laugh in the face of the entire Council if they unleash their full power.

Similarly, some other creatures I don't think deserve Physical Immunity. Sure, the Loup-Garou is badass. Sure, it could rip apart an entire police department. So, can it survive a nuke? Ten? Fifty? The full might of Queen Mab if she doesn't use some sort of a Catch-satisfying ability?

Again, GM Fiat is not a good solution. As a GM, I can already do anything. The rules in the book are there to tell me what I should and should not do.

So, opinions on this? If you share my opinion, did anyone come up with some sort of a custom power for other high-end Toughness abilities?

Remember what morgan tells harry about his actions back in the 50's while talking about....
(click to show/hide)
in ummm changes?  Plus magic is isanely versatile and can easily trigger nonmagical "attacks"... collapse the roof/building supports or throw a car at them and you have magically done something to attack wiin a nonmagical manner, if it's an old enough car, maybe it's mase of steel and hits  the ogre's cold iron vulnerability  Mely the floor into frictionless dust like  Ramirez can do and poof... that ogre is trapped for a bit while you find something useful t throw at him. With any kind of immunity, sometimes as the GM you have to step in and make a judgement call and say "yea ok sure, that's a reasonably powerful/creative enough attack to be partially exempt as long as your players are ware that it can work both ways if they minmax enough to warrant it.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: EdgeOfDreams on June 13, 2011, 07:47:14 PM
My main response is that Physical Immunity may prevent damage, but it doesn't make you unbeatable or protect you from being disabled.  For example, I would expect the Senior Council's response to an Ogre attack to be a bunch of earth evocations, opening up a 50-foot pit in the ground right under the ogre's feet, then filling it in with dirt and walking away.  The ogre was never directly attacked by magic, so his physical immunity doesn't matter.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: BumblingBear on June 13, 2011, 08:06:24 PM
My main response is that Physical Immunity may prevent damage, but it doesn't make you unbeatable or protect you from being disabled.  For example, I would expect the Senior Council's response to an Ogre attack to be a bunch of earth evocations, opening up a 50-foot pit in the ground right under the ogre's feet, then filling it in with dirt and walking away.  The ogre was never directly attacked by magic, so his physical immunity doesn't matter.

A wizard could just use a wind or spirit evocation to propel a rock or chair at said ogre at extremely high speeds too.

All that would cost is a declaration or character equipment and an evocation.

Without trying to be too snarky here, I think the OP ha not grasped the creative aspect of the DFRPG yet.

OP - you could just use spirit to explode or wipe the mind of a character with physical immunity.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 13, 2011, 08:07:28 PM
There is allways mental and social stress.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 13, 2011, 08:21:32 PM
I also find Physical Immunity extremely aggravating. Mostly for the first reason provided.

There are a few cases where I don't especially mind it. Like for intangible beings. But even then, it's undercosted.

Physical Immunity with a +0 catch is just plain better than almost anything else that you can spend 8 refresh on. From an optimization point of view, anyone with 8 points of normal toughness is a dumbass. And that's a problem.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 13, 2011, 08:21:51 PM
The way I see it Taer, you're the one putting efficacy over story. You totally could make a toughness power that is greater than mythic and make it cost 8 refresh. There is no reason not to. But you aren't willing to, because you feel that you must get the better value out of those 8 refresh. Where is that coming from? Why do you feel that way?

As far as the ogre, again there's no reason why your ogre can't simply have toughness up the wazoo. Seems to me that the physical immunity fits the canon, but if you feel differently then do differently.

If you're worried as a GM that physical immunity is too tough, then the best thing to do is to make the catch very broad. Physical immunity to magic means that there is a whole lot of other things that can hurt them, some of which can be brought about by magic (as mentioned above).

And yes, the way I feel is that some things (like the loup-garou, and shagnasty) really should be that powerful. There are some creatures that are simply overwhelming, that are an unstoppable force that's going to get what it wants. Japanese horror is a great example of this (Juon is the last one I've seen, but it's been a long while) and it can be used to create a lot of tension and fear.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Lanir on June 13, 2011, 08:33:22 PM
Going to try to state this simply.


If it annoys you, you either haven't given it an appropriate catch for your game or you've misunderstood how to use the catch.

The OP has kind of hit on a point here, in a tangential sort of way. An ultimate, extreme power like this should either be severely limited or it should be crafted in such a way as to fit your story exceptionally well. It's never supposed to trigger evil GM laughter. It's a trick you use when you want your players to be creative and not use the same tricks to get through every situation or when you just think that something makes sense. Like possibly making a fiery apparition of some sort immune to normal fire.

When you use Physical Immunity you have to kind of make sure there's another option is all, and if you've taken the PC's main tricks offline, you may be required to provide a nudge to get them thinking along the right lines after the initial wake-up call (which should always be a scary but ultimately not very costly encounter... making players pay out the nose for not knowing something you haven't told them yet is pretty prickish).
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Taer on June 13, 2011, 08:36:48 PM
OP - you could just use spirit to explode or wipe the mind of a character with physical immunity.

Psychomancy is Thaumaturgy. Without Kemmlerian Magic, how can you inflict Mental stress?

Quote from: sinker
The way I see it Taer, you're the one putting efficacy over story. You totally could make a toughness power that is greater than mythic and make it cost 8 refresh. There is no reason not to. But you aren't willing to, because you feel that you must get the better value out of those 8 refresh. Where is that coming from? Why do you feel that way?

Let's say I have a Shapeshifter villain, who has Modular Abilities. Why would he ever assume any other Toughness-based power other than Physical Immunity for the same cost, unless explicitly forbidden? And - if I must explicitly forbid him from assuming it, doesn't it imply it's too good?

And I feel that way because it feels entirely pointless. I could create a version of Evocation that grants 2 elements and no Focus Item slots while costing -3 Refresh, but is there really any point in doing so?

Quote from: sinker
And yes, the way I feel is that some things (like the loup-garou, and shagnasty) really should be that powerful. There are some creatures that are simply overwhelming, that are an unstoppable force that's going to get what it wants. Japanese horror is a great example of this (Juon is the last one I've seen, but it's been a long while) and it can be used to create a lot of tension and fear.

Shagnasty(well, another Shagnasty than the one we've seen) died to a nuclear bomb. This implies there is a level of force that can defeat him.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 13, 2011, 08:40:04 PM
Spirit Magic can do mental stress if you follow the official canon of the books otherwise how else did Molly make her attacks when she didn't have access to thamaturgy at all at that point. Also don't forget inctite emotion or conversation stress.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 13, 2011, 08:43:56 PM
Please do not try to invoke canon.

The issue is not clear.

The novels are not game rulebooks.

Also, the writeups in OW are sometimes unambigously wrong.

And for all we know, that character's mental shenaniganisms could have been maneuvers or the use of Psychomancy as a temporary power.

PS: Spoiler tags might be warranted there, I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: paul_Harkonen on June 13, 2011, 08:46:10 PM
Ah power gamers.

Look, DFRPG is a story heavy, rules light system.  If you want to break it, you can do that.  You can do it really easily (at least if you do so directly).  However, it also encourages lots of lateral thinking in order to get around those types of problems.

Consider this example:  We have a normal human in every way except he\she\it has physical immunity with a +0 catch.  You aren't going to hurt this person, ever.  Fine, instead of trying to kill this person directly (impossible) I'm going to spend the next set of exchanges applying aspects such as "Pinned Down" "Wrapped in barbed wire" "trapped in dirt".  I could also use assessments and declarations to apply "Weak floorboards, "creepy house" or "Construction yard relics".  After applying 4-5 aspects as a team we then tag them for effect in rapid succession.  We use those tags to force the NPC to concede, to be trapped in wires, to be pinned to the ground or some other equally effective way to simply prevent this person from moving.

DFRPG is all about aspect manipulation, story and creativity, not numbers.  If you just play by the numbers you are going to have easily broken systems and miss out on half the fun of the game.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 13, 2011, 08:53:52 PM
I disagree.

I think that DFRPG is actually pretty hard to break.

Also, just because it isn't a crunchy system doesn't mean that mechanical problems aren't problems. Mythic Toughness + Mythic Recovery is inferior in (very nearly) every possible way to Physical Immunity. That's not a good thing.

PS: I'm pretty sure that forcing someone to concede is literally impossible. It's a player action, not a character one.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: BumblingBear on June 13, 2011, 08:54:49 PM
Psychomancy is Thaumaturgy. Without Kemmlerian Magic, how can you inflict Mental stress?


Spirit evocations can attack.. well, spirit.  :)

There is some disagreement about this on the boards here, but the overwhelming majority agree with this.

You don't have to kill that way, either.  Taking out someone's mental track can knock them out.

After you knock out a guy with physical immunity, you could bury him in concrete or drop him to the bottom of the ocean.

Also, beings with physical immunity still need to breath.  A wind evocation could rob the creature of all the air around them, attempting to knock out or kill based on suffocation.

There are ways around everything.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Taer on June 13, 2011, 09:01:54 PM
As a note, could the people here cut back on the insults? I'm neither an idiot nor a munchkin. So, thanks in advance, would be nice.

Note, however, that I'm not asking here whether or not you can beat someone with PI. I'm focusing on whether it's an appropriate ability.

Would you allow for total immunities to other things? How about Social and Mental tracks? How about an immunity to Physical Blocks or Maneuvers(call it "Unstoppable Force" or whatever)? How about an immunity to assessments("Null Presence")? Or Declarations(Reality Warper)?

If any of those would be considered inappropriate, why do Attacks get a pass? What makes them special?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: EdgeOfDreams on June 13, 2011, 09:06:32 PM
Would you allow for total immunities to other things? How about Social and Mental tracks? How about an immunity to Physical Blocks or Maneuvers(call it "Unstoppable Force" or whatever)? How about an immunity to assessments("Null Presence")? Or Declarations(Reality Warper)?

If any of those would be considered inappropriate, why do Attacks get a pass? What makes them special?

I think a huge part of the answer to this line of reasoning is The Catch.  By the rules, you can't have no catch at all.  And to me, at least, a catch so rare as to never affect the plot (e.g. "can only be harmed by the Thimble of Zeus, which no one has ever heard of and was lost 1000 years ago") is the same as not having a catch.

I feel that Physical Immunity serves a totally different purpose than the Toughness/Recovery line of powers.  PI should be used ONLY as a plot device to force the opponent to find the catch.

Also, Immunity to physical attacks is heavily supported by lore, fairy tales, myths, and the DF novels, whereas other sorts of immunity (e.g. to mental attacks) are far less common and less iconic.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: EldritchFire on June 13, 2011, 09:07:17 PM
As a note, could the people here cut back on the insults? I'm neither an idiot nor a munchkin. So, thanks in advance, would be nice.

Note, however, that I'm not asking here whether or not you can beat someone with PI. I'm focusing on whether it's an appropriate ability.

Would you allow for total immunities to other things? How about Social and Mental tracks? How about an immunity to Physical Blocks or Maneuvers(call it "Unstoppable Force" or whatever)? How about an immunity to assessments("Null Presence")? Or Declarations(Reality Warper)?

If any of those would be considered inappropriate, why do Attacks get a pass? What makes them special?

I'm no expert, but I think Physical Immunity is there for very specific cases. The loup-garu who is immune to most physical harm except for inherited silver, or a flame archon who's immune to fire.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of Physical Immunity. I'd much rather have a collection of Recovery & Toughness. This is both from a player and GM standpoint. If a character has Physical Immunity and the one thing they aren't immune to shows up, it seems to be a cheap shot at that character. I know it's not, it's there to challenge them...but still, it's the feeling rather than the fact.

With Toughness & Recovery powers, it's not that big a deal until the fight has been going on for a while. Those extra stress boxes and consequences look mighty good when you only have 2 stress boxes left...and you can't use them. At that point, the rest of the party is beaten up as much as you are, so the feeling that you were singled out is less.

Just my [-2].

-EF
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: zenten on June 13, 2011, 09:08:52 PM
I agree that it's probably under costed.  Would 12 Refresh be better?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: paul_Harkonen on June 13, 2011, 09:19:55 PM
I disagree.

I think that DFRPG is actually pretty hard to break.

Also, just because it isn't a crunchy system doesn't mean that mechanical problems aren't problems. Mythic Toughness + Mythic Recovery is inferior in (very nearly) every possible way to Physical Immunity. That's not a good thing.

PS: I'm pretty sure that forcing someone to concede is literally impossible. It's a player action, not a character one.

Given the number of threads on here about X way to break the system, I think you aren't trying hard enough.  But that is neither here nor there.

I'm not convinced it actually is a mechanical problem, and mythic toughness + mythic recovery is a completely different power and mentality (flavor wise) than physical immunity.  They let you do different things.  Toughness allows you to take a beating, Recovery allows you to heal quickly (along with not needing food and being able to run\fight\whatever indefinitely) and physical immunity means you don't take damage at all.  Unless you are taking them for a specific character reason, you're right, physical immunity probably provides your character with more protection than two mythic toughness powers, but that doesn't mean there is a mechanical problem.  It also doesn't mean you can't, (or even that you shouldn't) take the toughness + recovery track if that is the flavor you want to have for your character.

As to forcing them to concede, I'm pretty sure that is well within the realm of a valid invoke\compel.  Characters, NPCs and PCs can be compelled to hide, to run, to investigate, to fight, to trip, and do pretty much everything else.  Why couldn't they be compelled to concede?  Admittedly as GM I would be somewhat cautious about what kinds of aspects can be used to make that kind of compel, but mechanically that's perfectly legitimate, and pretty much the whole point of the GM (in the context of conflicts) is to adjudicate what compels\invokes are reasonable.

Finally, being called a munchkin isn't an insult.  What you appear to be considering is how you can maximize in game effects from a mechanical standpoint without regard to flavor or story.  That is pretty much the definition of power gaming\munchkifying.  Does that make it bad?  no.  But that is pretty much what we are discussing here.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 13, 2011, 09:27:21 PM
Let's say I have a Shapeshifter villain, who has Modular Abilities. Why would he ever assume any other Toughness-based power other than Physical Immunity for the same cost, unless explicitly forbidden? And - if I must explicitly forbid him from assuming it, doesn't it imply it's too good?

You're letting the mechanics get in the way of your story and the characters in it. Before taking the power does the villain think "Hmm, how much toughness can I get for my 8 refresh? Well, since I can become physically immune, I must." No, he's simply doing what he does for the reasons he does them. He is a person. People are flawed. They do not always do the best thing every time.

In addition what is saying he can. Just because he has the refresh to take physical immunity does not mean he has the right to. A pure mortal at submerged level has the refresh to take physical immunity, what's stopping them? They may have reasons other than simple refresh that prevent them from reaching that level of toughness, and that doesn't mean that they couldn't use that same refresh (or less if you like) for a greater-than-mythic toughness.

Finally I think that the whole concept of villain refresh is just silly. What does it matter how much refresh he spends? Or how much any of his abilities cost? It may be a decent way to gauge what kind of a challenge the villain will be but is 41 refresh really that big of a difference from 40? If he spends a few extra points (or has a better-than-mythic toughness for only 6 refresh) will it really change how he works or what he does? When it comes down to it I rarely flesh out my villains that much. I have a story concept and they do that in whatever way that it presents whatever challenge I'm trying to accomplish. They have enough FATE points to make the story interesting when I want, and they run out when I want them to be at the end of their resources. I've even adjusted villains mid-conflict before and my players had no idea. EDIT: Of course I should note that this requires a great deal of trust between players and GM, but I'm lucky enough to have that.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there is no good reason whatsoever why the rule book (in whatever capacity) should be getting in the way of the story you want to tell. Tell the story that you want, and if Physical immunity doesn't fit into it then don't try to shoehorn it in, just because you feel like you must. When it does fit then relish it, enjoy the drama that it creates when it is unique and fun.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 13, 2011, 09:36:34 PM
@BumblingBear: I don't think there's an overwhelming majority either way, actually. Otherwise, you're right. But I don't think that this is the thread for that.

@paul_Harkonen: I'd appreciate a PM detailing ways to break the system. I've only seen one way, and even it isn't supremely impressive. Which makes DFRPG harder to break than any other game I've played, so far as I can see.

Anyway, characters cannot concede. Players can concede. It's a narrative action. Therefore it cannot be compelled, since players can't be compelled. If you invoke for effect in such a way as to make a character lose a fight or surrender, then that's not a concession.

@EdgeOfDreams: I mostly agree, although I'd tack on a secondary use of "logical necessity." You can't burn something made out of fire, etc. The problem is that Physical Immunity does Toughness's job better than Toughness does.

@zenten: I think you're on the right track. However, I don't think that any cost would really solve the problem. I think you'd have to use a different Catch system from normal Toughness, to reflect the fact that Catches are more important for full immunity.

@sinker: Just because a problem is easily ignored doesn't mean that it isn't a problem.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 13, 2011, 09:54:53 PM
@sinker: Just because a problem is easily ignored doesn't mean that it isn't a problem.

Means it isn't valid to one's personal existence, so effectively it isn't a problem to one who does not perceive it as such.

But that wasn't the only point that I had. Taer was saying if I have 8 refresh why would I buy anything else, and I was answering with "Narrative." Your story should be indicating what you should do, not your refresh level.

In fact based on my previous statement the refresh level is completely irrelevant, but I know that's a personal view.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Bruce Coulson on June 13, 2011, 10:06:44 PM
The 'unstoppable' monster is a part of the general mythology that Dresden (and most fantasy) draws from.  At least. the monster who is unstoppable in terms of direct physical force; the hero generally has to find some weakness, or find another way to defeat the monster.  Which is represented by the concept of Physical Immunity and the Catch; find the Catch, and suddenly the monster folds like a cheap suitcase.  In the case of Ogres, a cold iron spear-head thrown with Air or Spirit propulsion will serious crimp their style.

I could see have immunity to Mental or Social stress in some cases; although it would probably be a one-off monster.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Haru on June 13, 2011, 10:25:23 PM
Does anyone other than me find this power largely inappropriate in the game?

For example, let's say I'm designing some kind of a BBEG. I want for him to be extremely badass, tougher than even Mythic Toughness. Because of God-mode, there just isn't any place for designing any other super-Toughness powers. Why even bother? God-mode is available. I can't ever have a Toughness power cost more than -7 Refresh because -8 is invulnerable.
To every Toughness power there is a catch, especially for Physical Immunity. In the case of a BBEG it might be the one thing that is able to kill or disable him, and that is ok inside of a story, as long as the players have an interesting way to get it. The story is going to become less centred around fighting the BBEG and more centred around the quest for finding that one thing that can defeat him. Or the PCs can only foil BBEGs plans, but he lives to fight another day. After all, that is all Harry is able to do with Nicodemus so far.

Quote
It's also placed in some highly unsatisfying places in the book. For example, Ogres have Physical Immunity to magic. I mean, does that seriously mean that an Ogre could basically walk into a meeting of the entire White Council and the thousand or so wizards could unload enough magic to level a city and he'd just shrug it off? GM Fiat here is not really a satisfying solution.

Sure - I can get that Ogres are very tough against magic. But they're also nowhere near heavyweights, they shouldn't get to laugh in the face of the entire Council if they unleash their full power.
If they are throwing their magic directly at the ogre, then yes, he is going to smash his way through them. But as others pointed out, wizards have lots of different ways to use their magic other than point and shoot.

Quote
Similarly, some other creatures I don't think deserve Physical Immunity. Sure, the Loup-Garou is badass. Sure, it could rip apart an entire police department. So, can it survive a nuke? Ten? Fifty? The full might of Queen Mab if she doesn't use some sort of a Catch-satisfying ability?
Yes, it could. And it is not completely immune to anything, it can be hurt, even killed by inherited silver, it's catch. Queen Mab would be able to bind it, as would possibly a nuke if it buried it under a few thousand tons of dirt, but it would not be killed outright. And don't forget, a Loup-Garou is only a Loup-Garou for 3 days of a month, so if you want to do something to it, there is plenty of time to do it.

Quote
Again, GM Fiat is not a good solution. As a GM, I can already do anything. The rules in the book are there to tell me what I should and should not do.

So, opinions on this? If you share my opinion, did anyone come up with some sort of a custom power for other high-end Toughness abilities?
As I said, it all comes down to the catch, and that is something that the book tells you. I don't really see the need for any other high end toughness powers. Anything other than mystic toughness would make you immune to battlefield weapons, so putting up a physical immunity at that point is more than justified.

If a player absolutely wants to take up physical immunity, make him pay (by compelling him on his catch). I had a shadowrun player once, that wanted to take an allergy to gold on his character to gather up some more creation points. Too bad, that most cyberware connectors are made of gold...
What I'm trying to say is: if a character wants to have physical immunity, there is going to be something else, that is going to get him. Maybe his catch, maybe the BBEG goes after his loved ones instead of him. The character is going to think twice before storming the castle, if his friends are in the line of fire.

And for the most part, if I read it correctly, Physical Immunity is used to get Immunity for 1 condition instead of all but 1 thing, which makes it far less powerful, but gives a nice touch to a creature. A fire elemental's immunity to fire for example. Or - as you pointed out - an ogres immunity to mortal magic. And as far as I understood that, only the older and tougher ogres would develop the strength to shake of mortal magic like it was nothing.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: devonapple on June 13, 2011, 10:33:01 PM
Don't forget that another way to suss out a +0 Catch is simply to have enough exposure to a given creature. If there's a monster or villain with a +0 Catch, and it NEEDS to be destroyed, the players can play a "long con" and manipulate things so they can get in with the villain and hopefully learn what particular thing is his Catch. Then, use all that first-hand experience to really set him up thoroughly before taking him down. Not to continually flog canon examples, but Harry
(click to show/hide)
.

But, at the end of the day, a GM is putting a Physically Immune character into a game for one of several potential reasons, including:

1) It's in [Our World/Your Story/my mythology book/my imagination] and I thought it would be cool.
2) It's in [Our World/Your Story/my mythology book/my imagination] and I thought it would make sense for this story or creature.
3) I want the players to find a non-combat way to resolve this conflict.
4) I want the players to think more creatively about combat tactics in this conflict.
5) I want to show my players what a badass this villain is.

And #5 is the motivation - the Baron Von Badass trope - that's a potential problem, especially if the GM thinks it's motivation #1.

Edit: Physical Immunity is ultimately a puzzle to be solved or a "Wrong Way" sign. It's not meant to be a "You Lose" sign. And - quite frankly - that's for PCs as well as NPCs.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: tetrasodium on June 13, 2011, 11:16:58 PM
Shagnasty(well, another Shagnasty than the one we've seen) died to a nuclear bomb. This implies there is a level of force that can defeat him.
I'm not able to go searching for the exact quote/line right now, but I think
(click to show/hide)
only said he was pretty sure he probably killed it or hurt it enugh to make it crawl in a hole/go away for a while and lick its wounds. lose interest in chasing him down
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Lanir on June 13, 2011, 11:27:58 PM
Umm... sounding a bit like dead horse beating here.

It kind of looked like the original poster was a bit frustrated or uncertain about this power and wanted to know how to use it effectively in a game. Later comments have made me uncertain that was the correct way to read this. Taer, do you mind clearing this up? Just posting opinions that disagree with each other isn't particularly useful. If you're actually still looking for how to use this, then I think you'll find some interesting ideas have been posted that could give you new angles to think about.

The majority opinion here seems to be that this can be an effective power to use, but it definitely is one you have to consider. You don't just want to throw it out there without giving serious thought to how your group can handle it (which includes them finding out they can handle it). Again, the majority seems to think that it boils down to how broad a category the character is immune to, what their catch is, and how your players can manage to discover said catch. Managing the catch is managing the power.

So... Where do you want to go from here? Still have questions?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Belial666 on June 14, 2011, 12:58:55 AM
A point that has not been adressed; Physical Immunity is not absolute. There are at least 8 ways to bypass it and still directly harm the target;

1) Magical mental attacks.
2) Magical spiritual attacks.
3) Domination.
4) Incite Emotion.
5) Narcotic Saliva.
6) All Creatures Are Equal Before God.
7) Sacred Guardian.
8) Righteousness/Holy Touch


Wizards can do 1 and 2.
Vampires can do at least one of 3, 4 or 5.
People of Faith can usually do one of 6, 7 or 8.
Sidhe can do 1, 2 and occasionally 3 or 4.
Faerie Knights can do 1 and 2.
Greater Demons can do 1 and 2 and occasionally 3 or 4.

So, by the time someone has physical immunity, he is going to fight against enemies that can ignore his immunity at least some of the time. Physical Immunity only ensures your protection from mooks that have no supernatural powers to ignore it and could not find your catch.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 14, 2011, 01:12:18 AM
Bloody Sacred Guardian. Hate that power.

Anyway, I think that Holy Touch doesn't deserve a place on that list.

Standard disclaimer about mental/spiritual magic.

Also, it's called Addictive Saliva.

And Addictive Saliva doesn't really inflict harm. It's just a super-aspect.

Otherwise looks good.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Belial666 on June 14, 2011, 01:23:49 AM
Quote
And Addictive Saliva doesn't really inflict harm. It's just a super-aspect.
Under the "narcotic saliva" ability of the Addictive Saliva power, it says you can also use it as an attack to inflict mental stress.  ;D

Quote
Holy Touch doesn't deserve a place on that list.
Well, Holy Touch can satisfy the catch of some creatures and even if not, it is still weapon 1 against creatures offensive to your faith.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 14, 2011, 02:21:29 AM
Umm... sounding a bit like dead horse beating here.

It kind of looked like the original poster was a bit frustrated or uncertain about this power and wanted to know how to use it effectively in a game. Later comments have made me uncertain that was the correct way to read this. Taer, do you mind clearing this up? Just posting opinions that disagree with each other isn't particularly useful. If you're actually still looking for how to use this, then I think you'll find some interesting ideas have been posted that could give you new angles to think about.

This is not a statement that I like. It doesn't seem to help the discussion move forward. It dismisses everything that isn't the same as what you believe, which is incredibly irritating.

It seems to me that the original statement was 1) I really hate physical immunity because it seems overpowered, but 2) there seems like no alternative or even a justifiable reason for an alternative.

Seems like most people are acknowledging the first without looking at the second, and that's what I'm trying to remedy. If Taer feels like correcting me then I'll stop expounding on the concept.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Hal on June 14, 2011, 01:47:31 PM

Note, however, that I'm not asking here whether or not you can beat someone with PI. I'm focusing on whether it's an appropriate ability.

Would you allow for total immunities to other things? How about Social and Mental tracks? How about an immunity to Physical Blocks or Maneuvers(call it "Unstoppable Force" or whatever)? How about an immunity to assessments("Null Presence")? Or Declarations(Reality Warper)?

If any of those would be considered inappropriate, why do Attacks get a pass? What makes them special?

Appropriate?  Sure.  But you have to use your discretion in determining where it's appropriate and where it isn't.  For example, that Ogre with physical immunity to mortal magic?  Appropriate for a mixed group; the wizard might have trouble dealing with the guy, but he can provide support to the guy with the gun and the fae knight in your group.  The BBEG with physical immunity to everything but one thing (ala Nicodemus)?  You have to use that fittingly; unless you have someone who can break through his defenses reliably (like a Knight of the Cross), the point of fighting that guy is to delay him or get away from him.  It's a GM's tool, and like any tool you have to apply it where necessary and put it away when it wouldn't work.

I'd totally allow mental/social immunities, but it would have to be a sensible thing.  A golem or construct, for example, would probably have social immunity.    I'd probably give mental immunity to something that simply has no mind.  A plant, for example.  As for the rest of the things you mention, it just goes back to how you use them.  What's the purpose of shutting down those mechanics?  If it's to create something justifiably dangerous and encourage your players to work towards an unconventional solution, that's one thing.  If it's just to be big and scary and hard to destroy, then that's probably not a good use of the tool.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Taer on June 14, 2011, 02:31:38 PM
All right, let's go over this again, point by point.
1) It's an imbalanced ability. The philosophy of the game's design clearly states that roughly equal Refresh should equal to roughly equal powers(clearly, it's not always the case, but at least we should strive towards that). If you have a choice of -8 Refresh in Toughness powers, PI is unquestionably superior to any other combination of Toughness powers.

So, in other words, PI breaks the game design almost by default. But that is ultimately a minor issue.
2) I know that it can be beaten, I really do genuinely know that. I'm not asking about whether it can be beaten. I know there are multiple ways to overcome it.
3) What I'm asking is - does the ability make sense?
Does it really make sense that there are entities out there - who are not true heavyweights by any means - that can take the entire nuclear arsenal of the world to the face and not just survive but entirely laugh it off?
Does it really make sense that if the entire White Council worked together on the most potent Heart Exploding spell in existence, spend weeks and weeks sacrificing humans and going full crazy-on black magic to get into the 4 or 5-digit range as far as shifts go, creating a spell powerful enough to wipe a country off the map, a freaking Ogre(not a heavyweight by any means) could just shrug it off?

This is one of the bits of advice that I've seen repeated often in my GMing days. Do everything you can not to say "No". Say "Yes, but". The "But" is, make the challenge tougher. Make it much harder. Don't make it entirely impossible. PI just outright says "No, you can't do that, find a different way". And it annoys me.

EDIT: Or, let me put it in another way. Imagine an alternate world, where there was no Physical Immunity in canon. Where the Toughness abilities ended at Mythic Toughness and Mythic Endurance. Say, I came onto the Custom Powers thread and proposed PI. Does anyone here seriously think they'd say the ability was anything but crazily inappropriate?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on June 14, 2011, 03:22:22 PM
Here's my feeling: 

Physical immunity against a single thing (fire for fire spirits, cutting and piercing weapons for Nemean Lion, Nuclear Radiation for roaches, etc.) is an excellent use of the power.  It shuts down a specific type of attack and makes a character look at having the use it a different way.  When used this way, it is an effective power to influence the story and reasonably priced.

Physical immunity against everything is absurd.  Superman can still be hurt by things that don't bypass his weakness, just not killed.  When he simply can't be hurt, it's considered bad writing.  It reduces tension in the story.  It sucks. 

If I wanted to make a character that couldn't be killed except in a very specific circumstance, I'd make a power to do so.  It wouldn't make the character tougher, just harder to kill.  He could still be hurt, beaten, bloodied, but eventually he'd bounce back from it.

As written, I'd be more comfortable with PI being priced at 12 (possibly 14) refresh.  In this case, the "applies only to one thing" would be worth quite a bit more as a catch.

Personally, I'd rather just raise the Toughness and Recovery powers up if I wanted a very tough monster.  I'd also rather PI only be allowed for a single thing.

Ultimately, it doesn't really affect my games.  It's not a power that most player concepts, even at Submerged, could take or consider.  It's basically meant to be a "not quite plot device monster" power if for a +0 Catch. 

To use a cannon example, we see two things that could be said to have it: Nico and Shagnasty.  Both of which were basically plot device level characters.  It's priced as an option for them.

All games break at their highest levels.  DFRPG seems to do so less than others.  I like that.

Does that cover everything?  ;)
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Bruce Coulson on June 14, 2011, 03:43:53 PM
Yes, I think it does make sense.

In mythology, there are creatures and beings who simply could not be hurt by a given type of attack.  Fantasy literature has drawn on and expanded that concept.

Physical Immunity is a game-mechanic way of representing that absolute immunity.  If used carefully and rarely, and generally only against specific types of attacks (e.g. Ogres), it's not being unfair to the players, who (generally) are familiar with the tropes of myth and fantasy.

That -8 Refresh also means eight less refresh for attack powers, flexible powers.  When using the rules for scaling the opposition, game guides have to keep in mind what abilities would make for an interesting, challenging encounter.  An unstoppable, unkillable opponent who can force concessions in one hit isn't very interesting.  An opponent who is tough, can fly, breathe fire, (something else you could get with that 8 Refresh) could make for a tense, exciting battle.

You might be right that -8 is underpriced for the value; but overall, I feel that Physical Immunity is fair within the setting.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: TheMouse on June 14, 2011, 04:13:14 PM
Bringing in nukes is GM fiat, because there are no rules for nukes. One could posit that rules for them might include explicit interactions with Toughness powers. We don't know, because there aren't rules for it. Using an argument based on non-existent rules does not make any sense.

We also don't have rules for the most powerful spells possible within the 'verse. It is entirely conceivable that if those rules existed, there would be an explicit way to overcome Toughness powers. I mean, there exists within the fiction the ability to do so. But the rules don't exist that say one way or another whether that's possible. Using an argument based on non-existent rules does not make any sense.

In short, while I admit that saying that these things work this way is GM fiat, saying that they do not work this was is also GM fiat. The rules don't cover nukes. The rules don't cover every spell that could conceivably be cast by a high powered wizard. Using your  fiat interpretations on rules that don't exist is not a logical argument.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Belial666 on June 14, 2011, 05:10:46 PM
Physical immunity is better than toughness powers. It is not better for defense in a fight than other powers with similar costs precisely because it does not stop maneuvers, blocks and the like. It makes you impossible to harm by physical force. That's about 1/3 the ways someone can physically harm you, 1/9 the ways someone can harm you in general.

Quote
What I'm asking is - does the ability make sense?  Does it really make sense that there are entities out there - who are not true heavyweights by any means - that can take the entire nuclear arsenal of the world to the face and not just survive but entirely laugh it off?
Vandal Savage and anyone else who is truly immortal; like Nicodemus their bruises and pain (if any) would be aspects rather than stress that can take them out. Sebastian Shaw and anyone or anything else that can absorb a broad range of energy types, including kinetic. Susan Storm, Martial Manhunter and any ghost or spirit or shade or whatever creature doesn't actually have a physical form that can be physically damaged part or all of the time. Beings that, due to their nature, are utterly immune to a form of attack such as fire elementals and dragons being immune to fire, ice beings and forst giants being immune to cold and so on.

Quote
Does it really make sense that if the entire White Council worked together on the most potent Heart Exploding spell in existence, spend weeks and weeks sacrificing humans and going full crazy-on black magic to get into the 4 or 5-digit range as far as shifts go, creating a spell powerful enough to wipe a country off the map, a freaking Ogre(not a heavyweight by any means) could just shrug it off?
Ogres don't have immunity to magic. They have immunity to physical damage directly caused by mortal magic. Don't think of it as infinite resistance; think of it as no resistance. Direct physical force by mortal magic just goes through them like a sword goes through a ghost.

On the matter of that big spell, sure, if the White Council directly focuses the entirety of their magic into physically harming an Ogre, the Ogre will just ignore it, much like if they tried to crash a mountain-sized meteor onto a ghost. Now, if they try to crash a mountain-sized meteor onto the Ogre or directly focus the entirety of their magic onto the ghost, you bet neither the Ogre nor the ghost will like it.

Quote
This is one of the bits of advice that I've seen repeated often in my GMing days. Do everything you can not to say "No". Say "Yes, but". The "But" is, make the challenge tougher. Make it much harder. Don't make it entirely impossible. PI just outright says "No, you can't do that, find a different way". And it annoys me.
PLAYER: Can I melt the ice golem by throwing cold spells at it?
GM: No
PLAYER: Can I kill the Acid Elemental by throwing acid at it?
GM: No
PLAYER: Can I open my manacles with my lockpicking skills even though they have been magically welded instead of having a lock?
GM: No
PLAYER: Can I socially fast-talk the gelatinous cube into letting me pass even though it's mindless, blind and deaf?
GM: No
PLAYER: Can I bribe the traps in the dungeon into not closing if I step on them?
GM: No
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: paul_Harkonen on June 14, 2011, 05:21:26 PM
3) What I'm asking is - does the ability make sense?
Does it really make sense that there are entities out there - who are not true heavyweights by any means - that can take the entire nuclear arsenal of the world to the face and not just survive but entirely laugh it off?
Does it really make sense that if the entire White Council worked together on the most potent Heart Exploding spell in existence, spend weeks and weeks sacrificing humans and going full crazy-on black magic to get into the 4 or 5-digit range as far as shifts go, creating a spell powerful enough to wipe a country off the map, a freaking Ogre(not a heavyweight by any means) could just shrug it off?

To answer the two "Does it make sense?" questions.  Yes, it does.  Compare it this way, if you are made of fire, does it make sense for you to be able to withstand a similarly powered column of fire?  same answer.  You may not like the existence of those creatures, but it does make sense.

The next question to ask is:  Does it make them more powerful against those things as well?  Yes it does.  If you are immune to magic and all that the wizards have is fireballs to throw at you, you should win.  Just as a creature of fire should handily beat someone only armed with a flamethrower.

If that's true then you need to ask the last question: Does it break the game?  I remain unconvinced.

Combat does not have to simply be direct fireballs and physical attacks.  There is much much more to it, and physical immunity only prevents that direct confrontation, it does nothing to stop every other method of interaction available to the players.  Social combat, Mental attacks, physical aspects that are tagged, and invoked.  Throughout mythology there are plenty of creatures that are just flat out immune to X, why shouldn't they be modeled that way in the game?

Physical immunity is a very specific very powerful ability.  As a GM you should limit its use, but that doesn't make it a bad power.  Shapeshifting, Glamors, even Thaumaturgy all have the potential to be game breaking when used and thought of in very specific ways, why shouldn't physical immunity?  It exists to model those few creatures that are really and truly untouchable, and for those creatures I think it should be there.  It is ok to force the players to panic, its ok to put them up against something that requires lots of creative thinking, and maybe even forces them to run away the first time.

While a GM should try everything they can to answer "yes but" there are times when "no" is the right answer.  "Can I beat him into a pulp?"  "No, but you could trap him in iron chains" is just as good an answer.

*Edit:  And Belial just barely beats me to the punch with exactly the same thoughts.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: EdgeOfDreams on June 14, 2011, 05:29:06 PM
stuff

Good points, Belial666, I agree.

To approach things from a slightly different angle, Taer, let me ask this - How would you feel if Physical Immunity had a line that said something like "This power is not necessarily absolute; plot-device-level threats still have the potential to harm the creature even if the catch is not satisfied (e.g. a nuclear bomb, the combined magics of the entire senior council, etc.)"? Would that have made the power less objectionable to you if the writers had included such a caveat?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: computerking on June 14, 2011, 07:48:38 PM
"This power is not necessarily absolute; plot-device-level threats still have the potential to harm the creature even if the catch is not satisfied (e.g. a nuclear bomb, the combined magics of the entire senior council, etc.)"

That's pretty much the same type of thing I was about to bring up: Being the GM, you have to understand that all powers as written in the book have at least a little bit of "wiggle room", where the Story's needs are concerned. It's probably a good idea to imagine that every rule has a "PS: this is subject to the needs of the GM and the Story; Don't be ridiculous with it," invisibly written after it.

As for Physical Immunity, I think it can be fair, but only if the GM is mature enough not to abuse such a power. The Original Poster mentioned the possibility of a nuke, or the entirety of the White Council aiming a ritual at a character. I wonder, though, if they intend for this to happen in the course of their game? If not, then the question is moot. If you can only come up with improbable, ridiculously powerful things as examples, you're stumbling into the land of hyperbole.

As several posters have mentioned, the reason to choose Physical Immunity rather than Mythic Toughness and Recovery is because it fits the character you're making, the experience you want your players to have, and the story you're trying to tell. If you want a baddy who takes a licking, and keeps on ticking, but gets visibly worn down as the fight progresses, Take the Mythic coupling. If you want a villain that seems to be unstoppable, until you figure out his Achilles' Heel (Perhaps literally, if you have the players come up against Achilles), then he goes down quickly when hit with "the right stuff", then choose Physical Immunity. It's the story that determines whether the power is appropriate or not, not just the Letter of the Law.

And if you are allowing Physical Immunity for a Player character, I suggest you have a sit-down with them regarding how you view the power, and the restrictions you will be putting on it, if any. Perhaps requiring an extension of the Catch, so that the character can be hurt by, for example, "Left-handed Sword attacks and single attacks of more than 12 shifts of damage," would make it more palatable to both parties.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: BumblingBear on June 14, 2011, 08:13:46 PM
I really don't understand why this is a big deal.

GMs point blank can allow or not allow things in their games.

I won't allow a character with a catchless PI.  In fact, I won't allow a character without a very specific PI.

Conversely, I /would/ allow an 8 refresh toughness power.

So... that kind of blows the powergaming argument out of the water.  PI is not "better" than an 8 refresh toughness power if the GM won't let you take PI.

Why is this so difficult?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: EdgeOfDreams on June 14, 2011, 08:23:51 PM
I really don't understand why this is a big deal.

GMs point blank can allow or not allow things in their games.

I won't allow a character with a catchless PI.  In fact, I won't allow a character without a very specific PI.

Conversely, I /would/ allow an 8 refresh toughness power.

So... that kind of blows the powergaming argument out of the water.  PI is not "better" than an 8 refresh toughness power if the GM won't let you take PI.

Why is this so difficult?

I believe Taer expressed that he's aware of the GM fiat option but prefers not to have to use it.  It's sort of a discussion about the game design that led to such a power existing as written, as opposed to something different.  Just 'cause you can houserule or work your way around something doesn't mean it was good or bad design or well or poorly written to begin with.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Becq on June 14, 2011, 10:14:14 PM
Again, GM Fiat is not a good solution. As a GM, I can already do anything. The rules in the book are there to tell me what I should and should not do.
I think you are looking at this from the wrong direction, if you feel that you have to pull the GM card to prevent the abuse of powers like Physical Immunity.  Consider the following: "The Mythic level is nearly always reserved for potent NPCs, as is the special Physical Immunity ability"(YS184).  Reworded, this basically implies that Physical Immunity can only be used by GM fiat (rather than the alternative that it can be used except when GM fiat disallows it).  So the rules already say that you should not allow it.  You may over-rule them, but if you don't want players to use it, the rules have your back.

On a more general note in response to comments about using a power (like Physical Immunity) for no reason other than it's more refresh-efficient that other options, consider that: "At the very least, this usually means that the supernatural abilities must clearly derive from your character’s high concept"(YS158).  It's not good enough to want a power, or to decide that it would really make your character ub4r.  The power also has to make sense with respect to your High Concept and/or Template.  Your Table and GM are the final judges.

How does this apply to a Shapeshifter with Modular Abilities?  I think that this is one of those cases that excercises the 'usually' in my second quote above.  In this case, you are emulating something else's form, and that something else also was restricted by its High Concept as to what powers it was allowed.  So in effect, you are borrowing the High Concept of the creature that you are turning into, and choosing powers that that High Concept would allow.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Thrythlind on June 14, 2011, 10:35:18 PM
Physical Immunity, with three exceptions, is used in game to represent a narrow band of situations which that particular creature is completely protected from.  Very often, it is used on top of Toughness and Recovery.

The two exceptions: Loup-Garou, He Who Walks Behind and Nicodemus had broadly applied Physical Immunity with very specific catches.  If we had Shagnasty's stats it might be similar.

Toughness is meant to be a broad ability to resist damage with a narrow way to ignore that resistance.

Recovery is meant to be a broad ability to recover from damage with a narrow way to prevent that recovery.

The book clearly states that some of the powers included are originally only meant for use with critters.  Physical Immunity is basically one of those powers.

We had a player that wanted to use the Living Dead power because it mechanically appealed to him and he wanted to refluff it away from actually being undead.  The GM had to repeatedly tell him "no" and he would go "awww" in a mock "I'm not really upset" way and not bring it up again for three or four sessions.

As the GM it is always permissible to tell players "no" to a specific power.

As to why refresh costs for villains?  It makes perfect sense.

If I have 6 Refresh characters, they're going to be eaten alive by a 12 refresh enemy unless they get very, very, very creative.  However, that same 12 refresh might qualify as a mini-boss for a 10 refresh party.

The refresh costs exist primarily to compare matters and see what sort of trouble the party will have with it.

Mechanically, Physical Immunity gives its best returns when combined with another Toughness power...one of the examples is a fire-elemental type being vulnerable to cold and totally immune to fire.  The Toughness/Recovery had one catch and the Physical Immunity had a stacked catch, the combination totally paid for the physical immunity.

Physical Immunity is very much a thematic power.  You take it when there is no possible way to duplicate a particular resistance.  Taking it "just because" is roughly equivalent to saying "rocks fall everybody dies".  Sure, as GM you can decide that the players lose at any given time, but that's not the reason you're there.  You're not in competition with the players, you're providing them challenges and story.  If these kinds of games were a competition between player and gamemaster, the gamemaster would win every time.  There's no trick to that.

Think about it in terms of what you want from the encounter.

If you want it to be possible to defeat a particular enemy using normal, everyday tactics.  Look toward Toughness/Recovery.

If you want at least one of the standard tactics to be absolutely meaningless, then you go with Physical Immunity.

As to the Nuke question.

a ) it could be that a nuclear blast transcends physical damage

b ) I've played Rifts wherein dropping a nuke on a vampire might cause it to be thrown backwards a mile or so....but do absolutely no damage to it

A lot of game systems these days scoff at the idea of anything being completely immune to something.  HERO system, for example, there is no similar power to physical immunity.  You can buy a heavy amount of Resistant Defenses and Damage Reduction, but you can't just say "I'm immune to fire."  Even if your character is a fire elemental, if there is a fire out there hot enough, yes fire will burn even fire.

When approaching power selection the proper question isn't "why shouldn't I?" it's "why should I?"

"Why should I?" is more restrictive, it will tend to keep more in theme.

Physical Immunity only very rarely has an answer to "why should I?" that compels me to put it on a bad guy's list of powers.

to finish off....on the earlier conflict over forcing an enemy to concede.....I believe the original person to suggest that idea was speaking of conceding in character...as in the character looking around, realizing that he's not going to be able to win even if his enemies can't kill him and said character saying "All right, I concede to defeat."

They were not speaking of the game mechanic of concession which is what the protestor clearly thought they were doing.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 15, 2011, 02:46:57 AM
The prevailing opinion on Physical Immunity seems to be that it is entirely based upon GM fiat. If that is the case, then it should not be given a refresh cost.

If it is too powerful for player use (and it probably is when the catch is narrow) then it should be more expensive.

Having two options and having one be strictly better than the other is just bad design. DFRPG (kinda) avoids this because Toughness canonically tops out at Mythic, but in high-refresh games higher levels of Toughness are sometimes needed. I speak from personal experience here.

Sure, you can just ignore the problem. But solving it would be so much better. The way to do that, I think, is to increase the cost of the power and increase the importance of the Catch. Physical Immunity to fire for 2 refresh is probably alright. But Physical Immunity unless attacked with a Sword Of The Cross is not fairly priced at 8 refresh.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: zenten on June 15, 2011, 03:26:22 AM
There are a number of powers that are too powerful for PC use.  Mythic anything for instance.  This doesn't mean they shouldn't have a Refresh cost.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 15, 2011, 03:38:22 AM
Wrong.

I'm being blunt because I honestly think that the issue is that simple.

I've got a player character with Mythic Strength. It's pretty impressive, but he doesn't outshine the other players at all.

Meanwhile, another player character in the same game has Mythic Recovery. It has had very little effect on the game so far.

Mythics are really really impressive. But they aren't unfairly or unreasonably good. They are very expensive and you get what you pay for.

However, allowing them in a game will often be a bad idea. Not because they are superpowerful, but because they represent extreme specialization. And extreme specialization is the cause of most balance headaches.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 15, 2011, 03:39:39 AM
The prevailing sentiment is that Mythic Anything and Physical Immunities are too powerful for PCs to use due to "The Mythic level is nearly always reserved for potent NPCs, as is the special Physical Immunity ability." The implication drawn is that only potent NPCs should have such Powers, not that PCs are the exceptions (hence "nearly always") that can have such Powers.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 15, 2011, 03:58:13 AM
I have never bought the only plot device npc for mythic arguement, when you consider that most other ways of spending six refresh are more powerful (channeling + 4 refinement or 10 discipline, 9 power spells at submerged; unseliee magic + 2 refinement 9 discipline and 9 power, Incite Emotions Accuracy 7 weapons 4 etc).  Though non-specific physical immunity is definatly something I would agree qualifies for the NPC only catergory that greater glamours and Kemmlerite Necromancy.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Lanir on June 15, 2011, 04:19:30 AM
@Taer:

#2 - I guess the question here isn't whether you know about the ways around it but whether you think they fit in your game. I think the intent behind a power like this is that the story not be about the power, but about the catch. If that isn't a story that interests you, probably best not to use this power. Once that decision is made a more interesting discussion (to me at least) would be what if anything to add to the toughness powers.

#3 - I don't really look at this as an absolute thing in all potential cases. None of the rest of the game scales to nukes (for example) so there's no reason to try and apply this one thing to that scale. If someone gets creative I'd be happy to work with them (someone earlier mentioned applying aspects to tie up or immobilize the character for example). Not being able to blast or carve chunks out of a critter doesn't necessarily mean it can stand there and giggle at you. I do think that the general form of this is a bad idea for a PC.

As far as the "no" thing goes, that is the way to go. The reason this power sounds so wonky is because it's based off of stories that didn't have to provide PCs with something to do. It's okay if a hero in a story is frustrated. It's not so much okay if a player in your game is frustrated. Honestly I don't think I'd use this power very much if at all in games I ran. Runs into the same problem the whole D&D immunity to nonmagical weapons thing did. You have to both provide another path, and your players have to trust you enough to go along with it. If you as a GM haven't thought it out well enough beforehand or your players aren't on board with it, then... it's not going to end well. One big reason for the shift away from the "no" to the "yes, but" answer to player actions is it promotes this trust and lets you both get more into your game.

@sinker:  Wow, I see I got on your bad side. I wasn't actually intending to promote any side in my last post. I just think a conversation about what place the power holds in the game and how it can be used is more constructive than just an "I like it", "I don't", and a bunch of "Me too!"s so I tried nudging the conversation in that direction. If that's not how it came across to you, sorry. Didn't really intend to irritate anyone.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 15, 2011, 05:34:36 AM
Firstly Taer, I think PI is definitely appropriate for the game (though not for all situations as I and others have explained) and here's why: Drama. It is great to reach a point as a player where you're invested in a situation and suddenly you fall, and need to take a moment and work things out. Where you reach a locked door, and you have to try something new to get past it. These moments introduce challenge. When you get to the other side of these moments there's a great sense of satisfaction. PI should not be a brick wall that the players slam into and then have no way of passing though. There should be many other ways to get past the situation, and most often there are as pointed out above.

As for PI for players I can say that I have taken PI:mortal magic on a character once (it was thematically appropriate) and while it came in handy on a regular basis (especially when the party mage got to throwing around zone attacks) there was never a point where I felt like I could just sit there and laugh at the opposition, never a point where I felt like it was "God-mode". Seems to me that it works out ok. If we're talking about PI with a narrow catch, then I might see an issue with a player taking it, but then they usually run into the thematic issue anyways. "What makes you so incredibly powerful that you can laugh off all physical damage?" Not a lot of reasonable answers I can think of, and very few of them would make for remotely interesting characters.

Finally, I didn't mean to sound so harsh Lanir, but it does seem to me like statements like that are trying to squelch the discussion and I've always felt that so long as we haven't devolved to "You're wrong," "No, you're wrong," etc then discussion is good. Anyway, if that wasn't your intent then apologies.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 15, 2011, 08:34:03 AM
These moments introduce challenge. When you get to the other side of these moments there's a great sense of satisfaction. PI should not be a brick wall that the players slam into and then have no way of passing though. There should be many other ways to get past the situation, and most often there are as pointed out above.

If we're talking about PI with a narrow catch, then I might see an issue with a player taking it, but then they usually run into the thematic issue anyways. "What makes you so incredibly powerful that you can laugh off all physical damage?" Not a lot of reasonable answers I can think of, and very few of them would make for remotely interesting characters.
Why not turn it around? Take the PC with PI as the GM's challenge. The player (assuming it is a PC with PI and a narrow catch) would be constantly trying to prevent the GM from getting past him, so there will be greater satisfaction when the GM's NPCs can get past the situation. As a GM, I feel that as long as there is a in-game plausible reason why he is so powerful, then I am more than willing to accept it.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Taer on June 15, 2011, 08:53:33 AM
PLAYER: Can I melt the ice golem by throwing cold spells at it?
GM: No
PLAYER: Can I kill the Acid Elemental by throwing acid at it?
GM: No

Are we talking about D&D? There were ways to pierce elemental immunity there.

PLAYER: Can I open my manacles with my lockpicking skills even though they have been magically welded instead of having a lock?
GM: No

If your lockpicking has a supernatural nature to it? Sure, why not?

PLAYER: Can I socially fast-talk the gelatinous cube into letting me pass even though it's mindless, blind and deaf?
GM: No

Then grant it a mind, learn a telepathy power, succeed on an <social skill of your choice> check, there you go.

PLAYER: Can I bribe the traps in the dungeon into not closing if I step on them?
GM: No

I guess that depends on whether animism exists in the setting or whether you can talk to objects otherwise, now doesn't it? However, in this case you're applying a social context to a physical challenge. This is not the case with Physical Immunity, where a physical challenge cannot be overcome with a physical attack. Otherwise, refer to the above.

Quote from: Sanctaphrax
The prevailing opinion on Physical Immunity seems to be that it is entirely based upon GM fiat. If that is the case, then it should not be given a refresh cost.

Yeah, I think that nails it.

I mean, if Physical Immunity is already meant to be a plot device power, then why is it given a Refresh cost at all? I mean, it's not entirely inaccesible. Note that PI is an option for Changeling/Scion type characters which means it should be at least balanced for PC use.

Anyhow, the power just seems excessive and it entirely strains my suspension of disbelief. I mean, even characters in freaking /Nobilis/, who can casually put out stars and juggle continents can't get this level of invulnerability(at least in 3rd edition, it was possible in 2nd).

I probably wouldn't mind this so much, as someone mentioned, if it was explictly noted that plot-level events can pierce even PI.

If you need a character that's nigh-invulnerable, then an easier thing to do would be noting that Toughness could be expanded indefinitely(ie. -8 for Armor 4, 8 boxes, -10 for Armor 5, 10 boxes etc), expanding regeneration into new areas and leaving PI to cover only specific threats(like the Outsider immunity to magic or being immaterial, I don't mind those so much).
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: BumblingBear on June 15, 2011, 09:45:09 AM
Meh... I think the system as fine as-is.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The reason the power is priced is because by RAW, different levels of difficulty for player combat encounters are measured by refresh.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 15, 2011, 10:16:48 AM
@Taer You're really just kinda looking for validation here aren't you. That's totally fine, but if you'd originally asked "Hey, can I pull PI and simply have higher levels of toughness?" we would have said "Whatever floats your boat, have fun." instead of trying to convince you of the merits of the ability....
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Haru on June 15, 2011, 04:40:05 PM
Are we talking about D&D? There were ways to pierce elemental immunity there.

If your lockpicking has a supernatural nature to it? Sure, why not?

Then grant it a mind, learn a telepathy power, succeed on an <social skill of your choice> check, there you go.

So it is ok to GM fiat everyone of those options, but not PI? That is a bit random, don't you think?

As I said earlier, at a certain point it becomes pointless to create an even tougher toughness power. You are so hard to be hurt by [stuff], that you are practically immune to it, so why not put up an immunity instead? Why create a "godlike toughness" power for 8 refresh, what is it exactly that you wish to accomplish? Mystic toughness makes you practically immune to anything but battlefield weaponry, so if you take it further, you can't even be hurt by those.

The whole point is not to create a toughness simulation, the point is to create a toughness story, so it is fine as is.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: paul_Harkonen on June 15, 2011, 04:42:59 PM
Ok, I have one last comment that I hope is helpful for everyone, but its the last thing I tossing into this because it seems to have turned into "but I don't like it.  You shouldn't like it either".

As a GM there is an enormous difference between "Can I do X?" and "Can X be done?"  The answer to the second one should almost always be "Yes, but" (and even in the case of physical immunity, the answer is yes but you need to find it's catch).  The answer to the first one can absolutely be "no."  

"Can I lockpick the welded manacles?"  the answer is no. "Can the manacles be opened via lockpicking?" on the other hand yields the answer of "yes, but it would have to be supernatural in nature."

GMs should strive to create a world where anything is possible, but that doesn't mean any given PC can do anything at any given time.  "Can it be done?" is not the same question as "Can I do it?"  And I think your answers above are to the question "Can it be done?" rather than "Can I do it?"
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: polkaneverdies on June 15, 2011, 06:18:17 PM
^this
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: BumblingBear on June 15, 2011, 06:45:00 PM
Ok, I have one last comment that I hope is helpful for everyone, but its the last thing I tossing into this because it seems to have turned into "but I don't like it.  You shouldn't like it either".

As a GM there is an enormous difference between "Can I do X?" and "Can X be done?"  The answer to the second one should almost always be "Yes, but" (and even in the case of physical immunity, the answer is yes but you need to find it's catch).  The answer to the first one can absolutely be "no."  

"Can I lockpick the welded manacles?"  the answer is no. "Can the manacles be opened via lockpicking?" on the other hand yields the answer of "yes, but it would have to be supernatural in nature."

GMs should strive to create a world where anything is possible, but that doesn't mean any given PC can do anything at any given time.  "Can it be done?" is not the same question as "Can I do it?"  And I think your answers above are to the question "Can it be done?" rather than "Can I do it?"

+2

/golfclap
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 15, 2011, 10:13:00 PM
@BumblingBear: That's part of the problem. The cost of Physical Immunity does not accurately reflect the challenge that it provides.

Ballpark figures that I think might be reasonable. Not expecially well-thought-out, just a quick sketch. Feedback wanted.

2 refresh for immunity to electricity.
4 refresh for immunity to magic.
8 refresh for immunity to everything except cold iron.
16 refresh for immunity to everything except a Sword Of The Cross.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Belial666 on June 15, 2011, 10:49:59 PM
@BumblingBear: That's part of the problem. The cost of Physical Immunity does not accurately reflect the challenge that it provides.

Ballpark figures that I think might be reasonable. Not expecially well-thought-out, just a quick sketch. Feedback wanted.

2 refresh for immunity to electricity.
4 refresh for immunity to magic.
8 refresh for immunity to everything except cold iron.
16 refresh for immunity to everything except a Sword Of The Cross.


You are running into the problem of character effectiveness with the too-high costs. Consider, for a moment, the Enduring the Apocalypse game. Someone who has paid 16 refresh for your last physical immunity can be defeated by any other member of the group;

Bergelmir can just pick up a 10-ton weight and bury him under it. Or he could grapple him and use him as a weapon or projectile to whack things with; as he's indestructible, the giant would not have the problems of weapon durability he might have with anything else.
Sedran can outfight him with maneuvers until he has enough advantage to grapple, tie him up and take him for some private Inquisition.
Marcus and the new guy can rip his mind and eat his soul.
Elena can do too many mildly unpleasant (but utterly horrible) things to him to even contemplate.

At the same time, the only thing the physically-immune guy has to effect the environment is his skills and mundane equipment. It would take him several exchanges to kill a zombie. Bigger threats would just ignore him; after all, he's just a man with a gun. You can't kill him but it's not as if a gun can harm a mythically fast, mythically tough demon anyway. Or they can kick him real hard; how hard is it to kick a 200-pound object into escape velocity anyway?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 16, 2011, 12:30:07 AM
I'm with Belial on that one. 16 refresh is too much for something that's only very narrowly useful.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 16, 2011, 01:08:02 AM
I did not expect to see the words "very narrowly useful" used here.

Anyway, it would indeed be a pretty dumb power for someone with 18 refresh available to buy. It'd be like an Up To Your Waist character buying Mythic Toughness with a +0 catch. Too much defence, not enough offense.

Problem is, any cheaper and this becomes too much better than Toughness + Recovery. I figure that 10 refresh is the most anyone will spend on Toughness, and so that's what I'm balancing against.

By the way, this power would have been a very smart investment for that Hecatoncheir fragment that you fought in EtA. It had 8 points of Toughness, 4 points of Recovery, 3 defensive stunts, and 4 points of size. All of that did it a whole lot less good than this power would have.

So I don't think it's underpowered. It's just viable only at stupid-high refresh levels. Which is how it should be.

I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, though.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 16, 2011, 02:21:23 AM
I did not expect to see the words "very narrowly useful" used here.

Consider that there are two different situations under which one would take an action. There are conflict actions and non-conflict actions. Within conflict there are three types of conflict (physical, mental, and social). One of those (mental) requires specific circumstances, though I'd say those circumstances are easy enough to create (mostly through magic). Within Physical conflict specifically there are three actions all of which are capable of disabling someone. A high block will effectively disable someone. A manuever/compel also has the capability to disable someone. An attack, though stress will eventually disable someone. Out of all of those things PI is only useful in that one single circumstance (physical stress) and if it doesn't have a really narrow catch then it's not even useful in that one circumstance all the time. Seems narrowly useful to me.

I suppose it does depend on the campaign. In a campaign with a huge focus on physical conflict it would be more useful, but still not overwhelmingly useful.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Becq on June 16, 2011, 03:04:57 AM
I think 8 refresh is probably fine for Physical Immunity.  Instead, I think the problem lies with inflated rebates from The Catch.  With more reasonable Catch rebates, you are comparing Mythic Toughness to most things for as little as, say, -3 refresh to Physical Immunity to most things for -8 refresh.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 16, 2011, 03:08:33 AM
That's kind of an odd comparison, since you are clearly comparing a 3 point catch in mythic to a 0 point catch in Physical Immunity... Which is not remotely the same thing...
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Becq on June 16, 2011, 03:38:17 AM
That's kind of an odd comparison, since you are clearly comparing a 3 point catch in mythic to a 0 point catch in Physical Immunity... Which is not remotely the same thing...

I view the Catches for Toughness and Physical Immunity as working differently.

You buy Toughness to everything except something, with the Catch rebate scaling based on how often you will be facing that something.  0=rarely, 1=occasionally, 2=fairly often, 3=often.  The frequency can be due to your weakness being to something commonly used as a weapon in DFRPG, or due to ease by which opponents can determine and acquire your weakness, but your Catch rebate is basically your way of telling the GM how often you want to be inconvenienced by your weakness.  (Ex: It's pretty common knowledge that Fae are weak to iron, and iron can be found pretty much anywhere in the city, thus it's worth +3.  All your enemies need to do is realize you're a Fae, and suddenly you'll be facing squads armed with steel pipes and Bowie knives.)

You buy Physical Immunity to something, with the Catch rebate scaling based inversely on how often you will be facing that something.  0=nearly everything, 5=rather situational at best.  (Ex: with Dresden as a notable exception, fire attacks tend to be fairly uncommon, meaning an Immunity to fire will be only situationally usefult.  Thus it's worth a +5 discount.  Immunity to bullets would be worth quite a bit less of a discount, even if it were *only* immunity to bullets, since guns are very common weapons.)

(I'm not claiming this is RAW, by the way.  Just the way it seems to me it should work.)
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 16, 2011, 04:01:13 AM
It's definitely counter RAW, as RAW says that they both work in the exact same way.

Ahh, I get what you're saying now though, going back over your previous posts with that context in mind.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Becq on June 18, 2011, 12:09:11 AM
It's definitely counter RAW, as RAW says that they both work in the exact same way.
It's not entirely counter-RAW, though it does rely more heavily on the spirit of the RAW, rather than the literal interpretation thereof.  Consider the following:

1) The examples in the RAW do not follow the RAW.  My first example of two are the Fae, who have one of the most commonly available (and, in fact, is used as the example of a commonly avialable material) and one of the most commonly known Catches in the game: iron.  This should be worth +4 per the RAW, but Fae are only given (up to) +3 for it, even when they have enough refresh worth of applicable powers to qualify for +4 or more.  My second example is RCVs, who have the Catch of sunlight.  This is a nearly universally known vampiric weakness, and is available for free 50% of the time (or more, with the use of special hankies).  Yes they likewise get only +3 for it, even when they could have been allowed +4.

2) A strict following of the RAW can lead to (adjusted) refresh values for Toughness and Recovery powers that are more than a bit silly.  For example, if my character has Toughness with the Catch of "physical blows so soft that the average human would hardly notice receiving the blow".  Once I publicized this weakness on the internet, I'd get a +4 discount for it.  Yet the only attacks that I wouldn't get the benefit of my Toughness on are the once that can't damage me anyway.  (A gently applied poison or electrical shock, for example, isn't 'a physical blow' and would therefore allow my Toughness to be used).  This is obviously against the spirit of the RAW, but is technically allowed.

So the best bet seems to be to try to uncover the spirit of the rules, then find a way to reasonably apply them.  One concept brought up in the past is to consider 'weaponization' as a factor in Catch valuation.  This is a useful way of looking at the problem.  But at the root, what the RAW is trying to tell us is that the rebate value of a Catch is based on how likely that Catch is going to come into play.  Which is where I was going with my previous posts.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: TheMouse on June 18, 2011, 01:27:36 AM
One thing to consider about Physical Immunity (and Toughness powers in general) is that they do not in and of themselves allow you to achieve goals. They're entirely passive. All they do is mitigate or at best remove one failure condition: attrition based on physical damage.

In other words, you're not so tough that you win. You're so tough that you can't lose in one particular way.

So at first glance Physical Immunity might look really impressive. However, once you get down to it, it doesn't directly increase your ability to get what you want. You can't jog at highway speeds. You can't fly. You can't control the minds of others. You're just really bloody tough against physical damage. You're not even resistant against someone trying to talk you into something.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 18, 2011, 01:36:12 AM
Probably should edit out the inadvisable language before someone who cares complains (not me) but otherwise I agree.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Becq on June 18, 2011, 01:39:17 AM
By the way, I think that one of the key things that makes the refresh with rebate concept fail to satisfy for many people (myself included) is that rebates are constant, rather than relative, which really encourages min-maxing tendencies.

Consider the case where I want to play a Faerie.  I know I'm going to get the standard Faerie Catch package, which is worth +4 accoring to the RAW (despite examples in OW that indicate otherwise).  Why would I ever consider getting only -2 refresh worth of Toughness/Recovery, when I can get -4 refresh worth for the same net cost, or -6 refresh worth for only 1 additional refresh?  (Does this sound a bit like the orginal post?  It should.)

Or, if I'm playing some more customized template (non-Changeling Scion or Emmisary, for example) and I wanted to take Inhuman Toughness, why would I ever attach to it a Catch worth more than +1 rebate, since I won't get any additional rebate for making the Catch inconvenience me more?

One answer to this might be 'because it makes sense for the character', and I understand that sort of answer.  But the system encourages people to favor utility over story, which is odd given the nature of the game.

I would fix this by doing two things:

First, by using a story-driven interpretation of rebates, as I've described previously.  Basically, interpret rebates as the player's vote as to how often the Catch will come into play, with +0 being almost never and +3 being fairly regularly.

Second, by scaling the rebate.  For example, a +3 rebate turns into a rebate of +1 per tier (tier = -2 refresh worth) of applicable power, a +2 rebate turns into +1 every other tier starting with the first, and +1 rebate is +1 every third tier starting with the first.  Or something along those lines.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 18, 2011, 02:21:35 AM
But the system encourages people to favor utility over story, which is odd given the nature of the game.
I see this as the system encouraging people to balance utility together with story, instead of focusing on story altogether, which is in keeping with the nature of the game.

If min-maxed mechanic X works, then find a story that would fit the mechanics. If taking 6 Refresh for a Changling makes more sense, then come up with a plausible story of why the character has such Toughness powers.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 18, 2011, 08:22:01 PM
Wow, all of a sudden I agree with everyone.

Yes, PI is fairly narrow. But so are Toughness powers in general. And PI basically does everything Toughness does, but better. So it should be pricier than the highest level of Toughness.

Now, I have good reason to believe that if PI didn' exist, then characters in high-refresh games would have excellent reason to buy above-Mythic Toughness. So Toughness should be expanded, lest high-refresh play become boring.

So nearly-catchless PI pretty much can't be cheaper than 16 refresh or it'll be unbalanced against Toughness + Recovery. As a defensive power, it is rather unlikely to break games at a cheaper cost. But even if the consequences of a mistake are low, the mistake remains a mistake.

In other news, I agree with Becq about The Catch. But I think that I also agree with toturi. I read a quote on the White Wolf Exalted forum once that went something like:

Quote
Good game designers incentivize the behaviour they want to promote. Bad game designers incentivize other things, then complain about metagaming.

The current mechanics incentivize things that we don't want. So let's change 'em.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 19, 2011, 03:17:01 AM
The game design purposely didn't include higher than mythic levels in anything physical so attempting to balance physical immunity with these non-existent toughness levels only makes sense if your playing the game way different from the raw, this is fate game so that is perfectly reasonable. When it gets down to it 16 refresh for a power which can be bypassed by everyone (social skills yah) or by anyone who invests 2 refresh in incite emotion or 3 refresh in All things equal before God, 3 refresh in evocation or 4 in the right type of sponsored magic seems excessive. Yes Physical immunity is better than the other toughness powers that is the point of it (IMO) it is the final upgrade from mythic toughness (as it gives no advanatage to recovery or endurance  it doesn't class as recovery power) and as all of the other upgrades cost an additional 2 refresh this seems semi-reasonable even if it is the biggest leap. It should be noted that as I like that things cap at mythic and think that any higher levels could get really silly especially if they aren't capped.  I also think that catches should only be compulsory for PI which would give PI a weakness compaired to mythic toughness with a 0 catch.  
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 19, 2011, 03:30:33 AM
ways and means, I had trouble reading your post. So please forgive me if I make a mistake in my response.

But I think that you are wrong on at least two counts.

The first problem is that you balance PI only against Toughness. All that Recovery does is let you handle damage better. If you are immune to damage, then it is obsolete. There is no situation where Supernatural Toughness + Recovery is better than PI unless you take into account the ability to go without rest. Which is worth less than 1 refresh, and therefore not enough to balance out anything.

The second problem is that you see no problem with messing up high-level play. The game works at 18 refresh. I play it at 18 refresh. The only houseruling that's really needed is the ability to expand Toughness. So why would you remove that option? To benefit play at lower levels? Because pretty much nobody will let you take PI with a +0 catch at Submerged, and so this should never have any effect.

On another note, I don't think that it's easy to bypass Toughness of any kind. You can't make social attacks during a physical conflict, at least not under normal circumstances by my reading.

And on yet another note, may I take the lack of criticism for the lower levels of PI as a sign that I costed them correctly?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 19, 2011, 04:09:46 AM
My post was a bit indecipherable sorry. I would argue that limiting toughness to mythic dosen't nessesarily mess up with high level play, that it just places the focus on powers like magic or amusingly PI. This focus actually seems in line with the fiction (I know Sanctaphrax hates examples from the novels but the rp is called the dresden files) where the heavy hitters all have magic and PI (Fairy Queens, High Sidhe, Angels) and the higher level enemies such denarians usually have all round mythic level physical abilities (or less). As mythic level powers are powerful enough for creatures like the denarians it seems to me that going beyond that moves the character into plot device territory where PI is appropriate.  

As for Social Combat in physical combat I haven't found a rule directly prohibiting it, the way Your Story talks physical, social and mental combat all happen in different formats but given that most people allow mental attacks during physical combat I don't see why social combat can't take place too. The obvious arguement against this is that physical combat would make social combat impossible but at worst I would argue that physical combat noise would only act as a block against social combat rather than prohibiting it entirely. People are talked down during combat in the books and in real life though it is rare. Also intimidation is a natural part of combat so it very much makes sense to at least allow intimidation rolls during physical combat.    
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 19, 2011, 04:31:25 AM
I'd certainly allow Intimidation maneuvers and Declarations in combat. But the circumstances would have to be pretty special for attacks to work. Basically, I just don't want social characters to be able to take out combat monsters in physical combat.

Your example from the novels is unfortunately very solid. This is exactly why I hate examples from the novels. Trying to imitate the novels can make the game less good as a game. Which I try to avoid at all costs.

But I have to concede that the Toughness powers of the characters in the novels probably do top out at Mythic. Bah.

This is another reason I hate examples from the novels: they make me lose arguments.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 19, 2011, 05:32:43 AM
That was one of the things I kept trying to emphasize earlier, but ways and means seems to have articulated it better. The question is never why not take PI but why take PI? It needs to be justified by your high concept, and since Denarians apparently don't justify it... Anyways, thanks for the back up W&M.

Secondly Sanctaphrax I don't like the fact that you're comparing PI to toughness and recovery. I understand saying that recovery is just another way to manage stress and consequences. However what happens if someone with PI takes physical consequences? I can think of two ways to do it (concessions and self-inflicted consequences ala rituals or similar) and I've only been thinking for a few minutes. The consequences stick around for just as long as they would for a pure mortal. PI has none of the advantages of recovery, and the comparison is less than functional.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 19, 2011, 07:35:07 AM
The question is never why not take PI but why take PI?
If the question is why take PI, then the correct answer to that would be why not?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on June 19, 2011, 01:00:52 PM
If the question is why take PI, then the correct answer to that would be why not?

Because it doesn't suit your high concept. 
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 19, 2011, 01:52:03 PM
Because it doesn't suit your high concept.  
The question still remains why not?

The high concept can always be tweaked to accomodate having PI. If you want PI, take it and then come up with some reason why your character has it.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Lanir on June 19, 2011, 01:54:04 PM
My gut feeling is that having PI prevents enough of the detrimental effects of combat to be a reasonable equivalent to a high toughness and some level of recovery. Someone else can probably articulate that better than me though.

The high power vs low power thing is largely about scaling. PI is an absolute so it's harder to scale. It either works with absolute effectiveness or fails absolutely and does nothing. No granularity at all. I don't think there's anything wrong with saying it's a power PCs won't get. Stories tend to be best when the characters are challenged and we see that happening most effectively when their fight against the bad guys has consequences. Part of the heroic journey is recognizing those consequences and overcoming them. I realize we're only talking of one type of consequence here among many but it's one of the easiest types to apply in a roleplaying game and it's likely to be the "weapon of choice" especially for lower powered PCs. So really the objective is to price it so it doesn't pop up too early, before you can reasonably expect characters to have an effective secondary attack method that isn't ignored by PI.

As a GM you probably don't want defensive powers soaking up most of a PCs refresh. I saw someone do that in a White Wolf Vampire game once. One of the players min-maxed his way to the most defensive tricks he could get. I was playing a well rounded character and just outperformed him for quite awhile. Once he got enough experience to buy a reasonable offense though, that all reversed and suddenly I was left in the dust while he just waded through things. I think PI will have the same sort of game utility. When you can first afford it, it's not very useful. If you can back it up with Channeling, Evocation, Sponsored Magic, or something else with a bit of punch and the appropriate skill levels, you're pretty much set though. At that point you kind of end up like a mini Superman. The stories become more about whether Lois Lane has been kidnapped or someone has your kryptonite. The only way the bad guys can use new tactics is by hiding who or where they are from you. That sounds a bit boring to me.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 19, 2011, 02:01:14 PM
As a GM you probably don't want defensive powers soaking up most of a PCs refresh. I saw someone do that in a White Wolf Vampire game once. One of the players min-maxed his way to the most defensive tricks he could get. I was playing a well rounded character and just outperformed him for quite awhile. Once he got enough experience to buy a reasonable offense though, that all reversed and suddenly I was left in the dust while he just waded through things.
I think the player was willing to play the long game and wait for his investment to pay off. I find that so-called well-rounded characters often are more about instant gratification than anything else. If someone is willing to wait for his day in the sun and aiming for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, I think it shows a commitment to game in the long term.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: UmbraLux on June 19, 2011, 02:11:40 PM
The high concept can always be tweaked to accomodate having PI. If you want PI, take it and then come up with some reason why your character has it.
Can they?  For a high concept to give a reason for physical immunity it's going to say something extreme about your character.  You're probably a ghost, spirit, or other intangible being.  That's fairly limiting.

Whatever the concept, there should be associated baggage.  Spirits have difficulty affecting the real world.  Invulnerable intelligent diamonds don't move or talk.  Etc.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on June 19, 2011, 02:25:02 PM
This is something that I think a lot of people miss:

Powers must be tied to your high concept.  This is why they are allowed to be better than stunts.  Anyone can take a stunt.  Powers are limited to only a few.

Quote
Supernatural powers also come at a greater price beyond the simple math of your character’s refresh rate. No supernatural ability may exist in a vacuum—it must come about due to specific reasons rooted in your character’s concept.  At the very least, this usually means that the supernatural abilities must clearly derive from your character’s high concept (page 54), but other requirements may exist as well—see the Types & Templates chapter...for the particulars for each character type.

You can't just take them willy nilly.  Being really tough is pretty easy to fit in to a character concept.  A lot of monsters heal faster or have thicker skin than mortals.  Things that are actually immune to damage?  Far more rare.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 19, 2011, 02:48:07 PM
Can they?  For a high concept to give a reason for physical immunity it's going to say something extreme about your character.  You're probably a ghost, spirit, or other intangible being.  That's fairly limiting.
They can. The character can just as easily have physical immunity because God said so, or fell into a river and got washed up on the banks like that. The High Concept can simply even be Invulnerable Man.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: UmbraLux on June 19, 2011, 03:00:38 PM
They can. The character can just as easily have physical immunity because God said so, or fell into a river and got washed up on the banks like that. The High Concept can simply even be Invulnerable Man.
I suspect many groups would simply say that doesn't fit their game style. 

But let's say it was allowed...we have Invulnerable Man...who's only unnatural ability seems to be physical invulnerability.  His concept locks him in to a narrow set of powers.  Probably wouldn't be too terribly an opponent.  And he become easy once others find his Catch.

You could go further with concepts I suppose...I'm Mary Sue makes for one which can do anything.  But do you really want to play a Mary Sue?  Personally, I think flaws help define the characters. 
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 19, 2011, 03:20:22 PM
But let's say it was allowed...we have Invulnerable Man...who's only unnatural ability seems to be physical invulnerability.  His concept locks him in to a narrow set of powers.  Probably wouldn't be too terribly an opponent.  And he become easy once others find his Catch.

You could go further with concepts I suppose...I'm Mary Sue makes for one which can do anything.  But do you really want to play a Mary Sue?  Personally, I think flaws help define the characters. 
I never claimed that Invulerable Man would be too terrible an opponent. All I was saying is that it is not that difficult to come up with a high concept with ties to Physical Immunity.

I like Mary Sue and her boyfriend Gary. I also agree that flaws help define the characters, as much so as their strengths. But ultimately I want my characters to succeed; the easier, quicker and more complete the success the better and more satisfying. Mary makes her flaws work for her.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: BumblingBear on June 19, 2011, 06:33:09 PM
Real men:  Take a mild Toughness power to better survive the battles they fight for others.

Real Roleplayers:  Don't take a toughness power at all, and mutter that those who do are min maxers.

Real Loonies:  Take Physical Immunity to Cheese.

Real Munchkins:  Take Physical Immunity with the catch being cheese, a toughness power on top of that (in case the enemy coats their weapons with cheese) and wants invisible IOP armor that specifically protects against cheese, probably made by sacrificing the Loony.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 19, 2011, 10:06:02 PM
@InferrumVeritas + toturi: My opinion on the matter is that fluff requirements should never be used to balance out mechanics. It's bad juju.

@BumblingBear: Stacking Toughness and Immunity seems like a waste of refresh.

@Lanir: Very solid case, except for the bit where you call playing superman boring. Some people probably want to do that, and if possible then the game should make it possible for them to play that way alongside people with different playstyles. Problem is, the current rules don't support that.

@sinker: If something satisfies your catch, then neither power does anything. If something doesn't, then PI will always be better. Using self-inflicted harm as an example is a pretty bad idea in my opinion since self-inflicted harm's interaction with Recovery is usually considered a balance problem. That's why I balance against Toughness + Recovery.

Consider an arbitrary level of Recovery, that healed all damage as you received it. How would it differ from PI?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Silverblaze on June 19, 2011, 11:13:44 PM
I feel the need to preface this post with the following:

1. My post may meander but I'll try to keep it as concise and flowing as possible.
2. This is the first (1st) edition of a role playing game.  It will have flaws that will be fixed in the second edition (god/economics willing)
3. Go Go Gadget Wall of Text!


On physical immunity/toughness/mythic powers:

Yes the power as implemented bothers me.   It should be called immunity.  It should be accompanied by a chart of examples – along with refresh cost for the example of immunity.  Example: immunity to fire –4 refresh.

As is Immunity to fire is explained by giving the power – Physical Immunity: -4 fire only [ catch +4 all non fire attacks]

This seems inefficient/confusing.  The fact is many people do not consider magic a physical attack.  Many people assume physical involves kinetic force or similar means of causing damage. 

One could easily model a power for physical immunity that only works on social damage or mental damage as well.  This is why I feel immunity would be a better name and implementation of the power.

Mythic powers are not broken, nor are they NPC purview only…they aren’t for low refresh games though.  Mythic strength is easily the weakest when not paired with other powers or stunts.  Mythic toughness is verily outshined by immunity.  Also it is useless when the catch is satisfied.  Recovery: see toughness; however – I’d rather heal and get back up (playing possum) than seem like superman.  Speed: best!  You can’t damage what you cannot hit.  With a stunt you can take the athletics boost and use it offensively!

None of those powers help against a good (and prepared) spell caster…NONE. 

Sacred guardian:  I agree with Sanctaphrax.  The bane of this system is also its greatest asset: - The ability to modify a power or stunt to fit any item/character.  It makes a very customizable and enjoyable system.  It also means items of power are less special…temple dogs are less special…etc.
 Player 1: My sword has: all are equal before god.
Player 2: I like that that’s why I play a temple dog…it’s similar.
Player 3: I’m a scion of the white god or something…I want both as a power on my character…. plus True Aim!  I’m a walking sword of the cross dog!

I feel some powers and stunts should be exclusive to its origin (in some cases):
Ex: True Aim – items only
Ex: equal before god – item only or super pure/holy npcs…rare end game powers for PC’s
Ex: sacred guardian – guardian animals or golems only…temple dog PC is ok…it’s quite a challenge to play something with no opposable digit and the inability to speak in most cases.

I love that the game is customizable and that any of what I said can be ignored easily by system…but allowing anyone/anything to do anything as well as anyone else---.well that makes some things less special. 


On breaking the game/system:

Reader’s Digest Version to follow -

Wizards do it all by themselves.

A well-made spell caster can outshine anyone else.  I concur that breaking the system is easy.  The system was designed for story not tightly bound game mechanics.  That’s fine.  Don’t get shocked when a well-designed character takes most of the challenges in a given venue (mental, social, physical…depending on what they are munchkined out for…and laughs it off)  It truly is easy.  I’m going to bet the last drop of my blood Belial666, Bumblingbear, and or myself could make a character that would challenge a GM to defeat.  It can be done quite easily with the ability to make stunts also. (caveat: GM god mode…yes the GM wins…but by RAW – the system can be broken, finagled, steamrolled, raped {I hate that use of the word rape but it is applicable in the way that against the will of GM/designer/players the game is perverted to another’s will etc. into submission.})

A stunt monkey or a grappling machine can be almost as good as a spell caster.

Character with the following would be pretty mean:  evocation, thaumaturgy, sponsored magic, modular abilities 4 points or more, refinement in any number)

A character with sacred guardian, weapon focus, weapon specialization, and true aim…pretty mean fighter.  Pretty low refresh too.

I’m certain I could go on for pages about how to break systems…I haven’t found one I couldn’t run roughshod over.  There’s no point.  In the end if the group is happy and Gm feels in control…everything is peachy.


Right?

Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 19, 2011, 11:27:37 PM
Consider an arbitrary level of Recovery, that healed all damage as you received it. How would it differ from PI?

Mostly it would depend on how mechanically it did that. If it simply healed all stress before you take it, then there is no difference. However if it mechanically acted like recovery but much more it would be nothing similar. Recovery does only one thing in combat. It heals 1-3 consequences per scene as a supplemental action (during the scene). Even if you could heal an unlimited number of consequences in a scene you could still be taken out for several reasons. One being massive damage (I.E. 25 or more stress), another being simply that they couldn't keep up with the damage as it takes one supplemental action to heal one consequence (I.E. if you're taking two or more consequences per round, easily done with multiple opponents) and of course if they choose not to take consequences (though that one's a bit irrelevant). That is the only effect recovery has in combat. Even if you had Recovery many levels higher than mythic, there would be little mechanical difference to mythic and absolutely no similarity to PI.

If a player asked me this same question (I.E. "I want to heal all damage instantly and as it happens")looking to buy powers my immediate response (and that I would guess of many people) would be "You're looking for the Physical Immunity power. Take that and simply "Reskin" it as a ridiculously fast healing." Would I be wrong?

Personally I can't see much of a reason to have higher levels of recovery than mythic, other than more consequences recovered per scene (and maybe higher consequences, depending on the power level and what consequences people are taking regularly). You can already recover any consequence other than extreme immediately at the end of the scene, and never require sleep. I don't see how you could make another level worth 2 refresh (or even one really).
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: JayTee on June 20, 2011, 12:38:06 AM
The way i've always seen Physical Immunity is the character is Immune to anything you could reasonably get your hands on, not Immune to everything, Period. I drew this conclusion based on two facts:

1) Looking at the other toughness based powers, they slowly and steadily make you Immune to things that could be carried by one person. Inhuman Toughness makes you invulnerable to small weapons, Supernatural makes you invulnerable to conventional weapons and Mythical makes you invulnerable to Military grade weapons.

1) In the Dresden universe magic follows the laws of physics, and if physics has taught me anything, its that everything breaks if you hit it hard enough.

For example, the Ogre who is Immune to Magic mentioned above. Throw that thing at a single Wizard and he's going to have to get creative with his spellcraft, as he simply can't bring enough mystical force to bare against the Ogre's resilience. On the other hand throw that Ogre at the Senior White Council members and a dozen Wardens, something you usually wont see in a game, and that Ogre is going to be blown to chunks, with those chunks blown to bits and then finally those bits pulverized into individual particles!

So, if I'm being chanced by something with Physical Immunity to physical damage, I'm not going to be able to hurt it with anything I can get my hands on with any degree of ease. What do I do? Look for the closest building I can drop on it, or drop it off of, bonus points for Invoking the Cube-Square Law if it has Hulking Size!
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Ala Alba on June 20, 2011, 12:53:58 AM
If a player asked me this same question (I.E. "I want to heal all damage instantly and as it happens")looking to buy powers my immediate response (and that I would guess of many people) would be "You're looking for the Physical Immunity power. Take that and simply "Reskin" it as a ridiculously fast healing." Would I be wrong?

I believe that's how it works for ol' Nick in the books. I seem to remember him actually being affected by attacks, with it just not sticking.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Lanir on June 20, 2011, 03:50:22 PM
@Sanctaphrax: Okay, you have me there. Someone would want to play Superman. I'm pretty sure concepts like that don't have the longevity that a similar concept with some level of toughness instead would.

@Silverblaze: I had some similar thoughts but hadn't really formed them well enough to write down. My basic thought was to do like some other games do and segregate it out into several separate areas and powers associated with those areas. If you wanted to be immune to a bunch of things you'd buy multiple powers.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: InFerrumVeritas on June 20, 2011, 04:09:49 PM
@InferrumVeritas + toturi: My opinion on the matter is that fluff requirements should never be used to balance out mechanics. It's bad juju.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but that is the way the Fate system is designed.  If it weren't for that, all powers would be Stunts.  It is one of the examples of fluff and mechanics being blurred together.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 20, 2011, 05:32:11 PM
The way i've always seen Physical Immunity is the character is Immune to anything you could reasonably get your hands on, not Immune to everything, Period. I drew this conclusion based on two facts:

1) Looking at the other toughness based powers, they slowly and steadily make you Immune to things that could be carried by one person. Inhuman Toughness makes you invulnerable to small weapons, Supernatural makes you invulnerable to conventional weapons and Mythical makes you invulnerable to Military grade weapons.

1) In the Dresden universe magic follows the laws of physics, and if physics has taught me anything, its that everything breaks if you hit it hard enough.

For example, the Ogre who is Immune to Magic mentioned above. Throw that thing at a single Wizard and he's going to have to get creative with his spellcraft, as he simply can't bring enough mystical force to bare against the Ogre's resilience. On the other hand throw that Ogre at the Senior White Council members and a dozen Wardens, something you usually wont see in a game, and that Ogre is going to be blown to chunks, with those chunks blown to bits and then finally those bits pulverized into individual particles!

So, if I'm being chanced by something with Physical Immunity to physical damage, I'm not going to be able to hurt it with anything I can get my hands on with any degree of ease. What do I do? Look for the closest building I can drop on it, or drop it off of, bonus points for Invoking the Cube-Square Law if it has Hulking Size!

In Our World when talking about Nicodemous' PI it mentioned it works against nukes etc so from that I guess PI is a perfect defense against any physical thing but its catch.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 20, 2011, 08:44:33 PM
@Silverblaze: I really don't think that this game is easy to break. Thaumaturgy is the only real hole in the balance, I think.

Just because optimization is possible, doesn't mean that the system is unbalanced. An optimized Chest Deep character with 7 accuracy, 7 defence, and weapon rating 7 can still be challenged in a fight, it just requires opposition more suitable for a Snorkelling game.

@InferrumVeritas: Not sure what you mean. What mechanics in this game are balanced by fluff?

@JayTee: If you aren't really immune, then you shouldn't have Immunity. You should just have a whole bunch of Toughness.

@sinker: The point I was trying to make was that Toughness, Recovery, and Immunity all have the sole purpose of helping you deal with physical stress. Immunity does that infinitely well, so it trumps both Recovery and Toughness combined.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: BumblingBear on June 20, 2011, 09:05:41 PM
@Silverblaze: I really don't think that this game is easy to break. Thaumaturgy is the only real hole in the balance, I think.

Just because optimization is possible, doesn't mean that the system is unbalanced. An optimized Chest Deep character with 7 accuracy, 7 defence, and weapon rating 7 can still be challenged in a fight, it just requires opposition more suitable for a Snorkelling game.


I think the game is very balanced.

The people who don't think the game is balanced play it like it D&D, where everyone makes one piddly attack, and all stats are taken at face value.

In this game, a beat cop can kill a supernatural monster by having enough fate points and/or stacking aspects.

But hey - you're a gm who doesn't like people stacking aspects?  Ok, then actually compel them.  Be creative.  Compel them to attack without stacking aspects.

In my experience, the GMs who don't like the big numbers of the DFRPG are the ones who are not comfortable with aspects or compels yet.

*Note, I don't think I was clear that I was agreeing with Sancta and just adding to what was said.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 20, 2011, 10:39:46 PM
@sinker: The point I was trying to make was that Toughness, Recovery, and Immunity all have the sole purpose of helping you deal with physical stress. Immunity does that infinitely well, so it trumps both Recovery and Toughness combined.

And my point is that even mythic recovery does a very poor job of dealing with physical stress within conflict (a maximum of six stress). It's about long term endurance over many scenes. It just seems to me that Immunity is essentially a higher level of toughness, however it's a poor comparison to recovery. Someone with immunity still requires sleep, still requires time to recover, still tires. These are the main strengths of recovery.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 20, 2011, 11:37:32 PM
Sure, it's true that Recovery is mainly useful over an extended timescale.

But all of its non-damage-based benefits are worth 1 refresh at most. That's 1 refresh for not sleeping and not getting tired.

The real benefit is the rapid recovery of consequences. Which is worse in every way than PI, since PI means that you'd never have to take consequences in the first place.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 20, 2011, 11:44:49 PM
Never getting tired and never needing to sleep is worth 2 refresh in my opinion you can spend a dozen nights solid pouring power into your broken ritual. 
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 20, 2011, 11:48:33 PM
Mythic Recovery. +5 Catch. Costs 1 refresh, removes need for sleep in addition to other benefits.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 20, 2011, 11:51:19 PM
Yes but Supernatural Toughness with a catch of poison (+3) is also one refresh for a bonus off 4 stress boxes and 2 armour (6 stunts worth of powers) no one said that toughness powers with with majority catch where balanced, I think of that as more of a querk of the catch system than proof of anything.  
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 20, 2011, 11:56:12 PM
Well, if Toughness in general is poorly balanced, then this entire conversation looks a bit silly.

But point taken.

Still, I think that 1 refresh is reasonable for removing the need for sleep. As far as I know, there is nothing in the game that is balanced by the need for rest. So it's basically just narrative.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: ways and means on June 20, 2011, 11:58:06 PM
Your forgetting general fatigue which a gm can pull on players in any situation or the fact that they are never limited by endurance and so can keep going forever.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: toturi on June 21, 2011, 02:05:06 AM
The people who don't think the game is balanced play it like it D&D, where everyone makes one piddly attack, and all stats are taken at face value.

In this game, a beat cop can kill a supernatural monster by having enough fate points and/or stacking aspects.
I think the beat cop killing a supernatural monster by having enough FPs + stacking Aspects is taking all stats at face value. Aspects and FPs are part of the character's stats.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Silverblaze on June 21, 2011, 04:07:18 AM
@Sanctaphrax: Okay, you have me there. Someone would want to play Superman. I'm pretty sure concepts like that don't have the longevity that a similar concept with some level of toughness instead would.

@Silverblaze: I had some similar thoughts but hadn't really formed them well enough to write down. My basic thought was to do like some other games do and segregate it out into several separate areas and powers associated with those areas. If you wanted to be immune to a bunch of things you'd buy multiple powers.

Agreed...100%

That's how PI should work...a seperate power or powers granting those immunities. 
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 22, 2011, 05:11:31 AM
General fatigue has never seemed like an important limitation to me.

I mean, how often do players actually get told, "you need to rest now" for reasons other than clearing stress/consequences?
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: sinker on June 22, 2011, 06:13:26 AM
I guess it depends on how gritty/realistic you play your games. To be honest that's not something I've run into a lot either, but endurance over the long run (not within a scene) is 2/3 of the power. Thus I'd guess that the author felt that is worth 4 refresh (that being 2/3 of the cost of mythic recovery). I'd certainly not say that being able to remove between 1 and 3 mild consequences per scene is worth 1 refresh per consequence.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Belial666 on June 22, 2011, 07:15:53 AM
General fatigue has never seemed like an important limitation to me.

I mean, how often do players actually get told, "you need to rest now" for reasons other than clearing stress/consequences?

Didn't you put us into a scene where it was hard/impossible to normally rest and you wanted the environment to slowly tire us out? That would have been a good place for Recovery powers to work.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Lanir on June 22, 2011, 09:08:16 AM
Not familiar with the game Belial666 mentions but it's been my experience that the ability to keep going or endure harsh environments in a semi-realistic fashion (ie, it saps your resources, etc.) only happens in games when the GM makes a specific challenge of it. I've played characters with higher than normal endurance before in games and it basically just never came up. Even on the rare occasion where I might have engineered some use for it or reminded the GM that we'd been traveling nonstop all day and might be tired, the other players weren't very supportive because it would have felt like they were arbitrarily being penalized because the GM would have never considered it if I hadn't had an endurance trick.

DFRPG handles this a lot better than many previous systems. It's an after the fact roll with penalties based on previous activity levels rather than one of those godawful accounting messes you can occasionally find in other RPGs. But the reality is a lot of people either aren't going to think of it in their games if it's not a specific part of the challenge, or they're going to remember all those old kludges from other game systems and not want to touch it with the proverbial 10 foot pole.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Tedronai on June 22, 2011, 07:10:12 PM
Which, when at least one character has spent considerable resources being awesome at exactly that scenario, is what we call Bad GMing (tm).
Kind of like if a character had spent considerable resources on being an awesome sniper...only to find that the campaign was going to consist almost entirely of social interaction, investigation, and close-in brawls.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Sanctaphrax on June 23, 2011, 02:44:37 AM
That was based on the lack of a chance to recover from stress, not simple exhaustion. Then again, all of you had some level of recovery. So it made little difference.

On another note, my players have been getting a lot of use out of their Endurance skill lately. I use it as the default defence against environmental attacks.
Title: Re: Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?
Post by: Drachasor on June 25, 2011, 07:36:38 PM
Physical Immunity seems to be both too expensive and too cheap.

If you want something like being immune to lightning, then it seems too expensive.  However, when you are going for a more straight-up immunity to all physical stress, then it is far too cheap compared to toughness (or recovery though I agree recovery has other benefits).

I mean, they peg a Fire Demon, iirc, as having this as a +3 because I guess you'd have to research it is immune to fire or something.  +3 is pretty insanely expensive...that's equivalent to Evocation or Ritual in cost, but the benefit is far smaller.  I mean sure, Fire Immunity would be a bit handy against Harry, but he has lots of other ways of kicking ass.  And heck, even a Pyromancer could still hurt something immune to fire, since that doesn't make you immune to COLD (which is essentially part of fire, at least in the traditional element system).

Overall, it is a problematic ability.  I think it is generally best to consider it a Plot Ability rather than an actual option.