when things don't have a catch

[Taran]

OW lists a few monsters that don't have catches.  Zombies, specifically.

What do you figure?  Holy?  Or do they even have a catch?

[EdgeOfDreams]

Some things, like zombies, may not have a catch on their toughness powers.  This can be seen as the same as having a catch value of +0, something so obscure and hard to obtain that it might as well not exists.  However, everything has some sort of weakness. In the case of zombies, it's their lack of free will - shut down the wizard controlling them or his drummer and the zombies will either stop moving or act randomly.

[devonapple]

Nonspecific Catches can be taken as an opportunity for players to help establish them. Not as a simple Declaration, mind you, but as a Declaration after a series of GM-assigned challenges which culminate in them "discovering" (either through tons of research, or through trial-and-error) a Catch which the table agrees makes sense.

For instance, a gaming group could establish that Zombies lose the benefits of their Toughness powers when the oddly dischordant tones of the original Music of Erich Zann (to which H.P. Lovecraft alludes in his short story of that name) is played. This could be the result of several quests to research necromancy, past zombie hunters, liberate notes from an occult music collector, contract with a musician to recreate the sheet music containing the unearthly tones, and then actually record and weaponize the music in a way that the Wizards won't easily hex (hand-cranked wax tablet phonograph!).

[TheMouse]

I generally figure that the ultimate +0 Catch is things that qualify for any and all Catches.

Or, you know, leave it up to the players to figure something out, and then pretend that it was my idea all along. That works, too.

[Haru]

I think especially in the case of zombies, or all undead for that matter, the "can't recover from consequences" trapping from "living dead" is enough of a "catch" to justify a real catch of zero. You can hit them with what you got, run away, rinse, repeat, and kill them gradually over a few conflicts.

Or you can get creative. An empowered circle might be enough to cut off the power that holds the zombie together.

[zenten]

I'm cool with this being license for a normal Declaration.

[Discipol]

Excuse me but its impossible to not have a catch.
From the Catch list you need to take ALL * points, and since you want +0, you get toughness/recovery for everything EXCEPT something.

Zombies usually are vulnerable to fire.

[Masurao]

The Catch, as described in the book, requires players to take one, that doesn't mean that NPCs need to have a Catch. Or, as others have said, you can have such an obscure Catch that it is +0 and practically counts as no Catch. (Weapons made from metal, forged in the heat of an active volcano, by the hands of a virgin and bathed in sunlight for ten years.)

And, yes, zombie could be vulnerable to fire, but so are lots of beasties and it is not their Catch. I guess you could see it in the light that the zombie just keeps on going, whether it has bullet holes, or a nice crispy skin or what not.

[Rubycon]

The Catch, as described in the book, requires players to take one, that doesn't mean that NPCs need to have a Catch.

Are you sure about this one? I would think that such game mechanisms should alwys apply to everyone. This certainly includes exceptions, but these should be just that.
That said, in the case of Zombies I see no problem leaving them as they are. The weaknesses described - lack of free will (and combat tactics...), the inability to recover from consequences - should be enough to compensate for the catch.

[ARedthorn]

I have a bear shapeshifter in my group... in bear form he has Inhuman Toughness... and it didn't make sense that there'd be a specific source of damage that's extra-damaging verses bears, hence, he shouldn't have a catch.
Nevertheless, as the book does require one (even when it makes NO sense), so we did some thinking- wereforms that are particularly big have to use Ectoplasm to bulk up- so if anyone manages to draw a circle around him, or bring running water to bear (no pun intended), the ecto will evaporate, allowing anything to bypass his toughness, and causing more than a little discomfort.
Not much of anyone's going to guess to put a bear that's attacking them in a river or a circle, so definitely unknown, and rare. Also, not easy to pull off. We ruled it a +0, and left it at that. It's a little bit of a cop-out, but only a little.

For zombies... fire, running water... *shrug* Similarly cop-outs, but it works for me.

[jb.teller4]

The way that I read the intent of Catches is that every creature with toughness/recovery powers has to have a weakness or a way to get around that toughness/recovery power.

This isn't RAW, but something I've done on occasion is that if the creature (and I wouldn't allow this for PCs) has some other weakness (like zombies falling inert if the drumming stops or even having Human Form where the toughness/recovery don't apply until they change), I'll sometimes let that effectively count as their Catch and I'll give them a +0 Catch so they aren't getting any further discount (e.g. a zombie could have the Weakness of "Only while they can hear the drum (+0)").

Also, I've only ever done this with the "Inhuman" levels of Toughness and Recovery (where the toughness/recovery is a nice boost but doesn't make them invulnerable or nearly imposible to kill without either doing massive damage or finding their Catch). For the more powerful versions, like Mythic or Physical Immunity, I'd make sure there's a more standard Catch for the players to find out and exploit.

And finally, I've really only done that when I can't think of a good Catch and the creature isn't really important enough to get hung up worrying about it. I think that having a good Catch is almost always more interesting.

-John B.

[jb.teller4]

I dimly remember right after the game came out reading one of the developers talking about the cost of the Catch being a reflection of how often the Catch will come up in the game. Anyone who takes a +3 Catch should expect the Catch to be well-known and easy to get and to come up all the time (like maybe even as every session), while someone with a +0 Catch should probably only have the Catch come up very rarely (possibly never). In the same discussion, I vaguely remember the sentiment being expressed that taking a +0 Catch and saying "I dunno what it is, but it's really obscure and I don't really think it will ever come up" was fine, with the caveat that if a character in the game ever decided to actively research the Catch and figure out what it was, then you're have to make something up.

-John B.

[Discipol]

I'm sorry but Mythic Toughness with no catch sounds like the works of a BAD GM.
It is just so unfair that it deserve my disgust.

And this is precisely why there HAS to be a catch. I don't understand why npcs and pcs work by different game rules. Its the same world that all of the characters exist. I find that npcs have at least 1 more point of powers to spend + refresh padding due to the sheer number of pcs is enough to not add invulnerability on top of it via mythic toughness or regen.

What is the point to have a library or a Lore check if there is no prize at the end of the rainbow?

[Masurao]

I'm sorry but Mythic Toughness with no catch sounds like the works of a BAD GM.
It is just so unfair that it deserve my disgust.

This is just bad etiquette, reign your replies in a bit, no need to get catty in an otherwise friendly discussion like this.

And this is precisely why there HAS to be a catch. I don't understand why npcs and pcs work by different game rules. Its the same world that all of the characters exist. I find that npcs have at least 1 more point of powers to spend + refresh padding due to the sheer number of pcs is enough to not add invulnerability on top of it via mythic toughness or regen.

What is the point to have a library or a Lore check if there is no prize at the end of the rainbow?

You are assuming that everything can be found. It is the same as the discussion about detecting lies. Your players can roll all the Empathy they want, but if there is no lie to detect, there is no pot of gold. Same goes for Lore. If you would research Nicodemus, not even the bestest library could help you out, as he made it a point to burn every place which had info on him every other century or so. Harry came to guess his Catch through close interaction, deduction and luck.

Some NPCs just deserve the bad-assedness of having no real Catch, I mean, just look at the Loup-Garou. Yes, he has a Catch, but you need to prepare against it, if you stumble upon one, you are in deep, deep shit and all you can do is try and escape alive. Some things are just that nasty or powerful. What Catch would you give the White God, if he manifested upon Earth? Unholy items? Unlikely, more like it. (True) Outsider magic perhaps? Still won't come up that often. Or perhaps he can only be harmed by his own Archangels, which means only Lucifer has a shot and still isn't going to happen anytime soon, if at all, so it's a +0 Catch, which could effectively be called non-existent.

Also, I only uttered the possibility that NPCs needn't always follow PC creation rules, didn't say it should be so.

[ARedthorn]

I'm sorry but Mythic Toughness with no catch sounds like the works of a BAD GM.
It is just so unfair that it deserve my disgust.

And this is precisely why there HAS to be a catch. I don't understand why npcs and pcs work by different game rules. Its the same world that all of the characters exist. I find that npcs have at least 1 more point of powers to spend + refresh padding due to the sheer number of pcs is enough to not add invulnerability on top of it via mythic toughness or regen.

What is the point to have a library or a Lore check if there is no prize at the end of the rainbow?

Not necessarily a bad GM, there- it could be a good GM trying to tell his players to FIND ANOTHER WAY ALREADY.

This is Dresden, not old-school DnD dungeon-crawling. Social and Mental stress tracks exist for a reason, and Dresden frequently comes up against fights he can't reasonably handle if he comes right at them. Setting up a creature with Mythic Toughness like that is a good way to force the players to get creative, figure out another way and have fun doing it.

I don't recommend doing it often, but if a slugging match is a bad idea... you're a bad GM if you don't make that clear to your players at some point, and making them way-over-the-top-tough with no catch is one real good way to do that.

Isn't that kinda the whole point of the Loup Garou scene in the police station? Harry found a way by binding him, but until then...


Rabbit trail done- for the original question- I recommend Catches for most if not all NPCs and PCs alike... but you should follow the visual. Like I said- if your players run up against a zoo-omancer (say that 5 times fast), and get attacked by a bear- a real one- I wouldn't give it a catch at all, unless it's a magic bear (and the players should be able to tell that by a glance at it's stomach).