Author Topic: Were-Bear? (There Bear)  (Read 5314 times)

Offline Radecliffe

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2014, 11:38:54 PM »
Doesn't that kind of encompass every kind of physical attack?

So did the toughness only apply to magic, then?

The other way around.  The catch was that toughness only applied to slash, pierce and crush.  So no protection from magic, fire, acid, etc.

Offline solbergb

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 606
    • View Profile
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2014, 11:53:58 PM »
I dunno.  A bear actually would be pretty tough against fire or acid for the same reason knives aren't terribly effective.  The outer layer of fur and fat is pretty much non-essential.  It hurts, but it doesn't come close to doing anything that stops the bear from ripping you apart.

I favor the "high penetration" catch on this kind of monster.   It simulates better  "tough on the outside, squishy on the inside" critters, which include most mortal large animals.    With a big enough weapon, it gets just its raw endurance.  With not enough weapon, you mostly just annoy it even if you're a pretty good shot.

Offline Radecliffe

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #17 on: July 29, 2014, 12:00:42 AM »
Well, YMMV.  Of course, I also took Hulking Size and Great Endurance (while in bear form) so I still had six boxes on my physical stress track even for stuff that got past my Toughness.  He lived through the campaign so it worked out for me. 

Offline solbergb

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 606
    • View Profile
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #18 on: July 29, 2014, 12:23:53 AM »
I'm not a big fan of the "big weapons" as a catch. In comparison, a bear will take less damage from a big gun than a regular mortal would. It would still hurt him, because it's a big weapon, but it does need to get through its thick skin, and because it is a ferocious animal, it can deal with the pain better as well.

Except that a high powered rifle or .45 magnum round will in fact punch through the thick skin etc without actually losing anything in killing power, that's what they're precisely designed to do (just as most military rounds can kill you through walls these days).

While it is true that it'll deal with pain and such better than the average person, I think the fact that most folks would stat up a bear with endurance in the 3-5 range instead of the typical human rating of 0-1 covers that sufficiently.   Bear blubber really isn't as good as kevlar+strike plates against stuff designed to penetrate meat.   Likewise a spear is actually a pretty effective weapon against an elephant if you know what you're doing with it. (I saw a video in college of a Pygmy running under an elephant, stabbing it once, running away and wait for it to die...)

If you want it to be more precise than the mechanical "weapon 3", I think you could represent the catch as "deep penetration weapons, such as spears, high powered rifles, pistol-3 magnum rounds".   So the bear gets armor against a normal sword but not a heavy spear, against a shotgun, but not a rifle, against a flamethrower but not a tightly focused Fuego-blast (where Harry managed to control it properly and didn't dedicate any shifts to knockback) even though all of those are technically weapon 3+ attacks.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2014, 12:29:20 AM by solbergb »

Offline Haru

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5520
  • Mentally unstable like a fox.
    • View Profile
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #19 on: July 29, 2014, 01:11:15 AM »
Against a human, overpenetration means that a big gun is only a bit more effective than a little gun. Against a bear or an elephant, there's less overpenetration and the big gun is way better.
This makes total sense, and I hadn't seen it that way before. You're right, looking at it like this, it makes absolute sense.

If you want it to be more precise than the mechanical "weapon 3", I think you could represent the catch as "deep penetration weapons, such as spears, high powered rifles, pistol-3 magnum rounds".   So the bear gets armor against a normal sword but not a heavy spear, against a shotgun, but not a rifle, against a flamethrower but not a tightly focused Fuego-blast (where Harry managed to control it properly and didn't dedicate any shifts to knockback) even though all of those are technically weapon 3+ attacks.
And this not only makes sense but is in keeping with my sense of the catch. This should work nicely.
“Do you not know that a man is not dead while his name is still spoken?”
― Terry Pratchett, Going Postal

Offline Mr. Death

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 7965
  • Not all those who wander are lost
    • View Profile
    • The C-Team Podcast
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #20 on: July 29, 2014, 03:04:46 AM »
If you want it to be more precise than the mechanical "weapon 3", I think you could represent the catch as "deep penetration weapons, such as spears, high powered rifles, pistol-3 magnum rounds".   So the bear gets armor against a normal sword but not a heavy spear, against a shotgun, but not a rifle, against a flamethrower but not a tightly focused Fuego-blast (where Harry managed to control it properly and didn't dedicate any shifts to knockback) even though all of those are technically weapon 3+ attacks.
Yeah, I think this is the best explanation I've heard so far.
Compels solve everything!

http://blur.by/1KgqJg6 My first book: "Brothers of the Curled Isles"

Quote from: Cozarkian
Not every word JB rights is a conspiracy. Sometimes, he's just telling a story.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_T_mld7Acnm-0FVUiaKDPA The C-Team Podcast

Offline Quantus

  • Special Collections Division
  • Needs A Life
  • ****
  • Posts: 25216
  • He Who Lurks Around
    • View Profile
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #21 on: July 29, 2014, 12:18:25 PM »
That makes sense, I like it.  Mr. D, is Haru's impression correct in that your shifted character is more or less a mundane bear, as opposed to something more overtly supernatural? Basically, are you going Alpha, Mouse, or Loup Garou?
<(o)> <(o)>
        / \
      (o o)
   \==-==/


“We’re all imaginary friends to one another."

"An entire life, an entire personality, can be permanently altered by just one sentence." -An Accidental Villain

Offline Mr. Death

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 7965
  • Not all those who wander are lost
    • View Profile
    • The C-Team Podcast
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2014, 02:05:26 PM »
That makes sense, I like it.  Mr. D, is Haru's impression correct in that your shifted character is more or less a mundane bear, as opposed to something more overtly supernatural? Basically, are you going Alpha, Mouse, or Loup Garou?
Yeah, Haru's impression is correct (it's a low refresh game at this point, he can't afford to be much more than a regular bear just yet).
Compels solve everything!

http://blur.by/1KgqJg6 My first book: "Brothers of the Curled Isles"

Quote from: Cozarkian
Not every word JB rights is a conspiracy. Sometimes, he's just telling a story.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_T_mld7Acnm-0FVUiaKDPA The C-Team Podcast

Offline CrimsonJoker

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: Were-Bear? (There Bear)
« Reply #23 on: August 04, 2014, 02:09:31 AM »
I have a bear in my game, and after a bit of discussion between me and him he decided to take Claws and Strength/Speed, though he's a Black Bear.