Is anyone else annoyed by Physical Immunity?

[zenten]

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.

[Sanctaphrax]

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.

[toturi]

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.

[ways and means]

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.

[Lanir]

@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.

[sinker]

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.

[toturi]

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.

[Taer]

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.

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).

[BumblingBear]

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.

[sinker]

@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....

[Haru]

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.

[paul_Harkonen]

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?"

[polkaneverdies]

^this

[BumblingBear]

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

[Sanctaphrax]

@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.