When Unkillable Shuts Down...

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Nereidalbel

Not Unkillable 1 is a -20% modifier.

That's about what I was thinking, but I'm wondering what your logic for that is?

[PseudoFenton]

Originally Posted by Rupert

That doesn't read as a one-off 'triggers at the threshold' to me. It reads as a state change. Thus if the ability was turned off and you hit -10xHP, you'd die, and then when it turned back on, you'd change state to a ghost and start healing.

I disagree, once you hit that threshold nothing can affect you until you hit full HP again. It also never happens unless you hit that threshold, get to 1HP off of -10xHP and nothing noteworthy happen - hit it and it triggers the event. It doesn't matter that the event is a state change or not, it's still dependant on the trigger for your state to change.

Note that Unkillable 3 doesn't do anything whilst you're in your 'ghost state' other than prevent damage, capture, and let you heal normally. Except dead things don't heal, so normally healing does you no good. Just because you're a 'ghostly' corpse doesn't mean you heal any better than a regular corpse.

If the advantage said "When you die, instead become a ghost and heal back to full HP" then this would be different - but this is not what it says. Unkillable 2 and 3 never let you die, they prevent death from ever occurring whilst they're active. If however you die whilst they're not active, then you're dead, and need to be resurrected via normal means rather than relying on Unkillable to do the heavy lifting.

I can see how some may look at the name and say "but gee, shouldn't you not be able to die then?" but a name is just a name. Unkillable 1 is really just "Requires total body destruction before death", Unkillable 2 is "Body can never be truly destroyed and always regenerates back, but can be trapped forever to prevent regeneration", whilst Unkillable 3 is "Unkillable 2 but can now no longer be trapped and may reform at a different location than death/where body currently resides".

I again reiterate that if you've allowed Unkillable to have a power source that can be blocked, or allow someone to spend CP to acquire a power specifically designed to remove Unkillable - then that should mean something. The duration on the Affliction to remove Unkillable just means that once you're hit with it, you can flee (rather than fight) and eventually recover and not have to worry about dying again - it should not mean you have to wait an extra hour or two after being killed before you start coming back again.

If you do say that once the Affliction has expired you come back, then every version of the Affliction will have 'Extended Duration Permanent (no dispel condition) +300%' slapped onto it because it would be useless otherwise! Equally you can expect any Mana Dependant versions of Unkillable to have their bodies cremated down to -10xHP within a no-mana zone so the body can't be dragged out allowing them to come back. Basically - all you're doing is making it a little more costly and requiring a little more effort, but you're still not preventing Unkillable folk from being killed.

As as it takes a lot of CP to remove Unkillable 3 via an Affliction as it is, I don't really think it needs to be made any more expensive. You're also making more problems for yourself promoting the necessity for this version of the Affliction, because now you need only be hit with it once to be robbed of your 150CP investment. They don't even need to try and kill you right away, once your power is gone they can take as long as they like, and you'll never get better without saving up another 150CP to buy the ability back again.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by PseudoFenton

Unkillable 3 is "Unkillable 2 but can now no longer be trapped and may reform at a different location than death/where body currently resides".

So, for 50 points over Unkillable 2, you're good with "Can't be trapped if the GM is in a friendly mood"? Note that it states that your new body forms where the GM chooses. It doesn't even state that the GM has to choose when you take the power, or that he has to tell you where it is prior to your 'death', or that it has to be the same place each time. Now, for 50 extra points I'd expect the GM to be generous and reasonable, but even something like "Your body will form at your home in a place of your choosing, for any reasonable value of 'home'" seems to me to not be worth 50 extra points. My interpretation seems to me to be 1) closer to worth those extra points, and 2) within the wording and intent.

I again reiterate that if you've allowed Unkillable to have a power source that can be blocked, or allow someone to spend CP to acquire a power specifically designed to remove Unkillable - then that should mean something. The duration on the Affliction to remove Unkillable just means that once you're hit with it, you can flee (rather than fight) and eventually recover and not have to worry about dying again - it should not mean you have to wait an extra hour or two after being killed before you start coming back again.

It does mean something - it means that anyone with only Unkillable 1-2 is dead, and that even Unkillable 3 (150 points of advantage that only applies when damaged to the point where normal people die, mind) won't stop you being killed and your body captured, at which point the advantage can be continually suppressed unless you're rescued, etc. Oh, and a 'permanent' affliction prevents even Unkillable 3 from saving you until it is somehow removed.

If you do say that once the Affliction has expired you come back, then every version of the Affliction will have 'Extended Duration Permanent (no dispel condition) +300%' slapped onto it because it would be useless otherwise!

Only if Unkillable 3 beings are a common threat.

Equally you can expect any Mana Dependant versions of Unkillable to have their bodies cremated down to -10xHP within a no-mana zone so the body can't be dragged out allowing them to come back. Basically - all you're doing is making it a little more costly and requiring a little more effort, but you're still not preventing Unkillable folk from being killed.

I'm not sure how this is even an issue.

[Nereidalbel]

Originally Posted by Rupert

That's about what I was thinking, but I'm wondering what your logic for that is?

A Kromm post re-quoted in half a dozen threads.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Nereidalbel

A Kromm post re-quoted in half a dozen threads.

That's a source, not logic. Logic is "Sure you may die easier if you remove the benefits of Unkillable 1 from Unkillable II, but you also come back easier since you'll have fewer negative hit points to heal up."

[PseudoFenton]

Originally Posted by Rupert

So, for 50 points over Unkillable 2, you're good with "Can't be trapped if the GM is in a friendly mood"?

I'm not following, at what point does the GM's mood affect if you can be trapped or not? Unkillable 3 means you can't be 'trapped' and prevented from healing back to life - whilst Unkillable 2 means you can be (whether you are or not is dependant on how and where you died, and how much your foes know about your ability to come back).

Originally Posted by Rupert

but even something like "Your body will form at your home in a place of your choosing, for any reasonable value of 'home'" seems to me to not be worth 50 extra points

Where you appear when you return to life is incidental, the fact that your corpse can't be chucked into a volcano/sunk to the bottom of the sea/etc and forgotten about is what you're paying the extra points for. They're very well spent in that regard too, as it means that if you are reduced to -10xHP you can't be kept in that state by external measures.

Originally Posted by Rupert

It does mean something - it means that anyone with only Unkillable 1-2 is dead, and that even Unkillable 3 (150 points of advantage that only applies when damaged to the point where normal people die, mind) won't stop you being killed and your body captured, at which point the advantage can be continually suppressed unless you're rescued, etc.

Don't forget that those extra 50cp also have to be accounted for in the Affliction too, so you're passively making it more costly to negate the advantage too. Also, your proposal for "it means something" is "you can just spend your life repeatedly hitting them with negation..." that's hardly meaningful - the second you stop doing that they still come back in your opinion, which makes it useless as a means of overcoming the advantage.

Originally Posted by Rupert

Oh, and a 'permanent' affliction prevents even Unkillable 3 from saving you until it is somehow removed.

I said the +300% version of Permanent, meaning there is no means of removing it.

Originally Posted by Rupert

Only if Unkillable 3 beings are a common threat.

Not really, if your characters entire shtick is being able to slay the unslayable - then you're going to want to actually be able to do that.
What's the good in killing something only for it to stay dead fractionally longer than it would've otherwise?? Yeah you may be able to take down a formally Unkillable foe quicker when they have to roll death checks, but if you can't keep them dead then what's the point?
If you're saying that Unkillable 3 always come back when their ability is restored, then anyone who's bought Affliction (Negate Unkillable 3) will make it a non-dispelably permanent too - or why are they even bothering to get it?

Originally Posted by Rupert

I'm not sure how this is even an issue.

So you're happy for an Unkillable 3 (Mana Dependant) person to get properly killed (without any chance of coming back) via destruction of their corpse whilst in a no-mana zone? If so then I don't see why you've issue with negating the advantage with Affliction as a means to kill them for good. Or are you saying that you're happy that they won't come back only if their body is entirely destroyed whilst the ability is unactive?

[Nereidalbel]

Originally Posted by PseudoFenton

So you're happy for an Unkillable 3 (Mana Dependant) person to get properly killed (without any chance of coming back) via destruction of their corpse whilst in a no-mana zone? If so then I don't see why you've issue with negating the advantage with Affliction as a means to kill them for good. Or are you saying that you're happy that they won't come back only if their body is entirely destroyed whilst the ability is unactive?

Hey, if no part of their body ever leaves the No Mana Zone, they're pretty much toast. Or, you know, just bury them with a high level mana damper.

[Sunrunners_Fire]

Originally Posted by PseudoFenton

If you're saying that Unkillable 3 always come back when their ability is restored, then anyone who's bought Affliction (Negate Unkillable 3) will make it a non-dispelably permanent too - or why are they even bothering to get it?

Afflictions can be cured via Healing w/ Cure Afflictions.

Permanent vs Permanent w/ Dispelling Conditions simply means that the thing doesn't have its' own specific little ritual that automatically breaks it if you spring for the +300% version.

[Nereidalbel]

Originally Posted by Sunrunners_Fire

Afflictions can be cured via Healing w/ Cure Afflictions.

Permanent vs Permanent w/ Dispelling Conditions simply means that the thing doesn't have its' own specific little ritual that automatically breaks it if you spring for the +300% version.

Add Cosmic 50% and the healing needs Cosmic to heal the affliction.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by PseudoFenton

I'm not following, at what point does the GM's mood affect if you can be trapped or not? Unkillable 3 means you can't be 'trapped' and prevented from healing back to life - whilst Unkillable 2 means you can be (whether you are or not is dependant on how and where you died, and how much your foes know about your ability to come back).

Because the GM chooses where your Unkillable 3 character comes back, not you.

Where you appear when you return to life is incidental, the fact that your corpse can't be chucked into a volcano/sunk to the bottom of the sea/etc and forgotten about is what you're paying the extra points for.

Where is not incidental at all. It could be very useful, or an enormous drawback, depending where it is.

I said the +300% version of Permanent, meaning there is no means of removing it.

And by default Unkillable is, because it's a standard advantage, 'Permanent', and yet here we are, looking at someone who has had it removed.

Not really, if your characters entire shtick is being able to slay the unslayable - then you're going to want to actually be able to do that.
What's the good in killing something only for it to stay dead fractionally longer than it would've otherwise?? Yeah you may be able to take down a formally Unkillable foe quicker when they have to roll death checks, but if you can't keep them dead then what's the point?
If you're saying that Unkillable 3 always come back when their ability is restored, then anyone who's bought Affliction (Negate Unkillable 3) will make it a non-dispelably permanent too - or why are they even bothering to get it?

I don't know. Why is anyone bothering to get Unkillable when people can build powers that simply remove it? And why should a temporary suppression of a 150-point power work as well as permanent removal, which is what you're advocating?

So you're happy for an Unkillable 3 (Mana Dependant) person to get properly killed (without any chance of coming back) via destruction of their corpse whilst in a no-mana zone? If so then I don't see why you've issue with negating the advantage with Affliction as a means to kill them for good. Or are you saying that you're happy that they won't come back only if their body is entirely destroyed whilst the ability is unactive?

Not at all. The way I see it, Unkillable 3 in that no-mana zone is dead until the mana level about their corpse is raised. What I wonder about your earlier post is why it's relevant that people 'have' to buy a bigger power. The whole thing smacks of an arms race between players and GM to me, and if that's the case the exact details of how various abilities interact is the least of the campaign's problems.