Diffuse and AoE

[Tuoni]

Originally Posted by Not another shrubbery

? Rapid Fire?

Sure. Each hit from a machine gun does 1pt of damage. Likewise for fragmentation from an explosion. Then there are afflictions from stuff like Tear Gas, or even a poisonous dart/spider bite. Setting the place on fire also works since the flames would consume all the oxygen.

Diffuse is nice, but without a good amount of HP or Regeneration as back up one can still be taken out of the fight (although not necessarily killed) rather easily.

Originally Posted by Not another shrubbery

It isn't immediately obvious just how much such a hypothetical enhancement should be worth, but it seems like just charging double is underselling it. Try making the effect with IT:DR.

My thinking is thus.

The wounding modifier is 1 of 3 key parts of Diffuse. The other two being Immune to Grapple and Immune to Dismemberment. Personally, I peg the wounding part at being 70% of the total package.


AoE and non-AoE are both mutually exclusive subsets of All Damage. AoE is generally less prevalent then non-AoE, and so defence against AoE is worth less then defence against non-AoE. To me, it be about 2/3rd as useful.

70% * 2/3 = 46% which I'd round up to 50%.

Therefore adding AoE defence to diffuse would be +50%*.

Originally Posted by Not another shrubbery

Try making the effect with IT:DR.

This hits on a sore point of mine. I don't like Diffuse as-is all that much. I think it should have been 3 separate advantages that were combined as a template or meta-advantage or something. That would make it so much more easy to modify to fit a specific idea such as Jerander's. Likewise for Supernatural Durability.

Edit: Er, seems I didn't actually respond to your request. In short, I wouldn't. I don't think Diffuse and IT:DR play nice together. Even if we exclude enhancing Diffuse, a high level of IT:DR is better off replaced with Diffuse + IT:DR (Only vs AoE). And I don't like that.



*By extension, removing the wounding modifier entirely would be -70%, and switching the defence to only vs AoE (or something equally as common, like burning attacks) would by -20%.

[starslayer]

I don't think its appropriate to insist that diffuse be broken up into relative advantages. Diffuse, like intangibility, flight, invisibility, and a host of other things, is a single advantage that has multiple in game effects based on that single external effect.

When you are diffuse you have no central components, and any given portion of you can survive without the rest; because of this you suffer radically reduced damage from attacks that don't cover a large area of your body, attacks that DO cover a large area of your body do full damage (Arguably most diffuse creatures might take EXTRA damage form explosions, fire, and the like as there diffuse natures make the damage hit the individual components that make them up more effectively).

If you cannot be injured for more then 1-2 HP even from large area attacks then you are not diffuse, your something else, and that something else may need other ways to be modelled.

With that said, something like: Intangibility, reflexive, costs HP 1, costs HP 1 [not against aoe/impaling/peircing attacks], can carry objects (full encumbrance), reduced duration (instant) cosmic+50% [no 'off time on reduced duration'] will achieve the same basic effect, but what's happening is not that you are supremely resistant to damage, so much as you are not being damaged AT ALL, but your supernatural power that makes you not be damaged at all costs you a small bit of your life force.

Another way to look at it might be that:
Most weapons do not do the damage listed, they do radically less, however that damage has a wounding modifier on weak squishy human targets with all our vital bits and static structures; but rather then write most damages as fractions and then list the multipler that brings it back up to normal levels for targets that do not have some form of injury tolerance the game rules simply this by assuming that most targets ARE fleshy things with vital bits and static structures, and provides special rules for things that are not.

[vicky_molokh]

The vs-AE-only version is certainly interesting. In fact, I generally find it more interesting than the vanilla Diffuse trait. It seems especially appropriate for cinematic weapon masters who shrug off grenade explosions, but need to individually parry focused blaster bolts. Or some summonable familiars.

[Tuoni]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

The vs-AE-only version is certainly interesting. In fact, I generally find it more interesting than the vanilla Diffuse trait. It seems especially appropriate for cinematic weapon masters who shrug off grenade explosions, but need to individually parry focused blaster bolts. Or some summonable familiars.

Stuff like that is the main reason that I like advantages to be as atomic as possible. It is a lot easier to fit pieces together then to take them apart. This isn't going to happen until 5th (or 6th, or 7th) edition though, so I try not to dwell on it.

Originally Posted by starslayer

I don't think its appropriate to insist that diffuse be broken up into relative advantages. Diffuse, like intangibility, flight, invisibility, and a host of other things, is a single advantage that has multiple in game effects based on that single external effect.

When you are diffuse you have no central components, and any given portion of you can survive without the rest; because of this you suffer radically reduced damage from attacks that don't cover a large area of your body, attacks that DO cover a large area of your body do full damage (Arguably most diffuse creatures might take EXTRA damage form explosions, fire, and the like as there diffuse natures make the damage hit the individual components that make them up more effectively).

I didn't reply earlier because I can't really argue anything*. You make a good point, and I agree. I just like to keep the thematics wholly separate from the mechanics. Diffuse is built around the thematics though, so separating things runs into balance issues with stuff like IT:DR.


*that and I ended up being dragged to camp for the weekend.

Originally Posted by starslayer

With that said, something like: Intangibility, reflexive, costs HP 1, costs HP 1 [not against aoe/impaling/peircing attacks], can carry objects (full encumbrance), reduced duration (instant) cosmic+50% [no 'off time on reduced duration'] will achieve the same basic effect, but what's happening is not that you are supremely resistant to damage, so much as you are not being damaged AT ALL, but your supernatural power that makes you not be damaged at all costs you a small bit of your life force.

My problem with a solution like this is it is such a complicated solution to a very simple problem that creates edge cases (people with Affects Substantial or Maledictions) and unintended consequences.


In Jerander's build for example, it feels like it had been so much simpler to use something like Diffuse(Vulnerable to Fire/Sunlight instead of AoE, +0%) rather then trying to modify Insubstantial into something else. But the integrated nature of the advantage made that unlikely.

This is just me working the situation over in my head though. I don't actually have a problem with Diffuse. More of an "in an ideal game system" thing.

[starslayer]

Originally Posted by Tuoni

My problem with a solution like this is it is such a complicated solution to a very simple problem that creates edge cases (people with Affects Substantial or Maledictions) and unintended consequences.

I don't agree with your statement here, counter advantages counter advantages. If its not affects substantial or maledictions then its 'negated advantage: Injury tolerance' or attacks that are a huge number of low damage attacks, or attacks with cosmic.

[Tuoni]

Originally Posted by starslayer

I don't agree with your statement here, counter advantages counter advantages. If its not affects substantial or maledictions then its 'negated advantage: Injury tolerance' or attacks that are a huge number of low damage attacks, or attacks with cosmic.

The existence of counter abilities is not an issue for me. Its 'which' counter abilities.


What I mean is that, if someone just wants "Diffuse, but extended to AoE because of *insert fluff here*", going the modified Insubstantiability route creates vulnerabilities that might not be realized until after play begins.

Such as the fact that the insubstantial character can be grappled by other insubstantial beings (ghosts). Or Malediction based cutting attacks (psychic knives) have a full effect. Or immobilized with Bindings with Affects Insubstantial (spirit shackles). And good luck trying to attach something like Infiltrator or Swarm to it. There was a pretty long thread on that not to long ago.

One also becomes immune to non-malediction afflictions since they don't actually hit. I'm sure other unintended consequences could identified if people tried.

Some concepts this might not be a problem. Others it might make no sense at all. That leads to even more enhancements, limitations and advantages being considered. In the end, what could take 5 minutes and a singly line on a character sheet takes an hour and a full paragraph. Something that kinda sorta works if you squint.

I don't like interdependence (mechanic A is only allowed with B and C with limitations X, Y, and Z) in GURPS. Those things are excellent when building a setting (see Rev's Psionic Powers), since they add flavor and coherence. But I prefer those to be added after the fact. Not requirements built in.