Starvation and the Supernaturally Durable

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Facial Tentacles

Okay, so I need to come up with a special SD limitation. I can't picture a SD vampire or werewolf not needing to eat.

In fact it is extremely rare for vampires to be capable of starving to death. The imprisoned vampires of Vampire Diaries spent a hundred and forty miserable years as shriveled up husks who couldn't die and a lot of vampire movies start with someone releasing Sealed Evil In A Can that must then feed.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

In fact it is extremely rare for vampires to be capable of starving to death. The imprisoned vampires of Vampire Diaries spent a hundred and forty miserable years as shriveled up husks who couldn't die and a lot of vampire movies start with someone releasing Sealed Evil In A Can that must then feed.

Very true. Angel (on Angel, from the Buffyverse) spent months under the sea trapped and blood-starved. It's implied the same is true for True Blood vampires.

In anime, the Blood+ chiropterans (not traditional vampires, bust still) just go into hibernation with it and need it later in order to wake up. Almost no vampire fiction involves them starving to death. In fact, even when it suggests they would starve to death, it really only shows them feeling the pain of starvation (but almost never leading to death).

The last piece of fiction I remember that strongly suggested (with no real death occurring) that a vampire could starve to death was a soap called Port Charles (spin-off of General Hospital) where some characters were infected by a vampire. But again, no vampiric deaths as a result, only pain and weakness (with the viewer left to interpret whether death would eventually occur or just coma).

[Xplo]

Supernatural Durability is the one you use for movie psychos and monsters who never stay dead, right?

So I'm thinking, no way does starvation actually kill those guys - either they don't require physical nourishment at all, or else they just wither away until there's nothing left of them except a weak, shriveled version (presumably imprisoned somewhere without food) or some kind of inanimate symbolic part, like a skull or a cursed hatchet or something. And then of course something always happens to make blood fall on the symbol, or release them from their prison, at which point they disappear into the night to kill and grow strong again.

If you want to talk RAW... yeah, looking at the advantage, starvation isn't a single massive wound, so unless that's the creature's vulnerability, I'd say it doesn't kill him.

I'd also suggest a lower bound of -5xHP. Otherwise a long period of deprivation gets you, say, a cursed hatchet that has to be soaked in blood for a month and a half before the killer comes back, or a long, drawn out convalescence where the creature feeds and feeds without getting any stronger. Both seem unfaithful to the usual fiction.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by vitruvian

Having such a lower bound seems worth a pretty big enhancement, because it reduces the ways in which characters with SD can be messed up.

I don't think it should be an enhancement... it certainly does not seem like a big one. Noting that damage is normally capped at -10xHP for characters' remains, and -5xHP for objects, it seems reasonable to me that one of those multiples should apply to Supernatural Durability owners. The practical difference in play, between capping the loss or allowing it to continue indefinitely, seems negligible.

[vitruvian]

Originally Posted by Not another shrubbery

I don't think it should be an enhancement... it certainly does not seem like a big one. Noting that damage is normally capped at -10xHP for characters' remains, and -5xHP for objects, it seems reasonable to me that one of those multiples should apply to Supernatural Durability owners. The practical difference in play, between capping the loss or allowing it to continue indefinitely, seems negligible.

No such limit applies to Supernatural Durability by RAW, for direct damage or anything else, so far as I can tell. The upside of this is that the character can stay active, albeit at half Move and with the chance of being crippled. The downside is, as you've noted, it could take much, much longer to heal depending on how far negative you've actually gone.

Removing the downside without also removing the upside is what enhancements are for. If you want monsters that go dormant at -10xHP, but can't actually go any lower, I suppose that could be a +0% modifier, and more true to the vampires that need to be revived from dust or bones with a gout of blood, but if you want to cap starvation (or any other kind of) damage without removing the ability to stay active indefinitely, I'd say it's worth at least +50%.