[Powers] Applying Gadget Limitations to Unkillable Achilles' Heel & Hindrance...

[JCurwen3]

... and disadvantages like Weakness and Vulnerability. For Unkillable's limitations, you'd apply the Gadget limitations to the limitation value (making it smaller). I'm thinking specifically of the Gadget limitations Unique and Breakable.

Would you allow this? Or do it a different way?

I'm thinking of Unkillable characters with a special vulnerability to a certain item, but, for instance, it's just one (or a small, limited number) magical sword (or just one other individual being) that can kill them, and it can be destroyed, and then nothing can kill them anymore at all (if Unique in the Gadget sense) or until the special killing item is rebuilt / re-enchanted / resurrected / reborn (maybe it's like a "one in every generation or century or something") / etc.

Obviously if the thing that they're vulnerable to is Unique (can't be replaced) and it gets destroyed, then the point value of the character goes up (balanced by things like making them take disadvantages, forcing them to pay off the balance before they can advance further, or just handwaiving it depending on the importance of points in the game).

I mean, I guess technically if vampires could only be killed by stakes made from pine wood, one might eventually get the idea to systematically burn down every pine tree and piece of pine wood, but that's getting into the realm of incredulity and doesn't count as a lesser limitation I'd think.

For a fictional example think of The Vampire Diaries Original vampires that are Unkillable 2 (Achilles' Heel, Stakes made of wood from a specific ancient white oak tree; Hindrance, Limited number of irreplaceable enchanted daggers dipped in the ash of aforementioned tree; No Unkillable 1). They can only be killed by a stake of the wood of the ancient tree that they were created under, and barring that they can be kept in Unkillable 2 indestructible dead body mode via one of those few special daggers after it's been dipped in a bit of that (dwindling) ash from the original tree.

[the_matrix_walker]

This seems like allot of needless bookkeeping that would not result in a fair value allot of the time at the end. It's far more appropriate to asses the rarity of your Achilles' Heel on it's own merits. Gagdet modifiers are way off base for this as well, their first effect is to externalize the advantage.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by the_matrix_walker

This seems like allot of needless bookkeeping that would not result in a fair value allot of the time at the end. It's far more appropriate to asses the rarity of your Achilles' Heel on it's own merits. Gagdet modifiers are way off base for this as well, their first effect is to externalize the advantage.

You're probably right... I'm overthinking it. Although I still think that if there's only one thing that can kill you and it can be destroyed permanently (or at least for a very long time) it should be worth less than a "Rare" Achilles' Heel, Hindrance, Vulnerability, Weakness, etc.

[the_matrix_walker]

Originally Posted by JCurwen3

You're probably right... I'm overthinking it. Although I still think that if there's only one thing that can kill you and it can be destroyed permanently (or at least for a very long time) it should be worth less than a "Rare" Achilles' Heel, Hindrance, Vulnerability, Weakness, etc.

Some might say this was a power Quirk, kind of an inverted power quirk as nuisance effect, and that's probably the best way to handle it. There is always the old, "destined to be killed by..." whatever, which for some reason is a disadvantage in the old Celtic Myth stuff. If your GM likes it, that might work for you too.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by JCurwen3

You're probably right... I'm overthinking it. Although I still think that if there's only one thing that can kill you and it can be destroyed permanently (or at least for a very long time) it should be worth less than a "Rare" Achilles' Heel, Hindrance, Vulnerability, Weakness, etc.

Yeah but it can't be. Kryptonite or white ash shows up again as soon as the writer finds it convenient. I mean, lets face it, how long did it take before Damon managed to find another source for white ash? Unless the character buys off the weakness entirely, it will still be there no matter what he does to try to destroy it.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Yeah but it can't be. Kryptonite or white ash shows up again as soon as the writer finds it convenient. I mean, lets face it, how long did it take before Damon managed to find another source for white ash? Unless the character buys off the weakness entirely, it will still be there no matter what he does to try to destroy it.

Eh, good point. :-)

Damn that show moves fast...