High power scaling games shouldn't have 'lol no' abilities.

[Lago PARANOIA]

See the title of the thread. I strongly think that no games in the vein of D&D or Champions should ever have passive defense abilities in them wielded by willful creatures that allow the user to flat-out go 'fuck you, it doesn't work'. If they exist at all, they should only exist in the hands of completely unintelligent things like mountains or fire elements or whatever. And immunity based on tactics should always be on the table -- if you can't fly, then you're immune to bears 99.9% of the time. If you are blind, you are immune to visual figments. Etc.

But otherwise? Most of that crap needs to go.

The intent of that crap is to make it so that 'waste it with my crossbow' isn't always an option and to increase diversity, but in a party-based game in which you fight a wide variety of opposition, making a creature sword-immune or magic-immune or sneak-attack immune doesn't really do the intended job of shaking up tactics. Dave and Sarah and Brian still use the same bog-standard tactics. And unless you're willing to make all of the monsters in the game 2E Rakashas or 3E Demiliches or whatever the fuck, all you're doing is sucking the energy out of combat encounters.

[nockermensch]

In D&D, how bothersome would be to turn "critical immunity" into something like "DR X vs. precision damage"?

And about spells/abilities that render entire schools of magic irrelevant (I'm looking at you, Mind Blank), how about substituting "immune to X" to "gains a +6 bonus on saves vs. X"?

[Omegonthesane]

In D&D, how bothersome would be to turn "critical immunity" into something like "DR X vs. precision damage"?

And about spells/abilities that render entire schools of magic irrelevant (I'm looking at you, Mind Blank), how about substituting "immune to X" to "gains a +6 bonus on saves vs. X"?

I'd be inclined to make that "saves on a 2+" if it's meant to be a "nearly immune" rather than a "increase your actual ability" deal.

[RadiantPhoenix]

And about spells/abilities that render entire schools of magic irrelevant (I'm looking at you, Mind Blank), how about substituting "immune to X" to "gains a +6 bonus on saves vs. X"?

I'd go with +10, at least.

[...You Lost Me]

I think "lol no" abilities are great, especially on PCs, because it lets you wade through mooks and that feels awesome. Those kinds of abilities should definitely be partitioned and tightly controlled, but I don't think they should be removed altogether. I'd even go as far as to say the game is worse without them.

[CCarter]

The problem with most 'lolno' abilities is if they're fixed cost, whereas opponents may put much larger point or level investments into attacking, to the point where they can't do anything else. So if the level-12 archer is defeated by wind wall, or the level 20 beguiler is stopped dead by one Mind Blank or whatever, its as they say Smash Bros. time.

I think you should be able get PCs to change their tactics with an immunity if it shuts down one of their usual tactics, just not if it shuts down all of them at once. Its like the old saying 'if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail'. A PC who only has a hammer will keep hitting things with it despite it not working, while if they have a variety of options an immunity to one encourages them to try something else.

[Foxwarrior]

The "guess which spell Steve isn't immune to and cast it" game stops being fun when content bloat makes some Constructs start looking like people before they put on makeup.

And most of the fun tactical games I know of keep the tactics new and interesting by having a variety of objectives and environments, not by using immunities to create some sort of impromptu variable banlist.

[hogarth]

I've never been a big fan of puzzle monsters. And that doesn't just apply to puzzle defenses, but puzzle attacks too. "You don't have Death Ward? LOL!!"

[Whipstitch]

Yeah, it's also one of the umpteen things that helps make the caster>you issue as bad as it is in D&D given that non-casters can rarely nab niche defenses ala carte like a Cleric can just by back filling their unused spell slots for the day. Honestly, without a full caster around I often don't really bother volunteering to scout all that much as a rogue given that getting separated from the group can be really bad and the fact that a melee pain train can't change up their tactics that much in any case.

[Wrathzog]

I like this thread. This is a good thread.

[Kaelik]

I've never been a big fan of puzzle monsters. And that doesn't just apply to puzzle defenses, but puzzle attacks too. "You don't have Death Ward? LOL!!"

There is a difference between puzzle monsters and lol no defenses. Windwall isn't a puzzle monster, the very first time it is cast you make the really easy spellcraft check and you know exactly what it does.

Puzzle monsters are puzzle monsters because the knowledge check to know the same thing is absurd. It is the difference in information that makes something a puzzle X vs a lol no.

lol nos are good for players, because it is one fewer thing the player needs to worry about killing them all the time. It is a good thing for monsters because it makes the monsters more epic, and as long as the players have the ability to defeat it, they feel more epic that way.

I mean, flying is the most basic lol no that exists. How many people are really upset by players flying and killing things or by the idea of Dragons that strafe and don't land?

The problem is that lol nos are bad when they are a complete mystery, and they are bad when the players can't beat them. The solution is to make real characters that can beat them not to 4e the game.

[Omegonthesane]

I mean, flying is the most basic lol no that exists. How many people are really upset by players flying and killing things or by the idea of Dragons that strafe and don't land?

Not Lago, apparently - he explicitly called out implicit "lol no" abilities that result from your tactics rather than being always on as something that should be on the table.

[ishy]

Ain't the problem that quite a few classes / characters just can't do jack outside of their narrow niche?

Lol-no abilities are one of the few things that actually give a feeling of level progression instead of just a number treadmill.

You just need to be careful with which lol-no abilities you implement. For example I don't think anyone has a problem with high level people being flat out immune to normal diseases.

[DSMatticus]

I mean, flying is the most basic lol no that exists. How many people are really upset by players flying and killing things or by the idea of Dragons that strafe and don't land?

Not Lago, apparently - he explicitly called out implicit "lol no" abilities that result from your tactics rather than being always on as something that should be on the table.

Flight isn't a tactic. Or rather, it's not the result of a tactic. It's an ability, and you can choose to use it in any given situation, and that's tactical. But the actual thing that puts flight on your character sheet is not normally tactical, it's an ability. "Being faster than the other dude" is also an ability people have, which is the 2d equivalent of flight.

Honestly, this whole thread is kind of dumb. Your game either has lolno abilities or it's even simpler than 4e, complete with dragons landing next to the fighter to ask politely if the fighter would be so kind as to stab them. Now, "supported character archetypes should not be shutdown entirely by the lolno abilities of level appropriate opposition" is a much more solid statement. So solid I don't think you'd find anyone here to oppose it, which brings us back to this thread being dumb.

Lolno's that serve as a "you must be this tall to ride" benchmark are fine. Lolno's that act as narrow counters without shutting down a character archetype entirely are also quite doable.

[Lago PARANOIA]

I was trying to draw a distinction between crap like Death Ward and minor tactical inconveniences like flight. Because stuff like flight or invisibility isn't a 'you win against this tactic forever no matter who your opponent is'. It's only lol no until your opponent reveals that they can fly or have tremorsense 500' or whatever.

I was thinking stuff more like Mind Blank or Protection from Evil or True Seeing. Unfortunately I phrased it in an inartful way. Maybe I should have said 'asymmetric lol no abilities'?

[DSMatticus]

I'd point out that your solution to flight and invisibility as lolno abilities was to give people lolyes abilities, like how the Firemage has the ability to bypass fire resistance and fire immunity.

Which means what you're really saying is "lolno abilities should not entirely shut down level appropriate opposition, there are lolno abilities which fail that test, and that's bad," which is, again, a different and almost universally agreed upon claim.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Like I said, couldn't think of a better way to phrase that.

[Midnight_v]

Well... can we get a specific example of LOLno abilities?

The reason I say this is because of Lolwin abilities can be pretty damned horrible when they work often enough...
For example: Professor Xavier.
This is a comic example so to define where pointing at him being at his most powerful telepathy set up ever (no exceptions for the sake of argument)
Basically, he wins at everything forever. The only people who get to play the game then are people playing the exact same game (phoenix, shadowking, maybe Doc Strange or in dc the Martian Manhunter, and his fellows etc).
Initially, comic book people for years didn't think in terms of "Telepathy/Dominate" would be the most powerful thing ever... but basically everyone from superman to iron man to reed richards, and the forces of shield slowly receive retcons and/or upgrades by which they are able to exist because of "Lolno" effects.

While that sucks... Magneto and Ironman is a no brainier fro a long time then ironman goes and gets "Carbon nanotube fiber" to be immune to magnetism or what not.

There's a lot of things that just insta-gib you, so what would be the solution to that?

[RobbyPants]

I was trying to draw a distinction between crap like Death Ward and minor tactical inconveniences like flight. Because stuff like flight or invisibility isn't a 'you win against this tactic forever no matter who your opponent is'. It's only lol no until your opponent reveals that they can fly or have tremorsense 500' or whatever.

I was thinking stuff more like Mind Blank or Protection from Evil or True Seeing. Unfortunately I phrased it in an inartful way. Maybe I should have said 'asymmetric lol no abilities'?

In addition to DSM's suggestion on lolyes abilities, the other solution is to give people other abilities so they aren't shut down by one thing.

Fire immunity? Give the pyromancer smoke and ash abilities.

Mind Blank? Don't just rely on [mind affecting] spells to do your dirty work. Or if you do, keep a dominated minion handy to deal with stuff.

Death Ward? Use disease, poison, or acid. Or undead minions.

It's quite doable.

[hogarth]

Death Ward? Use disease, poison, or acid. Or undead minions.

Just to clarify: my complaint about Death Ward is not that I think that it's unfair for PCs to use. I'm complaining about encounters that are balanced using the assumption that every PC has access to Death Ward but without Death Ward are much more deadly. Likewise with other all-or-nothing defenses like See Invisibility or Magic Circle Against Evil or Heroes' Feast (or Daylight, to counter Deeper Darkness).

I should point out that this mostly applies to published adventures and organized play; otherwise, if your GM is throwing invisible armies against you and he knows you don't have any way to counter it, he's just being a dick.

[RobbyPants]

Death Ward? Use disease, poison, or acid. Or undead minions.

Just to clarify: my complaint about Death Ward is not that I think that it's unfair for PCs to use. I'm complaining about encounters that are balanced using the assumption that every PC has access to Death Ward but without Death Ward are much more deadly. Likewise with other all-or-nothing defenses like See Invisibility or Magic Circle Against Evil or Heroes' Feast (or Daylight, to counter Deeper Darkness).

I should point out that this mostly applies to published adventures and organized play; otherwise, if your GM is throwing invisible armies against you and he knows you don't have any way to counter it, he's just being a dick.

That wasn't a response to your complaint about Death Ward; I was telling Lago that it's possible to come up with ways around the immunities and that it can be just fine for the game.

So long as an entire character isn't shut down by one monster, I don't care if that monster can shut down part of what a character can do; even if it's his main shtick.

[zugschef]

I think that the case of mind blank illustrates the following problem pretty well: At a specific level you need specific types of "lol no"-abilities to prevent the game from breaking down (scry 'n die, cop, etc. in the case of mind blank).

the point probably is that the specific "lol no"-abilities must become available to pcs after the point where the real threats are rendered obsolete by them. your "lol no"-abilities function as a "you have to be this tall"-limiter and a tool for just skipping lower level stuff. as long as they stay with these two functions they're fine.

[Josh_Kablack]

See the title of the thread. I strongly think that no games in the vein of D&D or Champions should ever have passive defense abilities in them wielded by willful creatures that allow the user to flat-out go 'fuck you, it doesn't work'. If they exist at all, they should only exist in the hands of completely unintelligent things like mountains or fire elements or whatever.

When you said "Champions" you confused me.

In a typical 60 active point/12d6 campaign a 72 PD makes your character immune to normal damage physical attacks (aside from haymakers, pushing, movethroughs, knockback / being dropped from heights and adjustment power abuse). However in that sort of campaign, it is strongly recommended that PD be capped at 30, which takes immunity off the table - as a 12d6 attack will average 42 Stun for 12 points of Stun damage through soak. Now by combining high defenses with Damage Reduction and or healing/adjustment powers, you can build characters who are nigh-immune, cutting that 12 average down to 6 or 3 average or 12taken, but 2d6 auto-healed or the like. So for that, the system meets your request for no immunity - you cannot actually make a fire elemental who never takes damage from fire, just one who is extremely resistant to it and/or gains other benefits while taking fire damage. But for the game to have those properties you have to abide by certain limits on points. If your group capped attacks lower and defenses higher, then being mathematically immune would be on the menu.

Additionally in Champions, you totally can buy special defenses that make you mathematically immune to various exotic attacks. Buying 30 points of Power Defense makes you mathematically immune to the 4d6 of Transfer that 60 points gets an attacker, In 4th edition it was possible to do similar things with Flash Defense vs Flash and in 4th and 5th it happened with Mental Defense+Ego vs Mind Control / Mental Illusions.

On top of that you have a number of specific counters, some of which make you actually immune (Automaton vs Mental Powers / Stun Damage), some of which make you immune aside from silver bullets (Desolid or Teleport vs Grab / Entangle ) some of which make you not care even about taking the damage (having Daredevil's targeting Radar Sense against a visual Flash) and some of which let you spend action to negate damage in a probabilistic not-actually-immune way (Missile Deflection vs ranged attack, Martial Block vs melee attack)

On top of that you have a number of competing advantages and adders on attacks and defenses. Armor Piecing and Penetrating let you reduce or ignore defenses. Hardened means that armor can't be reduced nor ignored. You have NND attacks which replace the standard soak mechanic with an all-or-nothing check if the target has a nonstandard defense. You also have the even more expensive AVLD attacks which substitute a nonstandard exotic defense for the standard soak; You can buy Entangles which specifically Affect Desolid (Ghost Busters) or others which cannot be escaped via teleportation (Paralysis-type effects) -- but the teleporter can then buy Armor Piercing Teleportation to teleport through those.

...and so on and so forth...., it's a system where it's easy to be nigh-immune, hard to be totally immune to common effects, not impossible to be immune to uncommon effects, but possible to build powers which get around an immunity, and then possible to build powers that negate the getting around that immunity.

tl;dr Having personally played too much Champions I have no idea what you meant by that example.

[hogarth]

your "lol no"-abilities function as a "you have to be this tall"-limiter and a tool for just skipping lower level stuff. as long as they stay with these two functions they're fine.

Skipping lower level stuff makes some kind of sense. But the "you have to be this tall" usage is just the same sort of stupid specious circular reasoning that says you have to have rogues so that your party can disarm traps and you need to have traps so that rogues have something to do.

[RobbyPants]

your "lol no"-abilities function as a "you have to be this tall"-limiter and a tool for just skipping lower level stuff. as long as they stay with these two functions they're fine.

Skipping lower level stuff makes some kind of sense. But the "you have to be this tall" usage is just the same sort of stupid specious circular reasoning that says you have to have rogues so that your party can disarm traps and you need to have traps so that rogues have something to do.

The nice thing about "you have to be this tall" abilities is that you can create situations where you need heroes to kill dragons and not armies of tiny men.

Also, these are not the same things. It's possible to design a game where everyone gets the appropriate abilities at certain level bench marks. Something like trap disarming isn't a "this tall to ride" ability; it's a very specific type of ability. If trap-disarming were put somewhere on the continuum of "this tall to ride", it would come at the same level as the barbarian's trap-smashing ability, and the summoner's mook-summoning ability, and the druid's wood wose ability.