6e: Defense Misunderstanding

[Greywind]

Re: 6e: Defense Misunderstanding

 

I rather like games with these "low" defenses. They encourage people to get out of the way of attacks, use their surroundings, spend points on special defenses that go a long way toward flavoring your character, and all that good stuff.

 

Other people prefer games where the heroes and villains stand toe to toe slugging it out. That's cool, too. Just not my cup of tea.

Depends on the character concept.

[Vanguard]

Re: 6e: Defense Misunderstanding

 

Well, I think it's fine for many character types to have low defenses - speedsters, ranged types, martial artists, mentalists, most gadgeteers. It's just that "standing toe to toe" is pretty much the archetype of a Brick. I'd say that a "Brick" who focused on dodging attacks and using their surrounding to get out of the way is really more of a martial artist, or at least a hybrid.

 

And sure, those defenses don't have to be on all the time. But I think if a GM was using the guidelines as a hard cap, then having higher defenses in a multipower wouldn't fly either.

 

Hehe, what about the brick that "gets out of the way" by ripping up a section of the street to block the incoming Blast attack.

[Greywind]

Re: 6e: Defense Misunderstanding

 

Or the handy car.