Immunity: Armored

[RainOnTheSun]

How much would you charge for the ability to be immune to everything a tank should be immune to? I figure that would be:

Unarmed attacks from non-powered characters

Attacks from most weapons bought as equipment

What it WOULDN'T be immune to would be:

Attacks bought as powers, including super-strength

Equipment with the Penetrating extra

Naturally, since this is mostly designed to model tanks, the rule of thumb would be "should this attack work on a tank?"

Does this seem like it's reasonable to price as immunity to a common power descriptor (10 points)? A very common power descriptor (20 points)? Somewhere in between? More than a very common power descriptor?

[Shock]

In a world with consistent damage levels that make sense, why wouldn't this be covered by Impervious Toughness? I mean, if Impervious worked in a useful manner. I'd say you'd probably want Immunity to damage below rank 8. That should cover a heavy machine gun and everything weaker.

[catsi563]

Im with shock most of this would be covered by impervious toughness, a tank will shrug off most anything that isnt high damage or anti tank in nature

[RainOnTheSun]

The problem with Impervious Toughness, even if it did work in a useful manner - which, as you've noted, it doesn't, RAW - is Power Attack. If you have immunity to damage below rank 8, a character with Strength 3 or a light pistol can Power Attack for 5 and blow right through it. I also want something that makes more of a distinction between different types of weapons than Impervious does.

[Davies]

What would you say to Immunity 20 (bludgeoning), Limited to Half Effect -- so that even that Power Attacking Strength 3 guy forces a DC 19 save, but the Power Attacking Strength 12 guy causes one at DC 23 -- plus Immunity 20 (small arms)? Assuming the tank has Toughness 12 ...

[Shock]

I waffle back and forth on whether I think Power attack should be able to overcome Impervious. Most things with Impervious still have weak points. Tanks have viewports that can be targeted for instance. But most of the time, I think that it just shouldn't work.

[Ken]

Man, I must be doing something wrong. In the 11 years my friends and I have been using M&M, Impervious has worked fine for us.

[RainOnTheSun]

What would you say to Immunity 20 (bludgeoning), Limited to Half Effect -- so that even that Power Attacking Strength 3 guy forces a DC 19 save, but the Power Attacking Strength 12 guy causes one at DC 23 -- plus Immunity 20 (small arms)? Assuming the tank has Toughness 12 ...

Hm, Immunity (small arms) is probably simpler and more elegant than what I was messing around with, but 20 points when bullet immunity is 5 points feels like way too much to me. I probably wouldn't charge more than 10 for it, myself.

That, or I could just use Impervious and figure out how much Immunity to Power Attack should cost...

[Davies]

A laser/maser/lightning/pulson pistol is also a small arm.

Immunity (Power Attack) is probably worth as much as Immunity (critical hit). Make of that what you will.

[greycrusader]

I think what's clear here is that 1) Impervious was watered down too much in 3e, and should really either cost just 1 PP/rank or use its full rank against Damaging attacks, and 2) Maybe too many GMs are allowing characters to take Power Attack even if the character concept really doesn't justify the feat. Maybe as a few have suggested in the past, Power Attack should be ranked, with a +2/+5 circumstance bonus to Damage.