I'm a long-time dnd player, but am struggling with some of the MnM 3e concepts. I've been searching online for some of the answers or even an example of how these rules come into play, but I'm struggling to find it. I had a couple of questions about the game:

1. The Mind Reading power states that "To use Mind Reading, make an opposed effect check against the result of the target’s Will check." If a character has Mind-Reading 10, does that put the DC to 20 (10 base + 10 ranks)? Is the opposed check then if the target of the power can roll a d20 + Will Defense and beat a DC 20?

My confusion is that I usually think of opposed checks as both sides need to roll (like Stealth vs. Perception).

2. I'm not sure I understand how "damage" works. Bear with me, I'm used to hit points and there isn't anything like that in MnM. Let me pose an example to see if I understand this right. A superhero with Str 10 goes to punch a villain (unarmed +10). He has to roll a d20 + 10 to beat 10 + the villain's Parry defense (let's say that's an 8 for a total of 18). So our superhero rolls a 12 and hits! So then the villain has to make a Toughness check (let's say his toughness is 9) vs. DC 25 (15 base + 10 Str). If the villain rolls a 6 (15 total), that is two degrees of failure: dazed and -1 to future checks.

If the villain in the above example had a force shield 11, impervious, he would take no damage from the attack (since the damage is less than the ranks of the force shield).

3. For a mental blast, do you just forgo the attack roll and then go right to the "damage" check? If it was Mental Blast 6, it would be the villain's Will vs. DC 21 (15 base + 6 ranks). Same damage rules apply based on the result.

Sorry for the very basic questions. I didn't think I understood damage, but just going through that example, I can see how the penalties will stack up pretty quickly and you'll be incapacitated soon enough if you get hit too much. Thanks in advance for your help!

Don't have the book with me right now, but I'm pretty sure you're correct on 2 and 3. That's why mental attacks are so expensive, they default to perception range, meaning they never miss. Also, yes, if you get hit a lot, the penalties can start stacking fast.

On 1, I don't recall exactly how opposed checks work in M&M3. My gut says opposed normally means both roll, so it's 1d20+ 10 (your ranks) vs 1d20+ Will bonus. That seems to line up with the wording you quoted above.

Impervious reads as follows: " Any effect with a resistance difficulty modifier equal to or less than half the Impervious rank (rounded up) has no effect."

Therefore, the villain would still have to roll Toughness since the damage effect is 10. The villain automatically succeeds at any damage check against Damage 6 or lower (half the Impervious rank rounded up).

Mental Blast does forgo the attack roll and goes straight to the Damage check. The save is still 21, just a Will save instead of Toughness, and same damage rules do apply.

The reason the Mental Blast is an "auto-hit" is because it's Perception Range. Offensive abilities usually have one of three ranges: Close (melee), Ranged, and Perception. Ranged is for something that requires aim or targeting, like shooting a gun or an energy blast, and therefore requires an attack roll.

Perception range means if you can clearly tell where it is through some kind of accurate sense, you can automatically affect it. You don't have to aim, you just will it to happen. For most characters, this means if you can see it, you can hit it.

Good to know about damage. I initially thought it was going to be too easy to incapacitate someone, but as I wrote the post and read through the rules again, I could see it was going to be harder than I initially thought. Thanks for confirming!

As for 1, hmm, that sounds more right that what I was suggesting. It still doesn't sound right because I would think they would use their Defense Class (with is Will + 10). Maybe it's the DC + d20 against Defense Class + d20? That would be 1d20+20 vs. 1d20+10 + enemy's Will. That might be more of a fair opposed check.



Whoa, totally missed that. Thank you!

Okay, that makes sense. Thank you for the clarification!

It's actually exactly like Kaitou Kage explained. Furthermore, what you propose is exactly the same with the sole difference that you're adding 10 on both sides.
The wording you quoted is explained by:
d20+10 vs. d20+will

whereas you propose

d20+10+10 vs. d20+will+10.

I see...that makes perfect sense. I think I'm good now. Thanks!