If you think invincibility is too good, then tell them to make a card like:

Anti-Invincible (Not that name, but you get the point)
Plot Twist
cost 4
Stun target character your opponent controls that has invincibility. You lose endurance equal to the cost of that character.

~Tombster212

As I see it, the only teams potentially hurt in a big way by Invulnerability are the Titans and Sentinels swarms. A lot of people think the TT need a bit of a hamper anyways, and the Sentinels... well... UDE hates them.

Personally, I'm excited for the new keyword. Why? Because it'll force people to play differently. Too many people are single-mindedly focused on the beatdown tradeoff, and that's why some teams look crappy. Teams where you set up for board advantage and a solid strike down in one turn, like Gotham, the Titans curve, X-Men, and Spider-Friends, won't be phased much at all.

If nothing else, I think the non-Revenge Squad teams will help stall games out to later turns, which will force some more different thinking.

Canamrock is right, you're all stressing this mechanic too much. All we know are two mechanics, and what they do. Why not wait until we see what some of the cards are before we start b'tching.

Besides, we haven't seen what Kryptonite does yet. I think that might be your "anti-invulnerability" card...

OK, several people have taken this thread as a gripe, but it is far from it. The point was that UD has made a counter to everything that they have made so far. I just think that there will be a counter, and I was wondering what it might be.

I don't think that invulnerability is broken or will change the game forever; I was just curious as to what people thought might be a good counter.

Fizzle counters tuns of stuff. Have a blast countered locations and on-going plot twists. Utility belt and nice try are good counters for roy and others. Even x-men was given new cards to make them more competetive. I was just curious as to what UD has in mind.

Kairos, thanks for getting my mispelled nickname. Anyways, I'm talking about double breakthrough given to a WEAK character. Not MOJO! Someone who seems a bit weak for their drop. Team attacks doing breakthrough would need to be heavily team-stamped.

If possible, can someone post the new mechanics (or whatever has been presented about the new mechanics).

Thanks for spelling Lakitu wrong!

I mispell everyone's nickname. You aren't the first, so don't take offense.

Besides, it's a lot easier to think of a joke for Lakitu than Latuki.

Anyway, I didn't mean to offend your position, it is just my opinion that a team attacker doing breakthough is no where near as dangerous as a character who does double breakthough.

This is from the perspective of an opponent: I would rather see the other guy drop a team attacker with breakthrough than Double Breakthrough Man. Why? Even if the character is weak, there is the potential that single characer will destroy you. Mojo is statistically weak for a 4 drop. Any character who can do double breakthrough is an instant target to be powered up (not game terminology, I mean Savage Beatdown and Megablast).

Both would need to be a team thing. Team attackers doing breakthrough (and I was thinking one guy who could, not the team) could be team stamped, but is also inherently team stamped (since you need to team attack).

Iron Fist
Danny Rand
5RC
ATK: 7
DEF: 10
F/R: N/N

When Iron First causes breakthrough endurence loss, double that number if his attack has not been modified from it's printed number.

Double breakthrough would not be broken.

-Mike

Here's an explanation of Invulnerability for those who don't know:

Invulnerability: When this character is stunned, its controller does not lose END equal to its cost as normal.

Personally, I don't think there's a good direct counter to this. We have other effects that can work around this very well, however. Batman, Caped Crusader and Green Goblin, Norman Osborn both work around that mechanic perfectly.

Actually, there's a possibility for a card which could work...

4 While They're Down
Plot Twist

Target stunned character's controller loses END equal to its cost. Discard a card unless that character card has the Invulnerabilty keyword printed on it.

Fight fair, why do that when this is so much easier?

Back when I made the nickname, I thought I typed out Lakitu, but I typed Latuki. So you didn't spell it wrong, I did. My fault.

Another one we could do is something like:

5RC
3/8
This character may attack an opponent directly.
This character cannot be targeted by your plot twists or equipped.

Now, that's what I'm talking about. I'm seeing some great ideas that could be used. UD, pay attention. We could see some of these ideas in use some day. Good job gentlemen.

Well, we can throw restrictions on double breakthrough to make it more balanced (for the record, I never have and never will say anything is broken).

There are always problems: cards that do not target, defense lowering cards, etc.

If we are going to talk about restricted cards such as those proposed, I don't think they are applicable to the contentions I have. Let me explain:

Invulnerability is useful on anyone. There is no reason to want to take stun damage. The utility increases with character cost, as more damage is reduced.

If a character to be able to deal double breakthrough as a "counter" to invincibility, it would need to be useful on almost every character. Invulnerability has no downside (that we know of). Double breakthrough would need to not have much of a downside to be a true counter. If a charater with that ability is too statistically weak, he won't be played in the current environment. If he's too strong, he is going to be abused.

Of course, I like the ideas I've seen.

But again, I say if there is a keyword (banding, for example) that was defined, you could see something like this:

Banding: When characters with banding team attack with only other characters that have banding, the team attack deals breakthrough damage.

A good restriction, a keyword ability, a team's theme...I don't think it would be as dangerous as you might fear: reinforcement still stops it, a team attack is usually used so that smaller characters can take out a larger one anyway, and it's heavily restricted to keyword use.

The other point I like about this is that cards like Savage Beatdown would not be the be-all end-all card of the environment, one which lets you jump the curve without team attacking. It might encourage more interesting decks (including weenie decks).

I like banding. I could definitely see that fitting certain characters in the future game. Wonder twins for example would be characters that were pretty much always together. There are others too, but that's just an idea. I really like the idea though. Definitely brings new possibilities to the game.

A big counter to invincibility could be direct damage and direct stun effects. Dust off those Surprise attacks, Prime Sentinels and Sinister Salvos as well as cards like Overload and Fastball Special that stun the character without ever going to combat.

it'll only be an issue if its on weenie characters. if its on a late or at least mid level character (which is what i'm guessing) then its just a solid ability on a character.

just like evasion tends to be on low cost characters to keep then in play for swarm tactics, rather than on big character, i think invulnerablilty will tend to be on big characters rather than low characters, to help with more stall type tactics.

you don't need a "counter" to it. you don't deal some endurance lost. adjust.