Repricing Innate Attack

[Varyon]

Something brought up in the AotW thread was the idea Innate Attack may be priced too low. Rather than continue the derailment there, I opted to create a new thread.

Personally, I'm not convinced Innate Attack is indeed priced too low, but assuming it is, what's a more appropriate price?

I suggested there that IA pricing probably shouldn't go above [20] for 1d cr, comparable to the price you'd pay to add +1d to thr for a single attack using Striking ST, although I now realize this was a mathematical error - Striking ST +7 (Single Attack -60%) should cost [15], not [21]. Now, IA is Ranged, but it also is unable to use a weapon to enhance damage (either with a straight bonus or even upgrading from thr to sw); that's something like Ranged +40% with No Fine Manipulators -40%, canceling out.

Note with Innate Attack at [15] per 1d cr it's very nearly equal in price to the general DR needed to negate it. Innate Attack 10d cr [150] costs the same as DR 30 [150], letting 5 points through on an average roll. Negating just the relevant type of damage makes it cheaper. For example, consider a character with a TK blast that deals 10d cr with Range 10/100, and that can repurpose this (via Alternate Abilities) to create a TK shield that protects against crushing attacks. The latter would be DR (Force Field +20%; Crushing Only -40%; Alternate Ability x1/5) [0.8]/level, meaning it could be DR 35 [28] with a little change to spare - although if it isn't a force field, you could go up to DR 50.

If 1d cr costs [15], we'd need to adjust the other versions as well. Going with x3, that's [9] for pi-, [12] for tox, [15] for burn/cr/pi, [18] for pi+, [21] for cut, [24] for imp/pi++, and [30] for corr/fat; I presume these would end up as [10], [12], [15], [18], [20], [25], and [30], respectively.

For those who feel IA is underpriced, do these prices look more fair?

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Something brought up in the AotW thread was the idea Innate Attack may be priced too low. Rather than continue the derailment there, I opted to create a new thread.

The first thing you need to address is: priced too low for what? By what do you judge a fair price?

I, for one, reject the "character points as units of utility" argument, as they clearly are not just that. What about desired rarity (e.g., Combat Reflexes)? What about simulationism (e.g., skills)? What about setting assumptions (e.g., slap an Unusual Background requirement on any Innate Attacks)?

[Aldric]

I was actually making the opposite point on that thread, that, for my particular purpose, an Innate Attacks was too costly for what I got from it. (At the same time, Innate Attack with ST based was actually too cheap compared (for example) to a Striker

[Daigoro]

Start by reworking the ST damage tables.

As far as I know, the progression for Thr and Sw damage on the ST tables is an arbitrary, gamist construction, where a player can see a clean link between how many points they spend and what they get for it.

However, we have two points of reference to reality that we can work from. ST gives an objectively measurable BL rating, and guns have an objectively measurable amount of DR penetration (1" of steel is DR70, or whatever it happens to be).

Take those figures, and derive how much damage a person with certain BLs does to a steel plate, giving us a reality-based ST damage table. If we keep the point cost for ST as 10/lvl, then we have a basis for a unified theory of how much 1d of damage should cost in CP.

[RedMattis]

The real issue is that Innate attacks, DR, et. al. don't scale with the setting's TL and theme.

An Innate Attack is awesome relative to its cost in a TL3 campaign. Pretty good in a TL8 spy game. Okay in a TL8 military/tech heavy game. Absolute garbage in a TL12 game that lets characters stop around with the shiny new military toys.

High levels of ST is even worse. It is absolutely absurdly crappy at high TLs. Especially compared to picking up stuff like Charisma, Mind Control, or even stuff like Combat Reflexes/dodge.

[Anthony]

At TL 3, I find it works to just say "You may not spend more points on a single Innate Attack than your Striking ST".

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by RedMattis

The real issue is that Innate attacks, DR, et. al. don't scale with the setting's TL and theme.

So? Innate Attack fails to scale equally across the setting. It's completely irrelevant that my mages with Innate Attacks get them relatively cheaply for the amount of damage they do in my TL3 setting, while in your TL10 setting Innate Attacks don't do very much at all for their price. Since the two settings aren't mixing, comparing the costs doesn't matter at all.

But if our settings ARE mixing, well, then one of us is either High TL or Low TL and gets the benefit or detriment of that advantage or disadvantage. Innate Attack is still priced fairly in that it's either effective or not effective equally between TLs.

The purpose of character points is to provide a fair selection of traits for characters, not to objectively measure utility across game worlds.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

Start by reworking the ST damage tables.

This is something I could get behind, although if you're trying to do it based on how much steel a person can realistically punch through, I think you're going to be rather disappointed. Still this isn't a bad option for that.

Originally Posted by RedMattis

The real issue is that Innate attacks, DR, et. al. don't scale with the setting's TL and theme.

Indeed. The more readily technology is capable of being a stand-in for such Advantages, the less useful they are at full price. And you're absolutely right to make note of the setting's theme - innate DR is probably more worthwhile in a TL 10 setting revolving around a boxing championship than in a TL 3 setting revolving around merchants (indeed, given a boxer wouldn't have the option of wearing armor, an argument could be made it's more useful there than in a TL 3 campaign focusing on knights in a tourney).

Originally Posted by RedMattis

High levels of ST is even worse. It is absolutely absurdly crappy at high TLs. Especially compared to picking up stuff like Charisma, Mind Control, or even stuff like Combat Reflexes/dodge.

That's fairly setting-dependent, but in general, I'd say you're right. Lifting ST usually is still useful - you can carry more of the absurdly-powerful gadgets (or more-absurdly-powerful ones), wear markedly more DR (provided it's weight-limited rather than volume-limited), etc. You don't get much use out of Striking ST, unless the GM has things setup for you to need to wield rather heavy blasters (Striking ST is needed to meet MinST requirements), and HP's a joke, given anything able to get past your armor will reduce you to red mist once it does.

Originally Posted by Anthony

At TL 3, I find it works to just say "You may not spend more points on a single Innate Attack than your Striking ST".

What do you mean by this? Would a character with ST 15 be limited to [15] (the score of his Striking ST), [25] (the cost of +5 Striking ST), or something else?

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

So?

The issue here is more that a TL 12 cyborg with a built-in grazer pistol (built as an Advantage) is paying a massive amount of points for something a TL 12 human can just go to the local gun store and pick up for a small amount of cash. A character with the same ability at TL 3 would pay the same amount for it, despite it outperforming basically everything that exists. Of course, most GM's wouldn't allow the latter build - or would charge one heck of an Unusual Background - but it's still something of a design issue.

[AlexanderHowl]

Generally why I allow characters to purchase in-built equipment as Signature Gear as long as they have sufficient Payload to house it. Of course, at Spaceships scale, it is generally cheaper to buy it as an advantage, but it depends.

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by Varyon

The issue here is more that a TL 12 cyborg with a built-in grazer pistol (built as an Advantage) is paying a massive amount of points for something a TL 12 human can just go to the local gun store and pick up for a small amount of cash. A character with the same ability at TL 3 would pay the same amount for it, despite it outperforming basically everything that exists.

But the point is it doesn't matter at all, because the cyborg and the human never get together to see who has the better deal. There's no absolute standard of how capable you should be based on a given number of character points.

To put it another way: an average starting character from TL0 can only afford a stone knife as a weapon, while an average starting character from TL8 can afford a gun. One is clearly superior to the other. But the average enemy facing the TL0 character will also have only a stone knife, while the average enemy facing the TL8 character will also have a gun. Compared to everyone that matters, the resource doesn't need to scale. It covers everyone in the setting.

Character points do not equal absolute utility. They are a metacurrency that tries to keep things fair and operating within expected norms within a single game. How useful they are in your game does not equal how useful they are in my game.