-100% Limitation and Multiplicative Modifiers

[Humabout]

A method that's been mentioned a few times on here of which I am a fan when the enhancements and limitations start stacking up works thus: Capping any single, non-leveled limitation at -80%, multiply the sum of the enhancements by the product of the limitations (treat each level of a limitation as its own limitation for this purpose). Then multiply the advantage's cost by one plus your result.

The benefit is that every limitation contributes to the point reduction. The drawback is that you still need to cap individual limitations at -80%; thankfully, there are few such limitations available.

[PK]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

I'm building a power based on Create with Transmutation Only, which is a -100% limitation (P94), but we're using Multiplicative Modifiers. So, with MM, it's pointless taking any further limitations that I might want to add, say Takes Prep or Accessibility, to model the power properly.

You're misunderstanding that bit. The value of Transmutation is equal to (+50% * the number of transmutations), and then you reduce that by a flat -100% if you can only transmute.

So it's not like "Transmute Solid to Gas" is +50% and then "Transmutation Only" is a separate, -100% limitation. The way it works is that "Transmute Solid to Gas Only" is a single -50% modifier. And "Transmute Solid to Gas, or Gas to Solid, Only" is a single +0% modifier, etc.

In general, what's a way to make MM work in a more friendly way with the -80% cap on limitations?

With MM, the -80% limit is per limitation instead of overall. So let's say you really did have a -100% limitation, like "Costs Fatigue, 20 FP, -100%". For the purpose of MM, you treat it like a -80% limitation.

(Arguably, you could keep things more fair by breaking it into two limitations, a -80% one and a -20% one, but what's important is that you respect the -80% limit.)

Originally Posted by roguebfl

No CGA is right that es EXACTLY how Powers does

Nope. And frankly, everyone needs to understand that GCA does things in the manner which makes it simplest for GCA. Treating it as a separate limitation is a lot easier in the program than trying to recreate a complex build of multiple forms of transmutation. That doesn't mean it's a perfect map. I love GCA and use it for every character, but I'd never, ever treat it as a rules reference or trust that anything it allows is necessarily RAW.

[Daigoro]

Originally Posted by Rev. Pee Kitty

You're misunderstanding that bit. The value of Transmutation is equal to (+50% * the number of transmutations), and then you reduce that by a flat -100% if you can only transmute.

So it's not like "Transmute Solid to Gas" is +50% and then "Transmutation Only" is a separate, -100% limitation. The way it works is that "Transmute Solid to Gas Only" is a single -50% modifier. And "Transmute Solid to Gas, or Gas to Solid, Only" is a single +0% modifier, etc.

Yeah, it's looking that way, and it looks like I'll have to wrestle with GCA to get it to play nice by adding those 3 as separate variants of Transmute Only.

With MM, the -80% limit is per limitation instead of overall. So let's say you really did have a -100% limitation, like "Costs Fatigue, 20 FP, -100%". For the purpose of MM, you treat it like a -80% limitation.

Really? That's quite different to what Powers says-

Originally Posted by Powers p104

Then total the limitations (reducing any total over -80% to -80%) and apply them to the result.

which reads to me as the total of all limitations is capped at -80%, not each individual one.

Actually, I don't get how you mean this to work, unless you're using full multiplicative mods, ie a 100pt advantage, -80% for first big limitation = 20pts, -80% for second big limitation = 4pts.

And frankly, everyone needs to understand that GCA does things in the manner which makes it simplest for GCA. Treating it as a separate limitation is a lot easier in the program than trying to recreate a complex build of multiple forms of transmutation. That doesn't mean it's a perfect map. I love GCA and use it for every character, but I'd never, ever treat it as a rules reference or trust that anything it allows is necessarily RAW.

Sure, it's just in this case it was agreeing with my initial interpretation of the modifier. It is a handy first-glance reference though, you just have to know when to look deeper.

[PK]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

Really? That's quite different to what Powers says-

Argh, sorry. I recently got into a debate about using truly multiplicative modifiers (that is, add 1.0 to every modifier, then go through and multiply the advantage by every single modifier individually), and I had that on the brain.

With the official-yet-incredibly-optional MM rules, yes, you reduce the total limitation value to -80% if it's over -80%. And yes, that means that you have absolutely no incentive to every take more than -80% in limitations with MM, which is one of the many things I dislike about it. Please ignore everything else I had to say on MM, as my brain was shifted over to the wrong setting.

[cmdicely]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

Hmm.. complicated, and it means MM can give a lower minimum than Additive Mods.

I am the person that first proposed the "renormalize at -80%" approach (as far as I know, at least), and its not specific to MM. Part of the point is to turn the -80% "minimum" (for either multiplicative or additive modifiers) into a point of diminishing returns rather than a minimum.

Its perhaps somewhat more likely to be attractive with multiplicative modifiers because enhancements in that scheme can result in very high "minimums" if you apply a -80% limit, and because you hit the minimum sooner in the common case of applying limitations to offset enhancements. But conceptually, its not tied to the choice of multiplicative modifiers.

[Daigoro]

Originally Posted by Rev. Pee Kitty

Argh, sorry. I recently got into a debate about using truly multiplicative modifiers (that is, add 1.0 to every modifier, then go through and multiply the advantage by every single modifier individually), and I had that on the brain.

That's good, I thought I'd slipped into an alternative gurpsiverse.

With the official-yet-incredibly-optional MM rules, yes, you reduce the total limitation value to -80% if it's over -80%. And yes, that means that you have absolutely no incentive to every take more than -80% in limitations with MM, which is one of the many things I dislike about it. Please ignore everything else I had to say on MM, as my brain was shifted over to the wrong setting.

I like it with high level enhancements because it makes limitations mean something, but it's a bugger at the lower end of the scale. What other "many things" could there be to dislike?