11-07-2012, 12:20 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Apr 2012
|
Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
I'm working on a sea serpent that can turn invisible to stalk its prey, but must reappear as it attacks. This would be a glamour; the idea is that when you're in imminent peril, your self-preservation overpowers the illusion. What would be a fair value for this limitation? (I do need to figure out the point total for this since they're going to be hypothetically playable.) It seems like attacking undetected is one of the major advantages of invisibility, but it wouldn't be that hard to circle around while invisible and then attack from the blind spot, so I guess it's not that severe a limitation.
While I'm on the subject, would I need to add an enhancement to make this work underwater, without leaving a suspicious serpent-shaped gap in the water? |
11-07-2012, 01:13 PM | #2 |
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chelyabinsk, Russia
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
I'd say it's no more than -20% because All-out is -25% and it's more limiting.
Underwater only is usually +0% feature.
__________________
MH Setting. Welcome to help. |
11-07-2012, 02:24 PM | #3 |
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dreamland
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
It sounds like a -10%, like a big nuisance effect.
I think you would have to take Underwater on it, if it works underwater also. |
11-07-2012, 02:29 PM | #4 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
You might want "Fringe" for the "hole in the water" effect. It's generally used for "predator shimmer" but this seems like just as good an application.
__________________
All about Size Modifier; Unified Hit Location Table A Wiki for my F2F Group A neglected GURPS blog |
11-07-2012, 03:03 PM | #5 |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
Given that probably one of the most valuable aspects of Invisibility is the ability to attack targets without them getting meaningful Active Defences or being able to strike back without obscene penalties, this seems wrong to me.
Invisibility that doesn't work in combat seems like it would have less than half utility. It certainly wouldn't be nine-tenths as valuable.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
11-07-2012, 03:14 PM | #6 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
I pegged "Dissipates after an attack" (as in it has to be turned back on, possibly taking a turn) at -20%. The way you've worded it, it sounds like your idea doesn't need to be turned back on, it does so automatically, so this would be less.
|
11-07-2012, 10:04 PM | #7 | ||
Join Date: Apr 2012
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
Quote:
Quote:
Seems like the consensus is -20% or less... Last edited by Morathor; 11-07-2012 at 10:16 PM. |
||
11-08-2012, 01:52 AM | #8 | |
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dreamland
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
Quote:
|
|
11-08-2012, 11:39 AM | #9 |
Join Date: Apr 2012
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
I don't think the ability would turn back on automatically; once you've seen through the illusion, the serpent has to re-establish it, which means they get another will roll to resist it. But this is going to be a reflexive ability, so it won't take a turn, and Will-5 is a hard roll to make. So maybe -15%? That would give me a package of Switchable, Reflexive, Glamour (Will-5), and Ended By Attack for a total of +30%.
|
11-08-2012, 01:32 PM | #10 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack
And how is this better than Invisible (Switchable +10%) where you can attack freely while remaining invisible and they don't get a resistance roll at all (even at -5) to penetrate your cloak of invisibility? Obviously, having your ability shut down and make you more vulnerable should lower the point cost instead of raising it. Using Reflexive to turn it back on isn't necessary as you can consider being momentarily visible similar to having your ability cause you to be suddenly noticeable (like a flashy effect going off when you use Telepathy). After all, Reflexive is designed to enhance your ability to act in your benefit without requiring an action on your part. That really isn't happening here since your ability is already in use but periodically doesn't protect you as described by the condition. I would gauge as about a -20% since that's a pretty serious limitation on Invisibility and it seems worse than giving a non-obvious power (such as telepathy) a visible signature (typically -10% or so).
|
Tags |
attack, gurps, invisibility, limitation |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|