[PU4] Balance check

[Donny Brook]

I just used the rules in Power-Ups 4: Enhancements (page 10) to add an Enhancement to my rifle damage.

The rifle does 7d piercing damage, but with +P ammo can reach 9d. That gives a modifiable base cost of 9 x 6cp = 54. The modifier is worth +50%, so the final cost of the Enhancement is [27]. So far so good.

But is the result balanced? I applied the Long Range enhancement, which converts the rifle range penalties from the Speed/Distance table to the Long Distance Table. Now 27 points isn't cheap, but no range penalties out to 200yds and max penalty of -3 at the weapon's full range seems powerful. Any thoughts?

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

I just used the rules in Power-Ups 4: Enhancements (page 10) to add an Enhancement to my rifle damage.

The rifle does 7d piercing damage, but with +P ammo can reach 9d. That gives a modifiable base cost of 9 x 6cp = 54. The modifier is worth +50%, so the final cost of the Enhancement is [27]. So far so good.

But is the result balanced? I applied the Long Range enhancement, which converts the rifle range penalties from the Speed/Distance table to the Long Distance Table. Now 27 points isn't cheap, but no range penalties out to 200yds and max penalty of -3 at the weapon's full range seems powerful. Any thoughts?

For this example the basic question is if reducing a -12 penalty to a -3 for 27 points on one dedicated weapon is balanced? +9 skill that works on any weapon would only cost 36 points. Paying 27 for that to effectively only works on one seems a bit high, since you probably won't have it all the time, could lose the advantage if the gun is taken/destroyed, and will probably be used by an enemy at some point.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by naloth

For this example the basic question is if reducing a -12 penalty to a -3 for 27 points on one dedicated weapon is balanced?

The GM may also want to know how this is justified in-setting. I certainly would.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by johndallman

The GM may also want to know how this is justified in-setting. I certainly would.

Yes, indeed.

[Phantasm]

Also, as a GM I'd ask why are you building a rifle with points instead of with cash? (Note that "in order to alter my rifle in ways that the system doesn't have gear modification rules for" may be valid, but "to break the system" is not, in my book at any rate.)


I should also note that on p. 11 of Enhancements, under the "Other Weapons" heading, it states "The GM must carefully vet each modifier to ensure balance in his campaign." So in some campaigns, the GM may wish to forbid range-enhancing modifiers altogether; in others, the GM may not even care about such "silly" things like "balance", in which case all bets are off.

So what does your GM say?