25% of Starting Points

[JMason]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

Except a 25-point character that buys Combat Reflexes gets exactly the same benefit as a 100-point character that buys Combat Reflexes, not one-quarter the benefit as he does with an Ally.

On the other hand, as a character gains CP, Combat Reflexes remains the same, while an ally will become more powerful with the PC.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

Except a 25-point character that buys Combat Reflexes gets exactly the same benefit as a 100-point character that buys Combat Reflexes, not one-quarter the benefit as he does with an Ally.

I'd note that a 6-point character is actually not that far from being a peer to a 25 point character, whereas a 25 point character is much weaker compared to a 100 point character.

This doesn't really mean things are balanced, it just means that there's an imbalance factor leaning the other direction as well.

[weby]

Also it should be noted that at lower point values the 25% ally is actually closer to the PC in power than at higher point values. But costs of course more in relative % of the available points.

As a slightly silly but valid example lets say that the ally is built exactly the same as the PC, except for lower attributes and the lack of the ally advantage. Using a 5 point ally.

At 25 PC points, the ally costs 20% of the points, thus the ally maximum 6 points and is effectively only 25-6(ally pt)-5(ally cost) 14 points behind the master in points. That is one less HT or ST and 1 per/will less than PC.

At 100 PC points, the ally costs 5% of the points, thus the ally maximum 25 points and is effectively only 100-25(ally pt)-5(ally cost) 70 points behind the master in points. That is say two IQ, one DX one less HT or ST less than the PC.

At 500 PC points, the ally costs 1% of the points, thus the ally maximum 125 points and is effectively only 500-125(ally pt)-5(ally cost) 370 points behind the master in points. That is say six IQ, six DX, six HT and seven ST less than the PC.

[Bengt]

I don't think a lot of people learn many board games well enough for it qualify for even a single skill point. They play at default with their friends, looking up rules as they go along and having no idea what the tournament regulations are (if there even is any for that particular game).

Also, the Cooking skill is working as a chef, regular cooking is covered by Housekeeping, which I guess most people have a level or two in. But it's IQ/Easy so a single point goes a long way if you take your time and use tools and books for bonuses.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

Except a 25-point character that buys Combat Reflexes gets exactly the same benefit as a 100-point character that buys Combat Reflexes, not one-quarter the benefit as he does with an Ally.

Not really. Both of them get "an extra party member who is loyal to them".

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

In my own case, I probably have one point in Area Knowledge in four different cities, one point in Current Affairs in a dozen subjects, one point in Games in dozens of games (tabletop games and video games), and I doubt that I am exceptional. I think that realistic characters should probably have a minimum of 2 CP per year of age after age 15 in Area Knowledge, Current Affairs, Games, and/or Hobby Skills unless they have a good reason within their character background.

One thing I've learned over my years here on the message boards is that there are at least two different and incompatible GURPS played by people. And the difference is not cinematic or gritty. It is about fundamental assumptions about what things even mean in GURPS. This is sometimes given the shorthand of The Cult of Stat Normalization vs. people who aren't stat normalizers. But there is diversity here, though I'll use those terms for simplicity. And this is also often all caught up in language of realistic.

Differences I've noticed revolve around:
-Attribute level
-Skill level
-Number of skills
-How many points a realistic person has overall

Many Stat Normalizers don't think it is realistic for people to have attributes over 14-15 and will often have attribute caps to ensure that. They are more likely to want lower attributes than that, but with Talents. Non-Stat Normalizers don't think it is unrealistic for someone to have IQ 17 (or whatever).

Many Stat Normalizers stick to the idea that a professional level of a skill is 12, and don't think people should have skills much higher than that if they are going to be realistic. They tend to think most people have skills in the 9-12 range. Non-stat normalizers don't think it is unrealistic for a person to have a 14 or a 16 or more in a skill.

Many Stat Normalizers don't think it is realistic for people to have many skills. Rather they think that most people operate off of default for most things with generous positive modifiers for being in non-adventuring situations. Somebody in this camp would generally think a realistic person who drives to work everyday would NOT have the Driving skill. They'd just be doing it off of default. Sometimes they will encourage the Dabbler perk to represent every day skills a person might use more often, but that they still don't think they should have points in. The other group of people tend to have more skills on the sheet, they want the PCs to have points in Area Knowledge and Driving, etc.

There is a group that think that realistic people are built on 0-25 points and if you get too much above that, you are no longer realistic. If you tend to think attributes should be closer to 10 and that most skills should be off of default, then you easily get to a space where average realistic people are built off of 0-25 points. If, on the other hand, you think higher attributes, higher skill levels, and more skills falls into realistic, then you could easily see characters ranging from 150-250 being realistic and not cinematic.

(There is sometimes another debate about how to understand Disadvantages that doesn't really map well onto the Cult of Stat Normalization/Not Stat Normalizer conversation. There is a group of people who think that if you stat up themselves realistically, they would all end up being -25cp people because of all their Disadvantages; there are others that think that most Disadvantages in GURPS are a bit...heightened...for game purposes, and if you were going to model the real world, most things would just be quirks)

Anyhow. If you are not a stat normalizer and the person you are talking to is a Stat Normalizer (or vice-versa), it is often not productive to debate realism...because the fundamental understanding of realism in GURPS is not shared. I'd also recommend being very careful gaming GURPS with people who are very distant from you idea of realism in GURPS. It can lead to...unpleasant surprises.

So I suppose what I'd say is: the way you are seeing characters is totally valid, however, there will be a number of people who are going to think you are wrong and what you are describing is in no way realistic. Just know they are coming from a different understanding of GURPS. Your way of seeing things is totally fine though.

[Apollonian]

Originally Posted by trooper6

...because the fundamental understanding of realism in GURPS is not shared. I'd also recommend being very careful gaming GURPS with people who are very distant from you idea of realism in GURPS. It can lead to...unpleasant surprises.

I think there's a pernicious perception that GURPS is realistic. It's not. It doesn't try to be. What it tries for, and I think succeeds at, is verisimilitude: the appearance of truth. In my opinion, it does a very good job of taking a basic, physics-based view of the world and then making plausible, playable assumptions based on that worldview, as well as building in playable rules for fantastic stuff (as in, fantasy) that's as plausible as it needs to be.

Some people look at this very crunchy, detailed, plausible system, and seem to get caught up in its "realism" to the point of wanting to make it more "realistic." This invariably seems to involve adding more detail, because more rules = more realism or something. I think that's an unproductive way to spend gaming time, but if they're having fun, well... can't argue taste. But it does very much highlight my rule 0 for GURPS: Make sure that everyone in the play group is sharing the same assumptions about the game, or it'll all end in tears.

[AlexanderHowl]

I agree. In general though, I have not had any trouble finding people who share my interpretation of GURPS because I am the one usually teaching them GURPS for the first time. Since I tend to start them at 250-500 CP (and these are usually campaigns without superhuman abilities), they learn to appreciate what it means to be exceptional in GURPS. I have never had players ask to play a 25 point character because that is the average point value of a 5 year old child in my campaigns (the average person on the street can easily be 250 points in my games, they just have average attributes and most of their points in social advantages and trivial or work skills, like most people do in my experience).

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

Except a 25-point character that buys Combat Reflexes gets exactly the same benefit as a 100-point character that buys Combat Reflexes, not one-quarter the benefit as he does with an Ally.

I guess it depends on how you look at the value of an ally, I see it as relative rather than absolute

So an ally that is built on the same CP as the Character is worth the same to each character weather those characters (and thus allies) are 25pts or 100pts.

i.e what your paying for is the value of the ally as a percentage of the character, and that cost is set (just as the cost of CR is set).


That all said Ally as an advantage has a lot of variables in play

[Bengt]

I'm curious what Alexander's 25-point "average" 5-year old looks like stated up. I mean they are going to have pretty low stats, at least in ST and IQ since they are pretty small (quick internet search puts 5-year olds at ~18 kg, ~109 cm) and lacks a lot of general knowledge you would expect from an adult. They'll also have some disadvantages for wealth and social standing. What are they buying to get up to 25 points?