Challenge: Deliberately Miscost a Trait

[chris1982]

I would definitely make pricing dependent on utility for the current setting for some advantages.

DR 5 is a killer for a TL 3 world, while a power to produce a 3d fireball is an ok advantage in TL 8 but definitely not a game changer.

Or think about a power to communicate instantly over vast distances - from utility point of view this might go from about 30 points at TL 3 to 1 point perk (cell phone is always working) at TL 8...

[David Johnston2]

Actually to really answer the challenge, I propose this:

Make the base cost of Jumper 15 points.

Why? Obviously because it's a low point value dimension-hopping game.

[daniel_gudman]

Well if you really want to push the boat out...

Just tell the players to build a "master swordsman", or a "journeyman mage", or "somebody that would fit in with the cast of Sliders". Without a point total.

Never mind the points, just have everybody model their character concept. Before you even add two numbers together, make sure there's agreement on the "description" of the character that will in turn be modeled by the points.

I mean, isn't "point total" in the end is just an abstraction to allow a "fair" game where every player contributes equally...?

If you're worried about characters building really unbalanced characters, then....

For example, in a world where inescapable armor-ignoring super-long-range big-damage Innate Attacks exist, isn't MAD between the possessors of those abilities obvious? Because, if you use it even once injudiciously, sooner-rather-than-later, you'll be struck down by other users preemptively? It's practically necessary that you take a high-point secret ("Lethal Threat to Anybody, including other Lethal Threats to Anybody") or a high-point enemy ("World Powers: Watcher"); on a failed check the player will get splatted by an equally-empowered NPC who decided the character was, torecall the words of Uncle Ben, not exercising great responsibility over their great power.

Therefore, it's an ability that might be cheap in points, but must be exercised with only the most serious caution, because misuse will, logically, call down swift and terrible retribution from other ability users.

[martinl]

Originally Posted by daniel_gudman

...Without a point total.

Never mind the points, just have everybody model their character concept. ...

I'm all in favor of the building to concept school of GURPS character creation, and I will admit that "nothing costs points" is technically a massive point discount. However, it's kinda an edge case here, innit?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by daniel_gudman

Well if you really want to push the boat out...

Just tell the players to build a "master swordsman", or a "journeyman mage", or "somebody that would fit in with the cast of Sliders". Without a point total.

I'm not sure I see the relevance.

[Kalzazz]

Im not sure I can see that working to well, noone could agree what exactly a 'master swordsman' or 'journeyman mage' was

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

If I charge a UB for Innate Attacks in excess of 7 dice then that may mean I want to discourage powerful zaps but it should also mean that nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition....to be able to shoot through armour plating. Mental stuns are called for when it happens.

Heck, if you didn't, and I was in your game, I may be asking about option to buy one anyways. I know some of the players in my group would. "Surprise Value" is a force enhancer, for the tactically minded, but it's also a warm fuzzy "I'm a special snowflake" reward for the player - a guarentee that my character is COOL is totally something I would buy voluntarily.

Not necessarily about 7d fireballs - it could be any part of my character. In some games, that's a really big draw.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

No, most are disproportionately weak. In general the power of an ability should be coded into its cost, but a separate balance is needed for skills because of how the skill mechanics work. Simply getting rid of the cinematic skill and turning them into advantages would eliminate the need for separate advantages that grant access.

While I agree that getting rid of the cinematic skills like Breaking Blow, Power Blow, Invisibility Art, and others in favor of more accurate point cost system that doesn't fix the problem that a normal built with 500 points (that cannot buy abilities marked exotic) will be outclassed by a super built using exotic traits. UBs can help balance that gulf by effectively giving the normal more points.

A controller that uses influence advantages (such as mind control) will often have more control than someone relying on influence skills (not counting Bard skills which are a variant of Mind Control). Likewise, a soldier that has access to innate attacks with nifty modifiers that won't be available on normal guns, DR, and healing will be more effective than his mundanely built counterpart.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by naloth

While I agree that getting rid of the cinematic skills like Breaking Blow, Power Blow, Invisibility Art, and others in favor of more accurate point cost system that doesn't fix the problem that a normal built with 500 points (that cannot buy abilities marked exotic) will be outclassed by a super built using exotic traits.

Having some taboo traits is a limitation, but it's a pretty small one. It's not that hard to create a 'normal' who can beat most supers (the exception is abilities with no mundane counter, such as insubstantial in a setting without devices that can affect them -- and abilities with no mundane counter do normally call for an unusual background).

[simply Nathan]

Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ

Okay. Ignore IQ; it's hopeless. But there are other mental and social traits and it was those I was thinking of.

He's still increasing the price of things like Status, Appearance, and Reputation in comparison to other traits. Wealth is already way too expensive at the low end. How's Comfortable Wealth going to look when ST is only five points a level?

Well, I did start by saying I was ignoring the traits I don't use anyway, and I prefer to leave social Advantages other than Signature Gear alone.

IQ! is one of my favorite traits, and I think 10/level is decent for what it does. So yeah, I think I still want a general deflation, I just usually don't look at traits outside of "Melee combat guy", "Blasty/HP-refilling wizard guy", and "Climb stuff and unlock guy".

I actually think Wealth, Status, Reputation and the like are generally not worth buying at all and my only characters to have the first two were template-built...

Personally, I set -1 point for halved starting wealth, -2 for no starting wealth, and 1 CP cost for each +50% to starting wealth; don't allow it to be bought in play, don't have it impact anything in-game beyond what the players buy to equip their starting characters. I'll possibly consider house ruling that Signature Gear only buys plot insurance for the item while this method must still be used to gain it in the first place, but allow Signature Gear to be used on items found in play.


Back on topic, I'd price Common Sense as a Perk to greatly encourage taking it because it's good but most of the players that need it won't think it's as good as a level of ST, HT, or 3 FP/ER. Only player I've ever seen take it had a character with IQ 8, though that was still probably one of his better design choices now that I think of it. Or maybe make it a free, mandatory trait in my campaigns because I'm that kind of guy and so is every GM I've ever had.