How lethal is a master?

[Þorkell]

Originally Posted by oneofmanynameless

If you swap out his weapon skills for gun skills it's a different story. He'd likely kill at least one, if not multiple, PCs. He could easily kill all of them if the strategic situation was favorable to him.

The character proposed has no Tactics, or Soldier or any skill that suggests that he or she knows how to move and operate in a combat situation.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

The character proposed has no Tactics, or Soldier or any skill that suggests that he or she knows how to move and operate in a combat situation.

Needless to say, in a long-running campaign where skirmishes were just one expression of enmity, and conflicts had depth beyond "Who would win in a fight?", I'd favor this profile:

DX 10 [0]; IQ 10 [0]; HT 14 [40]; Per 16 [30]; Basic Speed 7.00 [20]; Acute Vision 3 [6]; Combat Reflexes [15]; Fit [5]; Luck [15]; Night Vision 9 [9]; Soldier (A) IQ+4 [16]-14; Stealth (A) DX+6 [24]-16; Tactics (A) IQ+6 [28]-16; Some Weapon Skill (E/A) DX+8/+9 [32]-18/19

over this use of the same points:

DX 14 [80]; IQ 12 [40]; HT 14 [40]; Per 12 [0]; Basic Speed 7.00 [0]; Ambidexterity [5]; Combat Reflexes [15]; Fit [5]; High Pain Threshold [10]; Night Vision 5 [5]; Some Weapon Skill (E/A) DX+11/+10 [40]-25/24

If I were the GM, it's just about given that the first character would be attacking from surprise at night, from concealment, on high ground, and from some insane distance, making up the weapon-skill deficit with bonuses for Accuracy, Aim, bracing, etc. And Luck would ensure that his "one shot" wasn't screwed up by a bad dice roll.

[Bengt]

Originally Posted by Kromm

DX 10 [0]; IQ 10 [0]; HT 14 [40]; Per 16 [30]; Basic Speed 7.00 [20]; Acute Vision 3 [6]; Combat Reflexes [15]; Fit [5]; Luck [15]; Night Vision 9 [9]; Soldier (A) IQ+4 [16]-14; Stealth (A) DX+6 [24]-16; Tactics (A) IQ+6 [28]-16; Some Weapon Skill (E/A) DX+8/+9 [32]-18/19

From the description of Soldier I have hard time coming up with situations where I would actually ask a player to roll it. I can think of some stuff that I would allow them to do without a roll if they had some points in it at all, but would have to roll something else otherwise to know to do.

Tactics is in kind of a similar boat. It has some clear uses (like spotting ambushes, but better per/senses can cover that and has more uses), but it mostly seems to cover random encounters, combat in my games tend to be more structured.

So dumping a lot of points in these skills seems like a waste to me.

What level of night vision is realistic for a human? 9 seems like a lot since it removes all darkness penalties (unless there is no light at all).

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Bengt

Tactics is in kind of a similar boat. It has some clear uses (like spotting ambushes, but better per/senses can cover that and has more uses), but it mostly seems to cover random encounters, combat in my games tend to be more structured.

There's a "win contest of Tactics, get X re-rolls for bad die rolls" option in either High-Tech, Martial Arts, or both that substantially boosts the utility of this one. The only issue we've found is remembering to roll the contest of Tactics.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Bengt

F

What level of night vision is realistic for a human? .

Bio-tech and Tactical Shooting both say 2.

[oneofmanynameless]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

The character proposed has no Tactics, or Soldier or any skill that suggests that he or she knows how to move and operate in a combat situation.

That doesn't mean the strategic scenario can't be favorable to him. It just means he doesn't have skills necessary to determine whether the strategic scenario is favorable, or create/avoid favorable/unfavorable scenarios. According to the book, at the start of a fight he will be in a random position on the battle-map determined by the GM that makes sense (unless he succeeds an IQ-6 check against tactics on default.) But if that randomness puts him on an elevated position at range, and his equipment includes an assault rifle with plenty of ammo, he'd have an advantage over the PCs. Luck can create advantageous or disadvantageous positions.

Although this makes me wonder if tactics should default to weapon skills (perhaps at between -6 and -8), as I can't really fathom having 40 points, 8000 hours of training, with a broadsword (or rifle or any weapon), not to mention a host of other combat skills, and not having at least a vague notion of what the advantages or disadvantages of a broadsword are, and what would be an easy or difficult fight for you.

[AlexanderHowl]

The character possess 20 CP that could be used to purchase Soldier and Tactics at IQ. Or, since Tactics is a group skill, the character could have always depended on smarter/specialized members of his or her group to be the tactician. Spending 15 CP on an Ally (100% point total; 15-) with Tactics-24 might not be a bad investment for the character, since it would effectively save them 52 CP and it would benefit every group the character belongs to (especially since the Ally would also have Strategy-18). Hm, more on that later...

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

The character proposed has no Tactics, or Soldier or any skill that suggests that he or she knows how to move and operate in a combat situation.

Yep. High weapon skill without Observation, Soldier, Stealth and Tactics suggests a duelist or gladiator, who might be lethal enough in a 'fair fight', but who'd be easy prey for real professionals like covert operatives or soldiers, who'll kill him from a coordinated and prepared ambush.

[Black Leviathan]

Hey has to get in reach. He can attack rapid strike both of your eyes with 50/50 odds. At 250pts, even without advanced armor that would make a sword pretty useless he's still dealing with threats that have a lot of HP either in volume of fighters or massiveness of size and ST. His Parry is so large as to be basically ridiculous, even parrying thrown weapons or even bullets is pretty reasonable in a cinematic game.
With 250 points you can make a SM+2 Giant or an Ultia-high magery wizard, so good-with-a-sword isn't as impressive.