Innate attack cost in high-tech games?

[Maz]

I know this has been discussed before, and I even have a feeling it is discussed in an official book. But right now I can find neither discussion or book.


So in a setting where the PC's have ease access to assault rifles (5d pi). Or sniper rifles or even LMG's.

The psionic character who can buy an innate attack feels like they are wasting points getting an attack that is pretty much the same as a Gun. This is true because of the setting there are harsh restrictions on innate attacks and they more or less have to be piercing attacks. And they require FP to use as well.


So my question is. Aren't there any guidelines for giving a discount to innate attack in settings where you could get the same bang for the money, using, well money instead of CP.

[Refplace]

A Psychic attack is not the same as a gun, even if it does comparable damage.
Conceal-ability and costs are big factors and if it does not benefit from those apply appropriate limitations.
That said Supers has ideas for starting with a device and enhancing it with powers. I sometimes let people buy a power that is easily done by gear they could purchase at 1/5th cost but that is a house rule and one I dont always use.

[weby]

Officially you could do them as enchantments to existing gear, that is if they want a 5 pi attack they could bu a 2 pi pistol and add 3d to it. The other official way that I know of is imbuements. But both are based on the idea of starting with lesser gear. Cannot think of any official discount way based on TL.

In my games the cost of innate attacks and DR varies by the TL, you can see my cost table in here: https://water.roto.nu/seikkailu/doku...innate_attacks

Basically both DR and Innate attack advantage cost with a multiplier based on the on DR scaling of mundane gear. I have used TL 4 as base as that makes the total cost of DR advantage equal to "best normal armor" 50 points or just below.

So as example in TL 8 the the costs are multiplied by 0.2.

[ericthered]

I usually advocate or allow an attack that's the equivalent of a weapon to be two perks: accessory and legal immunity (can carry item in public). If people don't know that you have the attack, a small unusual background of 5 points or so is appropriate.

If the attack is substantially better than a weapon you could carry around, things get more complicated.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by ericthered

If the attack is substantially better than a weapon you could carry around, things get more complicated.

Just add the cost of the IA over the baseline attack. If you figure everyone could have, say, an assault rifle at 7D, then call the first 7D of the IA an equipment perk. But the guy that wants a 10D attack pays for 3D of IA at the regular price, plus that Perk.

It's trickier to figure modifiers with a split pricing scheme, but I'd start with just using the cost for an Enhancement based on the full base price.

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by Maz

I know this has been discussed before, and I even have a feeling it is discussed in an official book.

Basic Set, pages 294-5 ("Body Modification"). You pay character points for whatever your character starts with. The GM is given three (not exhaustive) suggestions for acquiring modifications in play: modifications cost only character points (or must be balanced by lowering your point value elsewhere); modifications cost only money (with warnings that wealthy characters thereby get a big edge); or modifications are free (mostly for involuntary modifications or given to you by a Patron). Costs and recovery times for surgery are discussed.

The basic idea, though, is that as a starting character you can only start with whatever traits you can afford with character points, regardless of how much money you have or whether you can simply buy upgrades. If you want more than your starting character points allow, you'll have to acquire whatever it is you want in play by whatever means the GM allows.

[Kromm]

You could always adapt the Weapon Mounts rulings on p. 138 of GURPS Powers. That amounts to a statement that if weapons with a certain level of effectiveness are available to anybody, having them attached to you amounts to a small extra convenience worth 2 points per weapon you can carry.

Those rules were written for cyborgs with actual guns hanging off their bodies, but you could apply similar logic to psis and supers with attack abilities. In most cases, their only real edges are "You can't take away my 'gun' because it's built in!" and "I don't have to buy ammo!" That's close to a couple of perk-level instances of Signature Gear, one of them consumable (Supers, p. 81).

Total concealability and surprise value might be implied and also have value, but be careful. In, for instance, the Marvel universe where mutants are everywhere and known to exist, there isn't much surprise value to having a built-in "weapon" and there are power-detection methods that are about as effective as metal detectors, T-ray scanners, etc. If you think stealthiness is important, consider adding an extra point per attack as a perk.

Also remember that carried equipment is easy to upgrade. Someone with a gun can buy higher-powered ammo with cash, or trade in the weapon for a better one. A cyborg using the Powers rules could replace the equivalent of a handgun with the equivalent of a bazooka. Heck, the character might find a suitable upgrade as spoils of war. So there's a certain fairness to not forcing people with powers to pay for gun-level attacks.

BUT . . .

If the attack does something no production weapon in the setting can do (e.g., crush the victim's heart regardless of armor, or freeze people solid and make their fingers break off, or anything other than poke holes in or blow up targets), it should cost full points. If its damage is well beyond anything an individual soldier in wartime is likely to carry – say, equivalent to the output of an entire mortar or machine-gun team, or a tank or aircraft, or artillery – it should cost full points, as there comes a point where portability and concealability are massive advantages. (Anybody could conceal a handgun, or with effort a rifle, but probably not a GAU-8/A Avenger.)

This is fussy as a campaign switch. It gets extra-fussy if the GM has hard numerical cutoffs. If approaching things this way, the GM and player should be prepared to negotiate. It's usually obvious when an attack has crossed one of the lines above. ("Yes, technically, your power to spray little quills from your body isn't any better than a crummy handgun because each quill does 1 point of impaling damage and the campaign lets mooks carry around LMGs and sniper rifles. Except that you have RoF 300 and infinite ammo, and all the body armor in the setting is strong against piercing but not against impaling.")