-80% Limitation Cap: Any Exceptions?

[Otaku]

Originally Posted by Bruno

I don't understand this, personally. It's a cap on the discount (or points return), not on the number of limitations or disadvantages you can have. If it's important to your character to take those two -50% limitations with no enhancements, then take them! You only get -80% back, but you still have them. And later the GM will probably give you easy excuses to add 20% in enhancements for "free" in game events, or just flat out make it easy/cheap to buy down one of those limitations.

Same, you can take all the disads you want, you just don't get points back. After I hit the cap I tend not to write them down as full disads but as quirks, or just roleplaying notes - but my characters tend to end up hindered with something closer to the full versions anyways.

Or, yes, you can adjust your character concept.

I just explained this in the previous; since I was unclear I'll try again. I'll add something to help with perspective first: remember a "discount" isn't getting free points... its either not paying what is not owed or getting back what should not have been charged originally; a lot like a tax return. The cap on total Limitations is to preserve a certain minimal cost, because some (but I argue not all) such builds can be worth far more than such deep discounts indicate... but at the same time there are builds that are just not going to be worth that 20% minimum.

Earlier I brought the example of Shadow Form, an Advantage from the Basic Set that per RAW is a Disadvantage if Always On or a 0-point trait if Always On but you can carry up to Heavy Encumbrance... which is the system recognizing that not everything behaves the same way. If forced to conform to general RAW, the Always On Limitation would have a maximum value of -80%, so that instead of the actual RAW value of an Always On Shadow Form being a -20 point Disadvantage, it would remain a 10 point Advantage.

If a concept calls for Limitations in excess of -80%, then my choices are

1) Alter the concept: an option, but to some of us a most odious one that undermines our main reason for using GURPS. If not an "us", then at least a "me".

2) Overpay for the benefit, which often precludes buying something and thus still altering the concept, in addition to risking your character being less competent than point totals imply. With complex characters, this can quite easily reach significant threshold as multiple instances add up... at least for me. =P

Adding an enhancement doesn't even always work from an optimization standpoint; sometimes you've got all you need and anything else becomes a pretty meaningless bell or whistle. Yes there are many worthwhile Enhancements, but finding one that is exactly the right price and is relevant can be a challenge. The GM allowing me to take one later is not something I would count on, but for some groups that is an option.

The RAW actually addresses the concerns with violating the Disadvantage cap; you risk a character that is anywhere from under powered to a flat out hindrance to the rest of the group. Ironically you may have more fun than anyone else if they do accommodate you (your enjoyment being maintained/increased at the cost of their own. Now keep in mind, in both cases the issue is about getting what you pay for; it is a bit different than just wanting to spend points you don't have.

[Otaku]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Sort of a side note:



It's a misunderstanding of the rules, in that you can put an ability in an Alternate Ability - at least as far as I grok it. An ability can be composed of one-or-many advantages together!

For an example, Animal Dude has his Chameleon and Rhino Hide abilities in an Alternate Ability - he can have one, or the other, but not both.

Chameleon Hide is DR 2 (Tough Skin) plus 8 levels of the Chameleon advantage.
Rhino Hide is DR 10 (Temporary Disadvantage: Ham Fisted 2)

Both are abilities, but one is two advantages and the other is just one.

I think this is just a general language/communication issue; I was merely stating that Alternate Ability could be used to lower the cost of an ability below -80% as it was treated as a separate multiplier; be it one Advantage or a bundle of them, they could have -80% in Limitations and then have the 1/5 multiplier applied.

[Ulzgoroth]

I had a notion about adjusting negative modifiers in relation to a 'true multiplicative' (multiply all individual modifiers) scheme, some time back.

I haven't had occasion to try it, though.

[The Benj]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

-80% limitations, One Use Ever 1/5, Alternate Ability 1/5.

You now have a trait that costs 1/125 it's base price. Do them in order of above; after the first two cuts, if the ability costs less than something you have, you get the last cut. For instance, if you have Alternate Form:Body of Fire with maxed out enhancements, that can get upwards of 50pts. 50*25 is [1250], so you can have a burning attack as an alternative ability to your alternate form that costs [10] but is actually 125d (and probably you got the limitation that you die to use it).

You get the AA discount on the cheaper abilities, not the dearest. If you want your 125d, once-only attack, it'll cost you 250 points, but the Body of Fire will only cost you 10.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by The Benj

You get the AA discount on the cheaper abilities, not the dearest. If you want your 125d, once-only attack, it'll cost you 250 points, but the Body of Fire will only cost you 10.

I don't know, if you really want an ability that burns out the entire alternate ability forever if you use it, maybe it is worth a significant discount. It will effectively cost you a lot of points if you ever do use it.

[Otaku]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I don't know, if you really want an ability that burns out the entire alternate ability forever if you use it, maybe it is worth a significant discount. It will effectively cost you a lot of points if you ever do use it.

For what little it is worth, that sounds like an excellent consideration, and seems a similar concern to what initially led to me creating this thread; the general guidelines might be a bit tight. Permanently losing what you invested can be pretty constraining. For the sake of discussion, let us take three approaches, where in each the character is worth 500 points and has at least some "super" powers.

1) Character invested almost all points (including those from Disadvantages) into his superpowers; if he has an Alternate Ability tied into all of his Super Powers that has One Use Ever attached to it, using it drops him from a 500 to 50 point character. Even if it is an awesome Ability, that might be fair even costing as little as 1 point.

2) As with the character in #1, except he is practically a "Super Normal"; only 5 points total were spent on his primary "super powers" and his One Use Ever Alternate Ability, I'd be leery if he milked this for some sort of 1 point Super Special Awesome attack that may be One Use Ever but only costs him an effective 5 total CP.

3) Token "in the middle" example; a 500 point character sacrificing about 200 points of CP if he ever resorts to his One Use Ever Alternate Ability.

These kinds of things are why "GM's prerogative" strikes me as the best "standard" approach.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Putting a One Use ability in a AA seems like terrible idea.

I'm not so sure using it strips the rest of the abilities away. Limited Use doesn't. And if it does, how would you make an alternate one-use ability that doesn't strip away the other powers when used?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

And if it does, how would you make an alternate one-use ability that doesn't strip away the other powers when used?

I'm not sure that even makes any sense. If I have a gun with a kill, stun, and explosive self destruct setting, how do I keep the kill and stun settings when I blow the gun up?

[Otaku]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I'm not sure that even makes any sense. If I have a gun with a kill, stun, and explosive self destruct setting, how do I keep the kill and stun settings when I blow the gun up?

It makes sense, but in a pretty specific context; in the case of the a directed energy weapon, it would be more a matter of having one setting that burns out just what is needed for that setting, as opposed to what is needed for all settings. For a power it means you channeled the energy in such a way that whatever enabled you to do that specific act was destroyed or is otherwise never available again, but it won't prevent you from using other related powers.

That usually feels like a "stretch" to me, however.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Otaku

It makes sense, but in a pretty specific context; in the case of the a directed energy weapon, it would be more a matter of having one setting that burns out just what is needed for that setting, as opposed to what is needed for all settings. For a power it means you channeled the energy in such a way that whatever enabled you to do that specific act was destroyed or is otherwise never available again, but it won't prevent you from using other related powers.

That usually feels like a "stretch" to me, however.

I don't think those things would be AAs then since if they are disabled the other abilities aren't. An AA is supposed to represent abilities that are all actually the same ability. It isn't supposed to be a way to save points on unrelated abilities that you just don't plan on using simultaneously.