01-08-2015, 04:37 PM | #1 |
Night Watchman
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
[Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
GURPS makes it realistically hard to knock people out or otherwise incapacitate them without hurting them badly, if you use physical attacks. So I tried designing a power to do it. The budget is 15-20 points.
The context is a Weird War II campaign, where the opponents are almost always human, and very few of them have any DR, except for helmets. The character in question is very capable of sneaking up to melee range unnoticed, with effective Stealth-18, plus Invisibility. Knifing sentries is thus possible, but there's a risk they'll make noise and fight back: something a bit cleaner and surer would be welcome. The problem with afflicting an incapacitating condition is that the target gets to roll vs. HT+DR, minus additional levels of the affliction, and if he resists he's unaffected. So I seem to need enough levels to give -3 or -4 to that roll, and that means it needs to be fairly cheap per level. However, the lack of DR on most targets means this may be viable. So, per level, the cost is a base [10], and Daze is +50%. No Signature +20% seems advisable to avoid flashes and bangs. Daze does not take someone out, but it gives you at least a minute, in which time you can move people up to help you grab/bind/gag the poor chap. Alternatively sneaking past him should be fairly easy, and if he's unharmed when he recovers, he may not realise anything happened apart from a "funny turn". So we're at 170%, and need to cut that down substantially. We take Magical -10%, because that's required for powers in the setting, Melee Attack (Range C, cannot parry) for -35% and costs 1 fatigue for -5%. That gets us down to 120%. A Gadget modifier, for a cosh, DR2, SM-6, stolen by a quick contest of DX or ST is -60%. This is a replaceable item, but that involves a reasonable amount of trouble. We're at 60%, but that isn't cheap enough yet. I was stuck here for a while. Then I spotted the Armour Divisor limitation, which is -30% for doubling the effects of DR, and giving any target with no DR DR1. But that's actually cost-effective: we need to buy an extra level to overcome the DR1, but that only costs 3 points since we have the cost down to 30%. Six levels of this cost 18 points, and the target ends up rolling HT+DR-4 to resist. Then you think about what this models in game reality. A cosh to the head is worth avoiding because of the skull DR2, even if the target isn't in a helmet. Blows to the neck can be incapacitating. Melee Attack doesn't have any rules about limitations for needing to hit specific locations. It seems you use a melee attack skill to make the attack roll, and I can't find a limitation that models this - Inaccurate is for ranged attacks. Any suggestions? |
01-08-2015, 08:48 PM | #2 |
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Ellicott City, MD
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
Give a price break based on the hit location penalty. The same is done for DR.
|
01-08-2015, 09:08 PM | #3 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yucca Valley, CA
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
Affliction is one weird advantage. There are so many huge enhancements you might want for it that no reasonable limitations will reduce the level cost to where you can buy more than one, leaving you with a cool power that works less than half the time.
But, there are Enhancements that make a single level viable, like Malediction. This makes it a contest of Will versus HT, ignoring armor, and I think you can take Reliable +10 (from powers) for just +50%, that is net +5 points on level 1 Affliction. You run up against the rule of 16, but it's better odds than multiple levels of Affliction in some cases. |
01-08-2015, 10:30 PM | #4 |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
You can't take reliable as that's an end run around the overtly stated mechanic.
You want higher chance of success? Then you buy more levels. I agree that it's almost always absurdly expensive for tiny gains.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
01-08-2015, 10:45 PM | #5 |
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lynn, MA
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
|
01-09-2015, 02:16 AM | #6 | |
Night Watchman
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
Quote:
|
|
01-09-2015, 02:55 AM | #7 |
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: near London, UK
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
It suddenly occurs to me that you need to take into account the -5 for Low Mana.
__________________
Podcast: Improvised Radio Theatre - With Dice Gaming stuff here: Tekeli-li! Blog; Webcomic Laager and Limehouse Buy things by me on Warehouse 23 |
01-09-2015, 03:13 AM | #8 |
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Ellicott City, MD
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
That pretty much says "head shots only" to me, and I'd just say no to the spine. Spine only could be an AA, though.
|
01-09-2015, 06:57 AM | #9 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
Quote:
As it is, levels of Affliction beyond the first seem painfully overpriced to me. And yet the imbalance is so easy to fix, if you're the one sitting behind the GM's screen. If you're not, it's not worth asking. |
|
01-09-2015, 07:17 AM | #10 |
Night Watchman
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
|
Re: [Basic] Tinkering with Afflictions
Yes (the setting for the campaign in question is low mana), but it's not obvious what it applies to: there's no roll to make an Affliction work, so does it apply to the roll to hit, or perhaps boost the resistance roll? I presume I could buy Reliable to counter the -5?
|
Tags |
affliction, basic, daze, melee attack, no wounding, symptoms |
|
|