How lethal is a master?

[edk926]

Based on the original write-up, the character has the feel of a TL3 fantasy game. Let's keep this as fair as possible and compare to other similar era 250 pt hypothetical characters. You'd waste any melee-oriented character I'd make in one-to-one combat, because I would have more skills and would stop at skill 20. For ranged-oriented characters, it would really depend on the surroundings. A good 250 pt mage, unless highly specialized, is likely going to have spells that could take you out somehow before you get close enough to strike them though.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

So, I was wondering how lethal a master fighter would be in your games? For example, let us look at the following 250 point swordmaster:

Attributes: ST 12 [20]; DX 14 [80]; IQ 12 [40]; HT 14 [40]

Advantages: Ambidexterity [5]; Combat Reflexes [15]; Fit [5]; High Pain Threshold [10]; Night Vision 5 [5]

Disadvantages: Berserk (12) [-10]; Code of Honor (Soldier's) [-10]; Enemy (Rival Mercenary Band, Hunter, 6-) [-10]; Insomniac (Severe) [-15]; Sense of Duty (Companions) [-5]

Skills: Bow (A) DX [2]-14; Brawling (E) DX+2 [4]-16; Broadsword (A) DX+10 [40]-24; Fast-Draw (Arrow) (E) DX+2 [1]-16; Fast-Draw (Sword) (E) DX+2 [1]-16; Shield (E) DX+2 [4]-16; Shortsword (A) DX+10 [8]-24.

The remaining 20 character points would be for customization. So, how would such a character fair as an ally or an opponent in your games?

Being a berserker means he isn't going to get much joy out of his skill level.

[Bengt]

I must say that berserk is the last thing I would put on a swordmaster. He would have lived to be a master because he is cool in a fight.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

Against Raven, his IQ/Will 12, would be a 9 vs. her Terror, and he'd be suffering from fright checks. And that's the nicest thing she could do to him. Most of her abilities are 3d (5) non-wounding side-effects, so, he's regularly rolling against a HT10 to resist them.

Yeah, the mage in the old 90s group would just paralyse him so he couldn't dodge, and then fireball him to death. And he'd get to just stand there, frozen in place, watching the fireballs come at him and burn him to a crisp. Not a nice way to go, not at all.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I have to agree about UB. Unless an ability is truly unusual for the campaign or the setting, I do not require a UB. For example, I would charge a 25 CP UB for a character to have TBAM or WM in a non-cinematic campaign or a 50 CP UB for a character to have abilities in a non-powered campaign.

I wouldn't even consider such a high UB - anything warranting that sort of UB I'd just not allow.

[Railstar]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

However, this is not something inherent in Unusual Background. Nothing is preventing anyone else from spending 40 points to purchase a skill. If you're the only mage in the world, then yes, Magery is worth more. But, Unusual background does not provide niche protection. Just because you forced him to buy UB, doesn't mean that someone else is prevented from spending the points on their skill.

...

Again UB is not reputation. Just because he doesn't have a UB doesn't mean that people automatically know what he can do. A UB is just a tax. It doesn't give him anything. ALL it does is reduce the number of points he can spend on other abilities.

All of your examples are better emulated with Reputation or Social Regard. None of that is the realm of Unusual Background.

First of all, I'm of the view that someone with skill 24 would quickly gain a reputation (even if not a Reputation) if they ever used their abilities in public.

Or practised.

Or worked in a career where their skill 24 was significant.

What UB means is that people with this extreme level of skill are not a known factor in the setting. It's not like Reputation or Zeroed where people automatically know or don't know about him, it's more a case of whether it is a reasonable expectation to encounter something like him.

Using the town guard example, approaching him while covering him with ranged weapons might seem like the smart approach if the guy is going to kill one of them, assuming one approaches while the rest hang back in case their buddy dies. Or, they approach together so they might better intervene if the suspect attacks, since if they hang back they're too likely to hit their buddy (or innocent bystanders) with ranged weapons. It's a trade-off.

And whether that trade-off makes sense depends on whether such super swordmasters are a known factor in the setting. If a "master" is skill 16, and they are skill 13, approaching becomes a much more reasonable risk. In a DF environment where super-duper swordmasters are known about, and unknown delvers are commonly the best fighters in town, then you're right, the risk of getting close to him outweighs the risk of shooting the wrong target by mistake. Standard-issue townguard are then likely to use your method or to hire skill 20 swordmasters of their own.

The point is 90% of this character's efficiency comes from the assumption that the world isn't built to account for characters like him. Essentially he's only deadly if stat/skill normalisation applies to the rest of the world but not to him. Calling UB a tax is fair, because whether this is a factor in the setting should be determined before he takes UB, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be paid.

I'm realising this is becoming far more of a diversion than anticipated, should we make a new thread for this discussion?

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by ericthered

In Towers Intangible, he'd lack the technology skills to maintain the visibility he needed, and to use the armor and drones you need to stay alive. The game involves armored robots shooting each other with grenade launchers at indoor ranges.

A few notes on this: he'd do well in face to face fights. He'd struggle with target identification, and some of the nuances of ultra-tech warfare. If you had another character filling in those skills for him, he'd probably be fine. Though 24 in guns skill makes me think of a character in that game who is suffering from similar problems and is a little more balanced/prepared for such issues. And by balanced, I mean less committed to a single trick. And she has luck, which is very important in high risk combat. She could probably take him, but it could go either way, and I'd be hard pressed not to call her "extremely lethal"

[Mark Skarr]

Originally Posted by Railstar

First of all, I'm of the view that someone with skill 24 would quickly gain a reputation (even if not a Reputation) if they ever used their abilities in public.

Then this is a discussion that you, as the GM of the game, should have with the player, and require them to buy a Reputation.

However, I disagree with this view.

Originally Posted by Railstar

What UB means is that people with this extreme level of skill are not a known factor in the setting. It's not like Reputation or Zeroed where people automatically know or don't know about him, it's more a case of whether it is a reasonable expectation to encounter something like him.

Again, this is your opinion, and, honestly, slightly off from the stated purpose of the Advantage listed in RAW:

Originally Posted by Characters, pg 96

This is a “catch-all” trait that the GM can use to adjust the point total of any character with special abilities that are not widely available in the game world. “

However, it flies in the face of another paragraph lower in the listing:

Originally Posted by Characters, pg 96

Not every unusual character concept merits an Unusual Background. The GM should only charge points when the character enjoys a tangible benefit.

There is no tangible benefit for being a skill-24 swordmaster.

Originally Posted by Railstar

Using the town guard example, approaching him while covering him with ranged weapons might seem like the smart approach if the guy is going to kill one of them, assuming one approaches while the rest hang back in case their buddy dies. Or, they approach together so they might better intervene if the suspect attacks, since if they hang back they're too likely to hit their buddy (or innocent bystanders) with ranged weapons. It's a trade-off.

If they approach as a mob they're not well trained and operating less as guards and more as thugs.

Originally Posted by Railstar

The point is 90% of this character's efficiency comes from the assumption that the world isn't built to account for characters like him. Essentially he's only deadly if stat/skill normalisation applies to the rest of the world but not to him. Calling UB a tax is fair, because whether this is a factor in the setting should be determined before he takes UB, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be paid.

This is mostly irrelevant. Stat/skill normalization is too taste and not RAW. GURPS is not based on stat/skill normalization, it's a game and all the numbers exist for narrative purposes.

This is a 250-point character. 50-150 points more than the suggested Heroic adventurer that GURPS suggests (pg 487). They should be exceptional. They're firmly in the middle of the "Larger than Life" style characters. This character, by definition, is an aberration to what ever the normal rules of the world should be.

Originally Posted by Railstar

I'm realising this is becoming far more of a diversion than anticipated, should we make a new thread for this discussion?

In general, I would agree. However, this thread gives us a worked example to focus the discussion on.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Railstar

Using the town guard example, approaching him while covering him with ranged weapons might seem like the smart approach if the guy is going to kill one of them, assuming one approaches while the rest hang back in case their buddy dies. Or, they approach together so they might better intervene if the suspect attacks, since if they hang back they're too likely to hit their buddy (or innocent bystanders) with ranged weapons. It's a trade-off.

Covering him with ranged weapons isn’t really so you can put him down in case he attacks - it’s to show him that if he attacks, he’ll be put down. It’s a subtle distinction, but an important one. They’ve already identified him as a potential problem, after all.

The point is 90% of this character's efficiency comes from the assumption that the world isn't built to account for characters like him.

I don’t recall this being part of the question, and certainly didn’t take it into account in my answer. His skill would be quite rare in the setting the opponents I analyzed for him came from, but not unheard of.

[Railstar]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

However, it flies in the face of another paragraph lower in the listing:

There is no tangible benefit for being a skill-24 swordmaster.

There is a tangible benefit for being a skill-24 swordmaster. You can outfight all the other swordmasters, since skill 24 is not widely available to all of them.

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

This is mostly irrelevant. Stat/skill normalization is too taste and not RAW. GURPS is not based on stat/skill normalization, it's a game and all the numbers exist for narrative purposes.

Example 1 given under Unusual Background seems to solidly say that taste is a factor.

Originally Posted by Characters, pg 96

Example 1: “Raised by wizards” to justify access to magic spells might be a 0-point special effect in a fantasy world where magic is common, a 10-point Unusual Background in a conspiracy campaign where magic is known but kept secret, and a 50-point Unusual Background – or simply forbidden – in a horror game where a PC who wields supernatural power would reduce the suspense.

So the example given under Unusual Background says taste matters. Something that would reduce the suspense (the taste of a horror game) is explicitly given as a reason to charge a high Unusual Background cost.

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

Again, this is your opinion, and, honestly, slightly off from the stated purpose of the Advantage listed in RAW:

This is a “catch-all” trait that the GM can use to adjust the point total of any character with special abilities that are not widely available in the game world. “

If something is not widely available, then people will react differently than if it is widely available. I really don't see how that statement is off from the stated purpose of the Advantage listed in RAW.

If they approach as a mob they're not well trained and operating less as guards and more as thugs.

Casually using missile weapons in a populated area sounds to me like operating less as guards and more as thugs.

This is a 250-point character. 50-150 points more than the suggested Heroic adventurer that GURPS suggests (pg 487). They should be exceptional. They're firmly in the middle of the "Larger than Life" style characters. This character, by definition, is an aberration to what ever the normal rules of the world should be.

Then he has plenty of points for Unusual Background. I don't think "the rules don't apply to this character" should automatically be a bonus.