Talents & Martial Arts

[dataweaver]

That makes sense. 3e characters tended to lean heavily toward IQ and DX, which cost anywhere from 10 to 40 points more in 4e, with the 40-point cost bump being in the 15–17 range and it still being a 30-point bump as low as 13 and as high as 19. High ST andor HT could help offset this a bit, but 3e characters tended not to have those traits higher than 13 (and there would be no price break until 14, and nothing comparable to the cost increase of DX or IQ until 17). So just from the Attributes, a 3e character converted to 4e standards could expect its point total to go up by 60 to 80 points.

ISTR that 3e physical skills were more expensive than their 4e counterparts if bought up high enough (capping at 8 points per level IIRC); but that tended to result in 3e physical skills rarely being bought up that high; so, little to no impact on the point total. OTOH, weren’t 3e mental skills cheaper than 4e skills are, as in leveling out at 2 points per +1? It’s been awhile. If so, that would further inflate a converted character’s cost, as 3e characters tended toward higher mental skills.

So just from Attributes and Skills, saying that a 3e 100-point character is comparable to a 4e 150-point character is a conservative estimate; it’s probably closer to 200 points.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

So just from Attributes and Skills, saying that a 3e 100-point character is comparable to a 4e 150-point character is a conservative estimate; it’s probably closer to 200 points.

Mostly no, IME. A typical 3e pure thug was probably something like ST 13, DX 15, HT 13, which costs [120] in 3e, [160] in 4e, so that would become a 140 point character. A more swashbuckly character might have ST 11 and IQ 12, which would become [160] in 4e. A typical 3e mage was something like ST 9, DX 11, IQ 15, HT 11, Magery 3 and a bunch of spells; those stats go from [70] in 3e to [120] in 4e, which is a 150 point character.

[Infornific]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

So just from Attributes and Skills, saying that a 3e 100-point character is comparable to a 4e 150-point character is a conservative estimate; it’s probably closer to 200 points.

It varies from character to character. A high DX, high IQ will be relatively more expensive in 4e as a result of a deliberate design decision. If merely high DX or high IQ it's a bit closer to a 3:2 ratio and the occasional high ST character could be cheaper in relative terms.

Eyeballing the original 3e sample characters:

(Remember in 4e Literacy is free and Illiterate is -3 Disadvantage.)

Dai Blackthorn comes in at 153 (assumes he ups his half point skills to one point.) He spent a net 55 more points on Attributes, 1 more point on skills and got 3 points back for being Illiterate.

Robyn of the Meadows is about 161 (assuming she took 9 levels of Night Vision.) She spent 65 more points on Attributes, got 1 point back on Night Vision and and got 3 points back for being Illiterate.

Katrina comes in at 129 (assumes she keeps Bow at 14 and the GM lets her take +1 DR (Tough Skin) to replace Toughness. She spent 50 more points on Attributes but saved 7 points on Toughness, 10 points on Literacy and 4 points on Bow skill.

Corwin Bearclaw comes in at a bargain basement 118 points. He spent 30 more points on Attributes but saved 19 on Toughness and picked up another -3 on Illiteracy. To keep his Naturalist skill the same he needed to spent 10 more points but still he's a lot cheaper in relative terms.

Note that these could be tweaked further - Robyn and Katrina might pick up 5 points dropping Speed to 6.0, Dai might consider +0.25 Speed and -1 Move and Corwin might benefit from a Talent if it was a more cost effective version of Outdoorsman. And there was considerable savings from changes to Literacy and Toughness. But on the whole, a 3:2 ratio sounds right.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Infornific

It
Robyn of the Meadows is about 161 (assuming she took 9 levels of Night Vision.) .

Just a technical note but she probably shouldn't. Neither Bio-tech nor Tactical Shooting allow a normal human to buy that many levels. 2 levels maybe.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Just a technical note but she probably shouldn't. Neither Bio-tech nor Tactical Shooting allow a normal human to buy that many levels. 2 levels maybe.

No guarantee she's realistic, but practically speaking most of the benefit comes from the first 3 levels.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Just a technical note but she probably shouldn't. Neither Bio-tech nor Tactical Shooting allow a normal human to buy that many levels. 2 levels maybe.

But since one can have a final perception score of absurd levels, is that really a big issue?

[the_matrix_walker]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

But since one can have a final perception score of absurd levels, is that really a big issue?

In that Night Vision eliminates combat penalties for darkness, and no level of Per will... yes, I'd say it's an issue.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by the_matrix_walker

In that Night Vision eliminates combat penalties for darkness, and no level of Per will... yes, I'd say it's an issue.

Isn't 16 perception with -4 from darkness just the same as 14 perception -4 from darkness +2 night vision?
I don't have tactical shooting, so I apologize if that issue was addressed in it.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Isn't 16 perception with -4 from darkness just the same as 14 perception -4 from darkness +2 night vision?

It is for making perception rolls, but combat penalties for low light take no account of perception, and come straight off combat skill.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Isn't 16 perception with -4 from darkness just the same as 14 perception -4 from darkness +2 night vision?

No, it's the same as 14 perception and +2 DX (only in low light).

Incidentally, Night Vision is substantially underpriced. It's one of the few exotic advantages that is.