Making Skills Matter Again

[Bengt]

One could use point buckets (Pyramid 3/65) for CP rewarded during play as well as creation. If the stat CP ratio is low the players will have to spend more on skills. And sure they could spend 1-4 points in lots of different skills to maximise stat effects but most players want to be really good at a few skills and if buying the skills directly is the only game in town...

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Bengt

One could use point buckets (Pyramid 3/65) for CP rewarded during play as well as creation. If the stat CP ratio is low the players will have to spend more on skills. And sure they could spend 1-4 points in lots of different skills to maximise stat effects but most players want to be really good at a few skills and if buying the skills directly is the only game in town...

Maybe I and my players are different from the norm, but while we like being very good at a few skills, we very much also like being competent at a wide range, like a lot of fictional heroes.

[AlexanderHowl]

Point buckets just force people to purchase specific traits with CP, they do not make those traits matter more. For example, compare two 500 CP mundane characters, one where 250 CP of their points had to be put in skills and techniques and one not so limited. The latter character would be much more competent generally, as they could easily have an additional 200 CP in attributes, secondary characteristics, advantages, and perks than the former character (an effective difference of +4 DX, +4 IQ, and +4 HT).

Now, capping the benefit from experience to half the penalty of the roll, rounded down, would be acceptable to me. A character with skill at Attribute+10 would only gain the full benefit of their experience when their penalties are at -20, but I think that would be fine, as it would still be a difficult roll at an effective penalty of -10. Of course, characters would still gain the benefits on High Pain Threshold, Night Vision, etc., but that only make them even more competent (in the example given of a -37 penalty, the character would only suffer an effective -13 penalty to hit with those two advantages and the modified house rule).

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Maybe I and my players are different from the norm, but while we like being very good at a few skills, we very much also like being competent at a wide range, like a lot of fictional heroes.

Your group and mine are identical in this regard.

With the occasional Johnny One-Skill popping up here and there.

[hal]

If you want?

One of the things I learned early on as GM thanks to a now deceased player of mine...

When points are awarded...

No more than 1 point may be awarded to any skill, attribute, or advantage unless the thing in question was used during the session. In a GURPS 4e session, that means that the player has to have made 20 separate session uses in which the stat itself was rolled against. If a player had been using Psionics, the power had to have been used a number of times in which 1 point per session would be enough to raise that power.

I let it slide that points not used in game play were banked until he had 40 points. Then he went from barely affecting people with telepathy to being able to affect people from a FAR distance.

The only time I relax this rule is when the players are awarded NPCs as contacts or allies or what have you.

In that regard, players wouldn't be involved with "bucket" expenditure rules (although, in a way, it is a bucket style rule).

I also permitted players to track "crits" - whether successes or failures in any given roll. Why? If their skill were a 14 or less, the crit awarded an automatic experience award. Didn't matter if failure or success, as we learn from our failures as much as from successes.

It has worked for over two decades now...

[Bengt]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Point buckets just force people to purchase specific traits with CP, they do not make those traits matter more. For example, compare two 500 CP mundane characters, one where 250 CP of their points had to be put in skills and techniques and one not so limited. The latter character would be much more competent generally, as they could easily have an additional 200 CP in attributes, secondary characteristics, advantages, and perks than the former character (an effective difference of +4 DX, +4 IQ, and +4 HT).

If stats have a relatively low cap the skills will matter more than the stats, as they'll form the bulk of the value you roll against. I don't see how you can claim the opposite. It would be pretty unfair to cap some players and not others in the same game so I don't see how the comparison is relevant.

[Empada]

Another option is charging Unusual Background for higher attributes.
as an example

Att. UB Total
11 0 20
12 0 40
13 5 65
14 15 95
15 30 130
16 60 180

and you can change the UB as you see fit. you only get high attributes if you are specialized.

[Extrarius]

Originally Posted by hal

One of my "peeves" if you will, is the idea that someone who has NO actual experience with a skill (ie by default) can start off with "professional level" skill at all.[...]

One thing that can really help with this is familiarity penalties. I'd expect somebody using default would be unfamiliar with everything involved, and thus suffer additional penalties on top of defaulting. This essentially moves the "professional attribute" level a few rungs higher, but IMO that higher level of attributes is more believably good at literally everything.

[AlexanderHowl]

Originally Posted by Empada

Another option is charging Unusual Background for higher attributes.
as an example

Att. UB Total
11 0 20
12 0 40
13 5 65
14 15 95
15 30 130
16 60 180

and you can change the UB as you see fit. you only get high attributes if you are specialized.

Exactly how does this make skills matter more? It just makes attributes more expensive without making skills worth more. Even if DX 16 costs 180 CP, it is still better to purchase DX 16 and ten Average DX-based skills at DX (200 CP) than to purchase DX 12 and ten Average DX-based skills at DX+4 (200 CP) because of the associated +4 bonus to DX rolls, +4 to DX-based defaults, and +1 Basic Speed.

[martinl]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Maybe I and my players are different from the norm, but while we like being very good at a few skills, we very much also like being competent at a wide range, like a lot of fictional heroes.

I believe this is the whole intent of RAW. PCs built by someone efficiently using the GURPS CP based build system are broadly low-level cinematic - this makes more people happy than it annoys.

There are all sorts of possible tweaks if this annoys you, many discussed in this thread. Here are a few more:

• Group norms on character build.
  
• Templates.
  
• Life Path Systems
  
• Base all skills off of an assumed stat of 10, then discount or remove DX and IQ.
  
• Build to concept and ignore the CP system until play starts (or all together, using a different advancement mechanic).