Harmonizing Obscure, Chameleon, Invisibility, Silence

[munin]

Originally Posted by Refplace

…However If you eliminate Invisibility what do you do with See Invisible? Just call it a feature of Obscure that can counter it?

I've considered making an explicit counter to Obscure, something like Penetrate Obscurement (see through smoke, etc.). This would be a leveled trait which directly offsets penalties from Obscure. With perhaps an enhancement it could also replace Penetrating Vision.

For example, Penetrate Obscurement 1 (vision) would make someone with Invisibility visible to the user but still -9 to see (almost impossible to see or target).

[kdtipa]

Another thing to keep in mind is the tool box nature of GURPS. When I am creating a campaign, I decide what's available and what's not. Invisibility and Obscure might not be options, while Chameleon and Silence might be.

I do agree that Chameleons and Silence are over priced for the bonuses they give though.

And holy crap invisibility is over priced compared to Obscure. Yikes.

So... even if I'm picking and choosing, I guess I'd probably house rule some stuff here. I'm running mostly sci fi instead of powers campaigns, so I hadn't really looked at these.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by munin

I've considered making an explicit counter to Obscure, something like Penetrate Obscurement (see through smoke, etc.). This would be a leveled trait which directly offsets penalties from Obscure. With perhaps an enhancement it could also replace Penetrating Vision.

For example, Penetrate Obscurement 1 (vision) would make someone with Invisibility visible to the user but still -9 to see (almost impossible to see or target).

I'm a bit leery of allowing a first-level sensory advantage to fully shift the usefulness of invisibility from qualitative ("this sense is inapplicable") to the merely quantitative ("this sense gets a penalty that is likely less than your relative roll value if you have high Per"). I think that such a first-level trait would be tremendously more useful than its consequent levels.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I'm a bit leery of allowing a first-level sensory advantage to fully shift the usefulness of invisibility from qualitative ("this sense is inapplicable") to the merely quantitative ("this sense gets a penalty that is likely less than your relative roll value if you have high Per"). I think that such a first-level trait would be tremendously more useful than its consequent levels.

Acute Sense and Per already directly counter Obscure on a level vs. level basis. At least until you get to the -10 penalty.
And actually the other thread got me to thinking Penetrating Vision should counter Obscure (Vision) for its range. At lest for most special effects.

At this point my only issue with getting rid of Invisibility in favor of a modified Obscure is that it is a common power and simple as written.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Refplace

Acute Sense and Per already directly counter Obscure on a level vs. level basis. At least until you get to the -10 penalty.
And actually the other thread got me to thinking Penetrating Vision should counter Obscure (Vision) for its range. At lest for most special effects.

At this point my only issue with getting rid of Invisibility in favor of a modified Obscure is that it is a common power and simple as written.

It's the ability to turn the Obscure 10 / Invisibility into a mere penalty at the cost of a single level of a sensory booster that bothers me.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

It's the ability to turn the Obscure 10 / Invisibility into a mere penalty at the cost of a single level of a sensory booster that bothers me.

I suggested upthread treating Night Vision vs Dark Vision as a use case, so let's try that here (although this isn't quite what I was referring to). Dark Vision needs Color +20%. This basically means we're looking at [1]/level for each -1 that is negated, then a flat [20] to negate the "Sense is inapplicable" effect.

With that in mind, I'll change my earlier suggestion. Negating the penalty of Obscure 10 is [5] for Vision, [3] for Hearing, [2] for Taste/Smell or Touch, negating the lack of of the sense is worth twice this by itself. If the trait also applies to naturally occurring Obscure-like effects (smoke, darkness, etc), double the cost (the above progression is actually 5-2.5-1.75). Optionally, you must completely negate Obscure 10 before you can buy the trait that negates lack of the sense, but I wouldn't require this - a character who is at -5 in total darkness seems a like a perfectly legitimate character concept to me.

[draxdeveloper]

Do you think it would make sense to just lower the cost of silence to 3 or 4?

4 still is somewhat overpriced because is still better to raise stealth.

3 is fine, at least to me.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Point the first: Chameleon and Silence stink because they're over-expensive ways to buy more levels of Stealth. Removing the limitations on movement and on wearing clothing with Dynamic and Force Field results in both costing 8 points per +2 - which is comparable to Stealth skill until you realize it's only against one sense each. It's flat out better to just by Stealth, which works against Hearing, Vision, Smell, Sonar, and whatever.

Point the second: Obscure 10 (Defensive, Selective Area, Stealthy) [58] and Invisibility (Can Cary Objects: Heavy, Switchable) [84] are annoyingly similar for wacky price gaps (The Obscure is better and cheaper!).

Point the third: Invisibility being Always On by default is just weird.

Thesis:

• Invisibility should be removed
• Chameleon and Silence should become worked examples of Defensive, Stealthy Obscure.
• Obscure becomes "single target" (you, by default). If you want an Area Effect, buy it. Area Effect is required to buy Ranged.

I like your points, but I take exception with your List, specifically with the first bullet item. I like the distinction between Obscure and Invisibility, and think that the problematic pricing they show wrt each other might be traceable to the assumption of L10 in Obscure costing the same as L9 + L1, despite there being a big jump in effectiveness. Perhaps rather than assuming that L10 represents completely blocking the sense, the malus from Obscure should just accrue with a limit set by the GM for a particular game? Or heck, just adjust the prices of either or both traits to make them make sense as they approach each other utility-wise.

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

Yeah, this should go down in the notes for 5th edition. (If there ever is one...)

NARRATOR:
There never was.
Heh, Twitter humor :)

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by draxdeveloper

Do you think it would make sense to just lower the cost of silence to 3 or 4?

4 still is somewhat overpriced because is still better to raise stealth.

3 is fine, at least to me.

I 'essentially' lowered the price for them to 2.5 per level... but that's because I lumped them (Chameleon and Silence) together at 5/lvl for my last DF campaign.



The Players seemed receptive to this pricing... but no one played a Thief so it never showed up anyway.

[Brandy]

FWIW, this is an enhancement to Chameleon that I proposed some time back which harmonizes Chameleon and Invisibility. Just for another data point. :)

If Invisibility were described as +6 to stealth when moving and +12 to stealth when standing still (instead of a flat +9), then it would be essentially equivalent to Chameleon 6. However, Invisibility needs to add switchable -- invisibility isn't switchable by default, but chameleon is.

Chameleon 5 per level
Misdirecting: Even when you are successfully spotted by an opponent, your ability makes your precise location hard to determine. All opponent's to-hit rolls are -1 / level of Chameleon. +50%.

A maximum of 5 levels of this advantage can be purchased; Chameleon 6 with Misdirecting is equivalent to Invisibility with the switchable enhancement.