25% of Starting Points

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

I know this is RAW, but I think I'd protest if my GM told me I had to spend 45 points on having my parents as a Patron, who themselves might be only 50 CP characters.

You would also have a non-hazardous Duty nearly all the time.

[Kelly Pedersen]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

I know this is RAW, but I think I'd protest if my GM told me I had to spend 45 points on having my parents as a Patron, who themselves might be only 50 CP characters.

Just to note, this isn't RAW at all. A character only needs to purchase a Patron if that person will actually help them in adventuring circumstances. For most children in fiction, parents probably don't count for that, since they won't help in an adventure - they'll probably ground them instead, for getting up to such dangerous shenanigans! Any basic necessities of life that the parents provide is probably covered with just basic Status, or possibly taking the parents as a Contact with appropriate skills (Housekeeping, for example), to cover unusual-but-not-dangerous requests like "Can you help me prepare for my date on Saturday?".

Also, when building Patrons, particularly for low-point-value characters, I'd look more at the general descriptions at each level: "A powerful individual", "an extremely powerful individual", "an ultra-powerful individual", etc., rather than the point value guidelines, which, bear in mind, are all couched in terms of being "usually" this or that, not "always". If a 25-point character spends 10 of those points on a Patron, they're going to get a "powerful individual", and the fact that that person probably exceeds the "150% of your character point value" number by a lot is okay.

[Daigoro]

Originally Posted by RyanW

You would also have a non-hazardous Duty nearly all the time.

For the parents or the child?

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

Just to note, this isn't RAW at all. A character only needs to purchase a Patron if that person will actually help them in adventuring circumstances. For most children in fiction, parents probably don't count for that, since they won't help in an adventure - they'll probably ground them instead, for getting up to such dangerous shenanigans!

True 'nuff- I was only thinking about the 150%/200% clause, which of course breaks down completely if you look at a 0 CP character.

A good way to model parents is actually as Enemy (Watcher).

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by RyanW

The problem is (IMO) that the value of Allies scales with character power, but the cost of Allies does not. Superguy can have Batdude as an Ally for practically free, since even the highest cost of Ally is an afterthought on his huge budget. Meanwhile, Hobo Steve could take Hobo Mike as an Ally, but it would cost him a substantial chunk of his points. Both are approximately multiplicative in increased capabilities, but additive in increased cost.

Right but that goes back to the points that all advantage with set costs have this effect. Combat reflexes costs hobo mike 15 pts and batdude 15pt and superguy 15 pts.


The thing is Ally has both a set cost element (a 100% point ally that's always around always costs 20pts, whether the PC/Ally is 100cp or 1000cp),


And a proportional cost aspect, (100% of cp is a proportional value that defined by cp)

But that's because an allie's value is proportional to the character who buys it, but so in theory are the challenges each will face.

for example say Superguy is 2000cp, batdude is 500cp, hobo Mike and hobo steve are both 25cp


Superguy faces off against a 2000cp opponent with his ally Batdude. Batdude at 500pt is 25% of Superguy's opponents 'power'.


Hobo Mike faces opponent of 25cp (same proportional challenge in theory as Superguy fighting a 2000pt opponent), only at 25pts Hobo Mike's ally Hobo Steve is 100% of that opponents 'power' and proportionally much more of an asset than Batdude is for Superguy in an equivilnet fight, even Though batdude is 10x the raw power of Hobo Steve.

Now of course Hobo Mike is also in absolute terms much less powerful than Superguy, which is why even when the two have allies of equal power (and thus equal utility to them in there different worlds), the absolute points costs of that allies represents very different investments for overall points for superdude than it does for Hobo Mike.


I.e. basically in a 25cp low powered campaign having an ally of equal power costs you proportionally more than in a very high powered 2000cp campaign.

Just as Combat reflexes would be a significant part of a 25cp character and likely a defining feature, but is almost an after thought for a 2000cp character having 2000 pt adventures.

But I do agree ally throw up questions of absolute vs proportional in terms oi costs.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

For the parents or the child?

The child. Clean your room. Mow the grass. Eat your vegetables. (From the point of view of many kids, that last one may not be non-hazardous.)

Originally Posted by Daigoro

A good way to model parents is actually as Enemy (Watcher).

That's another way. Especially if you're running a Rugrats sort of "secret child adventurers" sort of game.

[Kelly Pedersen]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Batdude makes Superguy more capable in his quest to fight crime. Hobo Mike makes Hobo Steve more capable in his quest to find discarded pizza that isn't yet too moldy. That suggests that Batdude and Hobo Mike both add, let's say, about 20% to their ally's capabilities. But Batdude adds .1% to Superguy's point total, while Hobo Mike adds 20% to Hobo Steve's.

I take your point, but I don't really see what can be done about this with the general GURPS system. The same problem would seem to apply to almost any advantage that provides a benefit that isn't scaled to the character's point value. For instance, buying Combat Reflexes would probably add a similar amount to both Superguy and Hobo Mike's combat abilities, but represent a radically different percentage of their point totals.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Batdude makes Superguy more capable in his quest to fight crime. Hobo Mike makes Hobo Steve more capable in his quest to find discarded pizza that isn't yet too moldy. That suggests that Batdude and Hobo Mike both add, let's say, about 20% to their ally's capabilities. But Batdude adds .1% to Superguy's point total, while Hobo Mike adds 20% to Hobo Steve's.

Right but if Batdude is proportionally less of Superguy's CP total he is proportionally less of a help to Superguy when Superguy faces superguy level challenges. But Hobo Mike is portionally more of a help to Hobo Steve when Hobo Steve tackles Hobo Steve level challenges.

(no matter how much better Batdude would be at finding pizza instead of fighting crime than Hobo Mike would be).

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

I take your point, but I don't really see what can be done about this with the general GURPS system. The same problem would seem to apply to almost any advantage that provides a benefit that isn't scaled to the character's point value. For instance, buying Combat Reflexes would probably add a similar amount to both Superguy and Hobo Mike's combat abilities, but represent a radically different percentage of their point totals.

I agree it's a tough one in abstract, however i'd say the benefits of CR would also be felt more in proprational terms by a 25cp hobo getting into fight than say a 2000cp super hero.

I guess there is also the point that at 25cp we wouldn't expect anywhere as much capability from Hobo Mike as we do from 2000cp Superguy. So an investment in a 15pt advantage should be a proportionally greater one for the former than the later

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

I take your point, but I don't really see what can be done about this with the general GURPS system. The same problem would seem to apply to almost any advantage that provides a benefit that isn't scaled to the character's point value. For instance, buying Combat Reflexes would probably add a similar amount to both Superguy and Hobo Mike's combat abilities, but represent a radically different percentage of their point totals.

Altered Time Rate actually adds more capability when applied to a 1,000 point character with high Attributes, several Extra Attacks, very high combat skills, Weapon Master and other Advantages, than when applied to a 100 point character with few other traits.

Yet it's 10% of the point value in the first case, 100% in the second.

This is just how GURPS works and the only solution I can see is work with players to develop character concepts and only then impose a point limit, if you impose one at all. Point values aren't really effective at balancing much of anything, they are more useful to make players feel that they have at least the same chance as other players to choose cool stuff.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Altered Time Rate actually adds more capability when applied to a 1,000 point character with high Attributes, several Extra Attacks, very high combat skills, Weapon Master and other Advantages, than when applied to a 100 point character with few other traits.

Yet it's 10% of the point value in the first case, 100% in the second.

I agree some traits can at times "value add" thus having a multiplicative effect. But there's also the point that that increase should be seen in terms of what you face.

Put it this way. I think 100pts of ATR provides a proportionally greater advantage when facing 200cp adversaries than it it does when facing 1100pt ones. Even if say at 1100pt its mean an extra attack(s) at Skill30 and ST30 than say an extra attack at skill15 and ST12.

I guess another way to look at this is a 1000cp character will not have significantly greater difficulty beating a 200pt one than a 1100pt one would with addition of ATR, even if that 100pt difference would amount to significant difference at the 200pt level.


But yeah those are all a very subjective points!

Originally Posted by Icelander

This is just how GURPS works and the only solution I can see is work with players to develop character concepts and only then impose a point limit, if you impose one at all. Point values aren't really effective at balancing much of anything, they are more useful to make players feel that they have at least the same chance as other players to choose cool stuff.

That I agree with, there are really far too many variables here.

Just ask the TL12 psychic paying 10pt per points of ST and the TL3 knight doing the same!