More Imbuements

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Note that I'm not talking about man-portable weapons here; I'm talking about vehicle-mounted weapons.

The only different between a man-portable weapon and a vehicle-mounted one in most cases is what it's mounted to (a tripod/bipod or an actual vehicle).

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Why?

Because I was the author and that's how I wrote it? I felt it should be more difficult to imbue an object that you didn't have control of. It would be like a smaller human holding onto a really big sword, except his hand wasn't the one that wielding the weapon in the first place. You are, of course, free to do as you wish in your campaigns, but extensive playtest in my own games revealed that some sort of penalty was due and -2 felt about right.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

There's about half a step from “you can Imbue your rollerblades” to “you can Imbue yourself” — and it has a precedent in applying attack and defense Imbuements to unarmed combat. Between these three classes of Imbuements, I think it may now be possible to replace nearly all Cinematic Martial Arts skills with Imbuements if someone wishes to do so — the main exceptions being things like Invisibility Art, Hypnotic Hands, and Mental Strength.

Okay...yeah...sure...I guess. I'm not sure what you're getting at here. I had bicycles, skates, etc. firmly in mind when I wrote this and one of my players created a super who could imbue his skateboard to do some pretty cool things (well, all vehicles, but he really liked that skateboard).

Originally Posted by dataweaver

That is the most obvious next step. But what else could be Imbued?

I think someone mentioned imbueing computers (which I do have covered in the article I spoke of), but I'm not sure where you are going. Imbuements only work on gear for the most part - you can't really use them on anything built with an advantage. The exception being is unarmed attacks. What other gear is there that characters use often on adventures? Most of the breaking and entering stuff could use Attack imbuments. I'm not seeing where you are trying to take this conversation exactly.

[dataweaver]

I may be misreading, but I'm getting a distinct vibe of defensiveness from your responses, as if you feel I'm attacking your work. If so, please feel at ease: I rarely comment on things that I don't like. But I'm a tinkerer at heart; when I see something like this, my instinct is to find ways to refine and expand on it — that's what I'm going for here. One side effect of that is that my comments generally take the form of critiques and challenges rather than praise; but the motivation behind it isn't to tear down what you've built, but the opposite.

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

Because I was the author and that's how I wrote it? I felt it should be more difficult to imbue an object that you didn't have control of. It would be like a smaller human holding onto a really big sword, except his hand wasn't the one that wielding the weapon in the first place. You are, of course, free to do as you wish in your campaigns, but extensive playtest in my own games revealed that some sort of penalty was due and -2 felt about right.

Obviously I'm free to do as I wish in my campaigns; I'm not asking for permission so much as I'm asking for insight. With all due respect, “That's how I wrote it” and “extensive playtest revealed…” doesn't provide insight.

How does the engineer not have control of the vehicle? Certainly, he doesn't control what direction the vehicle is going; but he very definitely has control of the engine. And it's in that capacity that he'd be Imbuing the vehicle with such things as better fuel efficiency or a higher top speed. Kirk doesn't ask Sulu for more speed, despite the fact that Sulu is the helmsman; he asks Scotty.

Put another way: Imbuements are generally about enhancing gear; but more precisely, they're abòut enhancing skills that involve gear. Whenever the Imbuements system asks you to specialize an Imbuement skill, it generally asks you to specialize by skill use. And while many of the Transportation Imbuements certainly strike me as being conceptually associated with vehicle operation skills, a few of them strike me as being more closely associated with the likes of Mechanic. In those cases, it seems to me that if anyone should suffer a -2 penalty for not being the ideal person to do the Imbuement, it would be the pilot rather than the engineer: Sulu rather than Scotty.

Where's the flaw in my reasoning?

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

I think someone mentioned imbuing computers (which I do have covered in the article I spoke of), but I'm not sure where you are going. Imbuements only work on gear for the most part - you can't really use them on anything built with an advantage. The exception being is unarmed attacks.

And optionally, magic spells.

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

What other gear is there that characters use often on adventures? Most of the breaking and entering stuff could use Attack imbuments. I'm not seeing where you are trying to take this conversation exactly.

So you feel that the attack, defense, transportation, and hypothetical “cognitive” (i.e., sensors, communications, and computers) Imbuements are sufficient to cover everything that ought to be covered? That once the last item there is addressed, the Imbuements “system” will essentially be complete, save for the occasional introduction of an individual Imbuement here and there?

That's not a rhetorical question or an attack; I don't know if there's anything else that needs to be covered, and the system very well might be one class of Imbuements away from being “complete”. Or there may be something that I've overlooked, which is why I'm asking the question.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

I may be misreading, but I'm getting a distinct vibe of defensiveness from your responses, as if you feel I'm attacking your work. If so, please feel at ease: I rarely comment on things that I don't like. But I'm a tinkerer at heart; when I see something like this, my instinct is to find ways to refine and expand on it — that's what I'm going for here. One side effect of that is that my comments generally take the form of critiques and challenges rather than praise; but the motivation behind it isn't to tear down what you've built, but the opposite.

Nope. And if it came off like I that I'm sorry. :-/

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Obviously I'm free to do as I wish in my campaigns; I'm not asking for permission so much as I'm asking for insight. With all due respect, “That's how I wrote it” and “extensive playtest revealed…” doesn't provide insight.

Unfortunately, much of my work is as based on numbers as it is based on experience and gut feeling. You are seeking answers to a question that I cannot give. I cannot give them because when I wrote it and playtested it, I felt that the one who pilots the ship - i.e., the who is making the skill roll to operate the vehicle - is the who who should be making the imbuement skill roll. I adjusted it to allow others to make such rolls because one of my players brought up some of your concerns (Scotty on the Enterprise actually). That is it in a nutshell. I didn't like how it worked and felt play balance was slightly askew. I put in a adjustment for said balance.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

How does the engineer not have control of the vehicle? Certainly, he doesn't control what direction the vehicle is going; but he very definitely has control of the engine. And it's in that capacity that he'd be Imbuing the vehicle with such things as better fuel efficiency or a higher top speed. Kirk doesn't ask Sulu for more speed, despite the fact that Sulu is the helmsman; he asks Scotty.

Right, but in this example Sulu would be making the actually Piloting rolls, Kirk would roll Shiphandling (the skill of operation), and Scotty would be performing engineering tasks (probably via Crewman, Mechanic, or possibly Vehicle operation skill. The latter two would be giving complimentary skill rolls and Kirk would need to be the one to make an imbument skill roll.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Put another way: Imbuements are generally about enhancing gear; but more precisely, they're abòut enhancing skills that involve gear. Whenever the Imbuements system asks you to specialize an Imbuement skill, it generally asks you to specialize by skill use. And while many of the Transportation Imbuements certainly strike me as being conceptually associated with vehicle operation skills, a few of them strike me as being more closely associated with the likes of Mechanic. In those cases, it seems to me that if anyone should suffer a -2 penalty for not being the ideal person to do the Imbuement, it would be the pilot rather than the engineer: Sulu rather than Scotty.

I could see that as an optional rule in some instances, but you'd need to clearly define what skills could use it.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

And optionally, magic spells.So you feel that the attack, defense, transportation, and hypothetical “cognitive” (i.e., sensors, communications, and computers) Imbuements are sufficient to cover everything that ought to be covered? That once the last item there is addressed, the Imbuements “system” will essentially be complete, save for the occasional introduction of an individual Imbuement here and there?

That's not a rhetorical question or an attack; I don't know if there's anything else that needs to be covered, and the system very well might be one class of Imbuements away from being “complete”. Or there may be something that I've overlooked, which is why I'm asking the question.

To be fair, I'd really have to devote more spoons than I currently possess to the question, but right off...no. I'm sure there are angles I'm not seeing. I have this idea - well, I have about 3,000 words written, so not an "idea" idea - about "crafting" imbuements where you'd have something like "Keen Weapon" (which gives a permenant bonus to damage for cutting or impaling weapons you've forged) or "Strengthen Weapon" (which would increase the HT of a weapon you've forged). Such "crafting" imbuements would let you mimic how forging magical weapons or the like seem to work in fiction or movies. It would be totally magic system independent and could serve to function for other supernatural systems as well, say, like, a way to create psionic weapons or the like. It would also be TL independent so you could create firearms, GRASERS, or whatever.

[dataweaver]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

Right, but in this example Sulu would be making the actually Piloting rolls, Kirk would roll Shiphandling (the skill of operation), and Scotty would be performing engineering tasks (probably via Crewman, Mechanic, or possibly Vehicle operation skill. The latter two would be giving complimentary skill rolls and Kirk would need to be the one to make an imbument skill roll.

Kirk? Not Sulu?

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

I could see that as an optional rule in some instances, but you'd need to clearly define what skills could use it.

Indeed.

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

To be fair, I'd really have to devote more spoons than I currently possess to the question, but right off...no. I'm sure there are angles I'm not seeing.

…which is why I posted this to the forums instead of as a private email: the more eyes there are looking at a question, the more likely someone will see something that was missed.

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

I have this idea - well, I have about 3,000 words written, so not an "idea" idea - about "crafting" imbuements where you'd have something like "Keen Weapon" (which gives a permenant bonus to damage for cutting or impaling weapons you've forged) or "Strengthen Weapon" (which would increase the HT of a weapon you've forged). Such "crafting" imbuements would let you mimic how forging magical weapons or the like seem to work in fiction or movies. It would be totally magic system independent and could serve to function for other supernatural systems as well, say, like, a way to create psionic weapons or the like. It would also be TL independent so you could create firearms, GRASERS, or whatever.

Sounds interesting. Such crafting could also apply to such things as pottery and glass-blowing — or to architecture, providing an Imbuement-based approach to concepts such as Feng Shui or Sacred Architecture. I could also see applying it to skills such as Cooking to produce such things as “waybread” where a single bite provides you with all the nutrition you need for a week, or food that's so tasty that the person who eats it experiences bliss; or food that has medicinal properties. At what point do you cross the line from Imbuements to Spells?

I'd be inclined to suggest that Imbuements with permanent effects should require a character point expenditure or the equivalent (e.g., hundreds of hours worth of appropriate labor).

I've also wondered if musical instruments might be suitable subjects for Imbuements that don't fit the existing categories.

[Nereidalbel]

Sulu was at the controls, meaning he made the rolls. Scotty would make rolls for boosting engines, shields, and weapons. Kirk was mentally rolling tovdecide how many Red Shirts he should lose on that planet over there.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Kirk? Not Sulu?

Right, because Kirk is using Shiphandling which is the skill used to "pilot" a ship with a crew.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

…which is why I posted this to the forums instead of as a private email: the more eyes there are looking at a question, the more likely someone will see something that was missed.

Ahhh. Well then. Carry on.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Sounds interesting. Such crafting could also apply to such things as pottery and glass-blowing — or to architecture, providing an Imbuement-based approach to concepts such as Feng Shui or Sacred Architecture. I could also see applying it to skills such as Cooking to produce such things as “waybread” where a single bite provides you with all the nutrition you need for a week, or food that's so tasty that the person who eats it experiences bliss; or food that has medicinal properties.

Oh, absolutely. That's one of the things I had in mind actually. Basically, any spell that lets you make something. It would need some serious word-count to cover most tasks - all tasks would require something book-length.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

At what point do you cross the line from Imbuements to Spells?

An excellent question. The answer is: it depends on the setting, the magic system, and the effect.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

I'd be inclined to suggest that Imbuements with permanent effects should require a character point expenditure or the equivalent (e.g., hundreds of hours worth of appropriate labor).

The way I have it set up is you can spend CP to "imbue rapidly," but the act of creation and using the skill all that time is what makes the item "better." Imbuing the item with (whatever) doesn't take any additional time or require any additional effort, but a failed roll on the Imbuement skill makes the item crappy or broken. Spending CP basically "speeds up" time for the task, though that's limited by how high your imbuement is.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

I've also wondered if musical instruments might be suitable subjects for Imbuements that don't fit the existing categories.

That's actually a great idea. The Enthrallment or Musical Influence abilities could be comparable to imbuement skills for entertainment.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Nereidalbel

Sulu was at the controls, meaning he made the rolls. Scotty would make rolls for boosting engines, shields, and weapons. Kirk was mentally rolling tovdecide how many Red Shirts he should lose on that planet over there.

By GURPS, most "ships" should probably use Shiphandling. Though looking at spaceships it does seem to indicate that the Piloting is the key here. Hmmm. I honestly only glanced at Spaceships when I wrote Vehicle Imbuements, but I did look at Low-Tech 2 often. Oh well. I can tell you without a doubt that this is what I had in mind for "large vessels" (sailing ships, airships, spaceships, etc.). Ship's captains would be doing the imbuing, not the pilots.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

How does the engineer not have control of the vehicle? Certainly, he doesn't control what direction the vehicle is going; but he very definitely has control of the engine. And it's in that capacity that he'd be Imbuing the vehicle with such things as better fuel efficiency or a higher top speed. Kirk doesn't ask Sulu for more speed, despite the fact that Sulu is the helmsman; he asks Scotty.

I've been tinkering with this for awhile as well, because I noticed something similar. The problem is this: Imbuements represent someone enhancing an item as they use it. The person who wields the weapon imbues it, not the weaponsmith. The person who wears the armor imbues it, not the armorsmith. The person who drives the vehicle imbues it, not the mechanic back at the shop.

But why couldn't an engineer imbue a vehicle, or a weapon, or armor? Why not MacGyver on a thing for a few minutes, hand it back to the person who is using it with new enhancements? Isn't the pretty much the whole point of Gadgeteer?

So I've been thinking of trying to find some way to combine the Imbuements system with Gadgeteer for awhile now, because I think they go together like peanut-butter and chocolate, but it's not really imbuements. An imbuement lets you turn a laser blast into a cone attack for a single shot by spending fatigue. It's like casting a spell. A gadgeteer tinkers with your laser for a second and then hands it back to you with the capacity to do fan-blasts, and that will last (at least until it breaks down). It's like enchanting an item. It might use a similar system, but I think it would be fundamentally different (You wouldn't require the imbuement advantage, gadgeteer would be enough, and you wouldn't use imbuement skills directly, but you might use them as inspiration. I think the imbuement advantage requirements might represent how difficult the modification would be)

[Sassy Psionic Space Squid]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

So I've been thinking of trying to find some way to combine the Imbuements system with Gadgeteer for awhile now, because I think they go together like peanut-butter and chocolate, but it's not really imbuements. An imbuement lets you turn a laser blast into a cone attack for a single shot by spending fatigue. It's like casting a spell. A gadgeteer tinkers with your laser for a second and then hands it back to you with the capacity to do fan-blasts, and that will last (at least until it breaks down). It's like enchanting an item. It might use a similar system, but I think it would be fundamentally different (You wouldn't require the imbuement advantage, gadgeteer would be enough, and you wouldn't use imbuement skills directly, but you might use them as inspiration. I think the imbuement advantage requirements might represent how difficult the modification would be)

Quick Gadgeteer plus Lend Gear, like the Imbue Others enhancement? And Link +10% to Modular Ability Imbuement.

I also think that sounds similar to the Weird Science modifier in #3/46, which I thought sounded similar to Imbuement too.

DF 11 also had Spellsmith, which enhanced Quick Gadgeteer with Cosmic +50% so it also worked for magic items. I would imagine you could do the same thing for Weird Science tech that defies physics using reality-warping mad science.

[scc]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

GURPS High-Tech (p. 230) has a skateboard and really, they are basically the same thing, except skateboards are more stable. I'd just use those stats if I were you.

I think it's mentioned in basic that those sorts of gear provide Enhanced Move