Alternate Talent pricing for math heads

Xplo · 05-12-2013, 09:30 PM

So I was thinking about how 15-point Talents are generally overpriced compared to DX or IQ, how 10-point Talents are iffy, and how you're better off buying pure attributes than multiple Talents.

Proposed new Talent cost: number of skills ^ .5 * 2. Keep the 5-point cost floor if players would abuse its absence. This makes Talents with up to five skills cost the same as the alternate costs in Power-Ups 3 and then fall behind. Raise IQ to 25 points/level to better reflect its true value.

Incidentally, I counted 131 IQ skills (counting "families" of required specializations as one skill for the purpose), giving a cost of 23/level as a Talent, and 82 DX skills, giving a cost of 19/level, which is pretty close to their actual costs (if you include my proposed IQ cost increase). All things considered, pure attributes offer more bang for buck, but only if you're making a polymath - as it should be.

An "everything" Talent, for 244 skills, would be 32 points. So the next time someone wants to know what a +1 to any skill roll is worth in CP, there's a baseline...

Not · 05-12-2013, 09:57 PM

Since talents are a way of discounting skills bought in bulk, which runs against the grain of GURPS' general way of doing business, I'm inclined simply not to allow talents other than those listed in the book. The text suggests a sports talent, but to me that's just DX.

Er, sorry to be down on your idea.

Xplo · 05-12-2013, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not

Since talents are a way of discounting skills bought in bulk, which runs against the grain of GURPS' general way of doing business, I'm inclined simply not to allow talents other than those listed in the book. The text suggests a sports talent, but to me that's just DX.

Er, sorry to be down on your idea.

I disagree, obviously - but if that's how you feel, why allow the ones in the book?

sir_pudding · 05-12-2013, 10:12 PM

Have you looked at the alternative pricing rules in PU3?

Johnny Angel · 05-12-2013, 10:12 PM

How much are the reaction bonuses worth?

Anthony · 05-12-2013, 10:22 PM

The problem with talents is that their value isn't strictly a function of how many skills they are -- it's with what skills they are. A talent with a bunch of skills that are of marginal value, are highly redundant, have glaring gaps that will have to be filled in, or have a lot of shared defaults just isn't ever going to be that valuable. By comparison, the 'every skill I want to be good at' talent is fairly valuable.

The reaction bonus is basically Reputation (small or large class -- most examples are small class), at 5/3 or 5/2 per level.

~~NineDaysDead~~ · 05-12-2013, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not

Since talents are a way of discounting skills bought in bulk, which runs against the grain of GURPS' general way of doing business, I'm inclined simply not to allow talents other than those listed in the book.

Which book?

Xplo · 05-12-2013, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Have you looked at the alternative pricing rules in PU3?

I have. Didn't I reference them? I recall them being, basically, 1 point per skill, minimum 5. Which still leaves the problem that the big Talents are too pricy compared to attributes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony

The problem with talents is that their value isn't strictly a function of how many skills they are -- it's with what skills they are. A talent with a bunch of skills that are of marginal value, are highly redundant, have glaring gaps that will have to be filled in, or have a lot of shared defaults just isn't ever going to be that valuable. By comparison, the 'every skill I want to be good at' talent is fairly valuable.

Well, first of all, the point of Talents is to be useful to the character who takes them, and to give that character a defined field of expertise or ability. RAW warn against "me talents", but if you don't want at least most of the skills in a Talent, why would you take it? I think this is a case where the RAW miss the point by erring on the side of caution.

As to the point that some skills are more useful than others, I can't think of any mechanic that can alleviate that, other than pricing skills by utility (yeah, that gigantic can of worms, which I don't intend to argue for). If you think a particular Talent is overpriced for its utility, either don't take it, or go to your GM and make a case for lowering the cost.

Ultraviolet · 05-13-2013, 03:05 AM

The point of Talents is to allow a character to be highly skilled in a narrow field of skills rather than investing broadly in Attributes and by association being skilled in many fields.
Such generalists are IM HO trite and boring, and makes characters in a party too similar.

Imagine a campaign about spacefarers. The engineer, diplomat, and planetary surveyor all rely omn IQ based skills, so they invest heavily in IQ and may end up with similar stats. So they all have the same defaults in all fields not covered by their skills, also in those related to the other guys' fields (unless we talk about defaults from skills).
So when the engineer needs to machine a part to fix the reactor, and uses pure IQ default to Machinist he might as well let the diplomat get his hands dirty because they are equally skilled.
However had they used Talents the Engineer's might have included this skill.

I know this is putting things on the edge, since skills within same fields often default to other skills. But still.

Talents are a thing I (once I saw them in 4th ed) sorely missed back in 4th ed. There were a few advantages back then in 3rd ed that could help you: Mathematical Ability for techs and engineers, Musical Ability, Double Jointed for thieves and stage magicians.

And I use them a lot.
Say in my Cliffhangers campaign, the action-oriented explorer type can avoid being a total brain as well but cover his most vital science skills with a talent, save some points and focus on being tough, have good reflexes etc.

~~smurf~~ · 05-13-2013, 05:00 AM

I like talents.

Invented with Magery. A talent for power of magic. This means you do not need massive smart Mages all the time. Or semi smart ones at least.

Psi talents: One for each disicpline, therefore 2 disicplines are going to make you think about cost. Again not allowing for the bulbous brains of sci fi to do mind powers on mere mortals.

Ergo... other talents. Specialised in a narrow field.

It just means that a lot of characters do not have to be near olympic to do anything which is cool.

Moutain Climber: Climb, Absail (repelling?) repair ropes, tie knots and there could be more I cannot think of.

The (Clifton) gorge near where I live has people scrambling up and down it almost all year around. And yet we can say not many of them are built like heros but everyday people enjoying a sport. From easy up to 20 HVS+ routes.

05-12-2013, 09:30 PM	#1
Xplo Join Date: Apr 2006	Alternate Talent pricing for math heads So I was thinking about how 15-point Talents are generally overpriced compared to DX or IQ, how 10-point Talents are iffy, and how you're better off buying pure attributes than multiple Talents. Proposed new Talent cost: number of skills ^ .5 * 2. Keep the 5-point cost floor if players would abuse its absence. This makes Talents with up to five skills cost the same as the alternate costs in Power-Ups 3 and then fall behind. Raise IQ to 25 points/level to better reflect its true value. Incidentally, I counted 131 IQ skills (counting "families" of required specializations as one skill for the purpose), giving a cost of 23/level as a Talent, and 82 DX skills, giving a cost of 19/level, which is pretty close to their actual costs (if you include my proposed IQ cost increase). All things considered, pure attributes offer more bang for buck, but only if you're making a polymath - as it should be. An "everything" Talent, for 244 skills, would be 32 points. So the next time someone wants to know what a +1 to any skill roll is worth in CP, there's a baseline...

05-12-2013, 09:57 PM	#2
Not Join Date: Feb 2013	Re: Alternate Talent pricing for math heads Since talents are a way of discounting skills bought in bulk, which runs against the grain of GURPS' general way of doing business, I'm inclined simply not to allow talents other than those listed in the book. The text suggests a sports talent, but to me that's just DX. Er, sorry to be down on your idea.

05-12-2013, 10:12 PM	#4
sir_pudding Wielder of Smart Pants Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Ventura CA	Re: Alternate Talent pricing for math heads Have you looked at the alternative pricing rules in PU3?

05-12-2013, 10:12 PM	#5
Johnny Angel MIB Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Pennsylvania	Re: Alternate Talent pricing for math heads How much are the reaction bonuses worth?

05-12-2013, 10:22 PM	#6
Anthony Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Berkeley, CA	Re: Alternate Talent pricing for math heads The problem with talents is that their value isn't strictly a function of how many skills they are -- it's with what skills they are. A talent with a bunch of skills that are of marginal value, are highly redundant, have glaring gaps that will have to be filled in, or have a lot of shared defaults just isn't ever going to be that valuable. By comparison, the 'every skill I want to be good at' talent is fairly valuable. The reaction bonus is basically Reputation (small or large class -- most examples are small class), at 5/3 or 5/2 per level. Last edited by Anthony; 05-12-2013 at 10:25 PM.

05-13-2013, 03:05 AM	#9
Ultraviolet Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Århus, Denmark	Re: Alternate Talent pricing for math heads The point of Talents is to allow a character to be highly skilled in a narrow field of skills rather than investing broadly in Attributes and by association being skilled in many fields. Such generalists are IM HO trite and boring, and makes characters in a party too similar. Imagine a campaign about spacefarers. The engineer, diplomat, and planetary surveyor all rely omn IQ based skills, so they invest heavily in IQ and may end up with similar stats. So they all have the same defaults in all fields not covered by their skills, also in those related to the other guys' fields (unless we talk about defaults from skills). So when the engineer needs to machine a part to fix the reactor, and uses pure IQ default to Machinist he might as well let the diplomat get his hands dirty because they are equally skilled. However had they used Talents the Engineer's might have included this skill. I know this is putting things on the edge, since skills within same fields often default to other skills. But still. Talents are a thing I (once I saw them in 4th ed) sorely missed back in 4th ed. There were a few advantages back then in 3rd ed that could help you: Mathematical Ability for techs and engineers, Musical Ability, Double Jointed for thieves and stage magicians. And I use them a lot. Say in my Cliffhangers campaign, the action-oriented explorer type can avoid being a total brain as well but cover his most vital science skills with a talent, save some points and focus on being tough, have good reflexes etc. __________________ Playing GURPS since '90, is now fluent in 4th ed as well.

05-13-2013, 05:00 AM	#10
~~smurf~~ Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Bristol	Re: Alternate Talent pricing for math heads I like talents. Invented with Magery. A talent for power of magic. This means you do not need massive smart Mages all the time. Or semi smart ones at least. Psi talents: One for each disicpline, therefore 2 disicplines are going to make you think about cost. Again not allowing for the bulbous brains of sci fi to do mind powers on mere mortals. Ergo... other talents. Specialised in a narrow field. It just means that a lot of characters do not have to be near olympic to do anything which is cool. Moutain Climber: Climb, Absail (repelling?) repair ropes, tie knots and there could be more I cannot think of. The (Clifton) gorge near where I live has people scrambling up and down it almost all year around. And yet we can say not many of them are built like heros but everyday people enjoying a sport. From easy up to 20 HVS+ routes.