Alternate Talent pricing for math heads

[Not]

Originally Posted by Xplo

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

Touche. The only answer is that I'm an inveterate literalist. Not a good quality in a gamer, perhaps.

[Captain Joy]

Originally Posted by Xplo

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.

Xplo, IMO your alternative pricing rule for talents is superior to RAW. The only strike against it is that it's more complicated to implement; which you readily admit. They way your pricing scheme transitions seamlessly into the RAW cost of IQ and DX is brilliant. Well done, man.

It does seem, since the math gloves are off (or do I mean no-math gloves???), that there could be a more satisfying way to handle the pricing of few-skill talents other than a simple 5 minimum.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

It does seem, since the math gloves are off (or do I mean no-math glove???), that there could be a more satisfying way to handle the pricing of few-skill talents other than a simple 5 minimum.

A single-skill 'Talent' is canonically [2/level] and lacks the Reaction Modifier and the Study Time Reduction. *shrug*

[Captain Joy]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

A single-skill 'Talent' is canonically [2/level] and lacks the Reaction Modifier and the Study Time Reduction. *shrug*

Please elaborate.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

Please elaborate.

Page B118, Bonuses to skill rolls.

[kirbwarrior]

Study Time Reduction is at best worth a point per level, while the reaction bonuses as part of a talent imply they are worth a point per level. Dropping the bonus makes it seem about right with respect to the price of talents (With the new price, it would be [.25] per level, or +4 for [1], heh).

I actually like the new price, and it allows for huge, encompassing talents easier (such as a neat way to reprice magic spells correctly).

Actually, if I were to implement this new pricing, I would also use it to reprice Will and Per (HT is intentionally cheaper than it should be, and I'm okay with that reasoning).

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Xplo

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.

So you did. Nevermind.

I don't seem to get a lot of player complaints about Talents, so I've personally little motivation to change them. Even the two players that seem to actually care about game mechanics at all haven't noticed.

[Xplo]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

So you did. Nevermind.

I don't seem to get a lot of player complaints about Talents, so I've personally little motivation to change them. Even the two players that seem to actually care about game mechanics at all haven't noticed.

I recently made a "talented kid" sort of character with a few fields of expertise for a game. Unfortunately, the GM is fond of some of 3e's foibles and ported them into his 4e games - in this case, the age limit on skill points. (I tried to explain to him that points don't actually mean anything and that the rule was intentionally thrown out, but he remains unconvinced.) I tried to make it work with Talents, but it just cost too much for too little effect and I ended up pumping IQ instead.

Admittedly, if he wasn't using house rules, it might not have been an issue. But that, plus some complaints here, got me thinking about alternatives. If this is a solution in search of a problem in your games, congrats.

[Xplo]

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

It does seem, since the math gloves are off (or do I mean no-math gloves???), that there could be a more satisfying way to handle the pricing of few-skill talents other than a simple 5 minimum.

Well, the lower you go, the better off you are taking levels of Talent than levels of skill - meaning that clever munchkins might just do it. YMMV.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

A single-skill 'Talent' is canonically [2/level] and lacks the Reaction Modifier and the Study Time Reduction. *shrug*

Hm, didn't know that. Matches my pricing scheme, though.

[Not]

Any chance you could demand he justify all his declarations with citations, like people tend to do to me?