Talents adding directly to Techniques?

[evileeyore]

Is it kosher for a talent to add directly to a Technique irrespective of the Techniques skill?

Example:

Born to Parkour
5 points/level
Acrobatics, Breakfall, Climbing, Jumping, Running.
Reaction Bonus: Free runners, ninja, and traceurs.
Alternative Benefit: +1/level to HT rolls to avoid or recover from injuries incurred as a direct result of failure with the affected skills (including failed extra effort).
Alternative Cost: 5 points/level.


In the above, though Acrobatics can take the technique, it's possible a Character taking this might have a much higher Judo or Wrestling skill. Also... would this be double-dipping if the Character did not have Judo or Wrestling? Would this be kosher if the Skill the Technique could be applied to weren't a part of the Talent?


This came to me as I was building the above talent but couldn't think of a 5th skill that really fit well (Lifting is a possibility as is Hiking, kinda) and I realized that Breakfall might be a possible and strong 5th ability to boost. To me, even if it double-dipped, it might really fit the theme of the way they move and recover from falls.

Or is it just that I put this together at 6:30 am literally 2 hours after I should have gone to sleep and it's a Bad Idea™?

[Icelander]

I'd allow it.

Balance wise, you are effectively adding a part of a skill to a Talent that would support up to two whole skills without changing the pricing. There's nothing that forbids noting that a Talent gives bonuses only to certain uses of a skill (there is even some slight precedent that I'm too lazy to look up at work) and a bonus to a technique is effectively just a bonus to certain uses of a skill.

If you're worried that a Technique may default to more than one skill and that you are therefore adding a potential bonus to more than one skill, note that you could add two whole skills to the Talent in place of Breakfall and it would still be rules-legal.

Of rather more concern is whether the Talent can count twice for characters who base their Breakfall technique on their Acrobatics skill, also covered by the Talent. In this case, the rules definitely do not support it, though as GM you are, of course, free to add an exception for this particular Talent.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Icelander

I'd allow it.

Of rather more concern is whether the Talent can count twice for characters who base their Breakfall technique on their Acrobatics skill, also covered by the Talent. In this case, the rules definitely do not support it, though as GM you are, of course, free to add an exception for this particular Talent.

I completely agree. Double counting is fishy. Adding a technique (or class of techniques) instead of skill is not. The trick is that most talents that could add to a technique are likely to add to the underlying skill as well.

[hal]

My take on it is that a talent only applies ONCE, to the underlying stat itself, not specifically to the skill per se, but in that the Stat is broadly at its level, but for purposes of specific skill sets - the stat is seemingly higher.

That is largely why I balked at the fact that GURPS CHARACER ASSISTANT, being what it is (a program) allowed for a character to have a Talent X with a bonus to skill Z, and a Talent Y with a bonus to the same Skill Z, and end up with a +8 maximum bonus to that one specific skill Z.

If a technique is something that is part of a basic skill, and defaults to a basic skill, being able to use a Talent to benefit the Skill itself, and then also applying it to a technique is by definition - double dipping.

Feint is a default to the skill at Skill-0. So something that improves the Skill itself by +4, is already affecting the technique at the start by raising it from skill-0 to Skill+talent-0 Making it SKill+talent-0+talent does in fact, double the effect of something that modifies not a SKILL so much as the attribute.

That's my thoughts - not something I'd demand of every GM mind you. But as I say, good for the Goose means good for the Gander. Few players want to go up against an Optimized NPC - especially if they're not optimized themselves...

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by hal

That is largely why I balked at the fact that GURPS CHARACER ASSISTANT, being what it is (a program) allowed for a character to have a Talent X with a bonus to skill Z, and a Talent Y with a bonus to the same Skill Z, and end up with a +8 maximum bonus to that one specific skill Z.

That's kosher, GCA isn't doing anything funky there. Talents stack. Instead GMs are supposed to keep an eye on if players have stacking talents and decide if they mind the overlap or not. If it's just something like Weather Sense I don't think it's going to be game breaking.

[hal]

Originally Posted by Bruno

That's kosher, GCA isn't doing anything funky there. Talents stack. Instead GMs are supposed to keep an eye on if players have stacking talents and decide if they mind the overlap or not. If it's just something like Weather Sense I don't think it's going to be game breaking.

Although "Kosher", that still to me (ie, in my opinion) constitutes a dodge around the rule that Talents can't be any higher than +4.

While other GM's might rule that it is ok for their campaigns, and the rules as written may not forbid it, there is the rule of law, and then there is the spirit of law. Since I'm not a supreme court judge (where GURPS is concerned!!!), I can only state my opinion and leave it at that.

;)

[Armin]

Originally Posted by hal

Although "Kosher", that still to me (ie, in my opinion) constitutes a dodge around the rule that Talents can't be any higher than +4.

While other GM's might rule that it is ok for their campaigns, and the rules as written may not forbid it, there is the rule of law, and then there is the spirit of law. Since I'm not a supreme court judge (where GURPS is concerned!!!), I can only state my opinion and leave it at that.

;)

I understand your point of view. GCA5 will introduce Bonus Classes, so you can classify all your talent bonuses as such, and then limit the max from them to +4 per trait, regardless of source.

[hal]

Originally Posted by Armin

I understand your point of view. GCA5 will introduce Bonus Classes, so you can classify all your talent bonuses as such, and then limit the max from them to +4 per trait, regardless of source.

That there is work being done on GCA5 - is a good thing, and I hope that you're enjoying how it is working out as you create it. Nothing like taking something that didn't exist, working on it and eventually getting it to work as you'd like. :)

So, any projected date on when you think we might see it arriving? If that's classified, just take this as a "Hey, you did a nice job with GCA, wanna see GCA5 when it comes out!" Ie a vote of appreciation for what you've already done.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Icelander

In this case, the rules definitely do not support it, though as GM you are, of course, free to add an exception for this particular Talent.

Ah. Good. I was of the mind it wasn't kosher. I'll probably slot in a different skill there, like Urban Survival (Abandoned Buildings) instead.

Originally Posted by hal

Although "Kosher", that still to me (ie, in my opinion) constitutes a dodge around the rule that Talents can't be any higher than +4.

You might want to double check Basic pg 89 and read the last line of Talents again.

[Armin]

Originally Posted by hal

So, any projected date on when you think we might see it arriving? If that's classified, just take this as a "Hey, you did a nice job with GCA, wanna see GCA5 when it comes out!" Ie a vote of appreciation for what you've already done.

Afraid not. Every time I've ever thought I might have it ready by some time, life has happened and messed it all up, or I'd realize something else that seems very important and needed to be in there, and so on. I am trying to tie things off to get closer, but I'm in the middle of one last big thing, and that whole "life" thing is happening. That is preventing me from finishing that last big thing, which is preventing me from getting back to tying things up.

TL,DR: No estimates at the moment.

Armin

Sorry for the little thread detour.