Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

If you toss the book at them and say "make a character!" sure. But if you make the character with them, you shouldn't have a problem. At least, I don't.

"ST is this, DX is that, IQ is this, blah blah. You get these advantages, and now you have to choose X points from this small, easy list. Still need some help? Well, for your concept, I rather like this advantage and that one. I see you're eying that one over there, well, we can do this and that, how about that?"

It's MUCH easier than sifting through the entire book, and it's no harder than making a D&D character, IMO.

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

Official options are good, because they empower players, in that the burden of explaining why a given option should not be allowed lies on the GM, rather than a player having to explain why a non-official option should be allowed.

The problem with Perks is that there are a whole lot of them. This causes organizational difficulties.

A big and continually expanded index of official (i.e. Kromm-sanctioned) Perks, sorted by category, with each Perk placed in multiple categories, would solve the problem, though.

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

That's probably a good idea.

I'll always defend a player's freedom to start a character concept with a single high-cost Advantage, and then build on top of that, but if a player starts with a very low-cost trait, e.g. a Perk, and takes it from there, then there's a fair chance that said low-cost trait should be a high-cost trait.

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

That's why templates were invented.

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

There is also the issue of passive advantages.

I won't accept having to remind the GM that my character has Voice or Charisma, or Danger Sense, because there's a risk that doing so makes me look greedy (even though I'm only demanding to get what I've paid for). If he can't keep my character's capabilitistic individuality in mind without needing to be reminded, he's unfit.

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

Perhaps surprisingly, I disagree. Roleplaying gaming is a hobby for the intellectually gifted minority, so people who can't handle complex systems don't belong in it, but RPG designers can make their systems more accessible by organizing the information along sensible lines.

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

More official and Kromm-sanctioned Talents would be good, but don't overlook more variants of Blessed. Everybody else already does.

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

Or, maybe he is a little busy running the villians, the NPCs, the world setting, the atmosphere, interpreting rules, familiars, aliens, robots, etc. and maybe, he might feel that it wouldn't be too much trouble for the player to keep track of a few aspects of his/her own character to take a little of the burden off him.

just a thought....

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

For forum's sake, I provide this link to a related discussion:

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread...ferating+perks

Re: Perks, can we have too many?
 

Ah, I did have a nagging feeling the issue was brought up before. Damn, too late now.

Btw, I think a good "solution" would be something like the Skill Categories pdf, which groups skills into logical if overlapping (not a bad thing) categories.

Once enough of them are out there, I think that'd help remember all your options and help character creation.

Btw, I don't think "rpg is for an elite intellectual minority". We should move away from that stance, 4e does this well, it's streamlined in a way you can select how complex you want to make it.

I have made custom, modular templates to great sucess. They're basically 20 or 30-point packs that players can slap together to make a character. Big hit with my family who doesn't know GURPS and doesn't have the time to learn, but loves playing it all the same.