Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

Who are paying 5/level for their "class" talent and 5/level for their racial talent instead of 4/level for Bow? I'd say sure, be my guest.

The only issue for me is, Ranger (as I suggested it) has a serious overlap with Forest Guard, so the idea in Power Ups suggests that you shouldn't be able to get levels of both. You should just buy that up instead.

Most of the racial talents that duplicate these "class talents" are kind of like that - "elf scout" is probably a good subcategory of its own. They'll come out differently than a human scout anyway, so you don't need to throw talents at them to make them better.

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

Yes. And in GURPS, you're supposed to represent ranger training by putting actual CPs into each of those skills that ranger training consists of.

The RAW claims that Talents are meant for only those things that people can be born with natural aptitudes for, but even the examples in the core books make it clear that we're not supposed to take it seriously.

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

Yes it is. That's exactly what it is.

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

At least in the case of the Barbarian, the Outdoorsman Talent is there specifically so that he can "get by" with an average'ish IQ, since (IIRC) many of the skills covered by Outdoorsman are IQ-based.

So in that case, the cheap Talent is there to make a character concept feasible, that of "not bright at all, but savvy in the outdoors, albeit primarily a strong warrior".

The Thief's (pseudo-)Talent, High Manual Dexterity, instead covers the template's main schtick, (many) thiefly non-combat skills, but note that it's not one of the cheap 5 CP Talents. It's also one of the Talents in GURPS that makes the most sense, in terms of something a person can actually be born with, as in genetic aptitude.

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

I don't think Magery is the issue here, but Magic itself. In cases like Lockmaster, a spell is functioning as a Complementary Skill (ie, roll at no penalty to give a bonus to another skill check) except that instead of giving +1 on success and -1 on failure, it gives +6 on success and no penalty on failure - and it can be tried again until it succeeds, at the cost of FP. A wizard only needs skill 12 or so to consistently benefit from Lockmaster, meaning for a point or two in a spell (even without Magery) he saves up to 24 cp in Lockpicking.

I agree with PseudoFenton that this particular spell should be limited or altered. But it works as an example of other niche-invading spells. The problem isn't that a Wizard can buy an extra 2 levels of Magery, the problem is that many spells are wildly inappropriate for Dungeon Fantasy.

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

What makes you think the Thief gets nothing? The Thief gets both Flexibility and High Manual Dexterity, which combined give skill bonuses to Climbing, Escape, Erotic Art, Artist, Jeweler, Knot-Tying, Leatherworking, Lockpicking, Pickpocket, Sewing, Sleight of Hand, and Surgery. That covers a large chunk of the Thief's core skills; pretty much all of them in fact. Yeah, they're not called a "Talent" in name, but the end result is very similar.

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

I don't mind if a wizard can use a Lockmaster spell as long as it is at a low skill level while the thief is the expert with a high skill level. The wizard having some way to unlock ordinary locks is not much problem but I feel if there is a really tough lock he needs to call the thief.

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

This is one place where it's obvious how many options there are that could be applied to the magical spells, and where the reasoning behind the decisions that were made isn't obvious.

What if Lockmaster got two or three times the penalty from locks that the Lockpicking skill gets? What if it took ten minutes to cast instead of ten seconds? What if it cost ten energy to cast?

Any of those changes would make a big difference in how the spell is used. So why is it like it is, rather than how it could be?

Why not have a base spell: Three times the Lockpicking penalty, with a ten minute casting time, with a base cost of two energy? And then give the option of removing the penalty or reducing the casting time with additional energy?

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

That's Locksmith (Magic p. 143), not Lockmaster (Magic p. 144).

Lockmaster just picks the lock magically, at a penalty to cast equal to any difficulty penalty of the lock. Cost 3, 10 seconds to cast - that's pretty trivial for even a base-template Wizard (IQ 15, Magery 3 for a 15 for 1 point). That's a 15 or less for standard locks, and 50/50 on even pretty hard ones.

It's easy to get, too - Magery 2 and Apportation, and Apportation has no other spell prereqs (and it's damn useful in a dungeon!) Having a wizard with it, plus guys with Forced Entry and crowbars, has made a thief superfluous to my current group. They have two Scouts, too, in case you start saying "What about Traps?" - Scouts are plenty good at dealing with them right out of the box.

NMZs are an answer, but if you need to put up an NMZ on all the "hard" doors to make one template useful, I think the answer might be that the template needs some beefing up!

Re: [DF] Talents for the Standard Templates
 

Ah, I stand corrected. I was commenting based on the context of the thread, but didn't look up the spell again myself. Serves me right for assuming. I think my point still stands for Locksmith though.