Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnome
I'm not just theorycrafting or spitballing here. My opinions are based on experience in actual play, and all I'm saying is that some primary skills (mostly talking about melee weapon skills here) are underpriced at high levels, as compared with other ways of making your character better at combat, like buying ST, DX, etc., and as compared with the way other characters advance relative to typical published threats in their chosen area of expertise.
Obviously a 120-pt character shouldn't spend all 120 pts on one skill. My experience is more like this:
We start a DF campaign, and everyone picks a template. No problem so far. We favor fast advancement, so pretty soon everyone has 40 pts to spend. The swashbuckler spends all 40 on weapon skill. Everyone else spends on various things: higher attributes, more spells and powers, a diversity of skills, etc. The other characters get a bit better at doing whatever it is they do, or they branch out a bit. The Swashbuckler gets way better at fighting, so now the point of every combat is basically "stay alive until the Swashbuckler takes care of it," the Swashbuckler can easily parry attacks that seriously threaten anyone else (or spends one point on Sacrificial Parry to parry for the whole party if they are smart enough to stay close), the Swashbuckler can easily eye-stab any enemy within reach, can take out hordes of fodder with Rapid Strikes, etc., etc.
Of course there are a diversity of threats in such campaigns. The party still needs a Scout with Danger Sense to avoid getting ambushed, a Bard for social encounters, a Cleric for exorcisms, a Wizard to solve magical mysteries, etc. The Swashbuckler wasn't going to compete in those domains anyway. But his advancement path is so cheap, that it takes very little advancement for him to grow way beyond the typical threats that would still be interesting to everyone else. A Cleric with 40 extra points is still well within the level that plays well against the published adventures and monsters with basically no tweaks or maybe a few extra enemies here and there, while a Swashbuckler with 40 extra points has basically graduated from published DF threats and needs the GM to create new ones, which will become totally obsolete again when he gets his next 40 points. And as I mentioned earlier, some spells become outclassed at this level as well, as do some special abilities.
|
So no Dragons with breath weapons? No insubstantial foes? No high DR opponents?
Nobody with ... a gun?
Nobody with a very high Stealth score and a knife?
If you play a game where every enemy is something you can easily get right up close to and carve up with a sword, then of course, put all your points into a sword skill and you're golden.
But I do think that the published templates in most GURPS publications - and DF in particular - are made with the logic of the game supporting them. And sure: somebody who puts 80 CP into a skill should be good at it. But it is hardly an "I win" button. Putting MOST of your points into one skill - the way most people seem to play - would likely be more of an "I lose" button.
EDIT: Put 80 CP into Telekinesis and rip the arms off of most things as soon as they get within 10 yards. Or put 80 CP into Great Haste and run circles around everything for free. 80 CP ought to be powerful, but I don't think 80 CP in Broadsword is particularly more powerful than anything else. And I don't think specialist templates beat more generalist templates. They only beat the other templates on what they are supposed to specialize in. That high Stealth thief is still going to kill your Swashbuckler with a knife in the back.