Weapon Master vs Trained by a Master

[B9anders]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

That's actually what I was pointing out, which is why I thought it would be better to put it on TbaM.

The whole point of Trained by a Master is to get rapid strike and multiple parry bonuses that apply to all combat skills.Take these two benefits away from Trained by a Master and all you have is a hugely expensive Unusual Background for being able to buy cinematic skills.

If you don't want it to apply to all combat skills, simply don't take TbaM and go for Weapon Master with the weapons you want it applied to instead.

Combining TbaM with WM is only really a consideration for those who want all the benefits from Trained by a Master but also want the damage bonus from WM for their weapons of choice. In which case, you should put the limitations on WM.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by B9anders

The whole point of Trained by a Master is to get rapid strike and multiple parry bonuses that apply to all combat skills.Take these two benefits away from Trained by a Master and all you have is a hugely expensive Unusual Background for being able to buy cinematic skills.

If you don't want it to apply to all combat skills, simply don't take TbaM and go for Weapon Master with the weapons you want it applied to instead.

Combining TbaM with WM is only really a consideration for those who want all the benefits from Trained by a Master but also want the damage bonus from WM for their weapons of choice. In which case, you should put the limitations on WM.

Sorry, I should make myself more clear. I specifically don't want TbaM to apply to melee weapons. As a GM, I almost want to make it so it doesn't in any campaign, but I don't know a fair cost. If I put the limitations on WM, then I don't get the rapid strike bonus for ranged weapons.

I'm thinking it would be -25% for TbaM to not give anything for weapons. WM should be the one doing that.

[starslayer]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

Sorry, I should make myself more clear. I specifically don't want TbaM to apply to melee weapons. As a GM, I almost want to make it so it doesn't in any campaign, but I don't know a fair cost. If I put the limitations on WM, then I don't get the rapid strike bonus for ranged weapons.

I'm thinking it would be -25% for TbaM to not give anything for weapons. WM should be the one doing that.

Ok- this is a really simple one then;

Subtract the cost of weapon master from trained by a master.

So trained by a master: 20 points (Does not cover weapons)
Weapon master 20 points.

[B9anders]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

Sorry, I should make myself more clear. I specifically don't want TbaM to apply to melee weapons. As a GM, I almost want to make it so it doesn't in any campaign, but I don't know a fair cost. If I put the limitations on WM, then I don't get the rapid strike bonus for ranged weapons.

I'm thinking it would be -25% for TbaM to not give anything for weapons. WM should be the one doing that.

Let me see if I get this straight:

You want Rapid strike and parry bonus to apply to unarmed combat and whatever weapons you are a weapon master in and nothing else?

If so, I'd forget my previous suggestions and throw an "Unarmed Only" limitation on TbaM instead. -40% or possibly even -50%.

edit: I'd probably got for -50%.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by B9anders

Let me see if I get this straight:

You want Rapid strike and parry bonus to apply to unarmed combat and whatever weapons you are a weapon master in and nothing else?

If so, I'd forget my previous suggestions and throw an "Unarmed Only" limitation on TbaM instead. -40% or possibly even -50%.

edit: I'd probably got for -50%.

Is it that cheap? My players will love that...

[Agramer]

WPM > TBM

TBM as is is to expensive(considering benefits) to WPM(which gets almost everything as TBM but has damage bonus which in itself is worth 15ish cp)

[B9anders]

Originally Posted by Agramer

WPM > TBM

TBM as is is to expensive(considering benefits) to WPM(which gets almost everything as TBM but has damage bonus which in itself is worth 15ish cp)

I think it is decently priced considering it applies to all attacks. It is meant for those of high skill who can and do rapid strike often and in those hands it becomes very powerful.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Agramer

WPM > TBM

TBM as is is to expensive(considering benefits) to WPM(which gets almost everything as TBM but has damage bonus which in itself is worth 15ish cp)

Not to mention the great defaults on gobs of skills. Really, the ability to reduce the cost of rapid strikes for your unarmed skill can't be worth more than about 12 points (simply buying +3 more skill). While I understand that +3 to a single unarmed isn't as good as +3 to brawl, boxing, karate, judo, wrestling and sumo, most people don't use more than a handful of those skills, the +3 applies in full even when spending a fatigue for flurry of blows, and the +3 still helps you when you're not making rapid strikes.

When you add in the fact that it opens up cinematic options (individually worth no more than a perk), I wouldn't charge more than 15 points for "TBAM, but unarmed skills only."

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Not to mention the great defaults on gobs of skills. Really, the ability to reduce the cost of rapid strikes for your unarmed skill can't be worth more than about 12 points (simply buying +3 more skill). While I understand that +3 to a single unarmed isn't as good as +3 to brawl, boxing, karate, judo, wrestling and sumo, most people don't use more than a handful of those skills, the +3 applies in full even when spending a fatigue for flurry of blows, and the +3 still helps you when you're not making rapid strikes.

When you add in the fact that it opens up cinematic options (individually worth no more than a perk), I wouldn't charge more than 15 points for "TBAM, but unarmed skills only."

Oh that's a lot of good points. For the true Master, I'll make a metatrait that combines the two, for 60 pts (WM is 45, right?)

[Verjigorm]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Not to mention the great defaults on gobs of skills. Really, the ability to reduce the cost of rapid strikes for your unarmed skill can't be worth more than about 12 points (simply buying +3 more skill). While I understand that +3 to a single unarmed isn't as good as +3 to brawl, boxing, karate, judo, wrestling and sumo, most people don't use more than a handful of those skills, the +3 applies in full even when spending a fatigue for flurry of blows, and the +3 still helps you when you're not making rapid strikes.

When you add in the fact that it opens up cinematic options (individually worth no more than a perk), I wouldn't charge more than 15 points for "TBAM, but unarmed skills only."

Most dedicated unarmed specialists generall have atleast two combat skills that TBAM works for, and when those skills are both hard(Judo and Karate), that's effectively 24 points of awesome. And then we've got the access to cinematic skills(and if you're allowing cinematic traits, then... you should probably allow the cinematic skills related to them). That's the BIG point of TBAM or WM(WM also has it's damge boost...), it's effectively a UB for having access to cinematic skills that you otherwie wouldn't.

And even most Armed specialists could really use TBAM, too. If I'm a 15th century knight who uses a longsword, I thnk the rapid strike and parry benefits will excell for my Two-handed sword, broadsword, judo and knife skills.

Really, the question, TBAM or WM when using weapons comes down to this: what's your ST. If you're low ST(less than 14 or 15), then go with WM for the bonus damage. If you have high levels of ST? Go with TBAM so you have more skilsl to benefit from.

Of course, I haven't played a "one skill pony" charactr in a long time, prefering versatility over specilization, because once your GM figures out MA, you'll start facing much more varied antagonists who your one trick wont work against.