Perk Limit

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Langy

I'm not. Look at Power-Ups 2: Perks again. There's a single section called 'Combat Perks'. These perks can not be 'retitled' to 'General', because no retitling is going on. Instead, what's happening is some perks are titled under 'General' AND 'Combat' (the 'combat-enhancing perks that are not in the General location). Most Style perks are titled under both 'Combat' AND 'Style'. Some perks are titled under 'General', 'Style', AND 'Combat' all at once.

Also, there are no rules restricting you from taking perks from a combat style under your general allotment. The extra perk per 10 points in style skills is a bonus allotment.

Upthread, Kromm says there's no such thing as "Combat Perks" (despite his use of that exact construction in Power Ups 2) and those limits refer to "Style Perks". That's a huge part of my confusion here. Are perks from Styles not "Style Perks"?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

In the case that the skill points are from a specific style. What if they are just "wild" combat skills?

No such thing. Any perk useful in combat or that enhances magic is a perk that is part of some style although not necessarily your style.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

No such thing. Any perk useful in combat or that enhances magic is a perk that is part of some style although not necessarily your style.

Kromm answered this like three years ago.

What I'm trying to understand know is where (specifically) people are getting the idea that you can take "combat" or "style" perks above the skill-based limits by simply saying they aren't "combat" or "style" perks.

[Dragondog]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Might or might not, depending on whether the character has a character template or abilities package that includes them and also offers combat perks.

By RAW basic attributes doesn't count, as only points from skills and techniques count.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Upthread, Kromm says there's no such thing as "Combat Perks" (despite his use of that exact construction in Power Ups 2) and those limits refer to "Style Perks". That's a huge part of my confusion here. Are perks from Styles not "Style Perks"?

As I mentioned above, perks from styles are style-specific Style Perks. Combat Perks (from PU2) is a subset of Style Perks, together with combat related Perks from the other Perk "classes".

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Kromm answered this like three years ago.

What I'm trying to understand know is where (specifically) people are getting the idea that you can take "combat" or "style" perks above the skill-based limits by simply saying they aren't "combat" or "style" perks.

You cannot do that by RAW. So either they aren't playing RAW or they are misunderstanding RAW.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Kromm answered this like three years ago.

What I'm trying to understand know is where (specifically) people are getting the idea that you can take "combat" or "style" perks above the skill-based limits by simply saying they aren't "combat" or "style" perks.

I already mentioned that you are correct by a strict reading of the SAW (suggestion as written). However, I think the intention is different. Here's the suggestion:

Regardless of the campaign’s limit on perks, it’s recommended that the GM limit fighters to one combat perk per 20 points in combat, military, and/or police skills, and then allow one extra perk per 10 points spent on the skills and techniques of a combative character template, fighting style, or similar abilities package that offers combat perks. Combat-effective perks from other categories – notably Shticks (pp. 14-15), Skill Perks (pp. 15-17), and Unusual Background Perks (pp. 20-21) – count as combat perks for this purpose.

It's my belief that the intention is for the first bolded rule and the second bolded rule to be completely different sets. For the first bolded perk allotment (what I call 'Combat Perks'), the restriction is "20 points in skills gives you 1 perk slot from the list in PU2 that is specifically called out as a 'Combat' perk".

For the second bolded rule (what I call 'Style Perks'), the restriction is "10 points in a style, template, etc that offers perks specifically called out as 'Combat' perks in PU2 OR combat-effective perks from other categories gives you 1 perk slot which can only be filled with those perks from your style, template, etc." Note that you have to have actually taken the template, style, etc - if you lack Style Familiarity for a style, then that style does not count.

In other words, that final sentence modifies the second bolded rule but not the first. Further, the second bolded rule is an extra allotment above-and-beyond and does not restrict you from otherwise taking those perks with one of your other allotments, because anything else would be just plain silly. As an example of the silliness, consider a character with Off-Hand Weapon Training and 40 points in combat skills who purchases a style with Off-Hand Weapon Training, but lacks 10 points in that specific style. He'd suddenly be unable to have OHWT just because his style teaches it. That's silly.

I will say I was incorrect about some of my previous posts - you can't purchase 'Concealed Carry Permit' as a Combat perk - it's normally a General perk and bought as such, but you may buy it as a Style perk if you so choose.

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by Langy

It's my belief that the intention is for the first bolded rule and the second bolded rule to be completely different sets. For the first bolded perk allotment (what I call 'Combat Perks'), the restriction is "20 points in skills gives you 1 perk slot from the list in PU2 that is specifically called out as a 'Combat' perk".

For the second bolded rule (what I call 'Style Perks'), the restriction is "10 points in a style, template, etc that offers perks specifically called out as 'Combat' perks in PU2 OR combat-effective perks from other categories gives you 1 perk slot which can only be filled with those perks from your style, template, etc." Note that you have to have actually taken the template, style, etc - if you lack Style Familiarity for a style, then that style does not count.

In other words, that final sentence modifies the second bolded rule but not the first. Further, the second bolded rule is an extra allotment above-and-beyond and does not restrict you from otherwise taking those perks with one of your other allotments, because anything else would be just plain silly. As an example of the silliness, consider a character with Off-Hand Weapon Training and 40 points in combat skills who purchases a style with Off-Hand Weapon Training, but lacks 10 points in that specific style. He'd suddenly be unable to have OHWT just because his style teaches it. That's silly.

I will say I was incorrect about some of my previous posts - you can't purchase 'Concealed Carry Permit' as a Combat perk - it's normally a General perk and bought as such, but you may buy it as a Style perk if you so choose.

I don't agree with this interpretation. The second sentence simply indicates that the groupings in PU2 are primarily thematic. Despite not being grouped with combat perks, those perks can be taken as part of your allotment of combat perks. The first sentence simply tells you how to calculate the amount of combat perks you can have. There is nothing it that sentence that indicates that 'combat perk from a style' is different from 'combat perk from skills'. That sort of distinction is something that would be mentioned, but it isn't. In fact the use of the word extra is a counterpoint to your interpretation, since it implies that the amount of perks gained from styles is added to the amount allowed by skills, but with the cravat that those extra perks must be listed in the style.

As to your OHWT example, that doesn't make sense. You have 40 points in skills, this allows you two combat perks. You then take a style that doesn't benefit from those 40 points. This simply means you can't take a third combat perk as you lack 10 points in the style, not that you can't have perks listed in the style.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by Dinadon

I don't agree with this interpretation. The second sentence simply indicates that the groupings in PU2 are primarily thematic. Despite not being grouped with combat perks, those perks can be taken as part of your allotment of combat perks. The first sentence simply tells you how to calculate the amount of combat perks you can have. There is nothing it that sentence that indicates that 'combat perk from a style' is different from 'combat perk from skills'. That sort of distinction is something that would be mentioned, but it isn't. In fact the use of the word extra is a counterpoint to your interpretation, since it implies that the amount of perks gained from styles is added to the amount allowed by skills, but with the cravat that those extra perks must be listed in the style.

I already said that the actual rule as written is what Pudding said - you can't take any perk that is part of any combat style or has any combat application without at least 20 points in combat skills or 10 points in a style. However, I've been arguing intent, which is different - I think the actual written words were poorly chosen, making the whole thing complicated and odd.

As to your OHWT example, that doesn't make sense. You have 40 points in skills, this allows you two combat perks. You then take a style that doesn't benefit from those 40 points. This simply means you can't take a third combat perk as you lack 10 points in the style, not that you can't have perks listed in the style.

You're right. I'm not sure exactly what I was thinking there.

I'm still pretty sure the intent is you can only use those extra perks from a Style to purchase perks from that style, though. Otherwise, it wouldn't make any damned sense to have style perks in the first place, not to mention the lack of sense of restricting the bonus perks only to those with styles/templates/options that include perks.

[Dragondog]

Originally Posted by Langy

I'm still pretty sure the intent is you can only use those extra perks from a Style to purchase perks from that style, though. Otherwise, it wouldn't make any damned sense to have style perks in the first place, not to mention the lack of sense of restricting the bonus perks only to those with styles/templates/options that include perks.

Your perk allotment for style-specific style perks (what you call style perks) can only be spent on perks from your style.

I would have to agree with Dinadon though that the intention of the allotment of Style Perks (combat and combat-effective perks in PU2) are exactly as written. 1/20 points in suitable skills for "general" Style Perks and 1/10 points in suitable skills and techniques for style-specific Style Perks.

And where there is a suggested limits of 1/25 points of general perks, it is a recommendation for Style Perks. So in a way both are optional rules, but the latter should be enforced more often than the former.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by Dragondog

Your perk allotment for style-specific style perks (what you call style perks) can only be spent on perks from your style.

I would have to agree with Dinadon though that the intention of the allotment of Style Perks (combat and combat-effective perks in PU2) are exactly as written. 1/20 points in suitable skills for "general" Style Perks and 1/10 points in suitable skills and techniques for style-specific Style Perks.

I doubt it would be so; if it was intended that way, then the only place you'd find combat-effective perks in PU2 is under the 'Combat' heading, otherwise you'll have to adjudicate what's 'combat effective' each and every time. I don't think Kromm is that bad at writing and editing that he'd do that.

I really think what's intended is that combat-effective perks only count when dealing with Style-specific perks, and the text is just unclear. In any case, what's actually written is not what you just said - what's actually written is that those 'style-specific perks' don't matter, and you can instead choose any 'Combat or combat-effective' perk at all to fill that allotment.

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Kromm answered this like three years ago.

What I'm trying to understand know is where (specifically) people are getting the idea that you can take "combat" or "style" perks above the skill-based limits by simply saying they aren't "combat" or "style" perks.

Well, combat perks and style perks are not synonymous. Combat Perks are a category of perk, alongside the other general perk categories (Equpiment, Social, etc) There are styles that have non-combat perks within them. Style perks are just the perks included in a particular style. Just because a general perk is included in a specific style doesn't mean it is no longer available as a general perk. There is no renaming going on.

I will give an example to see if I can make this clear.

Style: La Verdadera Destreza
Style Skills: Expert Skill (Natural Philosophy); Mathematics (Pure); Rapier
Style Perks: Chi Resistance (Kiai); Off-Hand Weapon Training (Rapier); Sure-Footed (Uneven). Weapon Bond.

Looking at PU2, we see the listed perks in this style categorized as:
Chi Resistance (Kiai)--Supernatural
Off-Hand Weapon Training (Rapier)--Combat
Sure-Footed (Uneven)--Combat
Weapon Bond--Equipment

So, La Verdadera Destreza has four style perks, two of which are combat, two of which are not. La Verdadera Destreza has three style skills, only one of which is a combat skill.

The character is 75cp. She has spent
Rapier (12)
Brawling (8)
Expert Skill (8)
Math (12)

So what have we got with the perk situation?

3 General Perks because she is a 75cp character
1 Combat Perk because she has 20cp in combat skills
3 Style Perks because she has 32cp in style skills

Her General Perks:
Style Familiarity (La Verdadera Destreza)--PU2, p. 7 notes Style Familiarity Perks count as Unusual Background Perks in this instance.
Weapon Bond (Rapier 1)--Equipment
Unusual Training (Dual-Weapon Attack, Both attacks must target the same foe)--Unusual Background

Her Combat Perk:
Armor Familiarity (Rapier)--Combat

Style Perks:
Off-Hand Weapon Training (Rapier)--Combat
Sure-Footed (Uneven)--Combat
Weapon Bond (Rapier 2)--Equipment

Our fighter needs Weapon Bond twice. Since it is an Equipment Perk (I.e. not a combat perk) that is also in her Style (I.e for her a style perk), she takes it once under her general limit and once under her style limit.

Armor Familiarity is a Combat Perk, so she could not take it under one of her general slot., It is also not in her Style, so it only fits under her Combat limit.

What makes something ineligible for purchase in the general perk limit is not its presence in a style, but its categorization as a Combat or Magical Perk.

If I created a Style that included only non-combat perks--Honest Face, Etc...that doesn't mean a person can't get Honest Face as part of their general Perk allotment.