Perk Limit

[Langy]

That's my preferred interpretation as well, Trooper. Good explanation.

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by Langy

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.

Except the perk groups mentioned, Shtick, Skill, and Unusual Background, are noted for their broad, open ended perks. As such you need to account for the fact that the open ended perks allow people to create their own combat focused perks. There is already adjudication as to whether the perk even be allowed, so the extra step of checking if it is a combat perk isn't really that much.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by trooper6

Well, combat perks and style perks are not synonymous.

Then what the heck then does this actualy mean?

Originally Posted by Kromm

Huh? "Style Perk" is the term of art for any combat perk, however you justify it. That's just what they're called.

Also, even if you are able to take some perks from Styles as non-Style Perks you still have the 75 point Archer with the 150lb warbow problem. Strongbow is clearly a Combat Perk. I suppose you can argue that Special Exercises is not. If the Archer isn't formerly trained as being a Foot Archer and not built on a template, does his military role as a Yeoman Archer count to let him get away with only 10 points in Bow, Fast Draw, Armory et cetera?

[Dragondog]

Originally Posted by Langy

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.

Some of the Combat-effective perks have other uses outside combat, if they apply to the right skills. So they are listed under other sections in PU2.

You are correct though, the text doesn't actually say that the style-specific allotment only can be spent on the perks granted by that style.

Originally Posted by trooper6

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.

And here we have a problem as the terms used in Martial Arts and PU2 aren't the same. In PU2 they talk about combat perks and combat-effective perks and the recommendation lets us know how many of those we can have. Both from any suitable skills and from skills and techniques in a specific style.

In Martial Arts this is a rule, not a recommendation, and it talks about style perks and style-specific style perks. And all of the style-specific style perks of La Verdadera Destreza are listed among the style perks in that book and therefore limited to the rules listed there. Which are the same as the recommendations in PU2 for combat and combat-effective perks. So either Martial Arts is outdated, or that still applies.

I made an example with La Verdadera Destreza and Chi Resistance (Kiai) earlier in this post arguing that it could fall in the general perk allotment until the combat-effective caveat at the end of the PU2 recommendation was pointed out to me. I would call Chi Resistance (Kiai) a combat-effective perk, though I wouldn't call Chi Resistance (Invisibility Art) a combat-effective perk. I would call Weapon Bond a combat-effective perk under all circumstances. And claim that both of those perks fall under the combat perk allotment and couldn't be bought by general perks if the PU2 recommendation was followed.

Though I do agree that if a perk such as Honest Face was a style-specific style perk, one could buy it as such and also as a general perk as it is not a combat or combat-effective perk.

On the other hand, if I was the GM for that La Verdadera Destreza stylist, I would let him take those perks as you have listed.

[Dragondog]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Then what the heck then does this actualy mean?

PU2 and Martial Arts don't use the same terms. And one poster seems to be using the terms differently than another.

Also, even if you are able to take some perks from Styles as non-Style Perks you still have the 75 point Archer with the 150lb warbow problem. Strongbow is clearly a Combat Perk. I suppose you can argue that Special Exercises is not. If the Archer isn't formerly trained as being a Foot Archer and not built on a template, does his military role as a Yeoman Archer count to let him get away with only 10 points in Bow, Fast Draw, Armory et cetera?

I would say that's up to the GM. Assuming we have a GM who sticks to the recommendations in PU2 and he considers those 10 points the archer has spent as equivalent to a template, even though no template was used, he would likely go along with that.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Dragondog

PU2 and Martial Arts don't use the same terms.

But Kromm said that in response to me asking about how the Perk limits are reconciled between the different sources.

[Dragondog]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

But Kromm said that in response to me asking about how the Perk limits are reconciled between the different sources.

Yes, but the reply you quoted was not a reply to Kromm's quote.

Martial Arts speak of Style perks and style-specific style perks.
PU2 speak of combat and combat-effective perks.

Some posters in this thread don't seem to use the terms combat perk and style perk in that way though.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Also, even if you are able to take some perks from Styles as non-Style Perks you still have the 75 point Archer with the 150lb warbow problem. Strongbow is clearly a Combat Perk. I suppose you can argue that Special Exercises is not. If the Archer isn't formerly trained as being a Foot Archer and not built on a template, does his military role as a Yeoman Archer count to let him get away with only 10 points in Bow, Fast Draw, Armory et cetera?

Again, if you're trying to replicate something realistic you shouldn't be applying gameist optional rules to the situation. That's like complaining that a character in a game with Bulletproof Nudity gets a bonus to their defense from being naked - yes, of course it does, and yes, of course it'll create odd situations and won't make sense in others. It's not supposed to. That's why the rule is optional.

[Mr Frost]

I can't see a 1/x points ceiling of any sort working well for perks except as a suggested guideline , campaign/game-world dependent detail or something specific to a style or suchlike .

Take permits for example . These are dependent entirely on local laws and/or in some cases social or cultural mores .
Pumping iron to raise Str then spending 15 points on Cooking and Astronomy to get that extra 25 Character Points will not realistically help you get the Perk (Concealed Weapon Permit) unless that granting official was a chef at the NASA cafeteria and has a fetish for muscular people .
Likewise , an ex-special forces retired cop with degrees in psychology , law and criminology with the connections for a glowing recommendation and etc, etc whom works as a bodyguard or private detective should be able to get one regardless of how many other perks He has .



Perks in martial arts styles should have any per points spent limit be style and perk specific and not sometimes based on points spent .
Example : Yeoman Longbowman
Perks (no limits unless stated) : Strongbow , Special Exercises (Arm Str ; 1 level/4 points in Bow) , Weapon Bond (Longbow , 10 points in style) , Weapon Insurance (when in paid employ as bowman and on campaign , lost or damaged bow will be replaced at employer's expense ; 15 points in style and good standing with employer) Sure-Footed (Slipery) , Sure-Footed (Navy Training ; at least 3 months served on a ship) .


Unless a Perk is really overpowered {in which case , why is it a perk} , then a little GM/Player common sense should be plenty to keep things from getting out of hand .

[Jarreth]

I have three questions regarding perk limits.

A: Reading Tactical Shooting regarding Style Perks (Page 37) "...a shooter who knows a style (snip) can buy one of its listed perks per 10 points spent on its skills and techniques.

It doesnt state if a perk that comes in levels (EG: Dead Eye) counts as "one" perk choice or one per level of said perk. Is it one perk, and then it doesnt matter how many levels you buy in it, or one level=one perk?

B: Under Style Familiarity (Tactical Shooting page 37) "You can acquire the style´s Style Perks, improve its techniques whenever you have enough points, and buy any optional traits that would otherwise be off-limits.

Does this mean, I can ignore perk limits if I got the Style Familiarity?

C: On a sidenote, why have a cap on perks? I mean we got a point limit in how many points given for character creation (disads included), and I might be wrong, but thats how I see the caps in GURPs. The cap on perks seems...D20-ish in nature. X perks at every Y level. Plus, it seems the cap is soo high, it hardly matters in the end (if its one perk per X points and not perk levels).

Made a 300 pts NPC for my Black Ops campaign and he turns out to have this many perks availible:
12 General Perks (300 point character)
3 Combat Perks (68 points)
8 Style Perks (86 points)

Thats a perk limit of 23. Seems really high to me, and begs the question why the need for the additional math (there is enough of that in GURPs already)?