GURPS Power-Ups 6: Quirks

[Anders]

How many people read through this and said "Yep, that's me. And that. And that."?

I sure did.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by johndallman

The Slow Reflexes quirk, p24, seems problematic. Not in itself, but because the logic explained in it can also be used to justify +1 to a character's place in the turn sequence as a perk. Which is a bit too good IMHO, especially in campaigns where everyone has human-level basic speed (5-7) and most combat is with guns.

It is a perk, called Blinding Strike, in Pyramid #3/61. I don't think it's a problem, as it matters once in a combat, right at the start, after which everything is cyclical anyway – and arguably, those who get to act after seeing a few other people act have a planning advantage. Also, it matters only in pitched battles. In gunfights, which in my experience all start as ambushes or assassinations, the side with the advantage of surprise acts first, which usually also means "last" and "the only time." I do see how in fights where two sides agree to meet and fight when the referee drops his hand, as though in ice hockey, it's a nice edge, but it's really no more overpowered than the Fastest Gun in the West perk from Tactical Shooting in the equally odd situation of a High Noon showdown.

That said, the GM is free to limit how many levels of Blinding Strike are plausible. DF allows lots, but the realistic limit is probably something like "you may add a total of two levels of Blinding Strike and Basic Speed," so that the options are +2.00 to Basic Speed (as in the Basic Set), +1.00 to Basic Speed and Blinding Strike 1, or Blinding Strike 2. That way, ordinary humans can act at +2.00 relative to the native Basic Speed granted by DX and HT, and those who don't want to dodge or run can cheap out and hope that all fights start as standoffs with ready weapons.

All of which is beside the discussion of Slow Reflexes, really, because there's no precedent in GURPS for the pricing (or even existence) of a disadvantage to much affect that of an advantage, or vice versa.

[Rocket Man]

Originally Posted by Kromm

I don't think it's a problem, as it matters once in a combat, right at the start, after which everything is cyclical anyway – and arguably, those who get to act after seeing a few other people act have a planning advantage.

Agreed. In other games, I've sometimes had players declare in reverse order of their perception or intelligence (depending on what the system used for anticipation abilities) but act in order of their speed.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Regarding the interaction of the Controllable Disadvantage Perk with Quirks:
Should Will/HT rolls be required for activation of Quirks with this Perk, or would it be fair to say that since the Perk only activates a very small trait, it's OK to make it outright switchable? If not, then what is a fair way to let Controllable Disadvantage allow switching without a roll?

Honestly, I think it's just declare it does. There never was a really good reason to require anything more than a turn of concentration, let alone will rolls at hourly intervals. If it's so useful that you need to restrict activating it, it's clearly too useful to be a perk. Note for example the two disadvantages that are explicitly called out as not being valid - Berserk and Epilepsy - already have a faster switching method, presumably because of that perceived usefulness. Disadvantages that were thought to be so firmly bad they never needed such a "limiting" mechanic before shouldn't be *worse* that that.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by jacobmuller

If your GM allows it, why not? It's actually worth 0 points but may prove useful; sounds Perky to me:D
Perk: Fast Reflexes. You have +1 to Basic Speed for the sole purpose of determining your place in the turn sequence...

Debates on this usually hinge on when the GM starts the turn sequence. If it matters who is "first" in it, most likely you aren't starting it early enough. The person who wants to fight pretty much always should get the first move because you (at least notionally) started the sequence a while before that. Everybody before him in it already had their turn this round, and took Do Nothing.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by malloyd

Debates on this usually hinge on when the GM starts the turn sequence. If it matters who is "first" in it, most likely you aren't starting it early enough. The person who wants to fight pretty much always should get the first move because you (at least notionally) started the sequence a while before that. Everybody before him in it already had their turn this round, and took Do Nothing.

Even if you like to consider combat time as general rather than only for combat (I do, but I think it's officially deprecated), that depends on the nature of the start of combat.

You seem to have assumed there are a bunch of people standing around and then one of them attacks someone. That's not really the general case for combat.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

You seem to have assumed there are a bunch of people standing around and then one of them attacks someone. That's not really the general case for combat.

Due to playing much DF, I assume fights start because I turned a corner/kicked down a door/fell through a trap door and OMG GIANT SPIDER. Which immediately means it was my point in the sequence on account of I was moving at the time, and if I'm lucky I get Surprise. Otherwise, nobody gets surprise and we start the sequence after me. Wherever that happens to be.

Of course "Me" in that conversation may be the giant spider, and it's OMG ADVENTURERS but the same principle holds.

[Steven Marsh]

"OMG GIANT SPIDER!"
"OMG ADVENTURERS!"

I love this forum.

[Anders]

This is probably my favorite Power-Up. Well done!

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Steven Marsh

"OMG GIANT SPIDER!"
"OMG ADVENTURERS!"

I love this forum.

Not adventurers, but home invaders! The true NOPES of the world.