Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl
In addition, there should probably be a 2 ER/FP cost, just like with Temporary Enhancements (Powers (p. 172-173).
|
It seems odd
Powers has two different methods of doing largely the same thing (Temporary Enhancements and Extra Effort). Given the two, I prefer the latter, so would prefer to go with that here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth
For the bulk of these, the modifier values are based on Natural Weapons modifiers.
|
Indeed, and as you note, +40% really seems more appropriate than +10%, particularly given my suggested system. -4 to make Parrying your attack a Bad Idea, or -2 to do an Aggressive Parry, makes sense; -1 and +0/-1 (depending on skill level) to do the same doesn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth
That helps to see how you arrived at the costs. Largely I see the upfront cost as a balance to how cheap it is to add abilities later. Going from 1 (one technique, one skill) point -> 3 (one technique all skills) is something that can be done in a single session like adding a skill. You might even also have points to drop into the technique as well.
|
That's more of a GM question than a mechanics question; I mean, you can easily go from human-normal night vision to having better night vision than a cat in a single session by the same process.
Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth
At low levels that's certainly true. It ramps up quickly with high attributes, talents, and raw base damage. A character with the points to having starting skill values in the 20s could reliably default many (inexpensive) advantages cheaper than buying them normally.
Ideally any system would scale well for 150 point characters as well as 1000+ point characters.
|
If you have skill in the 20's, your opponents (other than the ones you can largely steamroll over) probably have comparable defenses. Yes, somebody with Karate 35 can reduce an opponent's DR to 1/3rd normal with no FP cost and still roll against a 15, for a pretty solid shot at a hit, as AlexanderHowl notes. What's important to keep in mind, of course, is that doing so is effectively giving his opponent a
+10 to defense, as if the
karateka wasn't burning all his skill for armor penetration, he could have done a -20 Deceptive Attack.
Where I think a real problem might come in is when the character is using a weapon that is unreliant on his own ST for damage (for anything based on ST, he could have purchased an Innate Attack or Natural Weapon or similar to capitalize on it), so GM's will need to be careful when deciding if the abilities can apply to things like firearms, force swords, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth
Yes and no... Yes, there will always be breakpoints. DX is more expensive and only worthwhile if you're bringing up quite a few skills rather than just one. It's better to improve 1 skill than 4 techniques. It takes 5 skills to be worth a point of DX, which spread equally between multiple skills would require 20 techniques to be worthwhile. It moves the problem to a different break point. It does not solve that problem.
|
It doesn't move the breakpoint at all, but rather just adds more skills. A character with Broadsword, Shield, Spear, Knife, and Acrobatics is well-served by just adding +1 DX once the skills reach the point where each additional +1 costs [4]. A character with Broadsword, Shield, Annihilating Weapon (Broadsword), Armor Breaker (Broadsword), and Distant Strike (Broadsword) is similarly well-served by just adding +1 to DX - it would cost [20] to give a +1 to each, so he might as well spend that [20] on DX, get the same effect, and also improve other skills, Basic Speed, and so forth.
And, of course, it's important to keep in mind these Techniques can be used
together. For example, and getting a wee bit ridiculous, with Armor Breaker (Broadsword), Distant Strike (Broadsword), Spiteful Wound (Broadsword), and Transmute Damage (Broadsword ->Burn, treat as Silver), all at Default +20 for [21] each ([84] total), a character could use a sword to deliver a fiery slash to a foe up to ST yards away, treating the target's DR as 1/3rd normal, and deal a wound that counts as though it came from a silver weapon (for interaction with Vulnerabilities and the like); said wound would require some sort of special intervention to be able to heal, not healing on its own. The [84] this costs would be enough for an impressive +21 to skill, which would only be enough to offset the penalty for doing
one of the above at a time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl
As for the balance of the techniques, they should not allow for reduced FP costs because they are not separate skills (unlike Imbuements). Imbuements are balanced because they have a much higher cost that techniques, so being able to waive FP cost is a reward for developing the skill. Having someone with Karate-35 being able to take a -10 for Armor Divisor /3 is unbalanced if there is a way to avoid the FP cost, especially since they can do so without buying up the technique.
|
Feel free to disallow the ability to do this for 0 FP. Honestly, IIRC part of my deciding to allow for that was noticing that double the penalty for Armor Breaker at the (2) level was comparable to Chinks in Armor (with an additional -2, but also working against flexible and natural armor).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony
That's overly cheap if the technique can be bought up (most universally useful attack adjustments, such as rapid strike or attacking chinks in armor, cannot be improved at all). My equivalent to this was "-1 per 5%, can be improved up to a maximum of -1 per 10%". Another variant is "-1 per 10%, to both skill and ST; raising the technique affects the skill adjustment".
|
Rapid Strike
can be improved, albeit in a limited form, with a Combination. Chinks in armor is explicitly called out as a legitimate choice for the Targeted Attack Technique (indeed, the comparison to Armor Breaker is also why I initially went with only being able to cut the penalty in half). I felt -1 per +10% worked alright for instantaneous effects, for the reasons I stated upthread, going with the harsher -1 per 5% for effects that lasted a minute per use.