Are proliferating perks a danger to GURPS?

[talonthehand]

Originally Posted by Lupo

It appears to me that Basic Set goes at great lenght to discourage players and GMs from applying enhancement and limitations to skills.

Sure, and I totally agree that 99% of the time it's a horrible idea. However, the rules support doing it occasionally.

[Joel]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Which simply leads to my harangue on how underpriced Ambidexterity is!

(Edit: as anticipated by Transmetahuman)

Underpriced for what? My feeling is that if you're using it to also buy an Extra Attack that you can use with your of hand, you would be better of buying the Extra Attack with Multistrike +20% instead for the same price. I'd rather have two attacks with my assault rifle than one with each of my two pistols, if Ambidexterity costed more, using two pistols would actually be more expensive.

[Lupo]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

No, Charm, Weapon Bond and Sure-Footed on their own aren't that great... until someone buys a Charm for Ice Slick, takes Sure Footed Ice, and forces his opponents to fight him on ice wherever he goes, thus ensuring he has +2 to +3 on his opponents for a mere 3 points. But that's not unbalanced, it's clever.

This one example may be clever.
But I see nothing clever in taking Shield Wall Training and a Large Shield... it would be really stupid not to do so.

The problem isn't "creative combos" - it's that many Perks are simply unbalanced because they grant a +1 or +2 to skill or parry, *without* significant drawbacks. They are little tricks that allow experienced players to "cheat" GURPS.

I certainly don't mind. Perks really are equivelant to 1 point advantages (1 point of night vision, for example)

Night vision isn't a very good example because it's arguably one of the worst balanced traits in the whole Basic Set.

In ALL campaigns darkness penalties will be common (in some campaigns more than others). Even if it's not pitch black, GURPS gives significant penalties for darkness (e.g., -3 for "torchlight", see B394).
I usually charge 2 points/level for Night Vision, and all my players still try to buy as many levels as they can.
Even at 3 points/level it would be a good deal, since
1) it benefits ALL combat skills and most Sense rolls
2) a significant portion of fights and adventure scenes do not happen in full daylight

The only case when Night Vision isn't "overpowered" for its cost is when the GM forgets about darkness penalties; or possibly, when magical spells/high tech devices are so commonly used that they can "replace" Night Vision.

And remember that usually in GURPS traits are priced assuming you will make a good use of them - Kromm stated that in several occasions.
That's why DR (Limited: Fire) only costs -40% or so less than "full" DR, instead of -80% as it "could" be. Because the game assumes that the PC with DR against Fire will try to expose himself to fire, face enemies who use fire and so on.

By the same reasoning, all Perks/advantages that grant a bonus to weapon skills under certain circumstances should have a cost close to 4 (the "full" cost to improve a skill).
E.g.: Weapon Bond should cost more than 1 point, because it grants a +1 to skill with "your favourite weapon only" - and guess what? Most characters will try to use their favourite weapon all the time, until they lose/replace it.

[Ulzgoroth]

What, no hate for Power Grappling? It's never going to fail to be substantially 'underpriced' for any character who takes it.

It also seems to be an essential rules patch for grappling characters with superhuman strength.

It seems to me that a powerful perk is often an only semi-optional game feature. But if they're good features, having them is better than not, isn't it?

[Harald387]

Originally Posted by Lupo

Here is a list of some overpowered Perks (with a suggestion on how much they should cost, e.g., how much I charge for them in my campaign).

I was going to write a long post deconstructing every single one of the points you made, but several people have beaten me to several of them, and the entire thing just became antagonistic-sounding. I will summarize with this:

-"Buying off a penalty" is not the same as "a bonus to skill" unless that penalty applies all the time, in every situation for which that skill can be used.

-If *any* penalty applies all the time, in every situation for which a skill can be used, the GM or the player is probably doing something wrong.

-Perks explicitly grant up to +2 to a skill in limited circumstances. This is one of their stated purposes, right out of the Basic Set. If you want to complain that "+2 to a skill is too good for a perk", you should probably throw out Perks altogether.

-You complain that some perks should be strictly controlled by the GM. I ask, "What, you mean the GM isn't already controlling what goes onto character sheets?". If you simply assume that everything in every book is automatically suitable for every game that might be run, I have an AWESOME TL12 power-armored soldier that I'd like to play in your next Banestorm game.

-A lot of your objections seem to come from an imperfect reading of the perk, or a poor understanding of exactly what the perk does. I'd be happy to point these out individually by PM if you're curious.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

What, no hate for Power Grappling? It's never going to fail to be substantially 'underpriced' for any character who takes it.

It also seems to be an essential rules patch for grappling characters with superhuman strength.

It seems to me that a powerful perk is often an only semi-optional game feature. But if they're good features, having them is better than not, isn't it?

Power Grappling is not all that scary by ability, but it still should probably be split into two different Perks, by effect. Still, it is essential for modelling the archetypal Aikidoka.

Most other combat perks should be compared to 'Easy Techniques', i.e. they should be treated as two levels of a Technique that cancels some obscure penalties (compare: ground fighting, timed defense, low fighting, targeted attack . . .).

[Kaldrin]

Originally Posted by Harald387

-A lot of your objections seem to come from an imperfect reading of the perk, or a poor understanding of exactly what the perk does.

I'd also like to add that it also seems to be a poor understanding of the design of the system itself and how it is intended to work.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Lupo

Most of those perks are combat-related simply because players are more likely to abuse "fighting" perks than "social" ones. I am including only "realistic" perks, not cinematic ones.

Just out of curiosity, how do you feel about techniques? Many of the perks you are objecting to do much the same thing - drop 1 point into them and they give you a +1 to skill to offset a penalty.

ARMOR FAMILIARITY:

How did I miss that one? Yeah, that ought to be a technique of each individual skill. It even comes in levels. Why is it a Perk?

- CLINCH: this is not really overpowered but allowing it will dramatically change the way martial artist are designed (making grappling skills far less important)

You may be reading more into that than I am. I assumed it applied only to the rules for grappling (i.e. gives the opponent a -4 to DX until he breaks free) and not to the setup for locks etc., which makes it fairly useless actually.

- EXOTIC WEAPON TRAINING: this is a +1 to combat skill, always. It should simply be removed, or possibly it should cost 3 points. Even then, ALL fighters who use "exotic" weapons will choose it.

I think it's actually something of the reverse, more a really expensive non-familiarity penalty that takes an actual point to buy off entirely rather than a few hours of practice.
Kind of a grey area depending on how exotic you think exotic weapons are I suppose, since the other way of looking at it would be as a cheap way to buy off the default penalty between say Spear and the otherwise unlisted Trident skill.

GRIP MASTERY: this perk basically grant you a +1 to parry (because you can "freely" assume a Defensive Grip and then relinquish it to attack).

Depends on your interpret of "or" and "(or both)", I think just cutting that bit in parenthesis pretty well fixes it. Making one grip change as a free action isn't as open to this particular tactic, because you couldn't shift out and back into the Defensive Grip on either side of your attack roll, which if you read or as exclusive or may be the way the Perk is supposed to be interpreted even as written.

POWER GRAPPLING: it's difficult to evaluate how powerful it is... but it's clearly *extremely* valuable to high-ST characters. Probably it's worth more than 1 point.

Though I'm not sure what rolls you'd normally make that isn't to hit or a defense. But yeah, I think rolls against ST are a bad idea in any circumstances whatsoever, and failure of 4e to kill them out is one of its bigger disappointments. Still the wrestling rules already suffer from lots of them (locks using margins of success of ST contests instead of damage rolls is basically the same thing) so I don't know this is any worse.

- SHIELD WALL TRAINING: this perk is SO overpowered.

Eh, Sacrificial Block is pretty trivial - I'd personally call it the free default - I'm parrying that blow even though I already know it is going to miss is perfectly reasonable (and could be worth doing in general, say to set up a techique that starts with a parry), that it was going to hit somebody else doesn't change anything really. I will give you that buying off a -2 penalty is a lot like a technique that ought to cost 2 points, for several skills.
The obvious balancing factor is to say it only works *when you are standing in a shield wall*, so no bonus unless there is somebody else with a large shield standing in one or more of your side hexes and with the same facing. That was how I was reading it, but I admit it doesn't actually say that.

- STRONGBOW: Suggested cost: 3 points

Hm. Striking Strength +2 (only one attack -60%) would be 4 points, you should probably charge that, and call the skill requirement an excuse not to pay an additional point for Special Exercises.

-TEAMWORK: this perk is so convoluted I don't think I would allow it. If I were to do so, I would charge 2 points for it. (note that it basically *includes* Sacrificial Parry and the "Sacrificial Block" portion of Shield Wall Training, only with the fuzzy "form up and then stay adjacent" requirement)

I still think those ought to be free. But it has a lot of other benefits. On the other hand it does make everyone burn a turn on a Ready maneuver and limits your actions some - e.g. you can't charge unless everyone does, or retreat as easily. I'd have to see it in play for a while before I decided it wasn't balanced.

OFF-HAND WEAPON TRAINING: this perk makes Ambidexterity useless (unless your character makes a point of using different weapons and skills every time...)

This one is forced by the low cost of Ambidexterity, and raising that, well, normally you just use your primary hand to avoid a penalty.

SPECIAL EXERCISES:

Eh, it's a particular instance of Unusual Background, these always call for GM judgement. You could equally well argue it should be free and advantages should be balanced at their native costs.

- PERFUME: this perk needs better explaining. What does "+1 on reaction rolls where a pleasant smell makes a difference" mean? A pleasant smell will ALWAYS be noticed when you talk with someone

I often talk to people I'm not standing right next too, but yeah it is ill defined. I assumed it was intended as a bonus to seduction with the usual vague the writing up for the sake of the PG rating. I don't see how what you smell like makes a difference in a potential combat reaction roll. Otherwise, well, Charisma (sense based -20%) [4]

[Lupo]

Originally Posted by Harald387

-A lot of your objections seem to come from an imperfect reading of the perk, or a poor understanding of exactly what the perk does. I'd be happy to point these out individually by PM if you're curious.

I am in fact curious and I'd really like to be enlightened by PM...

[RedMattis]

I went into the thread thinking: "What? Perks are perfectly alright!", but after looking at the examples I have to agree with Lupo on, perhaps not all, but many points.

While I think many suspicious looking perks are quite alright, although perhaps closer to 2 points in actual value, a few of them (Strongbow?) strike me as under-priced.
That's fine though, I can sort out a rare few perks... but if people start comparing to Strongbow when creating Perks we're going to start thumbing downhill.


Really, if the perk is there bows are underpowered, then what will we be see next?
Regrowth (Minor) + Technique "Critical Regrowth" [HT-4 Hard]?

...actually, about that, given the initiatives taken by GURPS Psionic Powers... well, maybe we will see something like that.



Note: I Think GURPS Psionic Powers looks really cool, but mixing Skill with Power Ability looks dangerous. Techniques for Enhancements....
Perhaps this is just that "Humanity" Flaw a game needs to feel less artificial like some guys said in the 3rd versus 4th edition thread awhile ago. :P
(I don't trust points to create fair characters in the first place (when things get complex), so for me it isn't really that much of a problem though. ;) )