-80% Limitation Cap: Any Exceptions?

[Culture20]

If you really want to have twenty -80% limitations on an advantage and have it still be worth positive CP after the computation is done, you could fudge the algorithm for calculating limitations (very Non Rules as Written):
Do the normal addition/subtraction with the smallest limitations until you reach +/-0%, and if you still have leftover limitations, apply them, highest to lowest, one at a time the the result.

Examples:

Advantage Fu [10], special Fu leveled enhancement +10%x5 (+50%), Only while in a bar (-40%)
Standard RAW calculations: 10 +10%= 11 CP

Advantage Fu [10], special Fu leveled enhancement +10%x5 (+50%), Only while in a bar (-40%), Temporary Disadvantage: Altered Time Rate (slow)(-80%), only during business hours (-30%), noisy (-5%)
Standard RAW calculations: 50-5-30-40-80... 45-30-40-80... 15-40-80... 0-25-80 Stop!
Non RAW: Two limitations left over: 10 CP -80%= 2CP ... 2CP -25% = 2 CP

Advantage Foo[100], special Foo leveled enhancement +10%x5 (+50%), Only while in a bar(-40%), Temporary Disadvantage: Altered Time Rate (slow)(-80%), only during business hours (-30%), noisy (-5%)
Standard RAW calculations: 50-5-30-40-80... 45-30-40-80... 15-40-80... 0-25-80 Stop!
Non RAW: Two limitations left over: 100 CP -80%= 20CP ... 20CP -25% = 15 CP

The biggest problem with this method is you can easily make "I win" perks, but they should be difficult to use in theory.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Yeah, the idea is that the advantage will always be worth something, and multiplicative modifiers can get hairy. I've personally run a variant where once you hit 80%, you can still apply modifiers, but they apply to the 1/5 value. So if you have a 20 point advantage with -105% in modifiers, you pay ([20]*.2 = 4)*.75) = [3] points on it. It was invented to be able to denote the difference between someone who maxed out their jumper limitations at -80% and someone who went by the concept and accumulated over -200% -- that ability was not worth 20 points!

It has occurred to me that instead of piling on limitations, a character could instead get limited disadvantages that simulated the effect of the modifiers.

[Agent]

Originally Posted by Otaku

I don't have that and won't be able to get it for quite some time, but I do appreciate that there is something official on this out there.

The book itself is quite worth it in a similar way to Powers (for consideration after that 'quite some time' there), but note that the gist of that rule is that the GM is free to adjust by fiat. The book does have a nice example of the very rule in it where an Advantage is priced-down to a Perk.

Personally I used/allowed this idea once as a simple way to get DR (Limited) down to 'reasonable' costs and up to absurd but hardly powerful levels, to model nigh 'Fire Immunity' and such...

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

That seems broken. I'd think you'd be ill-advised to allow that.

I am quite certain that the Rules Exemption Perk isn't meant for that usage at all. It'd be extremely ill-advised.

What one could do, with or without Rules Exemption, is to implement a diminishing returns principle after -80%, so that -82% becomes -81%, -84% becomes -82%, -92% becomes -85.5% and so forth, getting closer and closer to -100% but without ever reaching it. That requires a lookup table during character creation, though, or a modification to the character creation software or spreadsheet used.

And yes, the OP is onto something with the use of a divisor instead of a percentage modifier for Alternate Abilities. Any such divisor goes on top of th percentage modifier and is therefore not subject to the -80% cap rule. GURPS Supers has a few similar options that employ divisors instead of percentage modifiers; I think they're Costs CP To Use and One Use Only (Ever).

[kirbwarrior]

-80% limitations, One Use Ever 1/5, Alternate Ability 1/5.

You now have a trait that costs 1/125 it's base price. Do them in order of above; after the first two cuts, if the ability costs less than something you have, you get the last cut. For instance, if you have Alternate Form:Body of Fire with maxed out enhancements, that can get upwards of 50pts. 50*25 is [1250], so you can have a burning attack as an alternative ability to your alternate form that costs [10] but is actually 125d (and probably you got the limitation that you die to use it).

[vierasmarius]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

What one could do, with or without Rules Exemption, is to implement a diminishing returns principle after -80%, so that -82% becomes -81%, -84% becomes -82%, -92% becomes -85.5% and so forth, getting closer and closer to -100% but without ever reaching it. That requires a lookup table during character creation, though, or a modification to the character creation software or spreadsheet used.

Something I've considered is to treat every full -80% in limitations as a x1/5 modifier. For example, -100% in limitations translates to x1/5 plus -20%, or effectively -84%. -200% becomes x1/25 plus -40%, or -97.6%.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

Something I've considered is to treat every full -80% in limitations as a x1/5 modifier. For example, -100% in limitations translates to x1/5 plus -20%, or effectively -84%. -200% becomes x1/25 plus -40%, or -97.6%.

Thats something I've played around with as well. The one thing I don't like about it is how rapidly actual points go down from 60% to 80% (or the really wacky stuff that happens at 140% to 160%). I like the way you phrase the idea though, and it suggests other variants: a -60% or -50% break point. for demonstration:

base    1/2        1/5        
-0%        1        1
-10%    .9        .9
-20%    .8        .8
-30%    .7        .7
-40%    .6        .6
-50%    .5        .5
-60%    .45        .4
-70%    .4        .3            
-80%    .35        .2
-90%    .3        .18
-100%    .25        .16
-110%    .225    .14
-120%    .2        .12
-130%    .175    .1
-140%    .15        .08
-150%    .125    .06
-160%    .1125    .04

Splitting at 80 has the advantage of not changing any of the RAW ranges and it gives bigger discounts (and its worth noting it uses numbers divisible powers of 5 rather than powers of 2)

Splitting at 50 has the advantage of being a fairly smooth curve: there is not a huge incentive to change some numbers (60%, 140%) while little incentive to change others (80%, 160%). The incentive change is there, but its much smaller and pushes the players towards multiples of 50%.

[vierasmarius]

Oh, I do like the look of the "50%" curve, even if the results aren't as arithmetically clean. I wonder how well that would combine with Multiplicative Modifiers.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

Oh, I do like the look of the "50%" curve, even if the results aren't as arithmetically clean. I wonder how well that would combine with Multiplicative Modifiers.

The method is already a variant of MM, with the difference that you apply the capped Limitation value repeatedly to use up the total negative value, instead of just once. For instance, to get the effect of -160% (three steps at -50% and one at -10%), multiply by (1 - 50%) = 0.5, which is to say divide by two, and keep doing that. -160% is Cost * .5 * .5 * .5 * (1-10%) = Cost * .1125.

The version with a -80% cap is Cost * (1 - 80%) * (1-80%) = Cost * .04.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

-80% limitations, One Use Ever 1/5, Alternate Ability 1/5.

You now have a trait that costs 1/125 it's base price. Do them in order of above; after the first two cuts, if the ability costs less than something you have, you get the last cut. For instance, if you have Alternate Form:Body of Fire with maxed out enhancements, that can get upwards of 50pts. 50*25 is [1250], so you can have a burning attack as an alternative ability to your alternate form that costs [10] but is actually 125d (and probably you got the limitation that you die to use it).

Putting a One Use ability in a AA seems like terrible idea.