Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-07-2012, 12:20 PM   #1
Morathor
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

I'm working on a sea serpent that can turn invisible to stalk its prey, but must reappear as it attacks. This would be a glamour; the idea is that when you're in imminent peril, your self-preservation overpowers the illusion. What would be a fair value for this limitation? (I do need to figure out the point total for this since they're going to be hypothetically playable.) It seems like attacking undetected is one of the major advantages of invisibility, but it wouldn't be that hard to circle around while invisible and then attack from the blind spot, so I guess it's not that severe a limitation.
While I'm on the subject, would I need to add an enhancement to make this work underwater, without leaving a suspicious serpent-shaped gap in the water?
Morathor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 01:13 PM   #2
Walrus
 
Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chelyabinsk, Russia
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

I'd say it's no more than -20% because All-out is -25% and it's more limiting.

Underwater only is usually +0% feature.
__________________
MH Setting. Welcome to help.
Walrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 02:24 PM   #3
kirbwarrior
 
kirbwarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dreamland
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

It sounds like a -10%, like a big nuisance effect.

I think you would have to take Underwater on it, if it works underwater also.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicfish View Post
While I do not think that GURPS is perfect I do think that it is more balanced than what I am likely to create by GM fiat.
kirbwarrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 02:29 PM   #4
Bruno
 
Bruno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

You might want "Fringe" for the "hole in the water" effect. It's generally used for "predator shimmer" but this seems like just as good an application.
__________________
All about Size Modifier; Unified Hit Location Table
A Wiki for my F2F Group
A neglected GURPS blog
Bruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 03:03 PM   #5
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbwarrior View Post
It sounds like a -10%, like a big nuisance effect.
Given that probably one of the most valuable aspects of Invisibility is the ability to attack targets without them getting meaningful Active Defences or being able to strike back without obscene penalties, this seems wrong to me.

Invisibility that doesn't work in combat seems like it would have less than half utility. It certainly wouldn't be nine-tenths as valuable.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 03:14 PM   #6
Kazander
 
Kazander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

I pegged "Dissipates after an attack" (as in it has to be turned back on, possibly taking a turn) at -20%. The way you've worded it, it sounds like your idea doesn't need to be turned back on, it does so automatically, so this would be less.
Kazander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 10:04 PM   #7
Morathor
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno View Post
You might want "Fringe" for the "hole in the water" effect. It's generally used for "predator shimmer" but this seems like just as good an application.
But I don't want the hole effect. My concern is that RAW invisibility, not being designed for underwater use, would leave such a hole. I'm wondering if I need to take an enhancement to negate that effect. I suppose it's a rather silly concern; since the serpent can't survive above water, I should assume that the invisibility has its normal effect in its default environment, which means no fringe effect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
Given that probably one of the most valuable aspects of Invisibility is the ability to attack targets without them getting meaningful Active Defences or being able to strike back without obscene penalties, this seems wrong to me.

Invisibility that doesn't work in combat seems like it would have less than half utility. It certainly wouldn't be nine-tenths as valuable.
Well, like I said, it wouldn't be too hard to circle around somebody while invisible and then attack from their blind spot, thus negating their active defenses. So it can be used in combat, just not quite to the same effect. Retaliation is probably the more serious concern.


Seems like the consensus is -20% or less...

Last edited by Morathor; 11-07-2012 at 10:16 PM.
Morathor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 01:52 AM   #8
kirbwarrior
 
kirbwarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dreamland
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
Given that probably one of the most valuable aspects of Invisibility is the ability to attack targets without them getting meaningful Active Defences or being able to strike back without obscene penalties, this seems wrong to me.

Invisibility that doesn't work in combat seems like it would have less than half utility. It certainly wouldn't be nine-tenths as valuable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazander View Post
I pegged "Dissipates after an attack" (as in it has to be turned back on, possibly taking a turn) at -20%. The way you've worded it, it sounds like your idea doesn't need to be turned back on, it does so automatically, so this would be less.
It seems that the creature is only visibly during the turn of the attack (aka, until they choose another maneuver), and so can be far easier to get around than 'Turns off with Attack maneuver, must turn back on later' which seems -20%.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicfish View Post
While I do not think that GURPS is perfect I do think that it is more balanced than what I am likely to create by GM fiat.
kirbwarrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 11:39 AM   #9
Morathor
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

I don't think the ability would turn back on automatically; once you've seen through the illusion, the serpent has to re-establish it, which means they get another will roll to resist it. But this is going to be a reflexive ability, so it won't take a turn, and Will-5 is a hard roll to make. So maybe -15%? That would give me a package of Switchable, Reflexive, Glamour (Will-5), and Ended By Attack for a total of +30%.
Morathor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 01:32 PM   #10
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: Limitation for invisibility: Can't attack

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morathor View Post
But this is going to be a reflexive ability, so it won't take a turn, and Will-5 is a hard roll to make. So maybe -15%? That would give me a package of Switchable, Reflexive, Glamour (Will-5), and Ended By Attack for a total of +30%.
And how is this better than Invisible (Switchable +10%) where you can attack freely while remaining invisible and they don't get a resistance roll at all (even at -5) to penetrate your cloak of invisibility? Obviously, having your ability shut down and make you more vulnerable should lower the point cost instead of raising it. Using Reflexive to turn it back on isn't necessary as you can consider being momentarily visible similar to having your ability cause you to be suddenly noticeable (like a flashy effect going off when you use Telepathy). After all, Reflexive is designed to enhance your ability to act in your benefit without requiring an action on your part. That really isn't happening here since your ability is already in use but periodically doesn't protect you as described by the condition. I would gauge as about a -20% since that's a pretty serious limitation on Invisibility and it seems worse than giving a non-obvious power (such as telepathy) a visible signature (typically -10% or so).
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
attack, gurps, invisibility, limitation

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.