Flexibility as a Perk?

[JulianLW]

Originally Posted by Wazowski

It is being quite difficult, because he is discussing that he might take the advantage, and then take an anti-talent, which would make the advantage free, and still allow him to keep the +2 bonus on several skills from Flexibility.

This is explicitly against the rules in GURPS.

Have your player read "Negated Disadvantages" on GURPS Basic 120.

Then tell them to stop being such a power-gaming munchkin.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Wazowski

It is being quite difficult, because he is discussing that he might take the advantage, and then take an anti-talent, which would make the advantage free, and still allow him to keep the +2 bonus on several skills from Flexibility.

What does the anti-Talent do to those skills?

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by Wazowski

It is being quite difficult, because he is discussing that he might take the advantage, and then take an anti-talent, which would make the advantage free, and still allow him to keep the +2 bonus on several skills from Flexibility.

Originally Posted by whswhs

What does the anti-Talent do to those skills?

I'm similarly confused as to how this would work. At most you might take Incompetence (Climbing) and Incompetence (Erotic Art), which I would count against the 5-quirk limit and would still leave the net cost at 3 points, not 1 point.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by JulianLW

This is explicitly against the rules in GURPS.

Have your player read "Negated Disadvantages" on GURPS Basic 120.

Then tell them to stop being such a power-gaming munchkin.

That, and remind him that as per the Power-Ups Talents rules Anti-Talents are:
1) subject to GM approval (no he can't design his own),
2) prevent you from learning any of the skills covered *at all*, so even if this worked he's stuck with the defaults forever, which are pretty poor even with a bonus that somehow outstripped the penalties,
and 3) apply to rolls [other] than the skills listed when their purpose overlaps conceptually with the thing you are not talented at. So an Anti-Flexible Talent will penalize quite a lot of other DX rolls and DX based skills if the GM can find any connection between what you are trying to do with them and the concept of Flexibility.

[Michael Thayne]

That "Negated Disadvantage" rule honestly seems kind of superfluous in practice if you are enforcing disadvantage limits. Like Acute Hearing 4 [8] and Hard of Hearing [-10] is kind of nonsensical but if you have to use up -10 points of your disadvantage allotment to do it, it isn't particularly game breaking compared to Acute Hearing 4 plus literally any other -10 point disadvantage. Similarly, if a player told me he wanted to take Basic Move +1 [5]; Combat Reflexes [15]; Perk (+1 to Basic Speed for the sole purpose of determining order in combat) [1]; and Basic Speed -1.00 [-20], my main worry would be that the player didn't understand the concept of the disadvantage limit.

[JulianLW]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

That "Negated Disadvantage" rule honestly seems kind of superfluous in practice if you are enforcing disadvantage limits. Like Acute Hearing 4 [8] and Hard of Hearing [-10] is kind of nonsensical but if you have to use up -10 points of your disadvantage allotment to do it, it isn't particularly game breaking compared to Acute Hearing 4 plus literally any other -10 point disadvantage. Similarly, if a player told me he wanted to take Basic Move +1 [5]; Combat Reflexes [15]; Perk (+1 to Basic Speed for the sole purpose of determining order in combat) [1]; and Basic Speed -1.00 [-20], my main worry would be that the player didn't understand the concept of the disadvantage limit.

Yeah. It's totally obvious, but I think it's included mostly for players like the one the OP is telling us about who want to pair up some combo of disadvantage and advantage to get some benefit for free or on the cheap.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Wazowski

A player has taken Dexterity 13 and also wants to take the Flexibility bonuses: (-3 in penalties may be ignored when due to close quarters & +3 on all attempts to break free in close combat). Should it be allowed as a Perk?

That's two features in five. That means this would make the advantage useful in about half the situations it would normally be useful in. This isn't exactly an Accessibility limitation (B110), but we can use that as a guide and it gives a -20% to cost for being useful half the time, so this suggests this more limited Flexible cost 4 points.

As the player undoubtedly (given the threats of 'anti-talents') expects to never need the parts they're dropping, this seems a fair price to me.

What about Empathy, Charisma, and Voice?

Charisma doesn't really have sub-components - it works on all reaction checks and all influence skill rolls.

Empathy is already basically a talent (and can be replaced by the 'Empath' talent from Talents, p.10) and Perks has a version that's Sensitive, but limited to a quite specific group. Having just the IQ check, but for everyone seems to me to be better than that, and therefore worth more than 1 point.

Voice is also effectively a talent, one with a very good benefit effect and a lot of skills for the price. There's no way any part of this is worth only a single point, unless watered down to the point where it's unrecognisable.

[Wazowski]

Oh I see, so it won't work unless I allow it. If he asked, should I make Voice a leveled Talent at 5/level?

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Wazowski

Oh I see, so it won't work unless I allow it. If he asked, should I make Voice a leveled Talent at 5/level?

On one hand, you CAN do that. On the other hand, I don't think you have an obligation to do it.

On the gripping hand, though, given that Voice helps eight skills, RAW specify a cost of 10/level. The 10 points for +2 is a BIG discount.

[SID]

Please check the book Power Ups 2 Perks, so you learn more about perks and the things you could do. Giving the player the RAW flexibility for 1 CP is just too much.

A perk often costs you 1CP and gives you a situational +1 to a certain skill.