Emergencies Only Competence

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Emergencies Only is a -30% limitation, it should actually meaningfully limit the PC.

The idea that only action scenes can be meaningful to PCs is not one I subscribe to, and I don't think the Basic Set endorses it either.

Consider Absent-Mindedness. A 15 point disadvantage that largely kicks in only when you're bored.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

The idea that only action scenes can be meaningful to PCs is not one I subscribe to, and I don't think the Basic Set endorses it either.

And it wasn't what I was claiming. My point is that any definition which winds up being "only competent when it's important to be competent" isn't worth much; there have to be situation that would actually be resolved in game where the lack of skill mattered.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

And it wasn't what I was claiming. My point is that any definition which winds up being "only competent when it's important to be competent" isn't worth much; there have to be situation that would actually be resolved in game where the lack of skill mattered.

Ah. I guess if you interpret the OP's statement that the problem doesn't apply "when it really counted" as meaning "anytime this applies, it doesn't really count" that makes sense as a criticism.

I was going more by the examples which ran neatly to 'only effective under high-pressure conditions', which is exactly what Emergencies Only does.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Ah. I guess if you interpret the OP's statement that the problem doesn't apply "when it really counted" as meaning "anytime this applies, it doesn't really count" that makes sense as a criticism.

I find Emergencies Only such a slippery concept that the only time a player wanted it, I warned them it would be interpreted harshly, and they used a different limitation. My guideline would be something like "When the players feel the characters definitely can't handle the situation."

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Ah. I guess if you interpret the OP's statement that the problem doesn't apply "when it really counted" as meaning "anytime this applies, it doesn't really count" that makes sense as a criticism.

I was going more by the examples which ran neatly to 'only effective under high-pressure conditions', which is exactly what Emergencies Only does.

I wouldn't allow a definition of 'emergency' that's anywhere near that broad if you want -30%. Maybe if you want -5%. For example, you're not even going to roll driving unless it's a high pressure situation.

[ericthered]

Would Laziness work? It seems to have similar effects.

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by johndallman

I find Emergencies Only such a slippery concept that the only time a player wanted it, I warned them it would be interpreted harshly, and they used a different limitation. My guideline would be something like "When the players feel the characters definitely can't handle the situation."

Good thing you warned them. That's more narrow than I'd expect. Personally, I think emergency would be when there is 'danger to life or limb' and/or 'immediate risk of critical mission failure'.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

I wouldn't allow a definition of 'emergency' that's anywhere near that broad if you want -30%. Maybe if you want -5%. For example, you're not even going to roll driving unless it's a high pressure situation.

In characters, other examples of -30% limitations are No Blunt Trauma + No Knockback and Accessibility: Only While Flying. I don't think the RAW is as stingy with those discounts as you are, at least on any kind of consistent basis.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

Good thing you warned them. That's more narrow than I'd expect.

I intended to put them off the idea.

[Varyon]

This kind of sounds like some form of Higher Purpose, honestly - your character normally doesn't have very high skill, but when the Higher Purpose kicks in, they get a sizable bonus that turns them from Zero to Hero. It may be a bit too broad, however.