Rearranging Character Points

[weby]

I allow reassigning points but in a very limited way. That is the number of points that can be rearranged and the frequency are both low.

[Kalzazz]

I allow it, and agree with Celjabba as a good way to do intermediate change

[Phantasm]

I allow it, but only a given number of times per PC and only after a certain amount of time/progression.

For example, I might have one guy who notices he missed something. I'll let him spend earned XP on that trait, even if it's not something "learnable" or let him get rid of a trait that hasn't yet come into play to permit the new one to come in - essentially a trait replacement. But I won't let the same guy tweak his character sheet every other session without reason.

Also, I'll permit everyone to rework character sheets for minor optimization between arcs (one arc tends to take 6-10 sessions). This lets folks spend earned XP; one thing I won't allow in the reworking is a reduction in base skill level for something that has come up. This is often accompanied by a bit of downtime ICly, complete with monetary compensation for day jobs and whatnot.

[Bruno]

I've allowed it for a long time; it's the best way I've found of dealing with a group of mixed gurps-fu levels. I have no problems with optimal characters; what I have a problem with is a mix of optimal and not optimal characters.

Allowing people to rejigger their characters, I've found, also makes players less likely to just hoard points for DX and IQ and leave everything else. It's made the min-maxers actually less munchkinny.

[simply Nathan]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

I've got news for you. GURPS doesn't simulate that distinction.

When spells have varying levels of effect allowing different levels of Magery to put different amounts of energy in, it very much does.

[VariousRen]

Originally Posted by simply Nathan

When spells have varying levels of effect allowing different levels of Magery to put different amounts of energy in, it very much does.

It simulates the fact that Magery >= Spell skill. Under no situation is it better to have 10 spell skills with 2 points in them than it is to have 10 1 point skills and an extra level of magery. This is why I'm going to be allowing players to move points from spells to magery in my DF and fantasy games from now on, so they can improve over time.

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by VariousRen

It simulates the fact that Magery >= Spell skill. Under no situation is it better to have 10 spell skills with 2 points in them than it is to have 10 1 point skills and an extra level of magery. This is why I'm going to be allowing players to move points from spells to magery in my DF and fantasy games from now on, so they can improve over time.

But what you are saying isn't actually true depending on how your run your game. For example, if you are using Magical Perks with the suggested limitations from Magical Styles, the person with Level 2 Magery and 10cp in spells cannot buy any Magical Perks. None. Because you get 1 per 20cp in spells. The person with Level 1 Magery and 20cp in spells gets to purchase a Perk. If they are both practitioners of Magical Styles? 10cp Mage gets 0 General Magic Perks and 1 Style Magic Perk. 20cp Mage gets 1 General Magic Perk and 2 Style Magic Perks.

Also, I'd not forget about Familiarity. Perhaps Fireball isn't fireball isn't fireball. There are different traditions. And as per the familiarity rules, you get 2 familiarities per cp in a skill. This means 10cp guy only knows two different ways people do fireball, his own, and perhaps the way the mages from the west do it. 20cp Mage knows 4 ways. This could become important when finding old magic books, or having cultural exchanges with other mages or trying to counterspell.

And what if you want to float that spell roll to something other than Magery+IQ? Well, the mage with more actual points in the spell will be at an advantage there.

There final number might be the same, but they represent different ways of getting to that number and have different implications.

[LemmingLord]

Depends on the genre I guess. Honestly I don't like points too much. All character changes are best made according to reason. In most genres, I see little story reason to increase a talent.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by LemmingLord

Depends on the genre I guess. Honestly I don't like points too much. All character changes are best made according to reason. In most genres, I see little story reason to increase a talent.

As much as there is to increase a skill. A Talent is just a bundle of skills that another game could have perfectly well have lumped into a single skill with the same name as the Talent. Don't let the name fool you, there's nothing about the mechanics that have anything to do with inborn ability.

[Dingle]

The additional reaction bonuses in talents hint at some sort of unusual flair with those skills at the very least, if not necessarily an inborn talent.