Innate Attack Perk

[Alden Loveshade]

Weapon skills are almost all DX based, which makes sense to me. For most of them, I think allowing a Perk to base them on something else would be iffy. The character must control a weapon and maneuver it to hit a dodging opponent, or at least have sufficient arm coordination to punch the moving opponent in the jaw.

But in the case of Innate Attack, that dragon might be simply looking at someone and blowing fire, or that mage might be looking at someone and pointing a finger to cast a fireball. In these cases, Perception would seem to be primary over DX. Unless they suffer from a neurological or similar disorder, almost everyone can point at something successfully.

Consider this from GURPS Power-Ups 2: Perks for Attribute Substitution:

DX-based skills with a complex technological aspect can shift to IQ (“Battlesuit based on IQ”), while those that involve fine work or hand-eye coordination can move to Per (“Driving based on Per”).

So do you agree with allowing Perk: Attribute Substitution (Innate Attack based on Per)?

[Aldric]

Most likely no. That Perk itself should be watched carefully, of the two examples Battlesuit might work, Driving no.

[Alden Loveshade]

Originally Posted by Aldric

Most likely no. That Perk itself should be watched carefully, of the two examples Battlesuit might work, Driving no.

It's of course a matter for each GM to decide, but the Driving Perk is official RAW in that book.

[Aldric]

Originally Posted by Alden Loveshade

It's of course a matter for each GM to decide, but the Driving Perk is official RAW in that book.

I know, and I still don't like it and wouldn't allow it.

Not sayin there are no cases where it would make sense, but moving from one attribute to another which costs the same amount of points to improve is one thing, Per is much cheaper.

[Blind Mapmaker]

There's the Psychic Guidance perk (Thaumatology: Magical Styles p. 29) for spells. It goes one better and lets you attack with spell skill instead of innate attack. So I wouldn't think the Attribute Substitution is all that out of bounds.

If you keep it for NPCs or very closely restricted circumstances (after a quest searching for the dragon sage of whatnot etc.), I wouldn't worry about it. It shouldn't be first choice for everybody and their sister, though.

One of the problems with moving stuff to PER is, of course, the fact that it is very cheap and a part of IQ. If you make it its own attribute and maybe increase the price, it won't be such a problem. Power-Ups 9: Alternate Attributes is really helpful for things like that.

[Alden Loveshade]

Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker

There's the Psychic Guidance perk (Thaumatology: Magical Styles p. 29) for spells. It goes one better and lets you attack with spell skill instead of innate attack. So I wouldn't think the Attribute Substitution is all that out of bounds...

Unfortunately, I don't have that book--yet. Does it have you roll on spell skill twice, once for the spell and once for the attack? If so, that would be better for the vast majority of mages.

EDIT: Just bought it.

EDIT: I checked the book. Thanks for pointing that out! For most mages, that's even better than the Perk variation I suggested, and it still costs only 1 pt. I doubt many mages are going to spend 5 points per level on Per to get it equal to the Magery level they already have.

Example: My PC has IQ 14 and Magery 2. So for 1 point for Psychic Guidance, I can cast Lighting and aim at skill 16. Or I can spend 10 points on Per and 1 point on Attribute Substitution to get the same thing for that spell. (Yes, that also increases Per, but that's reasonable. I doubt any reasonable player is going to spend 11 points primarily for better Lightning aiming when they can get it for 1 pt.)

However, for a mage who has multiple beam spells, or for one who does have unusually high Per, I think my suggested Perk could work and would be reasonable.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Alden Loveshade

So do you agree with allowing Perk: Attribute Substitution (Innate Attack based on Per)?

I generally would consider it for any missile attack. It's the sort *almost* reasonable thing the perk is for (completely reasonable things don't need a perk at all, just the standard rules for floating a skill to a different attribute).

The major effect is that it gives IQ (or I suppose just PER) heavy characters access to an effective combat skill at a reasonable cost, which I personally consider a win - it gives their players something worthwhile to do in a fight, and fights are something that almost inevitably eats up a lot of play time in an RPG, and players sitting around for a couple hours while stuff happens they can't really participate in meaningfully isn't any fun.

And nah, I don't really worry about the difference in stat cost. PER still costs a point more than improving a single skill, so nobody is really likely to boost it just for a skill bonus. If you start wanting to Attribute Substitute a *lot* of skills to the same attribute I might start saying no, but for one or two substitutions it's not much of an issue.

[Varyon]

Switching from DX to another attribute isn't that big of a deal for a single skill, and is particularly not too big of a deal for ranged combat skills. You'll still need DX for all the other things DX does (including melee combat, which is why it's particularly not a big deal for ranged combat skills). With switching to Per, there is a small issue that you're rather unlikely to buy the skill above Default+6 [4], as you can boost overall Per (and all your other Per-based skills, which anyone with "high Per" as part of their character concept is likely to have several of) for just [1] more than raising that skill alone. That's really more a potential characterization issue than a game balance issue, however, and may be a complete non-issue if the GM doesn't let your Per vary much from your IQ.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Varyon

With switching to Per, there is a small issue that you're rather unlikely to buy the skill above Default+6 [4], as you can boost overall Per (and all your other Per-based skills, which anyone with "high Per" as part of their character concept is likely to have several of) for just [1] more than raising that skill alone.

Definitely cheaper than raising IQ or DX at 20/level. If you have Psychic Guidance there is the option of raising Magery at 10/level instead. Possibly cheaper with limitations, but only if you're willing to do stuff like limit colleges, make spells non-maintainable (not necessarily a problem for a missile-focused mage) or other limitations. Magery can actually shrink to 2/level (unlike skill) making Psychic Guidance the cheapest way to get accuracy, or just as cheap, if you only take Magery down to -60%.