ATR (One Manuever Only)

[Arcanestomper]

I've seen some discussion of using ATR for Mental Maneuvers only, but I can't find anything for what the limitation cost is for an ATR that allows one specific maneuver. Such as an extra Aim or Move.

Is there a limitation I can apply for any maneuver, or do I have to price it out for each specific possible maneuver?

[Kelly Pedersen]

I think you're going to have to set the value based on the specific maneuver. Not all maneuvers are created equal. The most obvious case is Do Nothing compared to any other maneuvers, but there's definitely differences in utility between, say, Evaluate and Attack, too.

Offhand, I'd peg "Do Nothing Only" as -90%. It's really only useful for running out the clock on the durations of things.

Move, Change Posture, and Evaluate I'd peg at -75%. That puts a level of ATR, absent other modifiers, at 25 points for each. Since buying up Basic Move by 5 levels, i.e. doubling the Move rate of the average person, costs 25 points, that feels right there. Actually, Evaluate might be need to be cheaper, since 25 points buys way more than +1 to skill, which is basically what Evaluate gives you. Make Evaluate more useful, would be my advice.

Aim, Attack, Feint, Move and Attack, Concentrate, Ready, and Wait I'd figure at -70%. That puts them at 30 points. More expensive than Extra Attack, but the attacks are a bit more flexible, since you can combine them with another maneuver. Cheaper than Compartmentalized Mind, but not once you put No Mental Separation on CM, and I'd argue this is more limited as well in that you can't maintain concentration in the same way a person with CM can.

All-Out Attack and Defense I'd peg at -60%. The ability to always do an All-Out Attack and then follow up with a maneuver that doesn't sacrifice your defense, or conversely the ability to do any other maneuver, and then get the defensive bonuses of All-Out Defense, are both very potent, and deserve to cost at least 40 points, I'd say.

[Arcanestomper]

Wouldn't Compartmentalized Mind (No Mental Separation -20%) still be 40 points. That would be more expensive than ATR (Concentrate Only -70%) at 30 points. I'm not sure if the inability to retain concentration is worth the extra 10 points there. Though it is something. Maybe -65%.

[Kelly Pedersen]

The difference between Compartmentalized Mind and this build with Altered Time Rate (Concentration Only), is that Compartmentalized Mind lets you do Concentration actions "in parallel" with other actions, while the ATR build only lets you do them sequentially. That means the ATR build is actually being constantly interrupted, with all that implies.

Consider a couple of cases as examples. In one, the character is casting a spell that requires multiple seconds to cast. In another, they've got an ability that requires constant concentration to maintain. The CM build helps a great deal with both of these. When casting the spell, they could use both their compartments to concentrate, effectively casting the spell twice as fast. The ATR build could do this as well. However, the CM build also has the option of having only one compartment cast the spell, taking the normal time to do so, while freeing up their other compartment to do other stuff - move, attack, concentrate on a second spell - all things the ATR build can't do at all, because you can't put Concentrate "on hold" while you do another action, which is what the build requires you to do.

And in the "concentrate to maintain an ability" thing, the ATR person is actually even worse off - they get practically no benefit at all. If all their actions have to be Concentrate, just to keep it going, the fact that they're Concentrating twice a turn has no effect, beyond being able to take two steps in the turn instead of one. Whereas the CM build can keep one of their compartments tied up and concentrating on the effect, while their other compartment does whatever the heck it wants.

For these reasons, I would argue that the ATR does justify being cheaper than CM - I'd rate those limitations as at least -10% on Compartmentalized Mind. Possibly slightly more, to be honest.

[chandley]

Back in this thread, I hashed out this price scheme:

Extra any maneuver at all: 100 points (Altered Time Rate).
Extra Attack: 25 points (note this isnt a full attack maneuver, just another swing inside an existing attack maneuver.)
Extra Concentrate: 40 points (Compartmentalized Mind, No mental separation)
Extra Tracking: 5 points (also not quite full Extra Aim, but close).
Extra Feint: Formally subsumed into Extra Attack by Martial Arts.
Extra Ready: 25 points (per suggested houserule from Kromm here)
Extra Attack Maneuver: 40 points
Extra Move Maneuver: 25 points
Extra Aim/Evaluate: 25 points
Extra Do Nothing: 5 points (see DF2 p.11 "Onward to Victory!" for why you might want this)

This isnt like RAW or anything, just what I worked out. Might serve as a jumping off point for your own thinking.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

Offhand, I'd peg "Do Nothing Only" as -90%. It's really only useful for running out the clock on the durations of things.

ATR (Do Nothing only) should be about as expensive as Extra Attack. It allows you to take AOA with almost none of the downsides. Just follow it up with Do Nothing and you get normal defenses. Versus Extra Attack, you can't stack it with other AOA options or Move and Attack, but you can choose other AOA options instead of getting the extra attack.

Edit: If the Do Nothing must come first, it is very nearly useless, minus things that use it as not-quite-concentrate like the DF2 leadership rule.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by chandley

Back in this thread, I hashed out this price scheme:

Extra any maneuver at all: 100 points (Altered Time Rate).
[...]
Extra Tracking: 5 points (also not quite full Extra Aim, but close).
[...]
Extra Do Nothing: 5 points (see DF2 p.11 "Onward to Victory!" for why you might want this)

This isnt like RAW or anything, just what I worked out. Might serve as a jumping off point for your own thinking.

No Advantage can have an effective limitation total less than -80%
meaning ATR(x -80%) [20] is the Cheapest possible out come

[corwyn]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

No Advantage can have an effective limitation total less than -80%
meaning ATR(x -80%) [20] is the Cheapest possible out come

No, but as a GM, you could make up new advantages based on the results - if it's only worth less than 20, so be it. If you're a player, you are SOL.

[corwyn]

Originally Posted by chandley

Back in this thread, I hashed out this price scheme:


Extra Feint: Formally subsumed into Extra Attack by Martial Arts.
Extra Ready: 25 points (per suggested houserule from Kromm here)
Extra Attack Maneuver: 40 points
Extra Move Maneuver: 25 points
Extra Aim/Evaluate: 25 points

Extra Feint is nowhere near as useful as Extra Attack exactly because it is subsumed into EA. If for 25 points I can get EA and use it for feint if I choose to, how is it the same cost if I can't choose to use it as an attack? Explicitly less utility means less cost.

Aim is way more useful than Evaluate. In fact, you can get the first round of evaluate and a whole lot more for less with one level of DX. In over a decade of 4e I've never seen anyone Evaluate. Aim isn't extremely common but it's more common than that since it is so front loaded for many ranged weapons. Most people would take Gunslinger/Heroic Archer instead, however.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by corwyn

Extra Feint is nowhere near as useful as Extra Attack exactly because it is subsumed into EA. If for 25 points I can get EA and use it for feint if I choose to, how is it the same cost if I can't choose to use it as an attack? Explicitly less utility means less cost.

He didn't say "25 points because it's subsumed into Extra Attack", so don't worry :) He specifically didn't give it any price at all, ie "don't buy it, buy Extra Attack".

Or if you prefer, buy Extra Attack and then put a limitation on it, "only for Feints".