Is Extra Attack worth it?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Varyon

If an Advantage is a poorer investment than just pumping skill, the solution is to either reduce the price of it or modify how it works.

The problem is that there are a quite large number of advantages where that's the case. Changing the cost of skills (revert to a 3e max cost 8, for example) is the smaller change.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Eh, if you implement a skill cap (hard or soft), all that means is that only those at (the cusp of) the cap will bother with Extra Attack.

I feel I must point out that for some it's doing the math for the multiple (and sometimes theoretical) uses of uber-skill that is the "bother".

Also, just a note because I sometimes have my own problems with tact (I have just barely avoided using the word "calculophilia" so far) but proclaiming uber-Skill unquestionably and unarguably far superior to Extra Attack leans towards calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid.

Sometimes it's the simple answer that's the good one. It might be the better one to emphasize to grow Gurps' market share too.

[pawsplay]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Then the cost of Rapid Strike (or DWA too) is multiplied by the number of Skills while Extra Attack remains at the same cost. That gives you one extra attack with any Skill and possible combination of limbs and weapons you have.

Asa person who always prepares his characters for combat in more than one mode I don't always take Extra Attack but I _never_ mess around with Rapid Strike or DWA either. They're a waste of cp and game time spent on math to me.

If you have 16+ skill you pretty much aren't going to miss anyway. Once you get near what is a "high" skill in your campaign, high skill and Extra Attack each have their uses.

I will say that Dungeon Fantasy dispenses with multi-strike, and still looks right to me at 25 points. So I I would probably say that requiring multiple attack modes should actually be a -20% modifier. But 25 points is still not outlandish.

Also, Extra Attack works with things that don't allow Rapid Strike, like innate fire blasts. And you can still ALSO do a Rapid Strike.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

My fix was to drop it to 20 points and make Multi-Strike implicit. I already allow Attacks to be traded for Readies, so...

That probably works too, and avoids the complexity of mounting defense penalties in addition to the iteration penalties if you try to use the same defense against subsequent attacks. I feel like an Attack that gets traded for a Ready should still call for a successful roll against an appropriate skill (Broadsword to draw your sword, for example, if you lack Fast Draw*), using the precedent of how Quick Shooting Bows works (you roll at -6 to draw the bow instantly, then attack at -6, which matches using a Rapid Strike), but could be persuaded to waive the roll if it would be at no penalty (as in the case of trading an Extra Attack).

*I also feel Fast-Draw being a Technique would be more appropriate than having it as an individual skill, but again, that's a discussion for a different thread).

Originally Posted by Anthony

The problem is that there are a quite large number of advantages where that's the case. Changing the cost of skills (revert to a 3e max cost 8, for example) is the smaller change.

I don't think "make pumping attributes sky-high even more attractive" is a good solution, I'd rather just identify the Advantages and make appropriate adjustments as they come up.

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

I feel I must point out that for some it's doing the math for the multiple (and sometimes theoretical) uses of uber-skill that is the "bother".

Also, just a note because I sometimes have my own problems with tact (I have just barely avoided using the word "calculophilia" so far) but proclaiming uber-Skill unquestionably and unarguably far superior to Extra Attack leans towards calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid.

Sometimes it's the simple answer that's the good one. It might be the better one to emphasize to grow Gurps' market share too.

I feel the current version of Extra Attack is a trap (albeit not a horrible one) outside of very particular circumstances, but I certainly didn't mean to imply anyone who, in my view, fell for such a trap was stupid or in any way my intellectual inferior. And I can certainly understand a desire to go with a simple approach even if it's sub-optimal - there's enough complicated stuff everyone has to deal with already without needing meticulously analyze and optimize the paper man you're making to bash in imaginary orc skulls (or whatever the campaign is focusing on). And, really, "optimal" for a game is arguably whatever is the most fun for the player, and if grabbing Extra Attack and going on your way is more enjoyable than trying to figure out if you could actually just make due with a couple instances of mixed DWA's, then Extra Attack already is the optimal solution. Personally, I think it's worthwhile to adjust it so its usefulness is more in line with its cost, as that way it ceases to be a trap in my perspective, but of course that doesn't mean others have to switch to the "improved" version.

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

"calculophilia"

Hey! I resemble that remark!

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Varyon

I don't think "make pumping attributes sky-high even more attractive" is a good solution, I'd rather just identify the Advantages and make appropriate adjustments as they come up.

Well, that list is somewhere between 80% and 90% of the entire list of advantages, and nearly 100% of things that are listed as exotic or supernatural. The core problem is that GURPS makes cost a hybrid of utility and rarity, rather than trusting its own unusual background mechanic to cover rarity and making cost a pure utility function.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Well, that list is somewhere between 80% and 90% of the entire list of advantages, and nearly 100% of things that are listed as exotic or supernatural. The core problem is that GURPS makes cost a hybrid of utility and rarity, rather than trusting its own unusual background mechanic to cover rarity and making cost a pure utility function.

Most Advantages grant something qualitative that skill cannot (with the caveat of skill-based magic systems, but those are a whole other can of worms). No amount of skill will reduce the damage you take from a bullet to the chest, but DR will. No amount of skill will let you breathe a cone of fire, but Innate Attack will. Ditto for 360-Degree Vision, Affliction, Allies (social skills can sometimes approximate this benefit, but your new allies lack plot protection), Altered Time Rate, Alternate Identity, etc. Some Advantages are (or contain) Talents... but typically these are competitively priced compared to the skills affected.

[Otaku]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

If you want your big, scary, magically souped-up apex predator to be able to "claw, claw, bite" every turn, just write down Extra Attack 2.

Partially because it reminded me of an old discussion with a friend, but mostly because it really is a nice way to handle things for a "simple" NPC. I may be way off base, but I'd also probably use it for Batman style characters who seem omnicompetent at combat beyond even what Wildcard Skills supply.

Originally Posted by Varyon

Martial Arts allows for stacking Rapid Strike penalties - -6 to get 1 extra attack (two total), -12 to get 2 extra attacks (three total), -18 to get 3 extra attacks (four total), etc. And that's still halved for WM/TbaM, for -3, -6, and -9, respectively. The penalty applies to all the attacks, as normal for Rapid Strike. Note, however, that attacks gained from Extra Attack or using All Out (Double) Attack are unaffected, but also cannot be used for Rapid Strikes - a character with Extra Attack 2 and WM could attack 4 times at +0/+0/-3/-3, 5 times at +0/+0/-6/-6/-6, 6 times at +0/+0/-9/-9/-9/-9, etc, but those first two +0's can never be split off on their own. Which has always struck me as really weird, but I assume there's some reason behind it.

Another time where I may be barking up the wrong tree, but I'm assuming it is because things get really broken when you do allow it all to work together. I have vague memories* of Third Edition games as a teen where either we

• Read the rules wrong
• Were playing before these kinds of rules were later added/clarified
• Intentionally decided to ignore this restriction and found out exactly why it was applied.

*When are they not vague?

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Otaku

Another time where I may be barking up the wrong tree, but I'm assuming it is because things get really broken when you do allow it all to work together. I have vague memories* of Third Edition games as a teen where either we

• Read the rules wrong
• Were playing before these kinds of rules were later added/clarified
• Intentionally decided to ignore this restriction and found out exactly why it was applied.

*When are they not vague?

Maybe not, 3e was comfortable with much higher Skill levels and handed out extra attacks generously. IIRC it was one more attack for every 3 levels of Karate Skill and a 10th Dan belt holder needed something like skill-35. You got extra attacks for very high Move too.