Extra-effort in combat, too cheap?

[Lupo]

One of my players thinks that Extra effort in combat is too good for its cost, and I somewhat agree with him.

He's playing a cleric in a fantasy game and he realized that often using extra effort is way more efficient than casting combat-related spells.
Why bother with Grace, Might or Shield, if he can use less FP to get similar effects with no roll required?
Of course spells lasts far longer (1 minute or more), while Extra effort works for a single roll, but... it works for *the* roll you need it, you don't need to have a cleric/wizard near you, don't need to waste a turn Concentrating, don't risk failures, spend less points and can choose a different "bonus" in different turns, adapting to circumstances.

Example: giving +2 DB with the Shield Spell costs 4 FP and requires one turn. If a player thinks he will need this +2 to defenses for 4 times or less in a given fight, he's better off using 4 times "Feverish Defense" and forgetting about spells...

Generally I am ok with Extra-effort - it's fun, dramatic, and gives the players the capability to "focus" on important rolls.

But I do think that it somehow overshadows many magic spells... simply because often spells cost 3, 5 or more fatigue, while Extra effort costs only 1. So it can be used almost every other turn in every fight (unless, of course, the PCs are already tired or can't afford to rest).

I've come to think that Extra effort in combat should cost more, at least in campaigns where "buff" spells are supposed to be common and/or effective. Perhaps 2 FP per roll... this way most PCs would use it more sparely or rapidly become seriously fatigued.

The same would apply to NPCs - as a GM I allow only "important" NPCs and monsters to use Extra Effort, yet since they pay only 1 FP they are able to use it on almost every attack and defense...

This perceived problem could be related with the fact that, generally, GURPS is very generous about fatigue expenditures for physical tasks (e.g., according to sprinting rules, an HT 12 man can sprint continuously for 4 minutes before losing half his FP... an HT 14 athlete, for 17 minutes.. that's not "heroic" but clearly inhuman and/or a Murphy!)

So while spells are (rightly!) fatiguing, strenuous physical tasks (including Extra Effort) are VERY cheap in terms of fatigue.

What do you think?

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Lupo

Of course spells lasts far longer (1 minute or more),

That's certainly justification enough for me. With Grace, I get a higher DX for the entire fight, which means I get bonuses on every roll, which in turn means those one-off emergencies where I need a bonus on "the" roll are less likely to arise. With Might, I get extra ST for the entire fight which means that I get more damage with every successful hit, not just the ones I designate as special beforehand. It also enables me to wear heavier armor and use larger weapons than I might be able to otherwise.

[Allister MacLeod]

You can also use Extra Effort on top of the bonuses conferred by spells, yes? So a dude with the Shield spell and Feverish Block would be even more likely to block than the mundane fighter just Feverishly Blocking.

Also, Extra Effort in Combat is an optional rule. If your group agrees it's unbalancing, it may be better to just ignore it.

[Lupo]

Originally Posted by Allister MacLeod

Also, Extra Effort in Combat is an optional rule. If your group agrees it's unbalancing, it may be better to just ignore it.

But I like it - I just think each use should cost 2-3 FP instead of 1.

Or may be, ALL physical tasks should cost double-triple the fatigue GURPS assigns to them... I'm undecided.

I always was somewhat bothered that GURPS has a dedicated fatigue stat, but all fatigue expenditures in the game (with the notable exception of spells) are so cheap that a PC will rarely use most or all of his FP.

[Extrarius]

Originally Posted by Lupo

[...]I always was somewhat bothered that GURPS has a dedicated fatigue stat, but all fatigue expenditures in the game (with the notable exception of spells) are so cheap that a PC will rarely use most or all of his FP.

People don't generally fight to utter exhaustion except when they're losing and can't afford to. If it's an even fight, or just barely tipped against them, or losing doesn't matter a whole lot, you can hardly expect a character to put their all into a fight. Put a party into a fight with something that can remove them from combat with a single hit, and you'll probably see more FP going to defense, or with an opponent that they either can't hit or can't damage and you'll probably see more offense-oriented extra effort used.

On the other hand, there are several areas in the rules that could be adjusted if you want more realism. The FP cost for movement are generally brought up as an example.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Lupo

I always was somewhat bothered that GURPS has a dedicated fatigue stat, but all fatigue expenditures in the game (with the notable exception of spells) are so cheap that a PC will rarely use most or all of his FP.

1) This is right up there with PCs rarely using most or all of their HP in a fight. You shouldn't expect them to, unless you REALLY want them to fight once, rest for a whole day, fight once, rest for a whole day, etc. This is VERY BORING.

2) Are you remembering to assign FP costs based on Encumbrance at the end of a fight?
Lightly armed and armored fighters may not take a lot of FP at the end, but they're the ones that are usually burning it constant as Feavered Dodges and Parries - they can't RISK being hit because of low DR. So they burn through FP quickly, and they still get hit with at least 1 FP, usually 2, at the end.
Heavily armed and armored fighters take 4-6 FP at the end of the fight. That's HALF of most peoples FP reserves, even if they don't spend ANY on a Feavered Parry or Block, or a Mighty Blow.


Regarding spells vs Extra Effort:

All of the spells come in multiple levels, that you just can't achieve with Extra Effort. Example: You can't GET +5 on your dodge, block, AND parry, in one round, with Extra Effort. You can with the Shield spell.

All of the spells stack or sometimes even work synergystically with Extra Effort - example Might increases your base ST, Extra Effort gives you a damage bonus based on dice of damage, and a ST bonus on ST rolls based on a percentage of your existing ST - the higher your base ST (Thanks to Might) the bigger your payout.

If you plan on using Extra Effort more than about ONCE (max usually twice) in the fight, you get a better FP-to-results ratio from the spell, due to it lasting 1 minute. If your players never need to use it that often, then yes, extra effort's an OK deal... but consider making them need it more often! More foes making Deceptive Attacks, more hordes forcing multiple defenses a turn, more foes with thick armor requiring Mighty Blows to seriously penetrate!

You can spend from Power Items, Powerstones, Familiars, and Energy Reserves (Magic) or Energy Reserves (Divine) using spells - you can't do that with Extra Effort.

Your caster can spend FP for other characters using spells. You can't Feaverishly Dodge for someone else, or Mighty Blows for someone else. Spellcasters should have Recover Energy, Breath Control, Regeneration (FP) or some other source of quick FP recovery - meaning that they bounce back much faster than other characters from FP expenditures.

[SuedodeuS]

I think the time span and the ability for the spell and extra effort to be stacked is probably enough to justify the increased expenditure. If you really have a problem with players using extra effort instead of spells, you might consider allowing them to buy Energy Reserves (from Powers) instead of just FP. Toss on the limitation that they can't be used to power Extra Effort and you're good to go. If you are a player rather than GM, see if you can convince your GM to allow ER. It costs less than FP and doesn't have some of the same problems.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Lupo

One of my players thinks that Extra effort in combat is too good for its cost, and I somewhat agree with him.

I'm afraid that I don't. Using up around 10% of a limited resource – specifically, one that can't regenerate on a combat time scale – for a single, near-instantaenous act such as a parry or an attack is, if anything, too harsh. Extra effort in combat comes at an incredibly steep cost. I rarely see players use it if they have any other option.

Originally Posted by Lupo

Why bother with Grace, Might or Shield, if he can use less FP to get similar effects with no roll required?

Because "one die roll" < "one turn," and "one turn" = 1/60 of "one minute." With extra effort, he's paying on the order of 10% to 50% of the FP cost for a spell to get on the order of 1% of the duration. That's steep. Extra effort in battle is more of a desperation move than anything else.

Originally Posted by Lupo

If a player thinks he will need this +2 to defenses for 4 times or less in a given fight, he's better off using 4 times "Feverish Defense" and forgetting about spells...

This says less about the rules than about the kinds of games you run. In my current campaign, battles typically run for 5-15 turns and PCs routinely need to make 2-4 active defense rolls per turn! That's 10-60 active defense rolls. To have +2 to them all would cost 10-60 FP. A Shield spell could provide that for 4 FP, which is on average on the order of 10% as costly. And indeed despite being allowed to use extra effort in combat, the PCs who can cast Shield always do, at maximum effect (8 FP for +4), because it's self-evidently an order of magnitude better. This would remain true even in a less cinematic game with a considerably lower defense loading.

And this ignores the fact that wizards often don't pay many FP at all, because they enjoy cost reductions for high skill and can use external power sources (like Powerstones). Indeed, wizards tend to traipse about with a free Shield spell at +1 or +2 DB every waking hour, because they know the spell at 15 or 20.

Originally Posted by Lupo

I always was somewhat bothered that GURPS has a dedicated fatigue stat, but all fatigue expenditures in the game (with the notable exception of spells) are so cheap that a PC will rarely use most or all of his FP.

Again, I'd call this an artifact of how you run your games. Every single PC in my current fantasy game has raised his FP score. The warriors raise it for extra effort in combat, while the users of tiring advantages (like Healing and Jumper), special skills (such as Imbuement Skills and Power Blow), and spells raise it for those things. As well, everybody likes to have insurance against post-combat FP losses, missed-sleep losses, and the like, because it's no fun to go into a second-wave battle or a surprise conflict halfway through the night at half Move owing to missing FP. Oh, and everybody uses ordinary extra effort – especially for jumping, lifting, and running – whenever the situation calls for it. Finally, nobody likes to collapse due to poisons, spells, and attacks that sap FP . . . which are almost as common as those that drain HP, in a fantasy setting.

Indeed, I've had to switch from tallying FP losses on character sheets to tracking them on separate paper stickers attached to plastic character-sheet sleeves because FP get burned and restored with such great frequency that I found myself erasing holes in character sheets after just two game sessions.

[Kaldrin]

I've seen players using it quite a bit, but the games are more toward the lower end of the scale. Like most things if it becomes commonplace or a problem you just have to remind the players there are penalties for it and be stringent about following the fatigue rules.

With my current campaign I've not applied it because I felt it would take away from the feel of the world building sessions. Now that the players know more or less what's going on in the campaign there will be more things like waves of foes, loss of sleep and exertion.

I've also had someone tell me the targetted attack technique was way too much bang for the points... I don't get that one either.

[Kromm]

We playtest the living snot out of most rules, including extra effort in combat and Targeted Attack. Thus, when people grumble, I'm skeptical . . . I know that we had a dozen or more people stress-test the rule and deliberately try to break it, and it went through as many iterations as were needed to fix it. That's why I tend to discount grumbling as an artifact of a particular GM's campaign rather than accept that there's a genuine rules flaw.

Of course, this is why house rules exist. However airtight a rule might be, it will never be all things to all people. Some gaming group somewhere won't like it, and will thus need a house rule to patch it.