Is Wild Talent a bad deal?

[Celjabba]

As someone said above, I would rule this build illegal at my table :

MA cost +0% for 'mental abilities and skill' only, +50% for physical ability only, +100% for mental and physical.
You cannot get around that by taking mental only as an AA of physical only, for an huge discount.

That said, skills are covered in the "mental and skill only, +0%", so there is actually no need for the physical enhancement.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

Hm. I just re-read that quote. Maybe you meant something different that what I am talking about. I would agree that you can't have an Alternative Ability structure within a Modular Abilities pool. But that's not what I've done with this build. This build uses two separate Modular Ability pools in an alternative structure.

Yeah. That's a no-no.

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Yeah. That's a no-no.

Per a house rule or an FAQ I haven't seen?

[Anthony]

In any case, I think it's true that wild talent is a bad deal compared to modular ability (skills), but that has more to do with modular ability (skills) being broken than with wild talent, ordinary skills are also a bad deal compared to modular ability (I would outright forbid using modular ability on skills, only allowing it for advantages).

[Prince Charon]

Originally Posted by Anthony

In any case, I think it's true that wild talent is a bad deal compared to modular ability (skills), but that has more to do with modular ability (skills) being broken than with wild talent, ordinary skills are also a bad deal compared to modular ability (I would outright forbid using modular ability on skills, only allowing it for advantages).

What about 'Skills Only' as a +100% enhancement, and 'Allows Skills' (meaning you get advantages and skills) as a +200% enhancement?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

What about 'Skills Only' as a +100% enhancement, and 'Allows Skills' (meaning you get advantages and skills) as a +200% enhancement?

I'd probably want to make it comparable to jack of all trades, so 'when applied to skills that you only have at default, it costs a minimum of 1 point per +1 to skill'. Thus getting the 1 point level in most skills would require 4 levels (40 points).

[kirbwarrior]

Even without comparing MA, Wild Talent just doesn't seem worth it. It's 20pts to have one skill at attribute once per session. It ignores TL but no other requirements. But having one skill permanently at attribute is roughly 3pts (considering how few VH skills there are). Being able to change this skill out is a big deal, but counteracted by being able to only use it once per session.

Really, I wouldn't have an issue with Wild Talent costing 4 points per level with a large buy in price akin to Unusual Background to make up for the ability to buy skills you normally can't. Considering Wild Talent is already Supernatural, you like already have to buy that UB anyway (or not have to at all depending on the campaign).

[ravenfish]

Gizmo seems fairly priced at 5 points for one use per session of any plausible item. I'm not sure that wouldn't also be a fairer price per one use per session of any plausible skill, with a +50% (say) cosmic-like enhancement to allow it to include skills you could never have learned, such as those at a higher TL.

[edk926]

Wild Talent only seems potentially worth it with the Retention modifier as it allows you to bypass some new skill learning requirements.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by ravenfish

Gizmo seems fairly priced at 5 points for one use per session of any plausible item. I'm not sure that wouldn't also be a fairer price per one use per session of any plausible skill, with a +50% (say) cosmic-like enhancement to allow it to include skills you could never have learned, such as those at a higher TL.

That's less extreme than my idea, I'll use this next time someone wants to take Wild Talent. In fact, I'm certain this should work, I see players get less use out of Wild Talent than Gizmos.