Google Groups no longer supports new usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

GURPS: Skill Levels vs. Attribute Levels

2 views
Skip to the first unread message

Art Urban (PROFS)

unread,
1 Jul 1992, 12:34:4101/07/1992
to
(I'm moving this discussion from r.g.frp to appeal to a wider audience.
Yes, I am the original poster.)

%Sounds like a wonderful hole for munchkins to wade through. After you're
%finished with your analysis, look at Character D, who has 15 DX AND the
%Naturally Gifted: Two-Handed Sword (+3). This combo costs 76 points to
%get these plus skill 20 in 2H Sword. This is only 18 points difference from
%character B, who is the same but DX 11! In other words, if some munchkin
%wants another physical skill, he can buy 4 more points of DX for only 18
%character points. This doesn't plug the hole, it merely moves it and
%may even make it larger.

In the interest of plugging holes (truely, I dislike exploitable situations)
please explain how Character D benefits to the tune of 18 points. Or, were
you trying to say that Character B gains the benefit? If this is your point,
I am left unconvinced that there is a problem. What do you mean by "4 more
points of DX for only 18 character points"? You must be talking about skills
here, but then how are you applying these points? Even if you are saying that
Character B gets to buy *more* DX based skills, it is done so against an 11
DX. Again, I see no problem.

Cost to buy Two-Handed Sword at skill 20
| |
v v
Character A: DX 15 (60 pts) + 32 (DX+5) = 92 pts
Character B: DX 11 (10 pts) + 40 (DX+6) + 8 (Gifted +3) = 58 pts
Character C: DX 11 (10 pts) + 64 (DX+9) = 74 pts
Character D: DX 15 (60 pts) + 8 (DX+2) + 8 (Gifted +3) = 76 pts

--
Art Urban ur...@stout.atd.ucar.edu
===============================================================================
"I've plummeted to my death, and I can't get up." - Crow MST3k
===============================================================================

do...@abby.chem.ucla.edu

unread,
1 Jul 1992, 17:10:3601/07/1992
to
Argh... wish I could quote with this @#($&!!!! newsreader. Anyway, my
point is that if said character D, with DX 15 and the Gifted +3 advantage
that you have proposed wants that physical skill at an incredible level
AND other physical skills at merely high levels (on the order of DX+2 or
so) then they are encouraged to boost the DX for the sake of those other
skills, as doing so costs them only 18 points (the difference between
character B and character D, whose only difference is going from DX 11 to
DX 15) instead of the 50 points that that same DX boost costs a character
under the current rules.

Let's take two characters, Character 1 and Character 2. Character 1 has
DX 11, Gifted +3: Two Handed Sword, and Two Handed Sword @ 20 for 58 points.
Character 2 has DX 15, Gifted +3, and skill @ 20 for 76 points.

Now let's add 4 physical average skills at level 15 to each of them.
This is DX+4 for character 1, and they thus cost 16 points each, for a
total (including those expenditures listed above) of 64+58 = 122 points.
This is only DX for character 2, so they cost 2 points each, for a total
of 8+76 = 84 points.

Okay, so maybe not very many characters will want four other physical average
skills. Let's bump it down to two. Here character 1 costs 32+58 = 90 points,
and character 2 costs 4+76 = 80 points.

As far as I can see, while your "Gifted" advantage does allow a character to
have one physical skill at a high level for less points, since character D
still costs less than character A (DX 15 + Gifted + skill vs. DX 15 + skill),
it helps the minmaxer just as much as it does the non-minmaxer, and
will thus lead to TRULY GROSS characters from those inclined to create
them.

Is that clear enough?

-Doug Gibson
do...@abby.chem.ucla.edu

Neither UCLA nor the National Science Foundation has a clue what I am doing.
They just pay me to do it.

This is a properly spelled version of the mimetic signature virus. Copy it
into your .signature file and join in the fun today!

Art Urban (PROFS)

unread,
5 Jul 1992, 16:44:4705/07/1992
to
%Is that clear enough?
%
%-Doug Gibson

Yes, in a sense, that is clear enough...*if* folks subscribe to your concerns.
I simply do not, nor do others I have discussed this with. This is *not* a
flame, even though the body of the text has that ring to it :)

Thank you for your willingness to discuss this topic, I'm sorry others did
not, and I would like to thank the unamed poster who commented on his Talent
advantage for characters, which in turn led me to Fantasy Folk. Again, Thanx!


--
Art Urban ur...@stout.atd.ucar.edu
===============================================================================

"What's Next? Chasing bunnies on a motorbike until their hearts explode? -Crow
===============================================================================

0 new messages