Sell me on GURPs, suckas.

[Username17]

1144788154[/unixtime]]Weirdness plays in the favor in roleplaying. If you pull out Hamster Fu and no one else in the world has a clue what it is, let alone that you have it, that's a big advantage.

And if you're the only blue-skinned alien on the planet earth, people will be able to ID you vs anyone else on the planet earth pretty damn easily.

It's the same thing. Utility in a roleplaying game isn't an absolute.

-Crissa

Still no. Hamster Style is completely meaningless. Sure there's some cool backstory there, but game mechanically you just make attacks and inflict damage.

If they have to do something to make your attack not work, it's worth more points if it's obscure.

If they have to do something to make your attack work, it's worth less points if it's obscure.

If your attack just works off the normal game mechanics, it doesn't matter whether it's obscure or not.

So a mental attack should cost more in a game world with no psions if it requires mental defenses to protect yourself from. A mental attack should cost less in a game world that has no psions if it requires an open mental contact to initiate. A mental attack that just uses the regular game mechanics should cost the same as any other attack. So if you aren't playing a psionic-flavored game, you should pay more for psionic blast, less for ego whip, and standard cost for telekinetic thrust.

Hamster Fu is just like telekinetic thrust, the fact that bystanders won't recognize it does not change its effectiveness.

-Username17

[RandomCasualty]

1144790943[/unixtime]]
So a mental attack should cost more in a game world with no psions if it requires mental defenses to protect yourself from. A mental attack should cost less in a game world that has no psions if it requires an open mental contact to initiate. A mental attack that just uses the regular game mechanics should cost the same as any other attack. So if you aren't playing a psionic-flavored game, you should pay more for psionic blast, less for ego whip, and standard cost for telekinetic thrust.

Hamster Fu is just like telekinetic thrust, the fact that bystanders won't recognize it does not change its effectiveness.

Well, in general I agree with you about this.

Except for one point.

Having an unusual abiltiy cna be nice because it lets you sneak into an area where you're normally not suppsoed to be armed. In some settings, especially modern ones, having stealth weaponry that nobody expects is useful.

SO while having retractable wolverine claws may not be any better than having a sword mechanically, and may resolve like sword attacks, the fact that you can walk into a place seemingly unarmed may actually be worth something as an advantage. Similarly, a psionic would have the same benefit.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

But what about a world where psionics is common, and wolverine claws are rare? Should the wolverine claws cost more just because they're not common?

[Neeek]

1144791142[/unixtime]]

Having an unusual abiltiy cna be nice because it lets you sneak into an area where you're normally not suppsoed to be armed. In some settings, especially modern ones, having stealth weaponry that nobody expects is useful.

SO while having retractable wolverine claws may not be any better than having a sword mechanically, and may resolve like sword attacks, the fact that you can walk into a place seemingly unarmed may actually be worth something as an advantage. Similarly, a psionic would have the same benefit.

Yeah, but "being concealable" is something that makes an ability worth more. If Wolfie's claws *didn't* retract, this wouldn't be an issue because even if he is the only person in the world with that sort of claw, everyone knows he's got them. So concealability is something you need to pay for *regardless of what it is*, but just having a weird power isn't.

[User3]

1144798488[/unixtime]]

1144791142[/unixtime]]

Having an unusual abiltiy cna be nice because it lets you sneak into an area where you're normally not suppsoed to be armed. In some settings, especially modern ones, having stealth weaponry that nobody expects is useful.

SO while having retractable wolverine claws may not be any better than having a sword mechanically, and may resolve like sword attacks, the fact that you can walk into a place seemingly unarmed may actually be worth something as an advantage. Similarly, a psionic would have the same benefit.

Yeah, but "being concealable" is something that makes an ability worth more. If Wolfie's claws *didn't* retract, this wouldn't be an issue because even if he is the only person in the world with that sort of claw, everyone knows he's got them. So concealability is something you need to pay for *regardless of what it is*, but just having a weird power isn't.

Nobody has low-grade x-ray scanners to detect hidden guns and retractable adamantine claws in ancient fantastic greece, but they may have a 'magic detector.' Hell, they probably won't recognize a gun as a weapon.

So 'concealable' should be an additional setting-dependant cost tacked on to whatever relevant ability. Which is I think kind of what you're saying.

[RandomCasualty]

1144798488[/unixtime]]
Yeah, but "being concealable" is something that makes an ability worth more. If Wolfie's claws *didn't* retract, this wouldn't be an issue because even if he is the only person in the world with that sort of claw, everyone knows he's got them. So concealability is something you need to pay for *regardless of what it is*, but just having a weird power isn't.

Right, the entire advantage of being weird is that people don't see it coming. And that goes beyond simple concealabiliy.

For instance, in settings where magic is rare and people don't believe in magic, enchantment is much likely to pass unnoticed. Where as in a setting where magic is common, everyone is wondering "is that guy charmed or dominated?" everytime someone acts out of character. When you attack someone with an enchantment they're not likely to even realize what's going on. In fact they'll probably let you sit there and cast your spell while they're laughing at you.

So in such a world, enchantment is worth more because it's more likely to be successful. Being weird and unique makes it more powerful.

There are cases where uniqueness isn't worth anything, but that's why the cost of unusual background is varied. There is a such thing as a 0 point unusual background cost, which would probably apply to wolverine claws that didn't retract and similar stuff.

[dbb]

Being weird and unique makes it more powerful.

Sure -- and being more powerful makes it cost extra. Just being weird and unique doesn't.

c.f. Frank's comments on mental attack.

--d.

[RandomCasualty]

1144816292[/unixtime]]
Sure -- and being more powerful makes it cost extra. Just being weird and unique doesn't.

c.f. Frank's comments on mental attack.

Well, Frank's comments were mostly dealing with mechanical benefits. I'm simply pointing out that you can have benefits that are purely roleplaying benefits but that make an ability more powerful simply because it's weird.

For instance, in a modern setting, you can go waving your arms around and chanting on a long spell and people probably won't shoot you. They won't see that as a threat, so long as you don't reach for a gun or something. In a fantasy setting wtih common magic, or in Shadowrun, they're going to shoot you dead on the spot.

Now mechanically that spell may be no better than a concealed gun, but roleplaying wise, it's granting you an advantage simply because they don't recognize it as an immediate threat. And this is not becuase it's necessarily concealable, but rather because it is weird and the enemy doesn't understand what you're doing.

[dbb]

Now mechanically that spell may be no better than a concealed gun, but roleplaying wise, it's granting you an advantage simply because they don't recognize it as an immediate threat.

If it's "mechanically ... no better than a concealed gun", it should probably be "mechanically" as expensive as a concealed gun. If it has advantages "roleplaying wise", its availability should probably be limited "roleplaying wise".

--d.

[RandomCasualty]

1144818554[/unixtime]]

If it's "mechanically ... no better than a concealed gun", it should probably be "mechanically" as expensive as a concealed gun. If it has advantages "roleplaying wise", its availability should probably be limited "roleplaying wise".

In a modern setting, a firebolt can be every bit as effective as a concealed gun mechanically, but the firebolt may be better. You've got metal detectors searching for the concealed gun, and yet you don't have firebolt detectors, nor are people expecting you to have ranged attacks once you've passed through metal detectors.

This helps in all sorts of scenarios, escaping from jail, fighting in secure facilities and so on.

You can't control availability through roleplaying, because roleplaying availability is a yes/no question. And anything that you allow becomes effectively free.

Now if you dont' want PCs with surprise attacks at all, then you're answering the very reason why unusual background is supposed to cost points, because surprise attacks are a definite advantage, even if mechanically they behave like normal attacks. There's more to a weapon than merely the damage it can deal.

[dbb]

In a modern setting, a firebolt can be every bit as effective as a concealed gun mechanically, but the firebolt may be better.

If the firebolt is "better" because it isn't detected by ordinary search checks or gadgets -- then it is mechanically better, and should be priced appropriately.

If the firebolt is "better" because when the DM feels like it he might decide to have it go undetected, but its undetectability isn't reliable or quantifiable -- that's not worth anything, IMO. MMV.

--d.

[Username17]

Weapon Concealability is a power that other people need to counter. Such counters could be anything from metal detectors to magic identifiers, and if they don't have the correct counter for your shit, you can smuggle your weapon with impunity.

So if you're in a setting with very little magic and you know fireball, the concealability of your weapon is worth more than if you lived in a magic-happy world where people expect that shit. But the fireball itself isn't worth more. It hasn't changed, and is still worth the same amount.

That's an important distinction that needs to be made. This means that if you are for whatever reason unable to smuggle your weaponry anywhere (for example: you're a warforged with a buzz-saw arm), you shouldn't pay any more for that spell attack that you would for a gun attachment - regardless of how common spells are (or aren't).

-Username17

[RandomCasualty]

1144819550[/unixtime]]
If the firebolt is "better" because it isn't detected by ordinary search checks or gadgets -- then it is mechanically better, and should be priced appropriately.

If the firebolt is "better" because when the DM feels like it he might decide to have it go undetected, but its undetectability isn't reliable or quantifiable -- that's not worth anything, IMO. MMV.

Well, consider two settings with undetectable invisibility.

Setting #1: High magic. While they can't actively detect invisible creatures, they know they exist. So if they hear sounds with no visible explanation, they may suspect invisibility. Further they may go about sweeping "empty" rooms specifically looking for invisbiiles. Basically whenever something out of the ordinary happens, they're going to go on high alert specifically expecting invisibles.

Setting #2: Modern realistic. Invisibility doesn't exist, or so everyone believes. Unless someone directly gets attacked by an invisible creature they just won't suspect invisibility is at work. Thus you can make lots of sound and they'll just think they're imagining things, or at the very least won't attribute it to someone actually being nearby but invisible. Even if you do slip up and splash water or make footprints or whatever, your enemies aren't likely to start opening fire on empty air.

Now, both these abilities are mechanically equivalent, they are in fact, the same ability, but the NPC reactions to them are going to be vastly different. And while none of that can be quantified, I still think it's worth points, and probably a lot of poitns at that.

[erik]

There are some abilities that may need to cost more per setting, as there are no significant counters to their advantages (flight, invisibility, teleportation).

Other abilities should just be handled as mechanically/cost equivalent, and described as different flavors (concealed knife vs. retractable claws).

Weirdness for its own sake should really only have a minimal cost that is proportional to how good an icebreaker it is and how well its novelty will get you free drinks at a bar (I am reminded of Gil Hamilton the ARM who had a wimpy telekinetic arm which could barely life a shot glass, and he would use it to get free drinks and intrigue the ladies).

[Fwib]

Don't forget that Gil's arm could also be used for sensing-at-a-distance and manipulating things through barriers (re: The Patchwork Girl, The Defenceless Dead)

Admittedly the distance-sensing stuff, IIRC wasn't in there to start with, but you'd have to pay points for the ability to reach through a sealed prison door and tap in entry codes from the other side, for example.

[erik]

I know, those were useful abilities which would have costs based upon their utility.

I was noting that having a weirdness cost for its own sake should only have a cost commensurate to its use as a party trick.

[dbb]

Now, both these abilities are mechanically equivalent, they are in fact, the same ability, but the NPC reactions to them are going to be vastly different. And while none of that can be quantified, I still think it's worth points, and probably a lot of poitns at that.

What you are describing, I think, is an result of the fact that abilities can be differently priced in different contexts. By that, I mean that the power "Blow Up The Moon" might be mechanically identical in two different games -- in both of them, having this power means you get to blow up the frickin' Moon.

Game one, however, is a standard superhero game. Blowing up the Moon, while believable, is such an awesome ability that hardly anyone has it and certainly no one expects you to have it. By the power scale of this game, it's totally hardcore, so it costs a ton of points.

Game two is a Dragon Ball Z game. In this game, if you don't have the power to blow up the Moon, or something equally awesome, you're kind of a loser. By the power scale of this game, it's nothing special -- so it costs about the same as a lot of other stuff.

However! In both of these games, what's important is not how wacky it is, but how powerful compared to everything else it is. Your modern invisibility example introduces a power that's directly superior to the other kinds of sneaking around available in the game. It's way more powerful than the "Stealth" skill, so it costs a ton of points -- because it's more powerful. It's not detectable and it has a special "Mind Control: Ignore Me" effect attached to it; that part should probably be quantified, too. Maybe bystanders tend to just write off signs that someone's nearby unless they make a really high Wisdom check -- that's worth extra points. Maybe bystanders just ignore it and don't even get to make a die roll -- that's worth even more points, as long as the DM abides by it in play. Vague flavor text that people will ignore it unless the DM feels like it, however, isn't worth points.

On the other hand, if you had some sort of chump invisibility that left a prismatic fringe, or maybe was always accompanied by the jingling of little bells, or in general made it clear, when detected at all, that someone was there whether you saw someone or not -- that "Invisibility" power would be about as good as Stealth, and hence, despite being really weird, should cost about the same (exactly how much depends on exactly how they work relative to each other -- I don't want to get bogged down in mechanics.)

And you could also, if you're prepared to extend "modern realistic" to "modern near-future", have a reverse example -- say there's active camouflage gear that analyzes your surroundings and then changed color and pattern to make the wearer effectively invisible. Although not "weird" by the terms of the setting, this ought to be priced more or less identically to "magic invisibility" -- they both do the same thing.

--d.

[erik]

Heh, the comment "as long as the DM abides by it in play" + invisibility topic just brought back some nostalgia from when I played Palladium's Nightspawn and my character could turn invisible among his other abilities.

I was extremely disappointed when every frickin time I went invisible I could still be found. By cops, by hounds, by everyone. Many of my friends were new to roleplaying and still finding their stride, the GM for that game especially so, as it was his first try at GMing. His stride at that time apparently was "the universe hates Erik" (who used to be the previous GM).

[Fwib]

Agreed. In a points-based construction system, you should only pay the the mechanical effects, not the special effects.

The trouble is, there may be some disagreement about edge cases

[RandomCasualty]

1144909624[/unixtime]]
However! In both of these games, what's important is not how wacky it is, but how powerful compared to everything else it is. Your modern invisibility example introduces a power that's directly superior to the other kinds of sneaking around available in the game. It's way more powerful than the "Stealth" skill, so it costs a ton of points -- because it's more powerful. It's not detectable and it has a special "Mind Control: Ignore Me" effect attached to it; that part should probably be quantified, too. Maybe bystanders tend to just write off signs that someone's nearby unless they make a really high Wisdom check -- that's worth extra points. Maybe bystanders just ignore it and don't even get to make a die roll -- that's worth even more points, as long as the DM abides by it in play. Vague flavor text that people will ignore it unless the DM feels like it, however, isn't worth points.

Well, the idea isn't that it forces people to ignore you. That's not even a mechanical effect, that's a flavor effect. The idea is that your NPCs don't know about invisibility and thus can't properly react to it, because they don't think it exists.

And that's the advantage to being weird. People don't expect whatever it is that you do. A mage in a nonmagic setting can really sit there and start chanting and handwaving for 12 seconds and nobody is going to run up and punch him in the face. Why? Because it seems nonthreatening. According to the physics of the world as those NPCs percieve them, handwaving and chanting doesn't cause fireballs or mind control spells to appear out of nowhere.

Being unknown is worth something, assuming your DM doesn't totally metagame against you. Its like the unknown monster in D&D that a party meets for the first time. It probably is going to be a more difficult encounter than a monster everyone knows. Because you don't know what it can do, and you dont' know what the best counters to it are. If you didn't know silver harmed werewolves for instance, the fight could become a lot tougher. Knowing an enemy's weak save category also lets you know some of its weaknesses. But if it's something new, you've got to guess, and the monster may well have some abilities that don't work with the games normal physics, and that grants it an even bigger advantage. I mean imagine meeting a beholder for the first time... the antimagic cone, the eye rays. You wouldn't know what the hell hit you. At first glance the monster seems more like a flying melee machine that can't be surprised and turns into a barrage of ranged death.

As for how to mechanically represent something like that, I don't think you can. It isn't an "ignore" effect per se, as the other guy is still going to be suspicious, it's just that he won't be shooting empty air anytime soon. If you open a door suddenly, and a security guard sees it, he's certainly going to go check out what happened, he just won't be expectig an invisible intruder. Maybe he attributes it to an electrical disturbance, or even a ghost. I mean who knows... But he wouldn't just outright ignore it. In my experience you really can't adequately mechanically represent NPC actions, so you're better off not trying and just relying on the honor system that the DM can actually roleplay.

[Crissa]

Because, in a roleplaying game, Hampster Fu is blocked by Style Sabercat. Sure, they're just a collection of names, moves, and bonuses... But that's rollplaying, and we're not playing a computer game, here.

-Crissa