tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post7363731563061232595..comments2024-03-28T15:32:19.036-04:00Comments on Dungeon Fantastic: GURPS 101: Patching Holes - Don't Over-PatchPeter Dhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-47551794994302750092016-03-20T10:37:35.467-04:002016-03-20T10:37:35.467-04:00That's fine - it's just that it's not ...That's fine - it's just that it's not the basic standard of GURPS, and GURPS 101 is all about the basics of the rules in the books. I understand the upsides of the approach, it's just that you need to be sure the GM is doing that before you go out and start to buy pieces and expect to assemble them into the whole.Peter Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-57965629708506647962016-03-19T14:32:59.936-04:002016-03-19T14:32:59.936-04:00As a GM, I actually /prefer/ incremental purchase ...As a GM, I actually /prefer/ incremental purchase of attributes to hoarding points over multiple sessions for a large buy. Which part is purchased first also informs the character's identity a bit.<br /><br />I also break down most 10+ points advantages so they can be purchased in bits (e.g. Danger Sense costs [5/8/10/13/15] for Per-4 to Per). i started players at ~165 points with partial DF templates, so this was a great tool to hint at the feel of the full template.Archon Shivahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18161660999691918584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-72254692148796859612016-03-11T09:44:45.621-05:002016-03-11T09:44:45.621-05:00I'd generally still allow the purchases, but i...I'd generally still allow the purchases, but it's always worth asking why it's wanted - the GM to the player, and the player to him or herself. Is this something worth investing in? Is this the focus I really want for my character? Am I just over-reaching to a failure by dumping points in an overly-specific solution? Am I so focused on "patching" that I'm not actually developing a solution?<br /><br />Point traps can happen, but a GM needs to be involved. Not saying that you're suggesting this, but it's worth saying anyway - the GM should always be aware and involved with what goes on the character sheet.<br /><br />I still let my players do what they want, inefficient or not. It's not <i>my</i> paper man, after all. The HT/Fit/HtS/HtK example about is lifted right off about 3 character sheets in my current game. But I'll try to tell them it's a sub-optimal choice at best, possibly a waste of points, and might even be a fun-killer.Peter Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-67342197017835043392016-03-11T09:38:06.564-05:002016-03-11T09:38:06.564-05:00That is definitely true. I actually had to stop so...That is definitely true. I actually had to stop someone from immediately blowing all of his saved points on Fearlessness after two people failed Fright Checks in my current DF game. I point out that both failed because they rolled automatic failures, anyway, so it wouldn't even help. But "short term fix for the last trip-up" is common.<br /><br />It's not only a case where people see a situation as adversarial. It's also not seeing failures and difficulties as an inevitable part of the game. It's also seeing a problem that occurs occasionally as a major and consistent problem to be faced. Failed a consciousness check once? Don't rest until that can't happen again! Once had to roll against a rare disease at HT-5? Get Immunity to Disease or bump your roll to at least a base 21 so you only fail on auto-failure rolls of 17-18. Etc.<br /><br />It's odd because for certain areas, it's reversed - any success is seen as proof you've got it covered. Failed Survival 3 times out of 4? That 4th time proves you have enough skill. Made that one Fast-Talk roll? You've got enough skill to depend on it in all circumstances. And so on.Peter Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-20611444499535219822016-03-11T04:30:30.011-05:002016-03-11T04:30:30.011-05:00Also, players often use earned experience to patch...Also, players often use earned experience to patch over what has just tripped them up. If people got mind-controlled, they'll buy Will. Deceptive Attacked, they'll boost their defences. It's a natural enough response; I think the answer is mostly to stop seeing the relationship between players and GM as an adversarial one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-16242304518743274602016-03-11T00:21:13.149-05:002016-03-11T00:21:13.149-05:00Whether or not a GM allows trading in, this is one...Whether or not a GM allows trading in, this is one area where I think its a good idea NOT to allow this kind of purchase in the first place.<br /><br />In regards to something like the ST example (and Im assuming DF here) Only allow up to X% percent of one level to be spent on related advantages before you just take a level. So levels of lifting ST, striking ST or HP is fine, maybe a combo of two of lifting, striking or HP, but if the GM sees you are taking all three they just tell you not to do this in the first place. (ALSO in DF once ST is maxed out all these options make sense to take so that's another time to allow them)<br /><br />Along with 2+ techniques for each skill and a couple other areas it will almost never be point efficient to make this kind purchase. A switch that has option for completely inefficient buys for experienced players is fine, but otherwise its just a trap for those who aren't familiar with the rules.Unachimbahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04873952842828774048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-71612827370389395282016-03-10T21:01:21.783-05:002016-03-10T21:01:21.783-05:00Thanks. It's compounded by "Ensure total ...Thanks. It's compounded by "Ensure total and perfect immunity to this one thing, before I move onto the next." There isn't an end to it, and you get overwhelmingly better at one thing while not actually be better overall.Peter Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7817710432110712270.post-66712025865552608392016-03-10T14:40:11.527-05:002016-03-10T14:40:11.527-05:00Step 1: Ensure total and perfect immunity to every...Step 1: Ensure total and perfect immunity to everything.<br /><br />Step 2: Game ended before I could achieve Step 1.<br /><br />This is great! "Perfect is the enemy of good enough."qpophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04398235894159011414noreply@blogger.com