- I'm deep in writing, so not a lot of time to post as I noted earlier this week.
- I do like this series on the Paradox games, although it makes me want to buy EU4. I had EU2 and I loved it. I never did get III or IV, and I own the original Victoria (I think) and I enjoyed that to a lesser extent. Anyway, it's a good look at the idea of a state as an actor, and the security dilemna that leads to zero-sum state expansion. I've tried the "tall" approach where you don't overly expand, and that generally got me bug-squished in EUII, eventually, by nearly equal military technology and vastly superior forces.
- Disadvantage buckets are an interesting idea. I don't think he's right that GURPS determines ST by height, but rather height by ST, but I liked the exploration of the general idea here.
- I can't (won't) spend money on minis I don't need, but I really like these Star Schlock minis.
- I'll respond to comments eventually. Give me some time - a lot to write and busy workdays.
I think separating out Disadvantage 'buckets' into different types is pointless.
ReplyDelete/rimshot.jpg
For instance if I'm playing a smoothboi social operator I'm not very much interested in Social Disads. That whole bucket is a waste to me. Inversely if I'm making a physical powerhouse warrior, I'm not likely to be interested in an "SM Bucket" or any Physical Disads. You just went out of your way to build buckets. I'm not using.
And unless you're making a Profession Bucket, you aren't even solving Mailanka's initial's problem, that some Templates come "pre-loaded" with Disads.
I solve that by 'baking them into" the Template. These Disads must be taken with the Template, they don't count towards your limit, instead they raise the Template's point budget.
It's the same thing GURPS already sort of does with it's suggested Template Disads, ye olde "take 30 points of disadvantages from among this list", but I don't bother with that, it's straight up "Take these Disads, then take X# of more disadvantages of your choice. Sure, sometimes it'll be from a 'suggested' list, but usually not.
Does this mean sometimes one or two Characters "are more powerful" than the others? Yes, but they also come with more problems, and that tends to even things out in the wash as I fairly strictly limit any "not a disadvantage" disadvantages, or shift them such that they are in fact disadvantageous.
The side regression on physicality vis-a-vis the ST stat felt kinda tacked on, like he'd been wanting to have this discussion for awhile and just found Disad Buckets to the 'closest" fit. It's an interesting kinda discussion that I once again find doesn't impact my games*, but it's interesting to think about.
.* I don't have the issue of "no one thinks about their character's height, weight, or build" as I and the people I play very much do tend to think about that as we build our characters. And a Character's size very much frames them and how people interact with them in my games and in the games I've played in.