Gurps Babylon 5

On Jan 16, 12:43 pm, David Johnston <da... DeleteThis @block.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:12:56 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
> >That's interesting (I thought that was only for Innate Attack) but
> >doesn't address the root of the problem. [snip]
>
> What is the root of the problem?

Addressed in the snipped part. I'm looking for a system that is more
skill-based than advantage-based, and based more upon capabilities
than effects.

-Max
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Jan 16, 2:05 pm, "cop...@yahoo.com" <cop....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Which would make it balance with magic -- the more spells you learn,
> the  more the cost for Magery becomes undervalued.

Exactly. Magic is my model here for the kind of system I want for psi.

-Max
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Jan 16, 7:13 pm, David Johnston <da....TakeThisOut@block.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:05:12 -0800 (PST), "cop...@yahoo.com"
>
> <cop....TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 16, 2:13 pm, David Johnston <da....TakeThisOut@block.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:55:44 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>
> >> >much rather have a lot of up-front cost for the latent, monstrous
> >> >power she starts out with, but doesn't know how to use, and then when
> >> >she discovers it, new skills can be added fairly quickly.
>
> >> The problem of course is that as more skills are added, the psi power
> >> cost itself became increasingly undervalued.
>
> >Which would make it balance with magic -- the more spells you learn,
> >the more the cost for Magery becomes undervalued.
>
> That's great for the all-psi and magician campaign. Not so great for
> anything else.

The problem is that in 3e, magic and psi were reasonably well-balanced
against each other but superpowers weren't balanaced well with either.

4e basically left magic alone (easily the most used of the three
supernatural systems above) but changed psi to balance with
superpowers. So, you still have one unbalanced system and two balanced
systems. IMHO, the wrong path was taken -- superpowers should have
been made to balance with magic, and psi should have largely been left
alone. In fact, the most broken parts of superpowers in 3e were those
that became part of racial generation and weren't used just for
individual super heroes.

Brandon
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:55:44 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
<wilson.max RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 15, 11:00 am, David Johnston <da... RemoveThis @block.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 07:16:36 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>> >Yeah, that's the mechanic that didn't make any sense to me. Power
>> >levels were specifically distinguishing between strength and skill.
>>
>> They still have that distinction of course, but it isn't Talent. It's
>> buying range for your Advantage, and dice of innate attack.
>
>That mechanic doesn't appeal to be because it doesn't have any
>cohesion. I don't have one (or five or so) abilities that I can use to
>do various things; I have a bucket of powers that I claim are all
>powered by the same ability. It ends up being advantage-based instead
>of skill-based. For instance, if Felice has this monstrous PK talent
>and I want her to be able to fly with it as well as levitate ships and
>knock people around, she has to spend 40-odd extra points to get a
>basic "Move 5" Fly, and move to increase it.

Or of course she could just use Telekinesis to levitate herself.
Having Flight lets her fly casually without requiring any
concentration but you can certainly get into the air and moving at a
fair clip if you have "monstrous" telekinesis.

Then she needs to spend a
>bundle more on the knocking-people-around part (Innate Attack).

You can punch people with Telekinesis. It's more damage-effective to
use objects but the invisible punches have their own advantages. Now
if you wanted to set things on fire or what-have-you, for that you'd
need another Advantage. But you can knock 80% off the cost for an
Alternate Attack.

I'd
>much rather have a lot of up-front cost for the latent, monstrous
>power she starts out with, but doesn't know how to use, and then when
>she discovers it, new skills can be added fairly quickly.

The problem of course is that as more skills are added, the psi power
cost itself became increasingly undervalued.

>
>Imagine if there was no "Magic" system included in GURPS, and each
>spell was an advantage purchased separately with the "magic; -10%" and
>"costs fatigue" limitation. Blech. Not flexible at all,

It's flexible. It just isn't enormously dirt-cheap.
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:12:56 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
<wilson.max.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 16, 8:35 am, b....DeleteThis@pvv.ntnu.no (Bent C Dalager) wrote:
>> In article <a34da3ca-2e2a-4eeb-b12a-e4dea45c8....DeleteThis@d21g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
>> Max Wilson  <wilson.....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >(...) For instance, if Felice has this monstrous PK talent
>> >and I want her to be able to fly with it as well as levitate ships and
>> >knock people around, she has to spend 40-odd extra points to get a
>> >basic "Move 5" Fly, and move to increase it. Then she needs to spend a
>> >bundle more on the knocking-people-around part (Innate Attack).
>>
>> If you have multiple advantages from the same source, then you can get
>> away with paying 1/5th the cost for every advantage except the most
>> expensive one.
>
>That's interesting (I thought that was only for Innate Attack) but
>doesn't address the root of the problem.

What is the root of the problem?
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Jan 16, 9:43 pm, David Johnston <da... DeleteThis @block.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:07:09 -0800 (PST), "cop...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <cop... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 16, 7:13 pm, David Johnston <da... DeleteThis @block.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:05:12 -0800 (PST), "cop...@yahoo.com"
>
> >> <cop... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jan 16, 2:13 pm, David Johnston <da... DeleteThis @block.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:55:44 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>
> >> >> >much rather have a lot of up-front cost for the latent, monstrous
> >> >> >power she starts out with, but doesn't know how to use, and then when
> >> >> >she discovers it, new skills can be added fairly quickly.
>
> >> >> The problem of course is that as more skills are added, the psi power
> >> >> cost itself became increasingly undervalued.
>
> >> >Which would make it balance with magic -- the more spells you learn,
> >> >the more the cost for Magery becomes undervalued.
>
> >> That's great for the all-psi and magician campaign. Not so great for
> >> anything else.
>
> >The problem is that in 3e, magic and psi were reasonably well-balanced
> >against each other
>
> Magic was slower, more exhausting

Depending on skill with the spell, many could be cast and maintained
for free.

>, more limited in it's power levels

To some extent, but not completely.

> and had absolutely pathetic range.

This was one of the few things broken with the magic system (being
tied to a tactical map).

With magic, for the cost of a single point, you can add a new
ability.You really can't do that with psi.

> >but superpowers weren't balanaced well with either.
>
> >4e basically left magic alone (easily the most used of the three
> >supernatural systems above) but changed psi to balance with
> >superpowers. So, you still have one unbalanced system and two balanced
> >systems.
>
> Why are you ignoring the guys who don't have powers?

I'm not. In virtually every game system I know of, they are at a
disadvantage to those with powers. There is no point in comparing the
two groups.

Brandon
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Jan 16, 9:27 pm, David Johnston <da....TakeThisOut@block.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:03:59 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>
> <wilson.....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 16, 12:43 pm, David Johnston <da....TakeThisOut@block.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:12:56 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
> >> >That's interesting (I thought that was only for Innate Attack) but
> >> >doesn't address the root of the problem. [snip]
>
> >> What is the root of the problem?
>
> >Addressed in the snipped part. I'm looking for a system that is more
> >skill-based than advantage-based,
>
> Yes, but why? Points is points.

Many GMs don't like players improving advantages, especially
supernatural ones. For example, my impression is that if a PC started
with Magery 1, most GMs wouldn't allow the PC to buy it up to Magery 2
in play. OTOH, almost no GMs have problems with PCs putting points
into skills.

Brandon
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Jan 17, 12:59 am, David Johnston <da... DeleteThis @block.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:44:39 -0800 (PST), "cop...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <cop... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 16, 9:27 pm, David Johnston <da... DeleteThis @block.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:03:59 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>
> >> <wilson.... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jan 16, 12:43 pm, David Johnston <da... DeleteThis @block.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:12:56 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
> >> >> >That's interesting (I thought that was only for Innate Attack) but
> >> >> >doesn't address the root of the problem. [snip]
>
> >> >> What is the root of the problem?
>
> >> >Addressed in the snipped part. I'm looking for a system that is more
> >> >skill-based than advantage-based,
>
> >> Yes, but why? Points is points.
>
> >Many GMs don't like players improving advantages, especially
> >supernatural ones.
>
> That obviously doesn't apply to a setup where heavily limited
> advantages represent individual magical spells.

Ugh, Talk about an extremely messy system.

Brandon
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Jan 17, 1:24 am, David Johnston <da... RemoveThis @block.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:41:16 -0800 (PST), "cop...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <cop... RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 16, 9:43 pm, David Johnston <da... RemoveThis @block.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:07:09 -0800 (PST), "cop...@yahoo.com"
>
> >> <cop... RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jan 16, 7:13 pm, David Johnston <da... RemoveThis @block.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:05:12 -0800 (PST), "cop...@yahoo.com"
>
> >> >> <cop... RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> >On Jan 16, 2:13 pm, David Johnston <da... RemoveThis @block.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:55:44 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>
> >> >> >> >much rather have a lot of up-front cost for the latent, monstrous
> >> >> >> >power she starts out with, but doesn't know how to use, and then when
> >> >> >> >she discovers it, new skills can be added fairly quickly.
>
> >> >> >> The problem of course is that as more skills are added, the psi power
> >> >> >> cost itself became increasingly undervalued.
>
> >> >> >Which would make it balance with magic -- the more spells you learn,
> >> >> >the more the cost for Magery becomes undervalued.
>
> >> >> That's great for the all-psi and magician campaign. Not so great for
> >> >> anything else.
>
> >> >The problem is that in 3e, magic and psi were reasonably well-balanced
> >> >against each other
>
> >> Magic was slower, more exhausting
>
> >Depending on skill with the spell, many could be cast and maintained
> >for free.
>
> But the psi effects were much more powerful than those spells

Depends on the psi level. At low levels (1-5) magic generally
outclassed psi (looking at CP cost for effect). It generally took psi
power to be 10+ for it to outpower magic, but by then you were were
spedning a lot more points on psi power than Magery.

and were
> free by default...even though unlike magery they didn't even have a
> supposed external power source and there were no "low psi" areas which
> inflicted a -5 to everything.

There was nothing in the rules to fix how common or rare Low Mana
areas were.

> And it's not as if there were any areas
> that made magic easier for a mage.

Err, High Mana. Very High Mana.

I would expect, on average, for there to be as many Low Mana areas as
High Mana and as many No Mana areas as Very High Mana areas.

> >>, more limited in it's power levels
>
> >To some extent, but not completely.
>
> >> and had absolutely pathetic range.
>
> >This was one of the few things broken with the magic system (being
> >tied to a tactical map).
>
> In order to talk about balance in the rules you need to actually use
> them as written. Otherwise you aren't talking about the rules any
> more.

I have no idea what you mean by this.

> >With magic, for the cost of a single point, you can add a new
> >ability.You really can't do that with psi.
>
> You could of course in 3rd edition and with much shorter prerequiste
> chains.

But not in 4e. In 4e a mage can add new abilities cheaply, while a psi
can't.

> >> >but superpowers weren't balanaced well with either.
>
> >> >4e basically left magic alone (easily the most used of the three
> >> >supernatural systems above) but changed psi to balance with
> >> >superpowers. So, you still have one unbalanced system and two balanced
> >> >systems.
>
> >> Why are you ignoring the guys who don't have powers?
>
> >I'm not. In virtually every game system I know of, they are at a
> >disadvantage to those with powers. There is no point in comparing the
> >two groups.
>
> Given that you aren't concerned with balancing characters

That's not true. I am concerned that if character A spends 50 points
on ability X and character B spends 50 points on ability Y, then the
two abilities should both be about as useful when needed.If one ends
up far more useful than the other, then for that setting they are not
both worth 50 points.

, what
> difference does it make whether psi is balanced with magery?

For people who do care about balance.

Brandon
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:05:12 -0800 (PST), "copeab@yahoo.com"
<copeab.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Jan 16, 2:13 pm, David Johnston <da....TakeThisOut@block.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:55:44 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>>
>> >much rather have a lot of up-front cost for the latent, monstrous
>> >power she starts out with, but doesn't know how to use, and then when
>> >she discovers it, new skills can be added fairly quickly.
>>
>> The problem of course is that as more skills are added, the psi power
>> cost itself became increasingly undervalued.
>
>Which would make it balance with magic -- the more spells you learn,
>the more the cost for Magery becomes undervalued.

That's great for the all-psi and magician campaign. Not so great for
anything else.
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:03:59 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
<wilson.max.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 16, 12:43 pm, David Johnston <da....DeleteThis@block.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:12:56 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>> >That's interesting (I thought that was only for Innate Attack) but
>> >doesn't address the root of the problem. [snip]
>>
>> What is the root of the problem?
>
>Addressed in the snipped part. I'm looking for a system that is more
>skill-based than advantage-based,

Yes, but why? Points is points. It doesn't make a difference whether
you spend 8 points on a Flight power, or 8 points on Flight skill for
a Psychokinetic power. You learn them at exactly the same rate.

and based more upon capabilities
>than effects.

I don't understand the difference.
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:07:09 -0800 (PST), "copeab@yahoo.com"
<copeab.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Jan 16, 7:13 pm, David Johnston <da....DeleteThis@block.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:05:12 -0800 (PST), "cop...@yahoo.com"
>>
>> <cop....DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >On Jan 16, 2:13 pm, David Johnston <da....DeleteThis@block.net> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:55:44 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
>>
>> >> >much rather have a lot of up-front cost for the latent, monstrous
>> >> >power she starts out with, but doesn't know how to use, and then when
>> >> >she discovers it, new skills can be added fairly quickly.
>>
>> >> The problem of course is that as more skills are added, the psi power
>> >> cost itself became increasingly undervalued.
>>
>> >Which would make it balance with magic -- the more spells you learn,
>> >the more the cost for Magery becomes undervalued.
>>
>> That's great for the all-psi and magician campaign. Not so great for
>> anything else.
>
>The problem is that in 3e, magic and psi were reasonably well-balanced
>against each other

Magic was slower, more exhausting, more limited in it's power levels
and had absolutely pathetic range.

>but superpowers weren't balanaced well with either.
>
>4e basically left magic alone (easily the most used of the three
>supernatural systems above) but changed psi to balance with
>superpowers. So, you still have one unbalanced system and two balanced
>systems.

Why are you ignoring the guys who don't have powers?
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5 

In article <lqqso35fqcfh5jg8uformvj2hme9f80c57.RemoveThis@4ax.com>,
David Johnston <david.RemoveThis@block.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:12:56 -0800 (PST), Max Wilson
><wilson.max.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 16, 8:35 am, b....RemoveThis@pvv.ntnu.no (Bent C Dalager) wrote:
>>> In article
>>> If you have multiple advantages from the same source, then you can get
>>> away with paying 1/5th the cost for every advantage except the most
>>> expensive one.
>>
>>That's interesting (I thought that was only for Innate Attack) (...)

It can be done for Innate Attacks, Afflictions, Bindings and possibly
Strikers. The main drawback is that two different advantages from the
same source cannot be used at the same time, and if one of them
sprains (or otherwise becomes unavailable) then they all do.

Personally, I'd be prepared to extend it to cover other advantages
also if the reason was a good one.

Cheers,
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd.RemoveThis@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs
 >> Stay informed about: Gurps Babylon 5