Skill packages vs. multipool

[SaintHax]

FrEd adios'd skill packages, that were weak to begin w/. I find that making a skilled character to be far less effective than a superpowered character. This mainly concerns Champions, but other genre's are still affected, albeit less so.

 

EC's and multipower give bonuses... and MP gives a big one! to buying powers on the same vein, or usable one at a time. There is very few things in the rules like this that applies to skills. Currently, we have Traveller, Scholar, and Scientist that I can think of w/o cracking the book. However, there is no incentive for a character to spend 3 points on a KS of ninja's, instead of adding a 6d6 Flash ultra slot to his multipower (role playing aside). Why is there no EC like package rules detailed in FrEd? For example, the Ninja would learn stealth, acrobatics, AK's, and medicine-- shouldn't there be a 6 point cost "Ninja Package" that then makes any of those skills cost one point less or something? How do any of you address this problem?

 

Related, a lot of blaster NPC's have martial arts training in CKC; but, since this costs 10 character points, I've never seen a blaster PC waste (and I do mean "waste" at 10 pts!) points on martial arts that will do 4 DC's less than his normal ranged attack. I'm how this could be addressed other than giving characters Xp that can only be used for skills and powers outside their current multipowers.

[Monolith]

I generally do not even worry about it. Skills are already very cheap. You can get a lot more mileage out of a 3 point Streetwise skill than you can a 1/2d6 Energy Blast, even a 4d6 Energy Blast that costs 7 times more.

[Lord Liaden]

Okay, first of all, for the Skill Enhancers we have:

 

"Jack of All Trades" for Professional Skills;

 

"Linguist" for Languages;

 

"Scientist" for Science Skills;

 

"Scholar" for Knowledge Skills;

 

"Traveler" for AKs, CKs and CuKs;

 

"Well-Connected" for Contacts and Favors.

 

Personally, I think that's a fairly generous selection of aids to learning skills.

 

Secondly, a "blaster/energy projector" can get a lot of use out of Martial Arts, whatever the Damage Class may be compared to their main attacks. An opponent may have exceptional Defenses against the character's normal attacks, or have Missile Deflection, or just be hard to hit at range. A well-timed Martial Throw can be just the thing to knock a charging opponent off his pins and set him up for a followup attack. And having a Martial Dodge or Block in your repertoire can save you from a hit that would normally turn you to paste.

 

Thirdly, a ninja Package Deal can include appropriate Limitations that offset the cost of the Skills bought. Now, you might say that that's just adding negatives to the character, but I prefer to look at it as fitting with a concept. I've never had a player who lacked "incentive" to tailor his character's abilities to fit a concept. Maybe I've just been lucky. Mind you, if the ninja player wanted to buy a Flash instead of more Skills, and could justify it within character, I'd usually be more than willing to let him do it. He might find along the way that the Skill he didn't take could have come in handy, though.

[Aroooo]

Typically I don't worry about it. I'm either playing in a skills heavy game (heroic level) or a Supers level game where lots of skills are less important.

 

I have one GM who makes up character 'packages' where each package (i.e. profession, archtype, etc.) gets a set of skills, and maybe an ability or two, for a fixed cost. That fixed cost is less than the individual skills/abilities added together. So, a policeman might have a Police Man package that costs 30 points, but individually it would be 40 points.

 

Aroooo

[PhilFleischmann]

Powers have frameworks to make them cheaper, in exchange for certain restrictions (all Drained together, only use one at a time, etc.)

 

Skills have the following advantages instead:

1. As mentioned above, they're already pretty cheap.

2. You can use all of them at the same time.

3. In many situations, they can be added together with complimentary skill rolls.

4. Background skills have Skill Enhancers, as mentioned above.

5. How often does someone try to Drain/Suppress/Dispell your skill?

[BNakagawa]

Obviously, a skill's value will never equal the combat effectiveness of the same points deposited in a core combat ability like CV or damage classes.

 

Assuming that you only ever encounter difficulties that are best resolved by combat.

 

In general, I dislike anything like power frameworks for skills. It's kind of nice being the only PC in a group that has a specific knowledge or skill. Won't happen very often if at all once you let people put skills in frameworks.

 

$0.02

[zornwil]

I have created a couple Skill Enhancers (made them into Prefabs for HD, not yet distributed to my group though) for alike skills (one for driving, one for weapons use). I could see creating others as needed if you want to encourage players to take a group of similar skills.

[Solomon]

The "gaming value" of skills mostly depends on the GM providing opportunities to use them. I usually try to reward clever use of skills, and I rarely had a problem with players considering skills "overpriced". As they get to know my GMing style, most players consider buying up skills a wise choice.

 

One of my players was jubilant when he found a way to track down a Black Paladin's secret base using an obscure Skill (KS: Antique Furniture) he had bougth as flavor only.

 

Frankly, I feel skills are appropriately cheap. Stealth is way cheaper and only marginally less efficent than Invisibility with fringe, 0 END and Activation. A 3 points social skill is way more useful than a 1/2 die of Mind Control. Plus, there are times using a power is simply not an option. Professor Xavier is likely to react badly to you trying to use Mind Control on him, but he won't object to Persuasion, Conversation or Seduction.

[zornwil]

I agree with the "skills are cheap" notion, I just do think that a few more Enhancers might not be a bad thing, particularly if PCs are buying many skills that are closely related. Then again, I do prefer slightly broader rather than narrower skills.

[BNakagawa]

The problem with broader skills and skill enhancers is that it makes everyone's feet larger, so to speak. In the sense that you will be stepping on people's toes more often.

 

The degenerate case is that everyone can do and know everything and that in order to have something that is entirely unique, you'll have to go so far afield there's little to no chance it'll ever come into play, like KS: left handed albino leatherworkers in tuscany.

 

$0.02

[zornwil]

Originally posted by BNakagawa

The problem with broader skills and skill enhancers is that it makes everyone's feet larger, so to speak. In the sense that you will be stepping on people's toes more often.

 

The degenerate case is that everyone can do and know everything and that in order to have something that is entirely unique, you'll have to go so far afield there's little to no chance it'll ever come into play, like KS: left handed albino leatherworkers in tuscany.

 

$0.02

 

I think that depends on how good the players are at staying out of eachother's schtick, excepting rivalries and the like. Certainly I agree of course that there shouldn't be too much degeneration. But Skill Enhancers for, by example, driving/piloting skills can be pretty reasonable in a high points super-hero game where such is often ignored. It wouldn't be so appropriate in a more human game where you want a greater differentiation and you know one guy will be an ace fighter pilot while another is a race car driver.

[Solomon]

I do not object to the notion of additional Skill Enhancers. However, I do feel that players (at least in my groups) are more inclined to buy a new skill rather than improving an existing one.

Then again, my campaigns are usually meant to last 20-30 sessions, so I don't know for sure what might happen in a longer campaign.

[zornwil]

Fair enough, just clarifying on my part as well.