Topic: Too many talents?

[Arioch]

One of the things I liked about HARP when I first read the core rulebook was the fact that talents, while limited in number, gave you a lot of chances to personalize your character...  but with each new rulesbook the number of talents seems to grow, and I think that this is becoming a problem.
I like character personalization, and I understand that most of the new talents are optional, but I fear that if the list of talents continues to grow HARP will become like d&d 3.x, with characters built using insane combinations of talents coming from various books to make them invincible... 

[kreider204]

There are some talents I'd probably just forbid my players to choose.  Others, I might require them to go on a dangerous quest to attain.  Either way, that could keep talent abuse down a bit.
Also keep in mind that a lot of the more powerful talents require almost an entire level of DP, which will put the PC behind in terms of skills, so that balances out a a bit.

[John Duffield]

I like having the option to include those talents but I do watch for balance. 

I also agree with kreider about the cost - I have seen my players go through two or three levels always intending to buy a talent but in the end opting to spend the DP elsewhere - it is fun to watch

[Right Wing Wacko]

We simply do not use all the books...
We really just play with Core, Cyradon, M:aFG, and Martial Law... with a handful of Bazaars thrown in...
...and we don't always use Martial Law... we also have Hack & Slash...
It is up to that campaigns DM to decide which Combat System to use...


But I feel your pain Arioch!

[sunwolf]

Options are always good.  You as the GM simply have to tell the players which ones are in use.  Also reserve the right as GM to throw out any option that is unbalancing your game after it starts.

[munchy]

I think I would allow almost all the talents as I can't think of one at the moment I feel is too unbalancing. Although I have to admit that "Eloquence" is an extremely strong one. On the other hand, it is quite expensive, probably about one level or at least a big part of a level for most characters. (Still it is worth its price.)

I have no experience with blood magic so far, however, so I cannot say how that really influences the game.

[SamwiseSeven]

I've always been a GM that tends to give my players lots of options.  Allowing them all the talents (or most of them if a few seem not to fit the game) is usually how I do things.

Sometimes I get the feeling I give TOO many options, but I think most people would prefer more options, to less options.

[munchy]

I think HARP looks pretty okay with its talents so far but then again I am speaking from a point of view that once had to deal with RMSS Talent Law as a GM and as a player who was mightily tempted and in fact succumbed to that temptation in some cases.

[Right Wing Wacko]

I think HARP looks pretty okay with its talents so far...

As do I, yet I only use some of the books and can't speak for the entire "library"...

[jolt]

I don't mind the increase in talents anymore than I cared about the feat bloat in 3.X.  The problem for me wasn't the numbers, but rather the information being spread out over too many books (Star Wars has this problem right now).  I ended up typing up every feat I allowed with a brief description of what it did into an Excel Sheet with a little superscript abbreviation saying what book it came from; without that, character creation would have been a nightmare of sifting through over a dozen books.

I love having options and can't recall off the top of my head ever thinking, "There's just too much "X" in this game.  But if the information isn't organised well, it's can definitely become a headache very quickly.

jolt

[kreider204]

The problem for me wasn't the numbers, but rather the information being spread out over too many books (Star Wars has this problem right now).  jolt

Hear, hear!  That irks me too.  On the other hand, I'm not sure what to do about it -- it's not like we DON'T want new HARP products . . .



 

[RandalThor]

I, personally, would love to see an entire book (it doesn't have to be big) devoted to talents. Of and on I have been working on translating the talents in the Character Law book for RMFRP because I really like the use of talents.

[Arioch]

I am speaking from a point of view that once had to deal with RMSS Talent Law as a GM

That's one of the things I fear... HARP talents becoming something like those found in Talent Law or RMFRP Character's Law 

But I feel your pain Arioch!

Thanks for your moral support!! 

[RandalThor]

That's one of the things I fear... HARP talents becoming something like those found in Talent Law or RMFRP Character's Law 

Which one of the books I would not play without.

[Arioch]

That's one of the things I fear... HARP talents becoming something like those found in Talent Law or RMFRP Character's Law 

Which one of the books I would not play without.

It's not a bad book, but talents' costs are completely unbalanced and I had to reprice most of them... I prefer EA gifts 

Does anyone know if somewhere there is a list of all HARP talents (talent name, cost and in which book it is)?

[Pat]

We allow characters to choose talents at when creating their characters only. After that new talents can only be added with GM permission and it must be discussed prior to levelling up. The GM may disallow the talent out right or may require a quest to achieve.

Regardless of the talent the player must demonstrate how the talent is going to be achieved (ie to get the Subtle talent the player may have to contact the thieve's guild to learn it or even perform a task for the guild in payment.)

[SamwiseSeven]

I think there is a full list of talents in the Vault, but I could be wrong.

[jasonbrisbane]

I like the extra talents but feel that some of them can make the game unbalanced...

I dont have the books with me so cant confirm if this is correct but:
- Two extra Talents at Level 1 (aside from Race and Profession Talents that they get)
- only One talent per level after L1.


I like the extra talents but primarily use them for creating and modifying NPC's (ie the Undead and Demon Templates use Speciality Talents...) I dont use the Harpers Bazaar races, etc, so I dont know about those...

[Arioch]

Also, I think that some of them could be simply merged into one more general talent: for example there are a lot of talents that gives a flat bonus to a skill or a group of skills, wouldn't it be easier (and maybe more balanced) to replace them with a single talent?

[jasonbrisbane]

Do you have an example?

I cant recall any off hand.
I know Subtle gives +10 bonus to Subterfuge CATEGORY.
I know that Scholar gives bonus to LORE skills (a range of skills).

These arent the 'Skill Bonus +10" Talent but give the bonus to a range of skills, that dont affect combat but are good for RP'ing perspectives (and NPC's). I certainly wouldnt charge a PC the Full "Skill Bonus" Talent cost for getting those talents multiple times......


The Subterfuge might be considered powerful; but as ambush uses # of ranks as the bonus, the skill bonus doesnt affect that much... (as I see it - I could be outvoted on this though! )