Attacks, Flaws, and Weaponry - Confused with disarmament.

[Malancthon]

I can understand situations in which it doesn't really matter except for flavor if the Ability is from the player or from the item. In that case, there's no point in spending the extra crunch for an extra point or not- especially in regards of NPCs.

The simple solution is either rename Focus as Gear or Item or tag Focus (Gear/Item).

It probably should be a bit clearer with the term Focus, as Focus does imply something unusual as a requirement- a magician who requires his book or a Shinto priest needing Ofuda paper strips to use magic, a Kamen Rider needing a belt to transform. I imagine choosing the word Focus was to make the Weakness a broader definition- it could be something exotic or it could be something mundane.

However, if there is no need for a mechanical point, just flavor, then just tagging an Ability as Gear with no point difference works, as is probably the original intent.

[The Reddest Mage]

Jiro's gun attack has the Weapon Flaw, while, as an extra, the Yakuza doesn't really warrant that kind of detail.

So your saying that you hand wave it. And so Gear ends up not being used.

Gear is there to group Abilities and Weaknesses if you want to. It can be useful for any campaign where characters change, upgrade, and exchange items regularly. (To the point that building them as an integral part of the character becomes awkward, like, say, a D&D style campaign.)

It doesn't actually work for a 'D&D' styled game, take Attack and attach the Weapon flaw, which implies the attack is an object and thus can be taken away. Or if it's a spell book, you take Focus. Tools for the job are under the appropriate stat, like Dexterous, because the game assumes you can carry whatever mundane gear you need at no cost, and for a fantasy game, I'd assume lockpicks and such are considered mundane.

I know you don't like it, and I want everyone here to be able to speak their mind about the game. That said, it's getting a little tiresome that every thread that brings up Gear—and even ones that don't, like this one—that you feel the need to interject this grievance. Gear does what it's supposed to do and nothing more. If you don't want to use it, don't. It is not an element that affects your ability to use the game, just an option (of which, as discussed ad nauseum, there are many.)

It's not that I dislike it, it's that it doesn't have a purpose. It's a wasted ability.

Here's the big thing for me: If it's in the game system, it's meant to be used. But if the game creator doesn't use it, then I'm left questioning why it's even there. And so I look into it. Which is what I did with Gear. Turns out, it's mechanically useless. There's nothing it can give that Focus (which gives BACK points) or Attack (Which increases combat damage) with the right flaw, don't do much better.

And the fact that you don't use it for any of the characters in game tells me (probably incorrectly) that even you don't have any real idea as to how to make it work.

Well, I personally do think the Gear Ability has some advantages that the Focus Weakness and the Weapon Flaw don't have.

If someone built a sword for their character by taking Attack +5 and attaching the Focus Weakness to it, they would have a +5 sword. They would get some extra points back, but those points couldn't go into raising Attack any further because it is already at the maximum of +5.

If they built the sword by taking Attack +5 and adding the Weapon Flaw, they would still have a +5 Sword, and could get a "free" +5 Endurance Perk to further improve its capabilities, such as the Effective Perk to increase the damage by +1.

If someone who already had an Attack of +5 built a sword with Gear +5 that was comprised of Attack +5, they would be able to use that sword at +10.

Of course it's rare that anyone would be starting out with one or more +5 Abilities, and the Gear Ability itself discourages players from building Gear that would give them bonuses over +5, but it doesn't forbid it and says to talk to the GM about the effects of such an Ability beyond +5.

So I think one of the main advantages of Gear is that Focus and Weapon don't have is that it is able to stack with Abilities the user already has. Whereas with the other equipment-building methods, I don't think one would normally take Attack as an innate ability, and then take the Attack Ability a second time to attach the Focus Weakness onto it to represent a separate weapon. I assume this because the description of the different ways to build weapons in the section under the Attack Ability using Raine's signature sword seems to imply that if you want it that your character can fight really well with a weapon, but even without that weapon still be a pretty good fighter, you would create the weapon with the Weapon Flaw so that their base Attack Ability would still be available even if they lost the weapon. Thus I don't think one would buy Attack twice to try to stack them by having one version with the Focus Weakness and one without. And using the Weapon Flaw is still limited to the +5 cap to the Attack (not counting the Effective Perk). But with Gear, one could effectively have an Attack +5, Gear with Attack +5, and then still add in further bonuses such as from Strong, Effective, etc.

So the way I have been understanding it, Gear's selling point is that if left unchecked, it can grant the largest amount of damage bonuses compared to the others.

Note, I've been speaking of Gear in terms of it only being a weapon because that makes it the easiest to compare with both the Focus Weakness and the Weapon Flaw. Of course the same holds true if it's a piece of equipment for non-combat purposes. For example, someone could have the Beautiful Ability at +5, and have a beautiful princess gown via the Gear Ability that granted Beautiful +5 so that the character when wearing the gown would have a Beautiful rating of +10, which is a higher single bonus than what someone with Beautiful +5 and the Focus Weakness or Requirement Flaw could have.

[Clay]

While I can’t say I recommend characters running around with +10 Bonuses, this does convey the point pretty well. In fact, even if you ignore being able to break the +5 barrier, this allows you to reach +5 much more easily. +4 and +5 Abilities are pretty heavily discouraged, but stacking +2s and +3s happens all over the place.

[Sabersonic]

So I think one of the main advantages of Gear is that Focus and Weapon don't have is that it is able to stack with Abilities the user already has.

That was my exact issue I had when I was designing weapons in my mecha-centric campaign.

Ultimately I kicked Attack from the mecha and just left it on the weapons. I figured that the attack level would match with that particular weapon Gear and not worry about +5 strikes from a sword.

Then again, I was too influenced by the gaming mechanics of Ace Combat Infinity when I did some of those designs so that might have been it.....

[IlinaYoung]

Combat Expert is more than just your ability to land an attack, it is also your ability to get a read on your opponent's fighting style, your ability to play chess/go, your affinity for identifying uncommon weapons, your martial training in the art of batmanning a situation, and your ability to devise competent tactics, plus combat expert technically applies to psychological attacks in combat while agile and quick do not. sure, agile applies to melee and ranged weapon attacks, but it isn't going to let you land a low blow on a paladin's pride the way combat expert will.