Previous thread: >>96462767GURPS is a modular, adaptable system, capable of running a wide range of characters, settings, and play styles, with a level of detail varying from lightweight to completely autistic.Optional rules allow you to emulate different genres with a single system, or even switch genres within a single game.A nearly complete archive of GURPS books can be found by using the image (follow the URL to get to a folder with some files, read the files to get to the archive). Never post direct links to the archive anywhere in plain text.If you're wondering where to start:- The Basic Set covers everything, including a lot of optional rules you probably won't use.- A genre guide can be found in the archive, under Unofficial/GURPSgen. It tells you what extra books and articles you may find useful for many common genres.- How To Be a GURPS GM is a good read even for players.- GCS (gurpscharactersheet.com) is an excellent character-builder software, with page references to all the books and the option to export to both Foundry and Fantasy Grounds.Thread question: Which rule do you constantly see shilled but always thought it was shit?
>>96568654What is the SM of a fairy like Tinkerbell?>TQMost GURPS rules that are constantly shilled are good from what I've seen.At worst they have specific settings/styles that don't work for them.
>>96568654"Revisiting High-Tech" from Pyramid 3/70 has some guidelines for reducing the amount of projectiles you need to keep track of and increase the individual damage of each of them. Are there any guidelines for flechettes, or for other weapons that have tons of projectiles?
>>96569606No direct guidelines, but common sense suggests that you use raw NP for flechettes and do not divide according to diameter like you do with pellets, since NP is already reduced for flechette rounds. Doing a quick experiment, it looks like an 18.5mm shotgun can only load in 6 darts per shell, since max NP gets divided by 40; even if they're only 3mm each (well into birdshot territory), dividing NP by ten would make effective NP 0.6, which doesn't make any sense, so we shouldn't do that and can safely leave it at NP=6.
>>96569800I'm admitedly thinking of beehive rounds for tanks or 70 mm rockets, which have flechettes in the thousands (7000 for an M255 rocket).
>>96568654>TQSorcery
>>96570088>literally just advantages and alternate abilities with some fancy coatingSo I guess all gurps sucks since 99% of the game is about advantages.
>>96569913Oh, I wasn't even thinking of those. Still, leaving effective NP alone should be fine; High-Tech Revisited was to put an end to multiple hits that deal 1d-5(0.2) apiece, and Howitzer beehives deal around 2d per hit, perfect for anti-infantry cluster rounds. Dividing effective NP might result in a more sane RoF multiplier, but it would also mean each flechette hits for around 6d cut, which makes it too effective against lightly-armored targets.>>96570576NTA but it really isn't though. GURPS has a very flexible advantages system and I appreciate it being there, but it's reductive to treat it as the end-all-be-all of the system. I like GURPS having skills, equipment, and yeah fully-fledged subsystems for specific tasks. I don't like systems like Mutants & Masterminds where I'd need to build my sword swing as an Innate Attack, or my ability to do so twice or targeting the face as special power stunts; ditto for being able to convince people or pilot a ship or sneak unseen.
>>96570838>to multiple hits that deal 1d-5(0.2) apieceWhat were they even thinking here? Like, if I recall doesn't armor divisor .2 give everything at least 1 DR? It's either you deal zero damage, or a bajillion 1 damage hits meaning that birdshot is somehow more lethal than buckshot or a slug.
>>96568654I don't know if it was ever a popular rule, but I never cared for Restricted Dodge against Firearms.I think the furthest I'd ever go to make dodging bullets more "realistic" is ask you to declare your active defense options after your foe announces his attack, but before he rolls to hit. You can still declare your defense after the roll, but then you take a Speed penalty to DX for the projectile's velocity (like suggested in "Dodge This!" from Pyramid #3/57). But this still feels a bit unnecessarily clunky.
>>96571167I guess it was there to exist as a counterbalance to highly trained special forces type characters who will have decent HT, DX and Basic Speed; on top of Combat Awareness. I can easily see characters with 11 or 12 dodge in that case
>>96569465>What is the SM of a fairy like Tinkerbell?Looks like her official height is 7" tall as per the copyright. That's SM-6.To figure out a realistic ST because i want to, you can shrink a 5'1" tall, 90 lbs woman. Tinkerbell would weigh 0.3 oz. That's ST 0.5 according to "When we were Very Small" from Pyramid 3/34.>>96570088Agreed. It feels like a crutch for powers as advantages.
>>96571262>Tinkerbell would weigh 0.3 oz. That's ST 0.5imagine...Jokes aside ST 0.5 seems rather unplayable. I wanted to have a tiny fairy template for a PC race but I probably shouldn't make them that small.
>>96568654>Which rule do you constantly see shilled but always thought it was shit?Insert *variant magic rule* hereOnly magic as powers gets a pass
>>96570882The way damage accumulates in GURPS (and most games in general) always felt unrealistic to me.In real life, it's not so much how many times you're hit, but where you're hit and how deep is the injury.I guess it's fine for the type of game where the PCs are fighting a boss-type enemy together, and it makes everyone feel good to know that every point of damage they inflict counts, so they know they're contributing.But I also like to see the sort of battle where some big bad demon or monster is seemingly impervious to most shallow injuries, so the PCs have to grab him and hold him down, or otherwise support each other to create an opportunity for one of them to chop off the monster's head, or run him straight through the heart.To answer >>96568654's question, I've often heard that Conditional Injury fixes this. But those rules seem way too cumbersome, having to switch from one damage system to the other every time injury is applied, even with Anon's simplified version in the trove. I wonder if there isn't a simpler way to achieve a similar effect.
>>96572004I haven't yet tested this at my table, but I was thinking of implementing a "Minor Wounds" rule. Basically, HP loss from injury is reduced by an amount equal to half your current missing HP. Other effects of injury, such as Shock, Knockdown, Stunning, Crippling, etc., still apply normally. Critical hits, crippling injuries, and things which totally ignore DR (Poison, Disease, Maledictions, etc.), don't get reduced, however.For instance, two Crushing attacks that inflict 6 points of damage each against an unarmored HP 10 human would each count as a Major Wound, but only cause 9 points of injury total, leaving the human with 1 HP left. If he were to get hit a third time for 6 points Crushing damage again, then he would be at -1 HP.This somewhat lines up with Conditional Injury, since each point of Wound Severity correlates with a 1.5x increase in total injury. An injury of Severity 0 for a HP 10 human is equalent to 10 points of damage. If a HP 10 human is at Wound Severity 0, takes another Severity 0 injury, fails his HT check for Wound Accumulation, and is reduced to Severity -1, then that is equivalent to being at -5 HP, or 15 points of total injury. You'd get the same result if an HP 10 human took two hits for 10 damage each using my "Minor Wounds" rule above.
>>96570838>too effective against lightly-armored targetsMaybe that effective NP division could be accompanied by a survivable guns-style halving of the damage with an armor divisor to compensate, but the idea behind dividing the NP isn't that each pellet deals an increased amount of damage, but rather you get hit by 10 or 100 pellets per NP increment. Whether getting hit by 10 flechettes or minigun rounds at a time stretches belief is up in the air.
>>96569606Having run the numbers on that, I think that dividing NP by 10 should only come into play for 1 Bird and smaller loads. This makes three sets of 1d-3 to 1d-1 ranges with different armor divisors, rather than giving 1 to 4 Buck and the various letter shots more than one die of damage.Or, to put it another way, if you have 100 or more pellets, divide the amount by 10, and if you have 1000 or more, divide it by 1000.
>>96572004Damage boxes/tracks are superior but let's not fuck up GURPS by adding things that don't belong in itIt's not the perfect system but... etc. etc. If you want damage tracks, play an FASA game
>>96572004>>96572128What do you guys think of this: >Conditional injury for dummies>HP/X = minor injury threshold>HP/Y = medium injury threshold>HP/Z = major injury thresholdEach time you cross to the next threshold, you become immune to any injuries equal to or less of the previous threshold.I haven't thought of the numbers yet, but something like hp/10, hp/5, hp/2?
At what point do you guys draw the line for mechanics being needlessly complex/in need of some amount of abstraction? Not that the rule itself is overly complicated per se, but that for whatever it's trying to accomplish, you'd be better off going with something more intuitive.For me, it's grenades (frags in particular). I understand how they function and why they're written the way they are, but I feel like you could get a very similar effect with a fraction of the steps required, or even just using rules that are present elsewhere with slight modification ("Shotguns and Multiple Projectiles" on pg.b409 comes to mind).
>>96575640Doing the calculation for blast damage can be a bit cumbersome, but what's the issue with frag damage? It's just a ranged attack at skill 15 with recoil 3 and a given amount of dice of damage. It seems dead simple to me.
>>96575640I just use this when calculation shrapnelhttps://www.monkeysushi.net/gaming/GURPS/
>>96575688I shoulda been clearer. I meant fragmentation grenades, not the frag damage itself. Calculating two different ranges for two different damage types, that also apply their damage/hits differently, just feels a little excessive for something that could be abstracted down and have very nearly the same effect.>>96575693Thanks, into the GURPS folder it goes!
>>96575693Is it me or is the damage calculation fucked?
>>96577334I'm not sure. It seems ok at least when using 1-3d6 damage.I think it adds up all the damage accumulated.
>>96577704I think it has to apply the damage modifier too which is a little inconvenientI keep getting 1 [2d] frag hit for 18 damage and such
>>96577842>>96577847I think it does ALL the damage calculations, which can be a problem if you're using monsters with specific traits.
>>96577891Hell, even if you're using edge protection or some other alternate rule
>ctrl-F "pillbox" in all the GURPS WWII books, plus High-Tech>the only actual statted results are two half-assed "mobile pillboxes" on Iron Cross p. 59 and Motor Pool p. 12So, to design a pillbox, do I just use the wall thicknesses listed for bunkers on Dogfaces p. 100 and Motor Pool p. 47, and multiply that by the figure of 25 DR per inch given on Motor Pool p. 11?
>>96578469That's very poorly phrased. What I mean is: Should I assume that pillboxes have the same wall thickness as bunkers?
>>96578514I guess? There are so many different pillbox and bunker constructions in existenceAny I have been inside have had walls at least a foot thick
Adaptations is necessary reading. So much good coverage for how to use the system. The most important supplement to have.
How messy will it be if I mesh high tech with ultra tech?I saw people saying that they weren't written with each other in mind but reading through them it doesn't look that bad. As far as ballistic weapons go, I'd probably stick with HT for the most part, it seems like with all the special ammo rules they can be competitive even against the lower level UT stuff. The vehicles certainly seem capable of threatening each other.
>>96582003They work finefrom what I understand the main problem with ultra tech is the anti-armor stuff completely outscales armor so hard that any sort of heavy armor might as well not exist with how easy it is to take it down.
>>96582003Ultra-Tech was written before High-Tech, and there's a lot of quirks and things that don't line up. Broadly speaking the underlying formulas for UT work for HT, but it's not that easy to find the ballparks for the variables from the examples in HT. I remember HEAT rounds and gyrojet stats being somewhat tricky to work out.The formulas aren't in the books at all, but the blog GURB has pretty solid approximations that I've been using. I'd check it for relevant articles before adding bits from UT stuff as-is.But broadly HT and UT work fine together, you just need to keep an eye out for stuff that doesn't quite mesh.Also what >>96582401 said, high TL HEAT and armor penetration is utterly absurd and the high DR values mean nothing against what is available at the TL. Anything past TL9 is nothing but powercreep, honestly.
>>96582401>>96582545Oh, I can definitely see the durability issue now that you mention it, actually.Even in HT this seems to be the case though, the only example where it doesn't hold true is LT I think, and even then, that seems to be primarily a result of most combat taking place with muscle powered weapons.
Any useful cheat sheets on combat maneuvers for new players?
>>96582594Isn't there one in the trove?
>>96582592It makes sense in High-Tech, because we are legitimately in a period of offensive tech outpacing defensive tech. But Ultra-Tech extrapolates it to an insane degree, with Shaped Charge and HEMP rounds rocking both armor divisors of (10) and over a dozen dice of damage. Either on their own would be defensible, but 6dx3(10) turns anything less than DR600 into tissue paper; you can load that into an under-barrel grenade launcher too (and a less-lethal pistol, RAW), so it’s not some niche heavy armament that you won’t see outside of military contexts.
>>96582594https://www.themook.net/gamegeekery/handout-for-new-gurps-players/
>TQMost of the stuff shilled all the time usually are fixes that usually work best most of the time, if anything, is rules that are shilled a lot but most people don't use them, like revised feint.
>>96582594 $32
>>96583124Don't forget gyrojets with the HEAT performance of HT 40mm grenades, or how HT tank rounds pale in comparison of UT infantry.
What are some rules you just ignore?For me its the DX check to not fall down after a kick when you miss.Feels clunky and unsatisfying in play.
>>96584590It should probably have some rule exception or perk to let people kick without worry about falling down, same with getting parried by a weapon causing a hit to the limb. Why doesn't Trained By A Master let you ignore these, for example? That's what you take to be a cinematic unarmed "monk."
>>96583610There's a printable Combat Cards pdf too
>>96582003Not much if you keep it TL9ish
>>96584590It's a DX check and not a skill check? So if somebody's an average person but very skilled in kickboxing his chances of falling on his ass in the advent of a miss are higher than an entirely untrained person with a DX of 11?
>>96585920Yes. tbf it only happens if you miss, meaning a highly skilled kickboxer is less likely to get in a situation where he needs to roll in the first place.
Why doesn't GCS master lib have the VtM module? Is it some sort of licensing bullshit?
>>96585753>It should probably have some rule exception or perk to let people kick without worry about falling down, same with getting parried by a weapon causing a hit to the limb. Why doesn't Trained By A Master let you ignore these, for example? That's what you take to be a cinematic unarmed "monk."True. Now that I think about it, I think I'll append that to trained by a master instead of just completely ignoring it.
