Previous thread: >>96568654GURPS 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: Best mecha rule?
>>96669987I have a better thread question: What is the number of starting points for your current campaign?Mine is 62.
>>966700210 pointIf you want to be special you need flaws.
>>96670044What's the disadvantage limit then?
>>96670021My group is starting an After the End game so 150
>>96670462what apocalypse did you choose? Zombies?
>>96670499Nuclear, but with weird stuff. Think Fallout mixed with STALKER with some elements from various other sources.
>>96671226Sounds cool.
Powers offers "Trigger: Leeched HP" as a -30% limitation.But if you can have an active trigger like that, why not>Trigger: Dealt damage with a swordOr something like that?
>BS>BM
Anyone ever run GURPS one on one, one gm one player? What rules / books did you use? I want to do something with my best friend, thinking something high fantasy and let them play a powerful wizard
>>96673443Yeah, it was the only way my best friend at the time and I would get to play. We just used GURPS basic, Magic, and Fantasy. We had a lot of other books but never got into using them as much.
>>96671998>why notWhy not indeed? It's definitely doable, though I'd probably count something like that as a -10% limitation rather than -30%, as swinging a sword is considerably cheaper XP-wise than Leech is. >>96673443Yep, I ran a 1-on-1 game set in a fantasy Japan. And the player was, in fact, a sorceress/enchanter. It was an "evil" campaign, so great use was made out of the Ally and Mind Control advantages to ensure that she still had some backup in the event of combat, and to compensate for skillsets that she herself couldn't get. I could have in theory just given enough points to allow for a truly well-rounded solitary champion, but this way felt more fun and like the character was actually grounded in a certain set of skills and abilities, rather than being good at everything that they might reasonably encounter.>What rules/books did you use?Nothing specific to the 1 on 1 experience, except for the Flesh Wounds rule (since a sudden PC death would naturally be a TPK) and Wildcard Skills (so that the PC would be confident that anything related to their main gimmick they'd be competent at, and to give them a little larger a set of Skills than one would normally get at 200 XP since they don't have other PCs to handle them).
>>96670021I'm currently using 150 points, -50 points of disadvantages. I also give players an extra 25 points if they build a character that's very on-theme for the setting. In practice these 25 points are granted every time, but I've found players actually try to make something fitting if I tell them this.I used to use 150 points, -75 points disadvantage limit (and no 25 bonus points), but players tried to hit the disadvantage limit every time and made highly dysfunctional characters (and they'd keep forgetting they had half their disadvantages).I do use the By Default skill rules, and one of my players has requested I bump up the starting points because By Default makes skills more expensive. Debating whether I should.
>>96673932>though I'd probably count something like that as a -10% limitation rather than -30%, as swinging a sword is considerably cheaper XP-wise than Leech is.True. I wasn't really thinking about the price, only on the idea that you can have triggers based on actions or situations instead of just "do this drug".
>>96674625>lso give players an extra 25 points if they build a character that's very on-theme for the setting.That's a neat idea.
Should I read Gurps Light and start solo playing to train DMing or start with the basic set?
Do I need GURPS powers if I have GURPS supers for a super-hero campaign?
Does extra effort make combat less tactical?I feel like the existence of Heroic Charge makes reach way less important.
>>96675418Yes. My last campaign in GURPS I let people use extra effort to do heroic charges and it pretty much invalidated any tactic that wasn't "rush towards the enemy and hit them until they die".In my current campaign I removed extra effort and combat flows in a much more interesting manner, with people positioning themselves, evaluating, going into total defense, etc.
>>96675150Technically no but supers is a really bad book, you're better off with just using powers and ignoring supers outside of gm advice
I like how willing the GURPS community is to teach people.
>>96675441This - to add to this, feverish defense gets really annoying too. >Basic speed 6>+2 to dodge (feverish defense)>+3 for retreating>+2 from a shield>+1 from combat reflexes>+2 from acrobatic dodgeAnd you're looking at players with 16 dodge.Though on Extra Effort more broadly, it's bound to reduce tactical choice. A lot of it amounts to "spend 1FP to ignore the drawbacks for doing something". So there's never any downside to a particular maneuver.Unless you're tracking FP intensely (which from my experience most GMs don't), most players will be starting the fight with full FP.
>>96675478>supers is a really bad bookHuh, really? All right, I'll get powers then.
how would you stat out a neet trans girl whos addicted to marijuana and monster
>>96676102>neetChronic Depression, plus likely a smattering of Phobias, Loner, Low Self Image, or any number of antisocial traits. Spend at least some of those points on Games, Hobby skills, or Area Knowledge (which RAW can be used for digital "areas" too, for knowing too much about niche forum drama and the like).>trans girlDepending on where you live, anything from a 0-point feature to a large Social Stigma; if you have had bottom surgery, also take Sterile [-1].>addicted to marijuana and monsterWeed is [-5] for being cheap and generally illegal; Monster is cheap and legal, so on its own it's just a quirk for [-1], but constant overcaffination can lead to both mental and physical health issues eventually, so it could justify anything from Bad Temper or Insomnia to reduced HT and Chronic Pain.
>>96675035GURPS lite is less material so it's a better way to ease into it.
>>96670021600 points and somehow the players are still less competent than 150-point characters.I told them they should know enough by now that they can build their own characters within the guidelines I've set. Big mistake.
>>96670021250 for my Morrowind game. 420 for my Monster Hunters game (I think MH templates have too many disadvantages, so I reduced it by 20 points).
>>96675035I always disliked GURPS lite. That being said solo play is great for getting a hang of the rules. If you have any questions, feel free to ask them here anon.
>>96676409>they can build their own characters within the guidelines I've set.As a GM, do you really want that?
>>96675494>acrobatic dodge>with a shieldWhat kind of wuxia shit are we playing here
>>96670021300, it's DF
>>96670021150. I'm generous with my disad limit when things call for it but pretty much all my games have been 100 or 150.
>>96676892RAW you can do this.Makes sense with a buckler, for example. Maybe not a tower shield.
>>96677382tfw nobody ever uses the DB 4 pavise
Can GURPS run not!40k?
>>96676892>>96677382I personally allow Acrobatic Dodge (now called Acrobatic Defense) with any Active Defense that gets improved Retreat bonuses. That includes parries with Boxing, Karate, Judo, or Fencing Weapons, and blocks with a Fencing Shield (any shield that is DB 1 or 0). I find it's a good compromise between the normal rules and the cinematic rules in Martial Arts (which lets any defense use Acrobatic Dodge).
>>96677404Where's that from? I recall pavises in LT were treated as mobile cover with no DB.
>>96677760Shields Up p. 22
>>96675494If you're playing a character with skill-16 with a fencing weapon, you're looking at a parry score of 21.Just from a Skill-16 Parry, a +2 DB shield, and combat reflexes, you're looking at a dodge of 14, or 17 with a retreat.
>>96677602Yes.Detailed injury rules make it a good system for brutal settings with dismemberment, blinding, etc. rather than simply losing HP.Can make interesting characters at a wide range of 'power levels' from subhuman scum to demigods.Options for various cinematic feats and weird powers.Tech may need to be handled with care, since the default semi-realistic ultra-tech favours long-range combat, stealth, smart weapons, and especially missiles, while making armour relatively weak, beam weapons accurate but weak, melee weapons near useless, etc. which doesn't fit 40k.
>>96677602Easily, right out of the box.>The Star Knights are the emperor's finest soldiers, drawn from gengineered Atlas (p. BT70) stock, clad in Heavy Battlesuit (p. UT184) and wielding a Payload Rifle (p. UT137) modified for automatic fire (p. TS69) and loaded with homing APHEX (p. UT152) rounds.>The brave men and women of the Imperial Legion make do with TL10 Heavy Clamshell (p. UT176) and are armed with both faith and Laser Carbines (p. UT116).>Their enemies are many, from Androids and Evil Faerie (Horror) to Shattered Minds and Infected (Zombies) to Insectoids, Reptoids, and Demons (Monster Hunters 3 and 5); of course, there are also separatist factions of humanity to contend with.>Humanity and their foes both draw upon psychic powers (Psis), gift that bring power at a cost (p. H146 and/or AtE1:25)
>>96677404>carrying 50 fucking pounds of shield>still able to move and block normallyyeah 32 ST sounds about right
>>96678928Clarification:>ST 16: You can use a pavise as cover, hung on a guige.>ST 23: You can use a pavise as a shield, but you have −6 to Shield skill, it counts as unbalanced (you can't block immediately after attacking), and if you don't use a guige you lose 4 FP after each battle.>ST 32: You can use a pavise as a shield with no special penalties.
How do I make the dfrpg martial artist viable for unarmed? The point cost of trying to make unarmed better is ludicrous and for what? 1d+3 thrusting damage i could already get with an impaling modifier if i gave a 100 point goon a spear?
>>96679208Option 1: Replace the "seven secret kicks" power up with the Pyramid 3-65 natural weapons. So your monk gets to use swing damage on his punches or kicks (or both), without taking self-damage.Option 2: make chi talent cheaper. Why the fuck it's 15 points when magery is 10?Option 3: Allow Chi Talent to work as the talent for imbuements and give them access to imbuements.Option 4: Use KYOS and let them buy more levels of Striking ST than the just 2 that every character in DF is allowed to get.
i want to make a dnd style animal companion and do not know how. Ally seems like a bit too much because animal companions have no rate of appearance and are always there, but the always there options says it is "reserved for worn items and such". familiar isn't quite right either
>>96679208I like this guy's fixhttps://chaoticgm.wordpress.com/2019/03/24/martial-artist-buffs-for-dungeon-fantasy/
>>96679466>Ally seems like a bit too much because animal companions have no rate of appearance and are always there, but the always there options says it is "reserved for worn items and such".For Allies, there's an optional rule to replace "always loyal, but present only on a roll of X" to "always present, but loyal only on a roll of X". I forget which book it's in, though.
>>96679518>I forget which book it's in, though.Dungeon Fantasy 15 p. 28
>>96679466The "reserved for worn items and such" is because GURPS assumes a "real" world where even close allies and friends will have stuff come up that demands their attention and can't always be with you on adventures 24/7. If you're translating D&Disms to GURPS, though, then you sometimes need to ignore stuff like that because in *that* game, animal companions are just extensions of the PC and not independent actors with their own goals and motivations and lives.Also Dungeon Fantasy 5: Allies has a bunch of pre-statted animal companions suitable for adventuring druid/ranger types.
>>96679466>but the always there options says it is "reserved for worn items and such".Just ignore this part. There's no reason you can't have a pet dog with the "always there" modifier.
Ahem.Kill Realm Management. Behead Realm Management. Roundhouse kick Realm Management into the concrete. Slam dunk Realm Management into the trashcan. Crucify filthy Realm Management. Defecate in Realm Management's food. Launch Realm Management into the sun. Stir fry Realm Management in a wok. Toss Realm Management into active volcanoes. Urinate into Realm Management's gas tank. Judo throw Realm Management into a wood chipper. Twist Realm Management's head off. Report Realm Management to the IRS. Karate chop Realm Management in half. Curb stomp pregnant Realm Management. Trap Realm Management in quicksand. Crush Realm Management in the trash compactor. Liquefy Realm Management in a vat of acid. Eat Realm Management. Dissect Realm Management. Exterminate Realm Management in the gas chamber. Stomp Realm Management's skull with steel toed boots. Cremate Realm Management in the oven. Lobotomize Realm Management. Mandatory abortions for Realm Management. Grind Realm Management fetuses in the garbage disposal. Drown Realm Management in fried chicken grease. Vaporize Realm Management with a ray gun. Kick Realm Management down the stairs. Feed Realm Management to alligators. Slice Realm Management with a katana.
>>96681195
>>96679466Build it as a Familiar. You didn't read the section about "frequency of appearance", did you? You can choose if the roll is for "availability" or for "power access". Just use that second mode.
>>96677855If you're that good against single targets, you can face multiple enemiesEven just +1 enemy will seriously crimp your defenses
>>96669987I could use some help figuring out how to use Meta-Tech. I'm a Gun Fu/Tactical Shooting person, and have absolutely no clue about building powers.My idea is to make "cryo" bullets and grenades. The former would be a cold counterpart to incendiary bullets, aspirationally numbing or freezing limbs or whatever else they hit, while the later would function similarly to an M308-1 incendiary grenade, but with an unspecified cryogenic substance instead of napalm. That one would be far more likely to freeze things, albeit I'm not sure where on the spectrum of "cold and numb" to "ice statue" that should fall for the purposes of GURPS, and it would likely also have a cold condensation cloud, so a "cold smoke" effect that could function the same as hot smoke.As far as Meta-Tech goes, I've mostly worked that out. The underlying items are a 5.56 bullet (0.027 lb, $0.5, SM -8, $1200/pt) and an M8 grenade (1.8 lb, $45, SM -6, $800/pt). Grenades are straightforward, they have Delay (Fixed) (+0%), Increased Range (Throwing Range) (+5%) and Area Effect (3 yd) (+75%); they don't have Limited Use because p.13 specifically points out the cost being divided by 5 covers this.Bullets aren't clear to me, with p.9 saying that bullets that don't increase damage but add effects use the weapon modification rules (pp. 12-13), but the relevant section (Conventional Weapons) deals entirely with parameters intrinsic to the firearm rather than anything relevant to the bullet. Am I supposed to build the bullet as if it was a rifle? And would that include enhancements such as Rapid Fire or Fast Reload or would it be treated as strictly single shot? This would be my attempt at a plain 5.56 rifle>Piercing Attack 4d/5d (20/25 pts), Accurate +1/2 (+5/10%), Increased 1/2D x60-80 (+30%), Increased Max x25-35 (+25%), Rapid Fire 3-15 (+50-100%), may have Selective Fire (+10%), has Limited Use, Fast Reload (-10%) if automatic, Extra Bulk -2/3 (-10/15%), and Extra Recoil +1 (-10%)
>>96683017Sure. I guess with this >>96675494, 16 (98%) dodge becomes "14 vs one (91%), 13 (84%) vs the other".
>>96683679The other guy can come from the non-shield side or somethingShields are powerful because people rarely bother with anti-shield weapons or tactics
>>96677855>>96683679>>96683731>muh parry too highjust bring in flanking forcesThe PCs in my session yesterday are all 250 points, and have parry at 16-18 levels, plus one of the dwarfs has block at 18 and sacrificial block and parry.They're still challenged by trash baseline DF skeletons simply by using mobility and numbers.One dwarf only survived because he had luck and could reroll his death save, while the elf got real life luck with the 5 unconsciousness saves he had to do despite HT of 10.
>>96675494a normal guy can use feverish defense 6 times before he can't use any other extra effort (since losing so much ST and Move is crippling), or becoming extremely vulnerable to FP draining effects, and after the fight he needs to rest over an hour (don't forget the FP loss at the end of combat) to get back to full FP, at least 10 minutes to get back to fighting form.In essence feverish defense slows combat down (since the first 6 defense are at +2), and heroic charge speeds it up (since the characters don't need to spend an extra turn attacking.)I still find myself not heroic charging since the defensive penalty is too much for me if I don't know what else may come around the corner.
>>96683973Not that anon, but what does losing ST actually do?ST loss from fatigue loss doesn't affect ST-based quantities. So your BL, damage, etc. doesn't get affected.Does it just make you a worse wrestler and harder to weild heavy weapons?
>>96683933You're brave for running this many foes at once. I imagine it'd slow combat down to a crawl if I tried this (though admittedly I play in person without the benefit of calculator tools VTTs give).
>>96684101Yeah, in roll20 it's pretty easy.Like here's the enemy turn>Nehekara warriors>[[3d6]][[3d6]][[3d6]][[3d6]][[3d6]][[3d6]] hits on a 12, deceptive strike (-1)the "[[3d6]]" command will roll and put it in the line so the players will read>Nehekara warriors>11 13 14 8 9 5 hits on a 12, deceptive strike (-1)And since I'm also on voice chat I'll say "Rufus gotta make 4 defensive rolls at -1"This takes me like 30 seconds, at most to type and click to roll.The long part is the player choosing which defenses to use.
>>96684094>Does it just make you a worse wrestler and harder to weild heavy weapons?I think so, and possibly unable to draw your bow
>>96683933I figured long ago numbers are the way to challenge strong PCs. Active defenses go way down if you have to defend against two or three enemies a turn.
>>96684187There are some ways to have single monsters to get through defenses but they're way harder to design.I mean there's only so many times you can justify some dude able to use a -10 deceptive strike or has 6 attacks himself.
>>96684222Tentacle monsters/anything else that can grapple or immobilize are good for this
How do I split an arrow like Robin Hood?
>>96685509According to Deadly Spring, a historically-accurate hunting arrow has a diameter of ~0.36". This makes its effective SM if aiming to hit the arrow dead on -13. At 20 yards, you're also adding -6 for range for a net -19 to skill. To split an arrow, and archer needs incredible skill, a well-balanced bow and arrow, and a good deal of luck as well.
>>96678527>Payload Rifle (p. UT137) modified for automatic fire (p. TS69) and loaded with homing APHEX (p. UT152) roundsNay. Gyroc. I wish there were a heavy gyroc with minST in the twenties at least
>>96685509If cinematic skills are allowed, then take Zen Archery to cut that -19 penalty (>>96685563) down to -6.
I'm trying to get into GURPS. Currently running a game for some friends who are new to the system. One thing that has us confused is the sheer number of skills and the harsh penalties for defaults. If I understand correctly, an average skill will have a default penalty of -5, which for an average person with attributes of 10, will give them an effective skill of 5, for a 5% chance of success on a 3d6 roll, which seems quite harsh.I've gone through a couple sessions already, and the PCs are constantly fumbling every roll. Whenever they attempt to do something that the player think should be common sense, they are baffled to discover that is skill is required, or that one of their existing skills doesn't apply when they thought it did. So they roll at default, fail, and become endlessly frustrated.For instance, the PCs were trying to get through a flooded tunnel by using scuba gear and dive torpedoes. But none of them had the SCUBA skill, so their suits had leaks after putting them on, and they were constantly crashing into stuff. Another also tried to pick up a laser rifle and was incredulous as to why his Guns skill didn't apply to Beam Weapons.I feel like it shouldn't be this hard. I'm probably missing something. I think using Wildcard Skills might help, but they'll still fumble everything outside of their Wildcard. I could also let them just pump up attributes so even their defaults are good, but that seems excessive.
>>96685563True, but typically, when an archer splits an arrow, it's on the bullseye. As opposed to, say, an arrow just lodged in a wall. Meaning that splitting the arrow isn't actually about aiming for the SM-13 arrow, it's about hitter the bullseye perfectly while that spot is already occupied. I don't know what those penalties would be exactly, but they aren't as severe. Especially because the bowman may well have familiarity bonuses for target shooting.
>>96686074Gyrocs have smaller warheads and worse penetration, though, and that penetration gets even worse at closer ranges. Payload Rifles seem to be the way to do it.My original spiel handled bolters as 18.5mm CAWs since 18.5mm is really close to the canon bolter caliber of 1” but alas shotgun rounds are underpowered for their size and thus their penetration was terrible, even after adding in ETC or upgrading to Gauss CAWs. To make a truly accurate bolter you’d need to bust out the gun creation rules from 3e Vehicles or use G3 and convert, but that defeats the purpose of “easy out of the box legally distinct 40k setting.”
>>96686403I'm sorry, but what's the logic here? You're aiming at an incredibly small target, you should use the size of the small target. To argue that it should be easier because it's "on the bullseye" doesn't make sense; would it be harder to spit an arrow if it weren't on the bullseye? Why? Is a 1cm bullseye painted on the side of a barn easier to hit than a 1cm bullseye on a 20" target?
>>96686494You're not aiming for the arrow, you're aiming for the bullseye. The arrow is just in the way.
>>96686304The default penalty is sometimes -5 but you forgot about the difficulty modifiers which can add +5.
>>96686572>I'm not trying to shoot a SM+0 person, I'm trying to shoot the SM+8 wall they're standing in front of, they're just in the way!I hope you realize how insane that argument is.
>>96686647In an archery contest, someone hits the bullseye. You're saying that everyone who shoots after him has to now aim for his arrow instead of the bullseye?
>>96686693If they want to hit the arrow and split it, yes. Otherwise, they roll to hit the target, taking the target's *entire* SM (and the range to it) into account and comparing margins of success.
>>96686468Just make a bigger gyroc?
>>966863041. Why are your PCs skills so shit2. trivial tasks get bonuses
>>96686304Bro, someone who never did SCUBA in his entire life is 100% going to drown if there's no one to teach him how to do it.The laser rifle should totally default to gun skill -2 or -4 tho
>>96686592Ah, I knew I was forgetting something. Looking at the Task Difficulty modifiers now, it seems like no modifier was technically the right call, as the PCs were often in a rush or under pressure, and rarely took their time. But I'll keep these modifiers in mind for the future.>>96686950I gave them about 250 points each, a list of skills that will be important, as well as recommended skill levels. But they kind of just ignored them. One PC took six levels of Extra Attack, but no Multi-Strike, so he didn't actually have enough limbs to use his attacks. We also got into argument over whether Extra Attack could be used to Aim or ready weapons and so on. Another took a whole load of random exotic advantages like healing, regeneration, flight, morph, corrosive attack, and so on, because he wanted to play a mutant. The last one just dumped everything into ST because he couldn't decide what to do with his points. I tried recommending templates, but he couldn't make a decision which one he wanted.>>96686987That makes sense. I guess I should've given them an instructor or someone to help them so they could get a bonus.
>>96687093>starting noobs at 250 points without templates in a high-tech campaign, rather than at 62 points with templates in a low-tech campaign
>>96687093>I allowed new players to take whatever they wanted for their 250 point charactersYou brought this on yourself. Next time run something lower power using templates.
My first GURPS was DFRPG, 250pts, albeit with templates
>>96687238Not that anon, but what would you recommend if I play with a group of players where 3 of the 5 players can handle a GURPS character just fine, but the other 2-3 have no idea what's going on?This (>>96674625) is my current point setup. I've found going lower than this and the experienced players are less satisfied. I'm not entirely sure the less experienced players would benefit from a lower point total either (they've been playing for 2 years now and just about have a handle on 3d6 roll low).
>>96687256My first GURPS was 100 points, TL 3, I was a ugly discount wolverine.
>>96687238>>96687272Templates are good.
>>96687093You got a valuable GURPS lesson there - you need to herd your players like cattle because otherwise your party will be completely bonkers
A slur bow takes 2 actions to reload each bolt.1 action to grab bolt1 action to put in slurbow.You do this per bolt.But can you draw two bolts at once? I feel like this should be possible with quickdraw.
>>96688471Look, here's two pieces of ammunition for your slurbow in a single post:niggerkiketranny (a bonus)
>>96689537Yeah I don't know what else a "slur bow" could mean but that.
>>96687272Speaking as a fairly experienced player, often making lower point characters is more fun. Some of my favorites have been 50 point chars with 50 points of disads.As for your actual question, you want to walk the people who don't get it through character creation. Hold their hand if you have the time, do this shit before a proper session. The experienced people you trust to build character properly don't need the same assistance. I've taught a lot of new players gurps and having somebody to point out disadvantages that represent what their doing or explain that most characters would have housekeeping helps a lot.For the record, I got no help my first time playing gurps and made a character with 15 int, physician (tl3) at 16 and 20 points invested in crossbow, for a low magic tl3 fantasy game.
>>96688471I would allow it
>>96688471It should definitely be possible. I wouldn't see a reason as to why you'd want to, you can't load two at once, but I think I'd allow a quickdraw at -2 or -3 to grab two at once in a position such that you could load one.>>96689573A german late 15 hundreds crossbow with a "barrel" which guides the bolt. There's few writings on them.
Is there a pre-build disadvantage for being ferromagnetic?
>>96687272>Not that anon, but what would you recommend if I play with a group of players where 3 of the 5 players can handle a GURPS character just fine, but the other 2-3 have no idea what's going on?Nta, but 150/50, probably. Help the new guys with their charsheets, really hold their hand on it the entire time.
>>96686468Why not HEMP?Your 18.5mm CAW would deal 6dx2(5) imp inc damage, which is better than Payload with APHEX, 10d(2) pi++.
>>96690403>>96690123>I wouldn't see a reason as to why you'd want toMostly to avoid rolling quick-draw twice when you want to do a double shot.
Is trained by a master overpriced?It's strictly worse for a weapon user than Weapon Master, and unarmed dudes are generally sub-optimal in the first place.
>>96690896Trained by a Master [30] applies to every weapon, including unarmed, so it should be compared to Weapon Master (All) [45]>+ costs 15 points les>+ includes unarmed (hand to hand is the basis of all combat)>+ access to some cinematic skills that WM doesn't (don't remember which, IIRC Light Walk was one of them)>- doesn't increase damage output>- no improved defaults
>>96690739You can't double shoot a slurbow, are you imagining something different than pic related?There's Double Shot in Dungeon Fantasy 11: Power-ups for normal bows.
>>96691119>You can't double shoot a slurbow, are you imagining something different than pic related?According to Low Tech you can fivetuple shot it.Seriously, check it out, it has two mods, one has RoF 2 and does thrust +3 and other has RoF 5 and does thrust +2.And both have reload of 2 like a bow, but per shot.
>>96688471Nay. You'd need 4 seconds to reload the slurbow (excluding time required to cock it): 1s to pick the first dart, 1s to set it, 1s to pick the second dart, 1s to set it.Fast-Draw reduces it to two seconds: 1s to pick the first dart and set it, 1s to pick the second dart and set it.
>>96691152Then I'm not really sure what they were picturing, but that was not a thing in europe, and I'm not sure how it'd work. Slurbows can also be used as Kugelschnepper, meaning they fire lead or steel balls instead of bolts, and you could probably load several of those, but I can't imagine that loading several bolts would be effective. China had repeating crossbows tho.
>>96691159>>96691182The "GURPS Low Tech Slurbow" is a weird and confusing gurps invention I think.
>>96691213Let's blame Chris Rice and throw slurs at him.
>>96690896>>96690960It's parry penalty reduction also applies to all weapons and, near as I can tell, it stacks with WM's.
I want to make an ability that absorbs radiation damage and converts it into FP. I was thinking of using Damage Resistance with the Absorption enhancement, but Damage Resistance doesn't actually stop radiation damage. Would allowing a special version of Absorption on Radiation Tolerance be valid? For instance, with Radiation Tolerance (PF 2; Absorption, heals FP, +80%) [9], every one in two points of rads instead becomes a character point that can be spent towards regaining FP. I think that might be fair.I'm also wondering how I would price a version of Absorption on Damage Resistance that converts damage to character points, but doesn't actually stop damage at all. I was thinking of pricing it by taking the modifier value of Absorption and subtracting -100%. For instance, with Damage Resistance 1 (Absorption Only, heals FP, -20%) [10], an attack that inflicts 2 basic damage would still inflict 2 penetrating damage, but you also get 1 character point to spend on healing FP.
>>96691364>Damage Resistance 1 (Absorption Only, heals FP, -20%) [10]meant to be>Damage Resistance 1 (Absorption Only, heals FP, -20%) [4]
>>96691376>>96691364The rabbit hole of DR with absorption is complex and complicated and confusing.And usually overpriced.
>>96691342It doesn't.https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=893754&postcount=7The penalty reduction that stacks with these advantages are those innate to fencing weapons and two-handed weapons (optional rule from LT).
So lets see>two-handed weapon + weapon master>-4 becomes -2, becomes -1>fencing weapon + weapon master>-4 becomes -2, becomes -1>unarmed with trained by a master>-4 becomes -2 lol that's it, you loser, what were you thinking bringing a fist to a sword fight? Fuck unarmed, even in cinematic gamesis this correct?
>>96691634IIRC if you're using something like Karate then you can parry once with each arm so it's more like a 0,0,-2,-2 progression which is arguably better than 0,-1,-2,-3.
>>96691646You can dual wield fencing weapons too, and a main-gaucho doesn't get off-hand penalties to parrying.So armed can get>-1,-1,-2,-2
>>96691675>main-gaucho
>>96691634Huh, I guess I misremembered Karate having all the benefits of fencing parries and they are only supposed to get the larger Retreat bonus, not the reduced repeated parry penalty.Oh well, I like my version better and will continue to use it.
>>96691675Now you need to level two skills, one for your main weapon and another for the main-gauche. It's probably cheaper, as long as you're allowed, to get the Off-Hand Training perk, but then you might have to deal with increased costs and carry weight.Anyway, unarmed tends to not be as powerful as armed skills and it makes sense, weapons were created because fistfighting sucks.You can try making fantastic unarmed fighters with Striker, TbaM (Unarmed, -60%) and Striking ST (Pact: Never wield weapons) and similar traits but it still tentds to be underwhelming under normal GURPS rules.
>>96691733>Anyway, unarmed tends to not be as powerful as armed skills and it makes sense, weapons were created because fistfighting sucks.It makes sense in realistic games.It doesn't make sense that even the cinematic versions of abilities are worse for unarmed.
>>96691793If you want a game where cinematic unarmed is as powerful as cinematic weapons, use KYOS to equalizes basic damage and Fist!
>>96691854huh. FIST! is actually the only wildcard skill I've seen that seems worth it. Assuming you allow all of the bonuses.Unarmed fighters usually want both judo and karate anyway, so going all in for a wildcard isn't that far off.
>>96691875Pyramid 107 has an article buffing wildcard skills.Blade! for one basically includes Weapon Master (Bladed weapons) in it.
By the way, even in realistic games hand-to-hand skill can be invaluable.As an example, your party is invited to the Count's castle but you have to leave your greatsword at the gate, like a normal person, but inside one of the courtiers turn out to be possessed or corrupted and rushes at you with a poisoned dagger. You might dodge it but without some unarmed combat skill, you might struggle to knock him out. Or if you end up in a bar fight your Polearm-24 won't help you if your unarmed skills are at default, you will just embarass yourself.
>>96691909>Pyramid 107I'll take a look, thanks.I really should just read the pyramids but every time I think about it I look at the number of issues and give up
>>96692295The trove has an In These Issues document that compiles the official summaries of all the Pyramid vol. 3 articles.
>>96692352That's pretty useful, I'll take a look, thanks
>>96691967The way I see it, unarmed combat is working as intended within the boundaries of the basic set's rules. It's a "back-up" skill that helps your character in scenarios like you described. Plus anything grappling related adds a whole bunch of extra utility.The main issue arises when things get more cinematic and trying to create an unarmed combat master of a character with the default rules. It just can't match other weapons without a decent amount of modified rules and new support.
>>96692409Personally I think this is a flaw of GURPS.For a generic and universal system, it can't even replicate proper martial arts stuff where the choice of weapon is mostly just aesthetic.
When I want unarmed to compete with weapons, I just allow my players to buy their limbs as Strikers or Natural Weapons, let them use Boxing and Karate skills with them, and even add Temporary Enhancements via Imbuement Skills or Power Stunts to their unarmed strikes. Never had a problem with unarmed competing with weapons this way.
>>96692472I did something similar but instead of allowing them to buy any natural weapons, I replaced "unarmed master" with this: Which is just buying natural weapons for all 4 limbs.>Unarmed Master [15]: Your unarmed attacks are considered weapons for striking and parrying. The restrictions in Hurting Yourself (Exploits, p. 40) don’t apply to you – enemies don’t get free attacks on you when they parry your limbs and can’t shift attacks to your limbs when you fail a parry, and you won’t injure yourself against high DR. Attacks targeting your limbs can still injure them normally. In addition, all your unarmed attacks deal Crushing or Piercing Damage, and they deal damage equal to your Swing damage not your Thrust.
I there some guideline for a super human?Like, if I have a human character with enough power to punch through a concrete wall, he should also have a certain amount of DR and be able to run faster. I want a guideline on how much and what else should I improve.Like how higher SM have a corresponding basic ST value.
>>96692516Nothing as specific as that.We know the max human limits (around 14-16 attributes, no DR at all, no striking ST...) but we don't really have a "how fast you should be able to move if you're that stronk" guideline
>>96691967You're right, but that requires a GM that makes sure to include a variety of scenarios in the game to make sure those skills can shine.
>>96688471There's a Double-Loading technique in Tactical Shooting. Meant for firearms, but can't see why it wouldn't work for a slurbow.>>96690481Affected by Magnetism, Power-Ups 6.>>96690896In short, yes, but arguably Weapon Master is under-priced too.>>96691634Yes, that is correct. Unarmed characters who can defeat weapon-users need to spend more points than said weapon users. This authentically reflects what unarmed characters who defeat weapon users are meant to be in fiction, i.e. simply better. That's the entire point of it being impressive to fight unarmed against weapons. It's really hard.
>>96693585>This authentically reflects what unarmed characters who defeat weapon users are meant to be in fiction>meant to bethere's plenty of fiction where the choice between armed and unarmed is cosmetic, and just about a character's "style".
>>96692516An average human has ST 10, DR 0.5, and Move 5. ST is correlated with the square root of Basic Lift, HP is correlated with the cube root of body mass, Dmg is correlated with the square root of kinetic energy, and DR is directly correlated with thickness. Move's precise relationship with physiology is tricky to pinpoint. It's often correlated with the stride length and the number of legs of an animal. But velocity is also correlated with the square root of kinetic energy, which we can get from ST/Dmg.Someone who is as strong, fast, and durable as giant 10 times the size (SM +6) of a normal human, but who has the same body mass as a normal human, should have ST 100, DR 5, and Move 50.As for how much ST you need to punch through a concrete wall, that depends entirely on the thickness of the wall, whether the wall is reinforced, and what skills/advantages the superhuman has. Punching through a foot-thick reinforced concrete wall without any skills, advantages, or extra effort could take as much as ST 400. But someone with high levels of Breaking Blow, Power Blow, Karate, and Crushing Strikers could punch through an unreinforced wall with as little as ST 10.
>>96692516>>96693857The closest relationship between ST and Move I can find is related to jumping, where ST/4 can replace Move in the formula.So a character with ST 10 and Move 5 can do a standing broad jump for 7 feet with Move or 2 feet with ST.A character with ST 400 can jump for 197 feet using ST. Keeping the proportions, it means he should be able to jump 689.5 feet with Move, which gives a Move 346.25. That's a lot of Move so I'd reduce it to 20, eyeballed at four times the basic move of an unmodified character, and Enhanced Move 4.Is it realistic? Hell if a I know. I'm not acquainted with any super and have no idea how biomechanics works. But at least it's a number.
Quick Question: does an internal explosion still get 3x wounding against a target with Injury Tolerance (No Vitals)?
>>96696898I believe so, yes
Another Question: when a fragmentation attack goes off inside of someone, how many times does it hit them?
>>96697081Yes
>>96696898RAW, it seems no. Technically, an internal explosion is simply "treated as an attack on the vitals"; no Vitals hit location, no extra damage.However, a simple reality check suggests that it should be allowed anyway; with no way for the pressure of the explosion to safely escape a completely homgenous container, its disruptive force will be magnified. Thus, I say screw RAW, go for x3 anyway.
>>96692426It can't?
>>96696898It passes the sniff test>>96697081iirc it just does the max damage
>>96698298Nope. For the same amount of points, unarmed is always going to be worse RAW.
>>96698625I dont think I understand the issue with that. Is it not realistic that a man with a machete will win a fight against a man who only had his fists?
>>96698665Is is but sometimes people prefer something more akin to JRPG where the guy punching is just as good fighter as the guy slashing.
>>96698665Yes, it's more realistic. But when using CINEMATIC rules, a Generic Universal Roleplaying System should be able to accommodate for settings where both are equally effective.
>>96698665again, the issue lies with cinematic games and no rules out of the box to support unarmed so that it can be just as viable as other weapons in these more fantastical scenarios
>>96698298It can. You just need to use exotic advantages like >>96692472 and >>96692490.Technically, armed combat also benefits from Imbuement Skills. But Imbuement Skills are generally more expensive than just buying a Striker or Natural Weapon with all the enhancements you want, or using Temporary Enhancements via Power Stunts. So it somewhat balances out.
>>96697124>>96697426>>96698613Alright, so it actually has nothing to do with attacking the vitals hit location, and just so happens to use a similar wounding modifier. Gotcha.>>96697124>>96698613Okay, but how many times? Five times? Fragmentation damage has effective skill of 15 (Rcl 3), modified for Range, Posture, and Size. Against a standing human-sized foe at zero yards, that would be a maximum of five hits.
If "Follow-up: Universal" is +50% and is weapons and unarmed, a Follow-up: Weapons Only would be worth how much?I think it's a bit like a gadget limitation: can be stolen, but cheaper as it's not a unique item.-15% seems fair to me for a +35% result.
Speaking of Fragmentation damage, I find it kind of odd how adding more dice merely increases the damage of the frags, implying that the frags are increasing in size, but not number. This is either an abstraction, or I just don't know how frag damage works in real life. If the former, then how should I represent a higher quantity of shrapnel?
>>96699076"All Weapons" is +40% going by Meta-Tech.>>96699093As I understand it, it represents you potentially catching more fragments due to a higher amount of them. Essentially instead of increasing the odds of being hit, you get hit by more when you do get hit. It's similar to how grouping together very low damage pellets to deal noticeable damage works.
>>96699101>"All Weapons" is +40% going by Meta-Tech.Fair enough. I should have looked at meta-tech first, thanks.
>>96699101wait, samefaggint here but>all melee attacks (armed or unarmed) or all weapon attacks (ranged or melee) +40%>All unarmed, or one category of weapons (+30%what about "all melee weapon attacks"? No ranged attacks and no unarmed attacks?
>>96699133I guess +35% would be a reasonable way to do it if you don't want to round up to +40%.That reminds me, is there any extended table for Extended Duration? It jumps from 3x to 10x, with base times often being 10 seconds, so by RAW there's no way to do 1 minute effects without the cost of almost 2 minutes of effect.
>>96699176I do feel like there's a few holes in various limitations and enhancements.
>>96678527Sample
>>96699067A direct hit from a fragmentation attack means you get hit by 3 fragments on average. Internal explosions are 3x damage. So internal fragmentation is automatic 9x damage of a single fragment.
>>96699656No, 50x damage. Fragmentation is a multiple-projectile attack with base skill 9, +6 from Rapid Fire bonus for 99 shots. Since it's point blank, half of those shots automatically hit.
>>96699675297x damage, take it or leave it. It's an attack against a close stationary target, so every one of those 99 shots hit. And every shot is a vital shot for 3x damage.
>>96698767It does accommodate settings where both are equally effective. What it doesn't do is allow you to build unarmed characters who are able to compete in combat against armed ones using similar builds (i.e. similar points put into attributes, skills, and advantages). This means it doesn't quite emulate the conventions of other games (especially video games) where their balancing mechanics are 'fair' to both armed and unarmed combatants.In theory, I guess there could be (non-game) fiction where weapons are explicitly just an aesthetic choice too, but I'm struggling to think of even a single example. I believe it is far more common for unarmed fighters who defeat armed opponents to be used to show that the unarmed ones are much more skilled or powerful than the armed ones.Since unarmed combat has some inherent advantages (less-lethal, can't be disarmed) it still has a role even if it isn't the most effective way of winning fights. I think that justifies it being at least a little less effective at dealing damage than using weapons, although GURPS arguably takes it too far, especially when it comes to cinematic abilities. It also probably goes too far in making unarmed strikers less effective than grapplers, especially (again) in cinematic games (there isn't even the excuse that strikers who defeat grapplers are meant to be demonstrating superior skill in most fiction).
>>96701387>(i.e. similar points put into attributes, skills, and advantages).So it doesn't accommodate those settings. The cinematic rules being weirdly realistic and making unarmed worse makes no sense for a generic universal system.>I believe it is far more common for unarmed fighters who defeat armed opponents to be used to show that the unarmed ones are much more skilled or powerful than the armed ones.There are hundreds of xianxia and wuxia stories where the choice of weapon is cosmetic and that's just one genre.
>>96699093It's definitely an abstraction. Fragmentation damage of shells is determined entirely by the diameter of the projectile, regardless of the size, shape, mass, etc. of the fragments.>>96699176My brain is tired after a hard day of retard-wrestling, but I think that if each multiplication by ten is +40%, then each +1% multiplies by 10^(1/40), giving approximately 1.06, 1.12, 1.19, 1.26, 1.33, 1.41, 1.5, 1.58, 1.68, 1.78, 1.88, 2... which gives a multiplier of 6.31 at +32%.
>>96701444>So it doesn't accommodate those settings.No, it does. Not being able to build an action hero and his helpless love interest on the same points budget doesn't mean it can't run the action genre. Superman being able to beat up the Riddler easily doesn't mean it can't handle supers. It just means that those characters aren't balanced against each other, because fiction doesn't have points budgets.>The cinematic rules being weirdly realistic and making unarmed worse makes no sense for a generic universal system.They aren't realistic. They are just badly balanced from the perspective of gamers who want to make optimal combat builds. That is arguably something that a 'universal' system should handle, but not being balanced doesn't stop it being cinematic. Cinema isn't balanced.>There are hundreds of xianxia and wuxia stories where the choice of weapon is cosmetic and that's just one genre.I have literally never seen any where being able to defeat armed opponents without weapons yourself is no big deal. In the ones I'm familiar with, using bare hands or silly improvised weapons is basically always something that super skilled characters do to demonstrate that they are super skilled. I know some Chinese fiction has fairly defined tiers of competence which actually exist in the setting, so I guess something like that you would expect the points budget and the capabilities to match, but that seems like a very obscure genre compared to mainstream Western cinema, novels, etc. where the convention is absolutely that weapons are dangerous and being able to face them while unarmed is a sign that you are more skilled (or otherwise formidable) than your opponent. Although GURPS is 'universal' it is also 'generic' and has to assign prices to attributes, skills, traits, etc. which may not work in every single possible case.That said, Weapon Master's damage bonus is completely overpowered for no good reason.
>>96701710>that those characters aren't balancedSo unarmed isn't balanced against armed, meaning the system doesn't accommodate those settings.Please remember that this is a game, not just a vehicle to stat fictional characters.> something that super skilled characters do to demonstrate that they are super skilledRead more wuxia and xianxia.Whether the average protagonist chooses between sword and fist doesn't affect his actual ability to fight at all.
>>96701510>I think that if each multiplication by ten is +40%, then each +1% multiplies by 10^(1/40), giving approximately 1.06, 1.12, 1.19, 1.26, 1.33, 1.41, 1.5, 1.58, 1.68, 1.78, 1.88, 2... which gives a multiplier of 6.31 at +32%.Assuming this is right, a table would be something like (first whole percentage giving at least the desired multiplier):x1.5 +8%x2 +13%x3 +20%x4 +25%x5 +28%x6 +32%x7 +34%x8 +37%x9 +39%x10 +40%
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that the only way to reach armed-unarmed parity like Anon is talking about is to remove equipment entirely; it's all down to Natural Weapons, bought in whatever style and with whatever modifiers the user feels is appropriate. Actual armaments would have Gadget limitations (or Accessibility if they can just use whatever weapon rather than their specific sword or whatever), and maybe more exotic unarmed variants (e.g. Swing-Based Cutting Long Reach) are locked behind minimum levels of Chi Talent or Unusual Background.Simply allowing Natural Weapons while also still including mundane gear would let unarmed fighters reach the same level of combat as armed, but they will always be at a points deficit; the 20 points or whatever spent on Natural Weapons are points the swordsman gets to spend on other things, since they get to rely on external equipment. That's fine in most games, but if Anon wants a completely even playing field where armed vs unarmed is almost entirely cosmetic, I think it would take a radical change like removing equipment.
>>96701755>So unarmed isn't balanced against armed, meaning the system doesn't accommodate those settings.>Please remember that this is a game, not just a vehicle to stat fictional characters.There is no universal points scheme which is balanced for both:'The only thing characters do is engage in lethal combat while having all their equipment, and some of them don't use weapons but do just as well anyway' settingsand'Characters use violence in a wide variety of ways, often covertly, without the intention of killing their opponents, in accordance with social conventions, when caught unprepared and unarmed, and so on' settingsGURPS isn't even intended to be a perfectly balanced system for any setting. You can't have a perfectly balanced universal system where there are also concrete differences between different approaches (e.g. where fists and knives have important differences which makes sense given how they work in the real world). There will always be good and bad builds. If you want to change which builds are good and bad, change the rules.I get that you would prefer it if you could just choose one option like 'cinematic' and just have it emulate the extremely specific genre you want, but there are a lot of possible genres and the writers chose to make it simple to emulate the ones they and their main audience were most familiar with. Those are relatively 'realistic' English language cinema, books, and comics, where tools generally make some difference. I would personally prefer it if they had made cinematic abilities narrow the gap between armed and unarmed characters rather than widening it. That seems more in line with how things seem to work in cinematic-spectacle films.
>>96701929That's pretty much just called using the HERO system, which is in some ways more generic and universal than GURPS.Or GURPS Ultra-Lite, where gear really doesn't matter.
>>96698836>rules out of the boxI haven't actually read the martial arts books but do they not have something for that, or do you not count those as out of the box?
>>96702035>There is no universal points scheme which is balanced for both:Ok, so you agree with me that GURPS doesn't accommodate those settings.
>>96701755>Read more wuxia and xianxiaNo, that sounds gay, much like you.
>>96702082NTA, you're looking at it wrong. Building a GURPS game is like carving: you remove material from the block until you have the shape you want. GURPS has a lot of pre-built "cut lines" where it's easy to differentiate: Tech Levels, Magic, Supernatural/Extraordinary advantages, Cinematic/Default/Tactical gunfighting, etc. What you're after is not on one of those easy cut lines, and therefore requires a higher level of GM determination in exactly how to go about getting to it.
>>96702149>NTA, you're looking at it wrongNo I'm not. There's a reason you have all characters start with the same amount of points and with a disadvantage limit.It's a roleplaying GAME.
>>96701929Alternatively, you can go in the other direction: allow unarmed fighters a way to funnel cash into improving their unarmed capabilities. In a high-TL game, this would make sense with cybernetics. In a fantasy game, you could tweak enchantments to work with magical tattoos or similar. In any other game, you might allow unarmed fighters to just straight up buy improvements to unarmed skills and advantages with cash through special training programs. Meta-Tech might be useful here. You can treat such improvements as "Cybernetics" of the "Bio-Organic Technology" origin, or whatever other origin makes sense.
>>96702194Yeah, and martial artists spend extra points for the surety that they are always going to have their hands available to them, the advanced grappling options, plus all the funny Ki shit if you want to go there. You might as well complain that a social build isn't as good at fighting as a martial artist; they do different fucking things.But that IS what you're complaining about, that you want to turn oranges into apples in favor of your specific vision. That's fine, you can do that. Like >>96701929 said, remove equipment. Use a single generic Melee Combat! skill that you can fluff as you please. That's how the system is supposed to work, you are SUPPOSED to change it to suit what you want.
>>96702379>never lose your weaponThat's a 1 point perk>grapplingweapon grappling technique, that's 2 points>funny kiyou mean all the underpowered point croc skills that either take a billion points to be effective or require 10 seconds of preparation? Each is a 1 point unusual training btw, and you don't need more than 4 or 5 at best.>they do different fucking things.No they don't. These are both fighting skills. Trying to claim unarmed combat is as separate from armed combat as fucking social skills is absolutely ridiculous.>you are SUPPOSED to change it to suit what you want.This conversation started with me declaring it a flaw of the supposed generic universal system. Yes, you can fix the flaw, and there are various ways to do that, it doesn't change that it's a flaw.
>>96702487>This conversation started with me declaring it a flaw of the supposed generic universal systemAnd that's where you're fucking wrong, kiddo. The modularity is a key component of the system, but for some fucking reason, it's a horrible terrible tragedy that you have to apply it in this particular instance.
>>96702487Being retarded on purpose is only good if it's funny, anon. Try making us laugh next time, okay?
>>96702249>Manual of the Edged Hand>Your unarmed attacks are now sw-1 cut or thr imp, reach is now C,1, and you can parry or be parried unarmed without issue>It costs $120 and you need to keep the 1.5lb scroll on you to regularly re-read.There are some edge-cases to consider here, but honestly yeah just re-fluffing a Long Knife as an "unarmed technique" isn't the worst idea.
>>96702536Modularity doesn't mean you have to make shit up, it means there are already premade components you can use to fit your needs. If you need to make up a new component to cover up a flaw, that's not modularity, that's just patching up a hole.
>>96702987Cool. You've already been presented with like 3 different options that don't involve adding anything. Now post your 1E core book that you refuse to use anything outside of.
>>96703018You're being needlessly confrontational. All I'm saying is that this is a flaw that a GM has to fix himself. Dunno why you think this is some controversial thing.
>>96703042Because you think that "normal shit that happens every time you do something niche in GURPS" is a flaw.
>>96703058I didn't choose to name the system "generic universal".Also, considering how many different online posts are there about how to buff unarmed or how to buff martial artists, this isn't a "niche" thing.
>>96702077I would probably not count that as out of the box.
>>96701755>muh balance
>>96703603>muh muh
>>96703900>muh muh muh
>>96704561>muh muh muh MULTIKILL!
The penalties for Move and Attack don't seem right. I play video games where I move and attack at the same time and it's not that difficult to do.
>>96705025so true br0ther
>>96702082Of course it does. Just remove the rules pertaining to weapons, allow disadvantages for innate attacks etc. And let the players flavour it however they want. Getting something to be purely an asthetic choice is really easy, you don't need rules for it.
>>96705275Actually yeah you could probably do it with innate attacks.
>>96705025True. In my times of hardcore pvp wow I learned that one second is a long fucking time, GURPS characters are honestly too slow if anything.
I think most posters here prefer GURPS over anything, so what the second best system behind GURPS?
>>96706106ACKS II
>>96706106D&D4eor Genesys if you want something non-medieval.
>>96706106I wouldn't call GURPS my automatic favourite since I generally prefer bespoke systems for whatever I'm running. GURPS does modern action better than the other options I've looked into though. For fantasy I'd probably use a different system, but I haven't run that sort of game thus far. I quite enjoy Cyberpunk, Red in particular since I like the things it changed from 2020 and I houseruled its shortcomings the way I like it. The way GURPS handles stuff like cyberware didn't feel very inspiring to me last time I checked.
>>96706106Fantasy Craft"Like DnD but streamlined" tends to sell better than GURPS so it's a nice backup.
>>96706106Traveller and it's derivated systems
>>96705025Your evidence is stupid, but your conclusion is still somehow correct. Melee attacks while running aren't so difficult that even a skilled fighter can't do them reliably. I don't know about shooting, but it seems more plausible that it would make a major difference, because basically no competitive shooters seem to shoot while moving faster than a walk, nor is doing so part of any combat training I'm aware of. Even in the military, the standard method seems to be shooting while completely stationary. In fact, GURPS might be too generous, as it allows up to a step every second while aiming and multiple yards of movement while making an all-out-attack.>>96706106WFRP 2nd ed and CoC are basically ideal systems for their settings, so I wouldn't use GURPS for warhammer fantasy or pulp-era mythos. There are presumably other systems which fit their setting or genre extremely well, but I haven't encountered them.Different players, groups, and games can suit different styles of system and the low-abstraction, rules-heavy approach of GURPS can often cause issues. I haven't yet found a satisfying moderately abstract, rules medium system which works all the time, but the 'Year Zero' system games have proved good enough recently. I don't think I could run a combat-heavy Aliens setting military SF game for seven players who are all disinclined to learn rules in GURPS.I generally find that with other systems I house-rule them a lot to get them working how I want.
>>96705025Your video game characters are larger than life heroes with Gunslinger and other traits that reduces the penalties from moving and attacking.
>>96706399>running full tilt with a handgun>just a -2, barely even noticeable>doing a charge attack that every single warrior in a war does>More than half chance to whiff completely so the enemy doesn't even have to defendYeah, that's wack
>>96706565-2 is halving your effective range, so it isn't 'no big deal', but yeah, running at 10 miles/hour should probably do more than that.Feels like the rules are more for making combat flow OK and balance than realism. If you allow large moves in melee without harsh penalties, then reach become irrelevant. On the other hand, forcing shooters to stay static really hampers them in a close-quarters fight which is what most tactical combat in GURPS games is likely to be. On the other other hand, mobile melee and static shooters would make melee more viable which is a major problem at TL 6+.
Is there a Fan Magic Expansion for GURPS Lite like how there is a Fan Combat Expansion?
>>96707587That would help alleviate an issue I have when designing a fantasy vs sci-fi setting.The machine gun overwhelms everything.
>>96707713Most GURPS magic systems are modular enough that you can just add them straight on to Lite. The problem is finding a suitably short one which can still give a good range of effects. The Discworld RPG magic system is probably the best for this, since it is already designed to work with a version of Lite, but even it is 26 pages long! A lot of that is fluff and discworld-specific detail, and the system could probably be made a lot shorter, but I doubt it could be reduced to two pages as I managed with the combat expansion.
Question: which GURPS book covers fantasy creatures like orcs and goblins and others without having to reinvent a bestiary or go to another RPG for sources? Would save time.Also I can run combat simulations with chatGPT if you need to know how strong characters or NPCs can get and how useful they are against each other (it uses the basic set's rules I'm assuming). I've noticed min-maxed mage, archer, knight are 50/50 win rate against each other at 200 points, which is pretty cool and seems like the system is kinda balanced. Just ask I'll be on for another couple hours.
>>96708152Dungeon fantasy monsters
>>96708152It's very unlikely that any LLM is going to accurately 'know' the rules of any complex RPG system, and quite plausible it will have some kind of quirk where it fudges dice rolls and the like to produce 'balance' which wouldn't actually be seen in the game. There is still no substitute for simply reading the actual rules.As for fantasy monsters, the easiest option is to use the Dungeon Fantasy and DFRPG monster books. They include most of the 'classic' monsters in a ready-to-go format which includes arms, armour, skills, etc. with the important data all worked out for you and unimportant stuff omitted.The only real problem is that those monsters are fairly high-powered, intended to challenge 250-point adventurers. Against more down-to-earth heroes, they may be overwhelming. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can result in a disconnect between expectations and results when a competent 100 point knight gets murdered by a couple of goblins.Also, of course, these monsters are only one possible interpretation which is unlikely to match any given source material. Notably, goblins and hobgoblins are not bottom-tier fodder in GURPS, as you might expect from other sources.
>>96708152this guy adapted every most monsters from D&D3e to GURPShttps://enragedeggplant.blogspot.com/2017/10/monster-index.html
>>96708209>>96708321thanks>>96708321very thanksI put a standard goblin in my "LLM" and got a 100% loss ratio against a 200 pt knight (not min-maxed). I then put an additional goblin behind the knight, etc. At 4 behind, one in front, things start getting deadly for the hero.Stats (which must not be from Dungeon Fantasy) are the following:Knight (PC, starting build)ST 13 (Strong, hits hard)DX 12 (Decent fighter skill)HT 11HP 13Weapon: Broadsword (sw+1 cut) ~2d+1 cutting damageSkill: Broadsword-14Armor: Chainmail (DR 4)Goblin (NPC, low-med ST)ST 9DX 11HT 10HP 9Weapon: Shortsword (sw cut) ~1d+1 cutting damageSkill: Shortsword-12Armor: Leather (DR 2)I'm only getting started so I have no idea what I'm doing. Never GMed. I'm reading Combat Lite in Basic Set Characters for now then I'll move back onto character creation, then back to Combat in Campaigns then go from there. Might read Gurps Light before I read Combat from basic set, not sure yet.Thank you for your post, much insight.
>>96706399nta but I would rather kill myself than play WFRP 2e again after tasting GURPS.
>>96706399>so I wouldn't use GURPS for warhammer fantasyWarhammer fantasy combat sucks, gurps is far superior. And outside combat, there's nothing special or unique about the warhammer fantasy RPG 2e that can't be copied and done better by GURPS.>who are all disinclined to learn rulesMy players don't know any of the rules and haven't read any rulebook and we play gurps just fine. All they need to know is what their character sheet says.
>>96708440With all the love in my heart, stop relying on machines to do you thinkin, you brain cuck. Read the books and run the combat yourself.
>>96709148I'll keep that in mind. I want to find a good win/lose ratio so as not to make my campaign too easy or difficult. When I can run 1000 simulations of a fight with set parameters (number of ennemies and power of PCs, I feel like I might be on the right path).I'm feeling the 1 in 3 chances to die at each fight without getting creative could be a good rule for balance to start with. Everyone survives if they are creative around fights or avoiding them. Maybe 50/50 chance is good too. That's what I'm trying to figure out right now, in parallel with reading the books and training so the "crunch" does not show much.
>>96709261One third chance of death in every 'fair' fight seems kind of deadly for typical dungeon-crawling. It's more reasonable for a gritty game where even one fight is something to be scared of, but that's still pretty tough. 50/50 is straight up nightmare difficulty.Very few players will feel comfortable taking even a 10% chance of character death to achieve a short-term goal. Real life soldiers tend to be keen to engage only when victory is near certain, and will usually be considered totally ineffective after sustaining about 40% losses. Realistically, there's no way that anyone except the most die-hard fanatics are going to accept fights where they each have a 1-in-3 chance of death (or serious lasting injury, capture, etc.) more than two or three times and keep pushing on towards an objective. Even in a game where the only consequence is you have to make a new character, you're likely to see some reluctance to engage. With a good group, that can translate into working smarter, preparing well, picking their fights, stacking the odds in their favour, and so on, but that can easily lead into them bogging down any story progression as they do everything possible to survive. With a less motivated group, you're looking at them just giving up.
>>96705025My only problem with Move and Attack is the skill limit of 9 for melee attacks. IIRC, this limitation was made for purely gamist reasons so skilled fighters couldn't just jump into melee range, attack at high skill, then jump back out. But Rapid Strike totally bypasses this limitation. For my own games, I just remove the skill limit and replace it with a -1 penalty, which is totally valid according to Martial Arts' custom technique rules.
>>96706106Shadowrun 3e because there's no good Shadowrun-without-the-dice-pool hack or system
>>96709261What kind of game are you even going for anyways? Are you trying to make a gritty game where combat is a last resort or a typical DnD dungeon crawl? Because if you're going for the latter then 1 in 3 chances of dying in a fight is obscenely brutal. The more combat you expect to see in your game, the less likely the PCs should be to die per fight. Hell, you can stack the deck in the player's favor and still have interesting combats by virtue of playing the enemies intelligently.
>>96706399>nor is doing so part of any combat training I'm aware ofMost training does not teach running and gunning, since yeah running around spoils your aim. But practical "in combat" shooting changes the deck a lot, police shootings especially feature cops backing away from the perp as fast as they can while shooting. But those are usually starting from C reach and ending at 2-6 yards and shooting while maneuvering isn't unheard of in tighter quarters. GURPS is about right on the money with how bulk impacts shooting and allowing a step while shooting.
What's the optimal strategy for one combatant to beat two combatants in low-tech melee?At what skill levels is such a feat even reliably possible? (15 vs. 12? 18 vs. 12? 21 vs. 12??)
>>96710497Force them to fight you one at a time. Next best strategy is having the skill/ability to make extra attacks and target them at either opponent.
>>96710497Disable one somehow and then fight them
>>96710497You must have enough skill to have their parries be reduced to 8 or less, and your parry needs to remain at 10 or higher.Assuming you're righting trained fighters (13 skill) but not too trained (no combat reflexes or high pain threshold);Then you have to have 16 skill and combat reflexes to be confident at winning.Assuming they're coming at you from the front, using standard gurps tactical combat rules, it's not too hard to prevent them from getting into your flanks just with steps and retreats, and with this much skill you should be able to hit their legs and get one out of the fight basically instantly.With this much difference in skill and a bit of luck (or, ideally, actual Luck), you should be able to fight 3-4 guys coming at you from the front.I have no idea if this is realistic, but from my experience DMing 16 skill really is the breakpoint where you start to be able to take on several enemies at once.Equipment can also change this massively. If you're walking around with DR 10 you can pretty much ignore anything done by ST 10 people, unless they bring the big swing two-handers or start grappling you.
How do I create an advantage that allows you to build up points by attacking the enemy which you can then discharge to do a big fuckoff attack?
>>96710497You can use It's a Threat (Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 77) as a very rough yardstick.Combat Effectiveness Rating of a character with ST 10, Broadsword N, and a longsword wielded in two hands:Skill: +(N-10)Damage: +10 ((4+1)*1.5 or (4-2+3)*2)Move: -1Parry: +2(N/2+3-8)Total: 2N-11Broadsword 12 yields CER 13, while Broadsword 18 yields CER 25. So you would need Broadsword 18 to be roughly evenly matched with two Broadsword 12 enemies. According to Chr*s R*ce.
>>96710770>Broadsword N*Two-Handed Sword N
>>96710770I'm not sure I buy this honestly. Though I suppose this is only accounting for skill and has nothing to do with advantages like Trained by a Master or Combat Reflexes
>>96710785CER does take such advantages into account, but the characters in this example don't have any advantages.
>>96710791Right, I still ultimately feel like skill 18 is a bit of an over estimate. But I presume it's designed around a featureless plane with all three combatants starting within reach of each other.
How do I represent a character with a built-in gun that can fire only in the forward direction? Canonically, Limited Arc (−40 %) is applicable only to Striker. Can I just throw it onto Innate Attack anyway?
>>96711029pretty sure you can find something about this in the vehicle rules.
>>96711108What? GURPS Vehicles doesn't have anything to do with character advantages.
>>96711172Maybe I remembered wrong, but I remember reading about how to add turrets and stuff to characters as vehicles somewhere.
>>96710676Sadly no, at least not without a lot of cludge. Powers discusses Energy Reserves that quickly drain on their own; combine that with Regeneration (1/sec) with an Accessibility limitation “Only after landing an attack” for a pool that only fills up when attacking and sits at 0 otherwise.
>>96711365Shame. I don't want to just build a special energy reserve because then you're spending points on what is actually a limitation.
Tag your generals. I won't warn you again.
>>96711440Tag your pronouns, pathetic faggot
>>96711375You could also try “Only after landing X attacks” or a similar setup as a limitation. Pricing those fairly would be a pain, admittedly, but it might be closer to what you’re looking for.There is also the cost divisor that GURPS doles out from time to time. 1/5 cost, above and beyond any other cost modifiers, for alternative abilities and points-powered abilities. Maybe using that instead of a traditional limitation would work?
>>96711512>“Only after landing X attacks”I guess that could work, but pricing would be the key, yeah.Point powered abilities would require a way to generate points.
>>96706399I would imagine it's some sort of balance thing considering turns and stuff.
>>96707587>If you allow large moves in melee without harsh penalties, then reach become irrelevantI dunno, I already feel like reach is a bit irrelevant in GURPS as is. Maybe exempting weapons that are capable of striking 1 and 2 without penalty; but since it's so trivial to step past the reach of a longer weapon it rarely feels like an actual advantage.
>>96711910Reach is only an advantage if you can hide behind someone
>>96709261Is this bait
>>96710497It's hard to gauge both because GURPS injuries cause characters to death spiral, but also because what the player chooses will matter a ton. He could do some stupid risky plan that guarantees his death if the dice go bad, or he could do something very conservative and safe.
>>96712034I'm new so no.
>>96711910There's a load of good weapons with Reach 1, 2 though; longsword, katana, quarterstaff, rapier, jian, greatsword. Long staff with reach 2, 3 is decent too, and reach mastery opens up many more options.
>>96711539>>96711512>>96711375>>96711365Here's some ideas I have>impulse points with and accessibility: only after dealing damage and some aspect to prevent its use for things beyond using a specific pool of abilitiesThis would allow cheap abilities since impulse points can be used like points to activate one use abilities. It still doesn't feel like you're "building up" anything.>energy reserve with "triggered Recharge 1/second" with the trigger "when you hit and enemy" and "actual time is one attack only" so it works for each attackYou're at least building up something but you're now paying for a limitation, since "uses FP" is a measly -5%, with perhaps another -10% for "must use only this specific energy reserve".
>AoE 2 yards (+50%); Dissipation (-50%); Emanation (-20%); Selective Area (+20%).For FREE you get to make your attack into an area attack that you don't really have to hit that doesn't harm you or your allies.Dissipation should not be -50%, I think. Or maybe AoE 2 yards should be more expensive.
So follow-up is not allowed on stuff that ignore DRbut if I put blood agent, the stuff stops ignoring DR, does that mean I can now put that attack on a follow-up?
Is there some rule against using Exotelerport, Affliction (Warp), to teleport a whole pint of poison into somebody's body?
>>96714791I think he gets to roll HT
>>96714730The follow-up can ignore DR afaik, but the carrier attack can't. If it does, you should be using Linked instead. There's some cases where I could imagine using Follow-Up would make sense in terms of a sequence of events, but if you're ignoring DR (which is the main mechanical reason to do Follow-Up instead of Linked, you should be using Linked instead.
>>96714730Follow-Up doesn't work with other penetration modifiers because all of that should be handled by its carrier attack. A poison used on the tip of a stinging tail is technically a blood agent in the literal sense, but since it relies on the Impaling Striker to deliver it, the poison is treated as a Follow-Up.>>96714824You have it completely backwards. Carrier attacks can have whatever penetration modifiers they want, explicitly; follow-up abilities cannot because they rely on the carrier to do the penetrating.>>96714791Beyond the general rule that "you can't use broad supernatural abilities to instantly kill everything no save by squeezing their heart/teleporting their brain away/summoning water inside their lungs, and the GM will call your a dipshit for trying," not to my knowledge.
>>96714874>Follow-Up doesn't work with other penetration modifiers because all of that should be handled by its carrier attackBlood agent and follow-up not working together makes no sense, and only exists because the writer was lazy and just lumped all penetration modifiers into a single pile.Everyone loves using poison as an example, but there are other things that should only work with skin contact or blood contact and should be used on follow-up. Leech, for example. Or some spell.
>>96714795>>96714874What about using the power to poison someone's drink while it's in their hand?Surely there's nothing barring that?
>>96715049>Blood agent and follow-up not working together makes no senseNo, it makes perfect sense. Blood Agent (-40%) is a meaningless limitation if you also have a built-in method of delivery that bypasses all the downsides of Blood Agent. "Must come into contact with an open wound or mucous membrane" is meaningless when you are making an open wound at the same time you're dispensing the poison (or draining blood from a wound, if using your Leech example); that sizeable discount is just free points if combined with Follow-Up.
>>96715102Except that follow-up attacks get to try to overcome DR twice.>normal follow-up attack>main attack hits DR, doesn't penetrate, secondary attack hits DR, roll damage, can penetrate>blood agent follow-up>main attack hits DR, doesn't penetrate, secondary attack doesn't even get to roll.
>>96715156>>96715102Samefagging but here's a better example of my reasoning:Lets say you have a monster with a stinger, that delivers the deadliest poison ever>stinger, 1d6 piercing [5]>poison followup toxic 10d6 [40]GURPS wants me to believe that having that 10d6 not do ANYTHING if the 1d6 piercing doesn't get trough is worth +0%.That's retarded.
>>96715282I'm not reading the whole thread to see where it went off rails but you're right:>If the primary damage fails to penetrate DR, the follow-up effect occurs outside the target, if appropriate, as if the target had been touched – just like a linked effect (see below).>B381also:>If the follow-up attack does fatigue or toxic damage, it won't do anything to armor, as it only affects living organisms. A fatigue or toxic attack with follow-up is automatically a blood or contact agent (see Delivery, p. B437), but it receives no cost break because it has a means to bypass DR -- the lack of which is what makes Blood Agent and Contact Agent limitations. If the follow-up does any other damage type, though, it affects unliving things and might be capable of penetrating armor on its own. See also Follow-Up Damage, p. B381.>https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=356035&postcount=27It's one of those frustrating bits of information that somehow is not part of the fucking Basic books.
>>96715929>but it receives no cost break because it has a means to bypass DRWhich is retarded. It should receive a cost break because it's now an all-or-nothing. Either the main attack bypasses DR, and you get to use your 10d6 toxic damage, your the main attack doesn't, and you get nothing.
>>96710676I was going to suggest Costs Fatigue and an Energy Reserve with Special Recharge, but you bring up a good point here >>96711375.Another suggestion is to add Limited Use with one of the Quick/Fast/Slow Reload options, but with a special variant where instead of Ready maneuvers to reload, you take Attack maneuvers to do so. So something like "Limited Use, 1 use, Fast Reload, must make 3-5 successful attacks to reload, -20%" could work.
>>96715975>So something like "Limited Use, 1 use, Fast Reload, must make 3-5 successful attacks to reload, -20%" could work.That's a really cool idea, actually. It's not quite what I want (you start with 1 use right away instead of starting at zero and building up) but it's going to be useful for other things.
>>96715968>It should receive a cost break because it's now an all-or-nothingYes, but on the other hand you can only roll once to hit with two attacks (stinger and poison).>But the stinger is weak!The cost break for having a weak delivery is the low cost of the delivery itself.You're only paying a couple points for your 1d stinger.Consider a wyvern with a 6d impaling tail with a 10d poison. On a successful attack, it will deal 6d-DR +10d damage. That's significant.
>>96716011It should receive a cost-break because it is weaker than any other follow-up attack. And, regardless it shouldn't be something exclusive to the toxic or fatigue damage types.You shouldn't have to go through so many hoops just to get "If this regular attack deals HP damage, it also delivers this extra damage/effect/leeches hp/etc".
>>96716067>It should receive a cost-break because it is weaker than any other follow-up attackYou mean Toxic Damage is weaker? Then that's easy to explain: It's also the cheapest Innate Attack type at 4 points. Consider it a -20% break over the cost o Burning (another type that can also take Cyclic).>You shouldn't have to go through so many hoops just to get "If this regular attack deals HP damage, it also delivers this extra damage/effect/leeches hp/etc".You don't. Just pick another attack type, burning or corrosion, and call it a poison. See the forum link of my original post.
>>96715050Yeah, that's absolutely legit. It's an expensive power, which can do powerful effects when combined with expensive, low legality class gear. Same as teleporting a grenade into someone's backpack, teleporting a rattlesnake into their hat, etc.Note that most versions of Warp can only teleport someone or something into an 'open' space (sometimes only into gas or vacuum, sometimes liquid as well, almost never into solids) and usually don't remove anything from the destination (forcing gas and liquid out of the way). Thus it may be difficult to introduce a large amount of poison into a small drink without it being obvious. However, most poison is fairly effective in small doses, so you probably don't need to worry.
>>96716149>>96716171Addendum: Note we're talking about Toxic damage having not effect on ARMOR not DR.If your natural DR, as in DR (Tough Skin), stops it, the toxic damage will still go through.
>>96716185Meant to tag >>96716067 instead of >>96716171
>>96716149>You don't. Just pick another attack type, burning or corrosion, and call it a poison. See the forum link of my original post.I think you are confused. I wan the secondary attack to NOT WORK if the primary attack doesn't go through DR.However, that is only allowed for toxic and fatigue.>>96716185And that's another problem. I don't want the effect to get through DR at all!This is very simple: here's what I want>if main attack doesn't get through DR, second attack doesn't, at all, regardless of DR being forcefield or toughskin, and the effect shouldn't be just toxic or fatigue, I want to do this with any other innate attack or other effects;As it is, this is extremely complex to achieve with gurps thanks to lumping every single penetration modifier into the same category out of laziness, even though some logically should be able to work with a follow-up attack.
>>96716257I was indeed confused. I see your point now and share your frustration.I'll look for any other elegant solution but meanwhile, you could use toxic damage as your stand in, even if it's not a poison.
>>96714299It's not that the weapons aren't good, it's the problem that having a reach advantage isn't actually an advantage unless the terrain or your numbers are in your favor.Say you have a longsword (1,2) and you're fighting an opponent with a broadsword (1). If your opponent is outside of your reach, they're free to move, move and attack or all out attack adjacent to you and do whatever their action allowed. You cannot passively prevent them from closing the gap unless you go first and make a stop thrust, but even that doesn't stop them from closing the distance outside of a special rule in MA.It gets worse if they're at Reach 2, since they can just step and attack into your reach every turn to strike at you. Forcing you to retreat to regain your "advantage" which may not always be possible or desired. Something like a longstaff kinda has an advantage with reach 2,3 since it can strike at reach 3 and forces the enemy to make some kind of move or all out action to close the gap.
>>96716379https://dungeonfantastic.blogspot.com/2013/08/melee-academy-keeping-your-reach.html
>>96716487>https://dungeonfantastic.blogspot.com/2013/08/melee-academy-keeping-your-reach.htmlThis article seems to confirm that reach isn't really an advantage until reach 3, since you have to do special maneuvers that leave you vulnerable.
>>96716487>do committed attack to step in and fly out>enemy has no penalty to his defenses, so you made an attack that left you vulnerable against an enemy that wasn't vulnerable>enemy can then committed attack against you, but you are vulnerable due to committed attack.seems like a losing proposition.
>>96716588I would argue it's worse at reach 3, since a lot of those weapons can't attack at reach 1 at all. Meaning he can very safely make an all-out on you.>>96716598Hell, he doesn't even need to attack you, he could just attack your weapon from outside your reach with some degree of safety, and either break it, disarm you or otherwise knock the weapon off line.
>>96716598>all-out attack (determined) swing/neck deceptive attackhesitation is defeat
>>96716588>>96716598The Reach 1 attacker is at a disadvantage as well because if he wants to keep the pressure, he can't Retreat (+3 to Dodge or +1 to Parry/Block) which is not insignificant.
>>96716698But if we're using MA he can sideslip (+2 to dodge/mobile parries) to keep the same reach or even slip (+1 to dodge/mobile parries) to close the reach on his opponent.
>>96716727That's still increasing his chance of being hit.The guy with Reach 2 can do similar moves: Step back while attacking then Retreating, or Sideslipping if there's nowhere to space. He will have equal or higher defenses to the Reach 1 guy.
>>96717243Sure, but the thing is those don't really off-set the loss of his advantage. The guy with the shorter reach has more options to close the gap and disable the reach advantage his opponent has. Between being able to make all-out defense, slips, attacking the weapon itself, committed attacks (or all out if it's a weapon you need to ready to strike at reach 1). While the guy with a spear, his only option is to wait, step back and attack or retreat when attacked. Sideslipping is a bad idea for him because he's maintaining reach instead of increasing distance, which cede control and benefits his opponent a lot more.
To put it simply, reach in gurps is a minor benefit, while in real life, reach is a huge benefit.
>>96717311The problem is that an opponent has no need to respect your reach, because you don't have passive control only active control if you explicitly take an action to Wait. Even DnD has more threatening reach weapons, because making that step into your opponent's adjacent square provokes an attack of opportunity.
Maybe something like an attack penalty if one attacks the same turn they move past the max reach of a weapon would work?
>>96717380Yeah. GURPS absolute hatred of "free attacks" sometimes gets in the way.
>>96717311Yeah, in real life a few inches more reach is a pretty good advantage, while in GURPS even a few feet doesn't mean much. On the other hand, if you made reach as good as it is in real life without adding any disadvantages (like it actually making point control more difficult, slower slashes, being really inconvenient in crowded spaces, hard to carry, etc.) reach weapons would be crazy good. Even as it is, edged rapier, katana, and quarterstaff are pretty much the best melee weapons in the game due to combining reach with optimal damage or improved parries.
Can you run a political campaign in GURPS? What quality would you expect?
>>96717910>Can you run a political campaign in GURPS?I guess. Social Engineering even has rules for elections.>What quality would you expect?Meh.
>>96717910Nope, it's impossible.
>>96717910Are you a bot or just fucking stupid?
>>96717275I don't follow. Everything you mentioned can also be used by the Reach 2 Guy.Between a Step (Attack or All-Out Defense) and Slip, the Reach 1 Guy can only move 2 hexes. The Reach 2 Guy can Retreat and Step back to distance himself just as easily.>committed attacks (or all out if it's a weapon you need to ready to strike at reach 1).The Reach 2 Guy will Step back and stab the Reach 1 Guy at reach 2.
>>96718213Yeah. Assume rapier vs smallsword, starting with 1 yard gap between them (i.e. at reach 2).Smallsword steps to adjacent (reach 1), attacks, rapier retreats for +3 parry (back to reach 2).Rapier attacks, smallsword slips forward to close the gap (reach 1) getting +1 to parry.Rapier steps back, opening up to reach 2 again.Repeat.Every turn, the rapier-wielder gets +2 parry above that of the smallsword-guy. With non-fencing weapons, it's only a +1 bonus, but that's still a fairly big deal. Given that it also allows you a wider choice of targets (threatening twice as many hexes) and comes with almost no downside (mostly just more expensive weapons), there doesn't seem to be much reason not to use reach 1,2 weapons if you can.
>>96718213You assume an infinite plane to step back to and stab with. Using most of the options as the guy with reach 2 would be forfeiting your reach advantage to your opponent, because the opponent has no reason to respect being outreached.Like >>96719045 brings up, reach is arguably only an advantage if you have an infinite amount of distance to retreat to so you can always claim a bonus to your dodge or parry. But even then the opponent is always stepping forwards and attacking you on loop. It's also extremely telling that this conversation is solely focused on weapons like the rapiers, longswords and quarterstaves which can also strike reach 1. We haven't even considered regular spears in the equation.
>>96719933>reach is arguably only an advantage if you have an infinite amount of distance to retreat to so you can always claim a bonus to your dodge or parry.Not infinite space. Just enough space. A small room is more than enough for most fights, as you can easily circle around. Further, the whole example here >>96719045 relies on our Smallswordsman feeling confident slipping forward on each defense. The whole situation changes drastic if he's not a expert fighter who really needs his own retreat bonus. Then, it's the fighter with more reach who determines the movement, and can bully the other fighter into moving about.
>>96719933>because the opponent has no reason to respect being outreachedThat's true but it's not super unrealistic with one-second turns. Just watched a kendo vs. modern naginata demonstration earlier this year and it was basically the naginata user taking a Wait, getting his one hit in or not, then getting BTFO by the shorter weapon
>>96720232The best strategy to closing a gap against an opponent with better reach is just moving towards him. Don't give him a retreat, just move into his hex and take the incoming attack for one round, then you can start wailing on him
I'm thinking about using the gurps skill system for a videogame I'm programming. I don't care about having the gurps name attached since sj is a faggot, but into how much legal trouble can i get for using the system? I'd imagine even something obvious like using the Guns(Speciality) format, not to mention calling my stealth skill "Stealth" should be fine, but what about having visibility modifiers from 0 to -10, using the range modifiers as in gurps, having Aiming go from Acc to Acc+1 and Acc+2 etc?
>>96721645Can't copyright game mechanics, dude, that's why TSR had to sell to Necromancers of the Coast, and why NotC pretended to be magnanimous with the meaningless OGL. sorry to bring up the retarded elder brother of RPGs in the only thread we're allowed to discuss the only good system in, lest we bump one of the twenty thousand Emprah threads off the catalog and make some snowflake reee, but the legal precedent is relevant to your question. Tl;dr steal whatever you like, and just change any names that are eligible for copyright protection
>>96721764Ok if i just have to change names and everything else is up for grabs that'll make it real easy.I figured if i just rip the system completely there'd come a point where it's obvious enough, since otherwise i could just copy and re release the gurps books almost word for word (but with better art).
>>96721456>Don't give him a retreatwhat does that even mean?as long as there's space, retreat is an option. the only way to deny it is by grappling.>>96721645Change ST, DX, IQ and HT to something like SPECIAL and you're set.
>>96721868>what does that even mean?Don't attack him so he doesn't get the extra movement from a retreat option.If he wants to get back to reach 2 he needs to pay fp or take some other penatly.
Am I retarded or is there no way to make the latest version of GCS calculate Basic Lift using the KYOS progression?
From my experience, it goes>reach edge of reach>all-out defense, 2 steps into reach 1>enemy steps back to reach 2 and attacks>bonus from all-out defense + slip to get back into reach 1>attack, or step into CQC and grappleIRL, a dude with a shortsword vs a dude with a spear I'd bet on the dude with the spear every timein GURPS, it's still basically a 50/50, make 60/40 in favor of spear but not nearly as bad as it should be.
>>96721961As you move in, he gets does the Stop Hit attack and step back. He won't retreat because you haven't attacked him but you will still be at 1 hex distance. Now it's his turn and he again steps back and attacks you at reach 2.There's better options next turn but the Reach 2 guy already got 2 attacks on you without punishment.
>>96722020Pretty sure RAW you get to keep moving after a stop hit, and the enemy would need to Wait in the first place
>>96722035Yes, but the Step happens after that.You can say "I'll wait and attack and then step back when X gets within reach"But when you use Move you can't "follow" a step. (IIRC)
>>96722153>"I'll wait and attack and then step backNTA, but I thought you couldn't do this but apparently you canwhich means a guy with reach 1 can do his own wait "I wait and step and attack if he steps closer to me"which makes reach really pointlessso every fight is a contest of waits
>>96717380>>96717406I know Shields Up had a rule for Focused Wards, which let you obstruct foes using your shield at reach 1. This doesn't cost any maneuver; you declare it as a Free Action at the start of your turn, and it comes at the tradeoff of narrowing your Block angle to a single foe. Would allowing a similar rule for weapons (e.g., "You can Obstruct a single foe at your weapon's full reach, but can't parry any other foes more than 30° from your target") help alleviate the issue? Especially with the rules in Martial Arts for Keeping a Foe at Bay that let you inflict damage on a successful Obstruction with a weapon.
>reach in real life>dude with shorter reach is hesitant to enter longer reach because longer reach can stab him BEFORE he gets close, and can still keep the pressure on with his own attacks without needing to over-commit (AoA or Committed in gurps terms)>reach in GURPS>the only wait to stab an enemy approaching you is to commit to be completely passive (wait)>if you want to keep your reach you have to over-commit (AoA or Committed so you can step back after stepping forward)One solution I can think off is that a defensive attack should allow you the option to get a free step back instead of giving bonus to defenses.
>>96722443Also a good idea.
>>96722485Can't you step back after attacks already?
>>96722584Yes, but the idea is to allow you to do >step forward, attack, step backAs a form of a defensive strike. -2 to damage but you get to step.I feel like this isn't unrealistic. You're not fully committing to a lunge, so you get less damage.Also everyone mentioning extra effort in combat, don't because if those rules are allowed reach becomes completely meaningless since everyone can just move and attack with no penalty.
>>96722216The Reach 2 guy can use evaluate instead of wait if the Reach 1 guy starts waiting.Reach 1 guy will either have to take a step and be attacked on the next turn, with the evaluate bonus, or use Move, All-Out Defense (Improved Dodge) or All-Out Attack to close the gap in one turn.>>96722485A spear is not an auto win weapon in a duel even in real life, look up some hema videos in youtube. It gives you an edge in duels and an even bigger benefit in battlefield with formations.
>>96722900>The Reach 2 guy can use evaluateIn gurps you maneuvers aren't secret, the turn the reach 2 guy uses evaluate, the reach 1 guy will know he can move in.
>>96722153I'd argue you can change where you move with each hex you move. Otherwise noone could e.g. turn a corner, see two paths and then choose which to follow.
Found this interesting Ultima adaptation for GURPS. It try to mimic some of the game restrictions like armor restrictions. Worth a check.http://gurpsultima.pbworks.com/w/page/99524703/Introduction
>>96724332>http://gurpsultima.pbworks.com/w/page/99524703/Introductioninteresting
>>96717910https://youtu.be/DoIb62THIT0?si=QPVCU_zlVAGREgpcApparently yes as that's what the "game of thrones" author says he plays in GURPS.
