File: gurps bio-tech birth cont(...).png (29 KB, 1273x388)

29 KB PNG

>>97531613
>Thread question: What is the worst piece of equipment in the game?
tfw no stats for condoms

File: commonsense.png (22 KB, 318x228)

22 KB PNG

would/do you play with this advantage? or do you just say "are you sure" even if the player's pc doens't have common sense?

Would separating IQ into intelligence and charisma with both only costing 10, and making social skills depend on charisma and the int. based one depend on the int. stat break the game? I feel like there's a similiar amount of social and intelligence based skills so it shouldnt be that bad.

>>97532079
According to Power-Ups 9 p. 25, IQ is already underpriced, so creating a new 10-point/level Charisma attribute does not justify making IQ any cheaper.

>>97531928
I ask "are you sure?" to all players and i straight out say to the ones with common sense "something seems off, take a moment to reevaluate your decision"

>>97532079
>I feel like there's a similiar amount of social and intelligence based skills so it shouldnt be that bad.
I don't think that's right. There's like a dozen social skills (not all of which map well with 'charisma') and a hundred other IQ skills. Smooth Talker is generally considered one of the worst talents even if you let it give a reaction bonus from literally everyone.
My instinct would be to port IQ-based influence skills to Will and bump its price up by a point or two.

>>97531928
I don't use the Common Sense advantage. I think rolling IQ for a players when they act dumb and giving them a hint if they succeed isn't something that makes sense to pay points for.

>>97532079
Does IQ still control Perception? If so then IQ would be grossly underpriced at 10/level. If it doesn't, 10/level is still underpriced but not game breakingly so.

>>97531928
We forced the one retard player in the group to take it and that has been the singlemost best choice we have ever made.
We have avoided so many disasters thanks to that one little advantage.

>>97532504
I'm almost the same. I pretty much treat every PC like they have Common Sense already. If it ends up that a player doesn't want or need Common Sense, then I treat that as a -10 point disadvantage for going without it.

>>97531928
I usually use it as an instanteneous, "your character think it over because it will lead to something bad", if he does another shitty one is on him.

File: Metal-slug-x-big1.jpg (105 KB, 500x496)

105 KB JPG

is it possible to make a "cartoony" setting like Metal Slug?

>>97535229
How're we defining "cartoony" here? As in heroes can take a lot of damage and be fine? Stun Points from Power-Ups 9 is an effective solution that requires minimal hassle to implement, so I strongly recommend that. Removing NPCs' ability to target PCs' hit locations also helps, as does giving them poor Guns skill levels so they're hit less often in the first place (though that last one is pretty realistic anyway).

Other stuff might be harder to translate to tabletop, like very specific bullet patterns and other gamey traits. But aside from those yeah GURPS can be tweaked to run basically any kind of setting; the only question is how much effort it'll take.

>>97535229
in metal slug you die in one hit from anything, and so do most human enemies
If anything, metal slug is more lethal than gurps

They told me GURPS was a toolbox, but it's literally just a book.

>>97536137
>he didn't buy the toolbox edition
skill issue

What skill do you use to punch with a vehicle robot arm?

drop a TL10 paraplegic genious person in a TL3 setting

does he survive?

>>97537065
According to Mecha Operations (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 40), the pilot simply uses his own martial-arts skill.
GURPS Mecha p. 51 (for Third Edition) offers an alternative that sounds much more reasonable: the pilot uses his martial-arts skill or his piloting skill, whichever is lower.

>>97537072
How high is the drop?

>>97537134
Yeah, gurps mecha makes more sense
I probably should read it before doing mecha in 4e and just steal stuff that makes sense.

>>97537072
How the hell are you paraplegic at TL 10?
Does he have technology with him?
Is he from a TL 10 setting where a 'genius' is someone who outsmarts top-end AI, probably thanks to significant biological enhancement, or is he just a genius by our standards?
Does he have any knowledge of the TL 3 world, or a chance to prepare? Can he at least speak their language, or a language which is related to it?
Has he been vaccinated against the diseases common in his destination?
Is he lucky enough to be found by kindly people who will help him?

Overall, I'd say his chances look grim. There will be vast areas of wilderness in which he will simply die within a few days at most in a typical TL 3 setting. If he is found, there is a good chance that it will be by brutal people who have no inclination to help him. If he is found by people who do want to help him, he will be a massive burden to them, meaning there is a good chance they will have to abandon him in order to survive, before he figures out how to communicate with them. If he gets lucky on that front, TL 3 medical care will be inadequate for him and he will probably die of disease.
Obviously this goes completely differently if he arrives in a nuclear-powered exoskeleton with a suitcase doc and paramedic swarm, and half a dozen nanosymbionts in his system, he's likely to do much better.

File: Vehicle Combat Test.png (1.02 MB, 793x652)

1.02 MB PNG

Gotta say the spaceship combat rules when used in isolation work pretty well. Just don't use them alongside ultra tech shit. Or interpret "dHP" as "x100" instead of x10.
The main thing is finding all the side rules and optional toggles to fine tune lethality of weapons and effectiveness of giant robots.
This reference site was invaluable
>https://gsuc.roto.nu/doku.php?id=reference

I ended up collecting a bunch of house rules from various online sources to get it to fit my tastes perfectly and I think I've got it dialed in just right where ships aren't made of paper but don't take hundreds of turns to get destroyed.

>>97538305
>https://gsuc.roto.nu/doku.php?id=reference
I have played in this guy's con games (not GURPS though)
Small world

>bust out gun stats to make some fallout guns
>just use close approximations from High Tech because it's easier and I don't need all the other details and the results are exactly as good
>can't use it for energy weapons

I'm beginning to wonder if I will ever use this book

>>97538510
There are few small-arms which you can't just extrapolate from existing examples, but I find it very useful for heavy weapons. Of course, most games don't feature heavy weapons, so its value is rather questionable.

Where can I find tools to make "grounded" mechs? Stuff like the avatar AMP, so small mechs that don't have the typical super mech abilities (speed, energy shields, bullshittium weapons etc)? I haven't taken a look at 3e mecha, and from what I remember of one of the pyramid articles (simplified mecha?) it was all very much focused on anime mechs

>>97538701
>GURPS Spaceships 1
for the base system
>Spaceships 4: Fighters carriers and mecha
so you can have legs
>Vehicles (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 40) Mecha Operations (pp. 4)
Expanded options for mecha, including all the little options that will allow you to make the mecha cinematic or more grounded.
>Spaceships 3 - Warships and Space Pirates
if you want tactical combat instead of abstract combat

If you limit your mecha to TL 8-9 stuff and don't add any cinematic rules, they'll be very grounded, some say a bit too grounded (an RPG will kill a mech without too much trouble, ultratech annihilates them). They don't move that fast either, the most unrealistic thing is how maneuverable robot legs are.

Here's an example statline of a simple grunt mech
>dHP: 15; dDR 8 front/Central; 4 Rear; SM: +4; Hnd/SR: +4/3; HT: 12; Move: 10/20; Cost: $ 399k
the "d" stands for "multiple by 10".

>>97538701
GURPS Vehicles, duh.

>>97538837
I would never have thought "spaceships" included mech stuff, huh.

>an RPG will kill a mech without too much trouble
Kinda what I wanted to go for. Mechs in me setting are essentially gun platforms. High caliber weapons, missiles/ATGM, and small enough to accompany infantry. Basically, instead of an IFV sticking around to support the infantry after they dismount, you got a mech them. Armor rated against anything smaller than an auto cannon, relying on mobility and APS for protection.

Thanks for the detailed writeup anon, much appreciated

>>97538701
If you want realistically shitty 'extra large battlesuit' style ones, just use the heavy exoskeleton and combat walkers from Ultra-Tech.
Your next problem is trying to actually justify their use. Power armour can be good in close quarters (where it's difficult to penetrate without using a grenade launcher or heavy weapon, which are problematic unless you are also wearing power armour) and allows you carry enough stealth gear that you can probably avoid direct hits in the open while shrugging of area attacks. But anything much bigger than a man won't be able to move through doors, cramped tunnels, narrow trenches, and so on, and will struggle with stealth due to both size and clumsiness. The only things they seem really well suited for are engineering, logistics, and casualty evacuation.

>>97538676
>There are few small-arms which you can't just extrapolate from existing examples
Such as?

>>97538510
Do you want to do your energy weapons how they're depicted in the good 3D fallout games (everything before FO4) or the 2D games?

>>97539178
>Basically, instead of an IFV sticking around to support the infantry after they dismount, you got a mech them.
The thing about IFVs is mechanised infantry already have several tons of metal box, which has to be armed and armored to some extent to even get them into the fight. Adding enough armor and firepower to make it an actual threat to other vehicles is relatively simple. Meanwhile, fielding what is essentially a whole other vehicle requires you to 'spend' transport capacity to bring it with you, as well as a lot more actual money to build it, more manpower to maintain it and so on.
You're also competing against robots, unless robots are completely shit in your setting. Even something as simple as a bomb drone, loitering munition, or brilliant missile will usually be sufficient to wreck vehicles or fortifications. A 'dog' style walker or a tracked or wheeled platform (like the 'robot mule' in Ultra-Tech) can easily carry a HMG, AGL, or ATGM, which is more than enough against most targets. That's if you even need a heavy weapon; the basic infantry missile launcher with shaped charge warhead is sufficient against almost anything.

>>97539722
>Such as?
You want examples of things which can't be extrapolated? It depends what your threshold for 'close enough' is, really. Many of the higher-powered handguns in high-tech have really dubious stats (10mm auto seems to have lower damage than it 'should', many 'hand cannons' have weirdly big bulk) so I like being able to have an actual system for them rather than trying to stay consistent with the inconsistent method used to stat them before.
Rifles are a bit better, but knowing where the cut-off points for things like Acc and Bulk are is still more satisfying to me than guessing.

>>97539178
You're welcome.
Also I disagree with the other anon, don't use anything from ultratech. The spaceships system is more versatile than trying to fit the retarded math from ultratech into a reasonable game.

>>97539834
Oh they don't replace IFVs or anything else, but they are better at following infantry in places a big metal box can't. Besides, it's just the explanation I use for suspension of disbelief for mechs in my setting. They aren't deployed everywhere. Urban environments, mountainous terrain, forests they are handy, but otherwise they aren't that good. Mostly used by mercs since they're the best bang for your buck if you want heavy weapons but don't have the space/money/crew for actual vehicles, as they are originated as equivalent of technicals, only using construction mechs instead of pick up trucks.

Mechs are unrealistic (for warfare), so I just want to have fun with them, without having crazy bullshit explanations about being superior.

File: bhu14ykms2241.png (734 KB, 640x642)

734 KB PNG

>>97539698
>>97539834
I think you guys are overthinking it. Everyone knows mechs are bullshit unless it's for the reasons you already listed: construction and rescue work. I think mechs are "attack helicopter but on ground" is fine. Pack a punch for the size and crew requirement, but made of paper. I mean, not like helis wouldn't eat shit by the metric ton with manpads and SPAAG in a peer-to-peer conflict (isn't that what's happening in Ukraine? The sheer amount of even old-ass Soviet era AA making helis perform poorly), unless they sit at the further range possible and just spam hellfires to style on tanks from the horizon.

>>97540020
>Ukraine
Afaik (source: guy on discord who knows more than me) it's kinda six of this, half a dozen of that. Proliferation of modern manpads creates a protective bubble that forces attack choppers to do these rocket lobbying runs, but when the Ukrainians had to leave their protective cover for a push, the Russian helis were waiting and used as intended, launching ATGMs from standoff distance. Could be just Ukraine being an unsuitable environment for them, but what the ideal environment is, aside from the middle east, idk, not my field of expertise, or even remote competence.

>>97539901
>The spaceships system is more versatile than trying to fit the retarded math from ultratech into a reasonable game.
Spaceships has its own weird quirks, like HP which is inconsistent with the usual rules. Spaceship weapons are also very questionable for non-space combat, since they are basically all optimised for very long range use against fragile targets, which may not be great in a close-quarters fight with tanks, for example.
Trying to do an IFV in spaceships:
30-ton hull
Front
[1-2] Steel armor
[3-5] Light alloy armor
[6 & core] Internal combustion engines
Center
[1] Medium weapon battery (VRF 2 cm gun, 2 16 cm launchers)
[2-3] Steel armor
[4-5] Light alloy armor
[6] Tracked drivetrain
[core] Control room
Rear
[1-3] Steel armor
[4-5] Passenger seating
[6] Fuel tank
Design switch: Armor and Volume, SM reduced by 1, DR multiplied by 1.8 (final DR 144/108/54). NBC filters only, no life support; increases passenger seating to 6.
The end result is lighter, better protected, and better armed (both more damaging and more accurate) than real life IFVs despite using only cheap TL 7 components.

>>97540191
NTA. I really, really don't think UT is any better at all, it's just a different kind of completely inconsistent math compared to the other books. Curse of GURPS I guess, I bet you that vehicles 4e would've been another set of unique math that conflicted with basic, spaceships, HT and UT. But hey, don't have to worry about that since it's never coming out now

>>97540224
>But hey, don't have to worry about that since it's never coming out now
It isn't going to be called GURPS Vehicles, but it is coming out (assuming no catastrophe). I'm just waiting on David to finish doing some work for other companies and then we're going to figure out exactly how to fund it all, but even if I have to pay for the whole thing out of my own pocket, I'm going to make it happen.
Still, my advice would be to just use Vehicles 3rd edition over either UT or Spaceships. It's much more flexible and capable of fine-tuning things to get them exactly how you want them.

>>97540104
Cold war chopper strategy apart from COIN warfare was to camp just above treelines/hills to shoot an ATGM, then get down below terrain cover and scoot elsewhere to do the same thing
You could do that in Ukraine just as well as the Fulda gap but the kind of armored thrusts this kind of tactic works against haven't really been a thing post 2023

File: IRA-gunman.jpg (355 KB, 1200x799)

355 KB JPG

How would you run an IRA bombing campaign in GURPS? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaS3vaNUYgs

>>97540191
>The end result is lighter, better protected, and better armed (both more damaging and more accurate) than real life IFVs despite using only cheap TL 7 components.
But is it cheaper?
If it's not cheaper than I think that's balanced enough.
>vehicles 3e
Not only is vehicles 3e 10x more complicated than spaeshisp, you're also gonna have to waste time converting the rules to 4e. It's much easier to just use spaceships if you're not going for ultra-realism (which anyone using mecha is not going for)

File: 1668863781851889.png (996 KB, 1920x1080)

996 KB PNG

>>97540492
Been doing a lot of bushwhacking and military intelligence analysis and counter-intelligence espionage in my game. The team just took out a company bagman with an acid jar to the skull then a double tap while he was incapacitated.

>>97540723
Nice!

>>97540492
That's actually a rather interesting question.
Obviously you can have the whole process of selecting targets and planting devices be actually played out as an adventure. The rules in Action should work OK, especially if you remove the more cinematic ones.
But the campaign of demoralisation is harder to model. Covert Ops (p. 9) has some vague suggestions for the effects of mass-casualty events, but a lot of IRA bombs were car-bombs with specific individual targets. Social Engineering covers psy-ops and inciting revolution, which kind of cover most terrorism, but the rules are brief and not focused on this kind of campaign.

>>97540723
Terrorism is mostly about eroding resistance to your overall goals by demoralising your opponents using fear. This is a fairly tricky thing to do, since sloppy targeting or insufficiently scary threats can actually build resistance to your cause.
If you can inflict even a couple of percentage points of actual casualties on a group, their morale is likely to collapse, making them ineffective. The IRA actually got close to this with some police forces; their ability to conduct law-enforcement functions was certainly degraded and that played into the IRA's goal of being seen as a credible 'alternative government', able to dispute the state's monopoly on force and control crime in their territory. I think the best approach is something like having a loyalty score for each relevant group, then somehow modifying that based on operational success. Overall public opinion seems like it would have to have several 'loyalty' scores representing each group's perceived legitimacy (probably easier to attach this to the group with a 'reputation' score).
Really, this needs a whole supplement to cover.

>>97542234
Transhuman Space Toxic Memes might have something on that sort of thing

>>97542352
Buddy asked a question in the spear thread.

>>97542234
>SJG are too busy mildly changing the Basic Set to give us GURPS Terrorism and get raided by the FBI again
The world is cruel.

>>97540253
Huh so it's actually going through as a non-gurps brand book? Well, provided it gets funded that is. That's good to know I guess. I'll admit I'm a bit hesitant because gun stats, to me, seems wholly useless outside of vehicle weapons, and I fear I might not have a use for a vehicles 4e

>>97542355
Spears suck in GURPS too, but at least they're cheap if your character is on a budget

>>97540253
>but even if I have to pay for the whole thing out of my own pocket, I'm going to make it happen.
Heartwarming news anon, thank you.

>>97542484
I really don't want to read through GURPS Guns to see for myself, how's it useless?

>>97542945
The only thing for small arms you can't get by simply extrapolating (if you care about official stats) is Bulk

>>97542945
>I really don't want to read through GURPS Guns to see for myself, how's it useless?
It doesn't matter what the methodology of the book is, it is conceptually useless for most people because almost all the guns that anyone wants have already been statted in official supplements or are extremely similar to one which have been.

>>97542866
Spears are good with KYOS rules. Once the damage disparity is addressed they can shine because they're the only polearm that counts as a staff for the defense bonus if you use staff skills with them, meaning a few perks will allow you to get +2 to parry basically forever since you can switch the skill/grip you're using much more freely.

File: Screenshot_20260212_15452(...).jpg (262 KB, 1069x953)

262 KB JPG

>>97531613
My candidate for useless shit equipment

File: Asterisk!.png (77 KB, 990x427)

77 KB PNG

Someone brought up a good point in the spear thread
how come I can one-hand a katana and swing at reach 2, but I can't one hand a spear and stab at reach 2?
And why does a spear used one-handed have an "*" meaning it takes a ready maneuver to switch reach... But the only available reach is 1?

That's it, I'm introducing a house-rule for all my campaigns:
>Justice for Spears
>Spears and Long Spears do Thrust +3 one handed and Thrust +4 two-handed
>Spears have reach 1,2 one-handed and two-handed.
>Long Spears have reach 1,2,3*

>>97543635
I'm no expert, but I think that making normal spears Reach 1, 2* and unbalanced when wielded one-handed and Reach 1,2 balanced when wielded in two hands is about right. It seems hard to 'fence' with them or shift grips with one hand (basically have to let go of the shaft and grab it again), but trivial with two.
Spears doing more damage than thrusting longsword doesn't seem plausible.

>>97543717
Getting stabbed with a spear is worse than getting stabbed with a longsword.
Source: spearheads are usually wider than longswords

>>97542945
99% of small arms are virtually identical to each other in gurps stats. Ergonomics, size, comfort, fit, triggers, how easy they're to clean etc, all things that differenttiate guns irl, aren't a thing in GURPS. Bulk doesn't vary that much between a slightly longer and slightly shorter rifle. Range does, but I genuinely want to know who regularly fights at ranges long enough that ±100 yards of range matters. Bullets would be at most ±1 damage depending on barrel length and so on.

That means, with HT and other books, you can just take an existing gun statline and use it as is or slightly modify it to have an unstated gun. The kind of super granular math guns has, and which requires really in-depth and lengthy research (and often times difficult to do) is just unnecessary.

>>97543717
I supposed having spear be (u) if used one-handed is fine, it opens up the coolness of Dwarven Spears so I'm ok with it.

>>97543717
>Spears doing more damage than thrusting longsword doesn't seem plausible
The spearhead is wider.
>inb4 length
Length doesn't matter outside very tiny knives. Human torsos aren't that wide front-to-back, and the width of the spearhead would allow you to run through a person without the shaft being an issue (in fact, boar/winged spears exist because people and animals can indeed slide down the shaft to the detriment of the wielder).

Does that mean that it's enough to do more damage, in GURPS numbers, than a sword? Idk, but I'd let spears be good, not like it'd make a difference considering how busted dueling halberds and thrusting longswords and the other one (rapier?) are.

>>97542234
>If you can inflict even a couple of percentage points of actual casualties on a group, their morale is likely to collapse, making them ineffective. The IRA actually got close to this with some police forces; their ability to conduct law-enforcement functions was certainly degraded and that played into the IRA's goal of being seen as a credible 'alternative government', able to dispute the state's monopoly on force and control crime in their territory. I think the best approach is something like having a loyalty score for each relevant group, then somehow modifying that based on operational success. Overall public opinion seems like it would have to have several 'loyalty' scores representing each group's perceived legitimacy (probably easier to attach this to the group with a 'reputation' score).
I like this concept but I am not sure how it would work with City Stats for the region and Boardroom and Curia for the organizations to accurately simulate it.

>>97543961
Every time that I've attempted to use Boardroom and Curia and City Stats its just been a complete non-starter for me

>>97543961
Seems like a terrorism campaign is basically just a complex form of the Change Reputation action (Boardroom and Curia, p. 20). You want to change the reputation of another group towards 'incompetent, unable to protect their people', possibly destroy their internal morale (which is just their reputation with themselves, as per the Improve Morale action), and build your own reputation among those who support your cause or hate your targets. The extreme actions give you some kind of bonus to your skill roll and possibly let you act faster than you otherwise could, but at the cost of potentially damaging your own reputation, especially if things go badly, you chose your target poorly, etc. You might also change the reputation of your broader identity group or cause.
I think that big, spectacular, atrocities will give a bigger shift in reactions than small acts of sabotage and so on, but I don't want to put numbers on them without at least doing some reading on the actual effectiveness of terrorist campaigns. The IRA seem like something of an outlier in that they were fairly disciplined and actually achieved a lot of their goals, while most other terrorists seem to achieve very little beyond what an organised crime gang would, and when things do work out for them (e.g. the WUO) it's less from their own merits and more that they became a useful symbol for larger social forces to use.

It always felt weird to me how a Retreat doesn't cost any movement, but you only get one per turn. I don't like how the Chambara Fighting rules in Martial Arts handles multiple Retreats either.
I'm thinking of allowing multiple Retreats per turn, but making each Retreat cost a Step or 2 MP (or only 1 MP for a Slip). In practice, most combatants still only get one Retreat per turn, since most maneuvers only afford a Step. But someone with Move 5 taking a Move maneuver could move forward one yard and Retreat backwards twice.
I also wonder if it would make sense to give a larger bonus to someone who dedicates all of his movement to Retreating from one foe. The bonus should follow a logarithmic progression. So 2 MP gives the normal Retreat bonus, 4 MP gives an extra +1 to defend, 8 MP gives +2, and so on.
Does that seem fair?

File: inyoung-kim-823-1.jpg (377 KB, 1920x2620)

377 KB JPG

This guy look like a good GURPS delver?

File: sam-hyde-stare-sam-hyde.mp4 (614 KB, 640x404)

614 KB MP4

>>97544670
>leathercore bucklepunk unarmored slop

>>97544644
Since you typically only retreat outside you turn, which turn's movement does the retreat come out of? Do you need to save movement points in anticipation of retreating, or can you 'get them on credit' and pay during your next turn? If the latter, what happens if you choose (or are forced to take) a manoeuvre that doesn't give you enough MP for all your retreats?

>>97544881
I was thinking that you would have to save movement in anticipation of retreating. I was considering allowing movement to be paid from your next turn, but like you, I also thought about what should happen if a character makes a bunch of Retreats but is stunned or forced to take a different maneuver next turn. Maybe an FP cost for Extra Effort could work, like that for Giant Step. If you're not able to move on your next turn, then you're forced to pay 1 FP for each Retreat you made since last turn.

>>97543881
>how easy they're to clean etc,
When I was nogunz I didn't have any appreciation for anything besides the aesthetics and muh firepower
As a lazy hasgunz my first considerations are ease of cleaning and field stripping. When it comes to GURPS I think that part is where familiarity should matter a lot

>>97544850
Reminds me of an early 00s jrpg npc, like something from a Tecmo game

File: Lmaoooo.jpg (168 KB, 1080x714)

168 KB JPG

>>97540224
>But hey, don't have to worry about that since it's never coming out now
You wish it wasn't. It'll finally be the beacon that makes people want to play GURPS. Focusing on the most important thing.

>>97545851
The most important thing about GURPS is making it appealing to retarded brown crippled. Those are the real heart of our beloved system!

>>97544670
>leather
sorry buddy, but unless you use some sort of low tech armor house rule (like this one https://noschoolgrognard.blogspot.com/search/label/Better%20Fantasy%20Armor), you might as well not wear armor, for all good leather armor does in a fantasy game.

>>97546227
Because leather armor is useless and didn't exist. Hardened leather, on the other hand, did.

>>97546401
True, tho I don't remember seeing hardened leather armor stats in gurps.

>>97546502
It was probably just treated as heavy clothing with a +1 dr

>>97546502
It's right there in Low-Tech

>>97546571
It's significantly better than just heavy clothing. Then again, GURPS DR is so poorly granular that mail is just 4 so can't exactly be as good as mail

>>97548076
It's DR 3 anyway

>>97548076
Why is gurps dr like this

>>97546401
>Because leather armor is useless and didn't exist. Hardened leather, on the other hand, did.
Actually, 'soft' leather was a significant component in things like buff coats and many 'fabric' armours. Its very helpful in forming a layer under mail too, since unlike woven cloth, it doesn't snag and tear easily. Hardened leather seems to have been fairly rare.

File: Cripple.png (135 KB, 1103x593)

135 KB PNG

>>97545968
To be fair, GURPS was a pioneer in encouraging you to make retarded brown cripples as characters.

>>97548703
I was reading some RPG called "Last Stand" 500 years ago, before I ever played gurps.
I just found my notes about it
>cool mechanics from Last Stand RPG:
>1: taking pieces of your enemy and integrating on your bio-armor. You first "Rip" it, and can use immediately, and later you can "Slot it" becoming permanent part of your armor. Slotted abilities are stronger.
>Like reaping off a "boomer bee" abilty to explode and using it as an AoE
>2: The bio-armor: each is a different animal/insect and has stat boosts, and can be modified by adding 4 permanent monster bits.
Can you do those things in GURPS somehow?

>>97548703
But as I said, leather armor doesn't exist. Leather used as clothing and backing was common, no one denies that. For example, scale was sewn over leather backing usually. Under mail it'd be just a different layer of padding instead of light quilted clothing (or just regular cloth in some cases). But as standalone armor? No such thing.

>>97548703
>leather seems to have been fairly rare
I don't know if I'd call it rare. Cuirass literally originates from "cuir bouilli", that is, boiled leather. Already in the 12th and 13th centuries we have mentions of "breastplates", and since they cannot have been iron or steel, they must've been leather. It definitely wasn't used as the main armor, but piecemeal protection (breastplate, schynbalds, vambraces, spaulders).

So in GURPS Spaceships, you can make a robot arm costs 10x less if you give it bad grip 2.
Is there a similar disadvantage I can give robot legs to justify a similar decrease in cost?
I'm trying to make a cheap ass mecha and the legs (100k each) are literally the most expensive part.

>>97549558
>GURPS Vehicles: 50-percent discount for Bad Grip 2 on arms; 300-percent premium for having two legs rather than four legs
>GURPS Spaceships: 90-percent discount for Bad Grip 2 on arms; no premium for having two legs rather than four legs
A bit strange.

>>97549676
Vehicles is 3e, and spaceships specifically aims to be simple, so this sort of discrepancy makes sense.

>>97540539
>But is it cheaper?
>If it's not cheaper than I think that's balanced enough.
That design in $365k.
In Mass Combat a basic-quality IFV with average-quality crew is $400k to raise. Crew-served weapons have raise costs of 25-50k, so it seems reasonable to say the crew themselves are worth $35k, making the cost equivalent, so the Spaceships build is better value, because it is a high-end IFV at basic prices.
Real-world IFV prices can be hard to find, but fortunately I've just spent several weeks researching them. Long story, short, it varies a lot. The figures in Mass Combat are OK for 'average' but there's more variance than they suggest, some of them millions of dollars, and the spaceships version gives Bradley performance at BMP prices.
It's not so bad if you're designing everything using Spaceships and never comparing to real-world vehicles, because the differences are small enough that they don't give absurd results.
You will run into the issue that Spaceships is very restrictive though. You're just screwed if you want a 20-ton or 50-ton vehicle, and you really need to break out smaller systems for a lot of things.

>>97549558
There is a rather obvious issue with clumsy legs. At best you could maybe have slower leg motors, but that would seem suicidal for a combat mech.
A discount for the number of legs seems reasonable. It's a lot easier to stabilise a quadruped compared to a biped. Maybe divide cost of each leg by something like 0.5+(L/4) where L is the number of legs?

>>97549877
>You're just screwed if you want a 20-ton or 50-ton vehicle, and you really need to break out smaller systems for a lot of things.
True, but I found that just having the formulas for SM 0-3 spaceships is enough for 99% of cases.
https://gurb3d6.blogspot.com/2017/03/spaceships-quickie-spaceship-for-any.html


>>97549888
that makes sense, thanks for the idea

>>97531613
In Bio-Tech, the Random Metamorphosis virus option says the cost is up to the GM but should be based on the amount of points that could be changed.
However cost for proteus viruses is based on the amount of weeks it takes for the changes to happen, which depends on the minimum TL of a modification. Is this supposed to be $1000/pt?

>>97549558
The rules allow for one-legged mecha. I personally would allow one leg system to represent two weak legs with the same rules as one leg. Optionally, decrease Hnd by 1 and increase SR by 1 for such a system.

>>97550060
That's also a good idea, and would cut the costs in half. Thanks!

>>97550060
Becoming the proverbial one-legged mecha in an ass kicking contest

>>97548944
>1
Supers has a brief segment on spending points to make your iconic gear better. For example, if your character has a unique airplane they use, rather than statting an entire airplane as an Ally, you start with a normal plane obtained normally (cash, stolen, Signature Gear, etc.) and treat is as a 0-point Ally; then you sum the point costs of any added traits (Enhanced Move, Reduced Consumption, an Innate Attack, etc.) that make it unique and just pay for an Ally worth that much. Permanently incorporating a stolen monster bit into your armor could be the difference between using the bit normally and paying the points to make it better.

>2
That just sounds like in-universe reasoning for how you're spending points to improve your character, no different than finding a teacher and paying them to learn new skills. You could also run a game with descriptive point totals rather than prescriptive and just give them the points, but some people really dislike that.

>>97550159
Yeah that could work. I didn't really think about points like that.

I've been googling around for firearms upgrade frameworks in GURPS. One result said it was something like signature weapon in superpowers with a point system or something
Any GURPS gen preferred models for upgrading weapons via engineer, floating around?

>>97549980
I guess, I usually do $500 though

I kind of want to use Commited Attack and Defensive Attack in my current campaign. Although, my game is mostly focused on gunfights, rather than melee combat. I'm thinking of allowing Commited Attack to work with guns by allowing the Double, Feint (for Ranged Feints), and Suppressive Fire options, but at -2 to skill. Meanwhile, Defensive Attack gives -4 to skill when used to make a ranged attack, instead of giving a penalty to damage. Finally, I'm thinking of adding a new option to All-Out Attack that permits full move, but no other benefits, as a more risky alternative to Move and Attack. Does that seem fair? My campaign is leaning more on the cinematic side, so it's fine if it isn't totally realistic.

>plan to make a space opera game
>get to subsector generation
>want more detail
>start reading about astronomy
>get some reality checks about FTL travels and planet habitality
>turn to hard sci fi out of pure autism
Is this common? It all started when I read GURPS Space and it has been full autismo from there. How should I go when worldbuilding (universebuilding, if you will) a space opera setting with GURPS? I tried Traveller but I feel like it lacks a lil' bit of details. And to wrap it all up: are desert worlds such as Arrakis or Tatooine even possible with the GURPS Space worldbuilding tools?

>>97550774
There's a pyramid article that includes "All-out attack: Aim and shoot" or something like that which you might read.
Since All-out attack: Aim and shoot exists, you could easily make "Comitted attack: aim and shoot" which would give half accuracy instead of full accuracy.
If you're using cinematic rules, you should use "extra effort: charge" or whatever it's called and just make people use 1FP to be able to move and attack at no penalties.

>>97550823
No
I wanted some sci-fi, read stuff about delta v and shit that comes with gurps spaceships and instantly decided to ignore all that shit and just use FTL drives and reactionless engines which are way simpler.

>>97550836
Noted. I'll look it up.

>>97550823
Yes I have done this like a dozen fucking times now.

>>97550311
Generally speaking, the more realistic options are well covered in High-Tech and Tactical Shooting.
The invention rules are OK for new designs.
If you want cinematic features adding, then I don't know of an actually good system for that. Meta-Tech is a not-so-good system which can work if you put some effort into making it do what you want.

>>97550774
All of those seem fine to me.

>>97550823
>Are desert worlds such as Arrakis or Tatooine even possible with the GURPS Space worldbuilding tools?
Under step 5, the random-generation procedures will not generate a Garden world with water coverage of less than 50 percent. However, a GM making his own custom worlds is not bound by the random-generation procedures, and setting the water to zero won't break anything later. Also, step 6 does allow the random-generation procedures to generate a Garden world with average temperature at 340 K (67 °C, 152 °F).

>>97551072
>step 5 and step 6
step 4 and step 5

>>97549877
>You're just screwed if you want a 20-ton or 50-ton vehicle, and you really need to break out smaller systems for a lot of things.
>Intermediate SM (SM +0.5)
>A ship of intermediate SM has twice the mass of a ship of the previous SM, but is treated as the next higher SM for purposes of being targeted or detected. So a SM +8.5 ship has a Loaded Mass of 2,000 tons (twice that of a SM +8 ship) but is considered SM +9 for purposes of attack and detection. All other statistics are extrapolated from the existing systems.
Combined with
https://gurb3d6.blogspot.com/2017/03/spaceships-quickie-spaceship-for-any.html
I say gives enough granularity for any sort of size.

>>97551656
Doubled mass is +2/3 to SM, not +1/2.

>>97551756
Just a minor math error

>>97549877
>Bradley performance at BMP prices.
Honestly, to me this seems just a "manually adjust cost later" depending on lore, balance and whatever other fluff factor you want.

>>97551656
Why do you need the approximate 'intermediate mass' rule if that blog post already lets you make a ship of any mass? Just for when you can't be bothered to open a spreadsheet?
It seems like you could also extrapolate systems of arbitrary size if you really want to. They all follow a more-or-less regular progression based on the ship's mass, or a value which is very easily derived from it (e.g. cube root of mass for DR). So you could make a ship which is 11.5% armour, or 4% control room, or whatever.

>>97551756
But the actual 'correct' value for +0.5 SM is the fourth root of ten, and the value for +1 SM is the square root of ten. Spaceships rounds off the latter to 3 when it should really be 3.1623... so it doesn't seem too bad to round off the former (which should be 1.7793...) to 2.
差不多 as they say in biosafety level 4 facilities.

File: gurps precise geometric p(...).png (48 KB, 923x905)

48 KB PNG

>>97552023
Way ahead of you.
https://www.htmlover.com/000007.html#Precise%20Geometric%20Progression

>>97552041
>>97551951
Math is very hard

I realize I'm the only guy using spaceships but in case this is useful for anyone:

>GURPS SPACESHIPS Pyramid articles
> • Spaceships I (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 30)
> ○ Sky Galleys
> • Alternate Spaceships (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 34)
> ○ Tanks, trains, subs, combustion power plants
> • Vehicles (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 40)
> ○ Mecha Operations (pp. 4) - Expanded options for mecha.
> • Modular Mecha (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 51)
> • Sailing the Open Skies (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 64 pp. 29 )
> • Spaceships II (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 71)
> ○ The Captain's Boat (pp 32) - Rules for Spaceships as patrons.
> • Medieval Sea Trade (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 87)
> • Spaceships III (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 94)
> ○ Battle for Earth (pp 11) - Example of mass combat vs aliens
> • Spaceship Malfunctions (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 103)
> • Astroduel (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 111)

>>97552609
Or you could just run a Ctrl-F for "spaceships" in the In These Issues file in the trove.

>>97552625
That's what I did!
Now you don't have to do it!
I don't know if you tried yourself but CTRL-F through the "in these issues" takes a while because going "ctrl+f spaceships" will also highlight all the "this medieval fantasy article was written by mr. dude who wrote spaceships and other stuff!"

>>97552644
>takes a while
>only 52 results in the file

>>97552669
that's a lot of results

>>97550948
Yeah, thanks.
It seems that a person stranded in a lower tech level has to deal with a negative modifier of -5 for "improvised tools" to upgrade weapons, with maybe special jigs and fixtures to offset it a small amount.
Interesting, I'm going to have to dig deep on it

>>97552609
Ignore the other anon, this was helpful. The sheer amount of BURPS articles and books makes combing through it a chore at times.

Today we had a fun game.
When confronted with the reality of eldritch horrors one PC acquired a delusion (there's no such thing as eldritch horrors), while and another became addicted to painkillers.
And the final PC passed all his checks, grabbed the spawn of Dagon and threw it into an industrial crusher.

>>97557715
>When confronted with the reality of eldritch horrors one PC acquired a delusion (there's no such thing as eldritch horrors)
kek!

>>97552862
Really depends on your situation. A TL 6 machine shop is probably better than 'improvised' for a TL 8 gun, but a TL 3 smithy would only be barely enough to qualify for the -5.
You may want to check out After the End 2 for some rules for crafting with crappy tools and materials.
Realistically, I'm struggling to see why anyone trapped with a high-tech gun in a low-tech world would risk damaging it to gain the dubious benefits of a customised weapon. You don't want a full-auto conversion if you have a limited amount of ammunition. You may wish you had a shorter barrel, but you risk fucking up your accuracy and even a full-length rifle is a lot handier than a crossbow or longbow. Converting to a bullpup might be less risky, but its a ton of work.
About the only thing I would really consider worth it would be a bayonet.

There doesn't seem to be much support for creating encounters or quests.

>>97564265
I guess it just expects you to know how to.

File: kyle-punk-art-herring-glu(...).jpg (960 KB, 1920x2688)

960 KB JPG

What IQ would you give an ogre? What does it translate to IRL?

>>97564274
Do you happen to know a good book about it? I just want to read what people have to say about encounter design.

>>97564304
NTA but I've always thought that GURPS combat isn't really "balancable" like lesser systems like d&d are. How do you balance an encounter irl? Apply the same thought to GURPS. 10 armored knights vs your janitor with his push broom? Bleak odds. The same but the janitor has a glock? Better odds but all it takes is one good stab from a sword and Scruffy's going down.

>>97564279
Roughly average black IQ so probably 8.

File: Screenshot_20260216_085455.png (405 KB, 1515x928)

405 KB PNG

>>97564265
That depends on which game you talking about. On another not, Adaptations has some advice on handling adventures from other games with GURPS.