>>97983586
I want to build a stinger tail for a cyborg, which functions like the Dan-Inject JM Standard from High-Tech minus shooting darts. So a 1d pi-, reach C weapon with a follow-up drug effect that has an HT-3 roll, and each point by which that is failed deals 1d FP.
The carrier would be an Innate Attack, Small Piercing 1 (Melee, Reach C, Can't Parry, -35%) [2], but I'm not sure how to build the drug effect:
>Affliction 4 (Sleep, +150%; Blood Agent, -40%; Limited Use, 3-4 uses, Slow Reload, -15%) [78]
>Fatigue Attack 1 (Hazard, Missed Sleep, +50%; Resistible, HT-3, -15%; Blood Agent, -40%; Limited Use, 3-4 uses, Slow Reload, -15%) [8]
P102 says that an attack only works if a natural weapon pierces DR, Blood Agent should be used instead of Follow-up, though it doesn't say anything about being attached to a carrier attack. But then we have this Kromm email exchange, from two years after Powers came out:
https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=356035&postcount=27

Am I on the right track? On a related note, toxic damage is wonky, you have all of these penetration modifiers specifying that any DR stops them, which toxic attacks always use, but if you use a follow-up, they become magically capable of potentially penetrating DR. Is there Toxic DR anywhere outside of, I'm guessing, magical items or supers stuff?

>>97975338
> >1,750 mph
>Huh???
1,750 mph is standard atmospheric top speed from a 0.5 G reaction engine (such as a single-system turbofan engine). However, this is an error, since the speed should actually be limited to 400 mph as per the Vehicles rules for flarecraft.

File: 1742277384835920.png (254 KB, 680x609)

254 KB PNG

Hey anons. I mentioned in the last thread that I'd bring this up, and I'd love to hear your thoughts.

My current project is basically trying to make a Dungeon Fantasy-style plug-and-play toolkit for GURPS sci-fi. Of course, unlike fantasy, "generic sci-fi" can mean anything from cyberpunk street mercs to hard vacuum colonists to full cinematic space opera, so the idea is to build a big unified resource with everything tagged by genre and tone. The GM can say, "this campaign allows Cyberpunk, Cinematic, and Fantasy tags, but not Space or Gritty," and both he and the players know what character options, gear, powers, vehicles, etc., are on the table.

Stuff included would be:
>archetypal templates usable across genres (Soldier, Pilot, Agent, Face, Tech, etc.)
>upgrade modules with traits/powers
>curated gear lists tagged by genre
>ready-made vehicles and spaceships
>racial/meta-trait templates for aliens, robots, mutants, etc.
>recommended or applicable rules for each tag/genre
>a large sci-fi alien/monster bestiary

The goal is for newer groups to be able to start a functional sci-fi campaign fast, and for experienced GURPS players to have a huge pre-sorted toolbox instead of rebuilding everything every time they want a new future setting.

Would people here actually find that useful?

>>97985089
I'd actually caution against such an ambitious undertaking. Chances are that you don't actually know all that many SF genres in depth, and genre guides written by people with only a shallow knowledge of the genre tend to be pretty bad. It would also be an absurdly large amount of work.
I recommend picking one fairly specific genre and doing a good job of that, then doing another, reusing suitable assets, then another, until you've got a fair number of well-researched subgenres covered, then if you've still got energy after years of reading, watching, and writing, consider bringing it all together in one interconnected project.

Planning on doing some sort of urban fantasy/horror mix within GURPS. I’ve got a couple ideas.

>>97985089
Any worked example would be great to have imo

>>97985089
This would be unspeakably useful yes.

>>97984836
Jesus. That's what, 670 kmh? There's no reason for a hover tank to be this fast

>>97985549
Have you checked out Voodoo and Cabal?

>>97985089
Yes but you're looking at a metric shitton of work there

>>97985549
Read Monster Hunters

>>97986692
Jet aircraft tend to be pretty speedy, and that's essentially what an ekranoplan is.
If you ignore the rules about winged designs needing to be streamlined or don't bother with the flarecraft wings and just use ground effect lift, you can get significantly lower top speed while still having OK acceleration. e.g. 1 G total thrust, 0.9 G for lift, 0.1 G for propulsion, gives 79 mph, or Move 1/39, only a little faster than a normal tank. 0.66 G of vectored thrust with flarecraft wings and no streamlining would get about 200 mph.

>>97987801
Honestly I'm just looking at all these numbers you posted here and in the last thread and I'm wondering if I should even use vehicles instead of arbitrary numbers.

File: the-hover-tank-from-battl(...).png (43 KB, 640x208)

43 KB PNG

>>97987801
>ekranoplan
I mean, sure, it's a ground effect vee, but it's completely different from the standard sci-fi hover tank/afv

>>97988109
The concept of a floating AFV without even a hovercraft skirt is fairly 'cinematic', so yeah, if you want it to be a tank (or assault gun, or whatever) which just happens to have jet engines / fans instead of tracks, you should probably simply choose numbers which feel right.

>>97988186
Sorry, meant to reply to >>97987919

I want to make a "narrative teleportation" power, that works similar to how horror movie monsters can just appear out of nowhere in complete silence.
To that end I was thinking of applying the following Aspects to Warp:
>Doubly Aspected (-40%): You can only teleport if no one is looking at you and if there is a possible path to the target location if you were walking.
Does this seem fair?

>>97988186
>cinematic
Well, it's feasible just impractical. It'd be very loud and handle funny but it's realistic enough not to be jarring

>>97989309
See Horror, p. 20. It's called 'Ghostly Movement' although it isn't specifically a ghost ability, and uses Accessibility instead of Aspected, but the limitation value is the same.
Also consider aspected Intuition, Serendipity, and/or Foresight (from Fortunately, I Saw This Coming, Pyramid 3/53) for someone that always knows where the victim will run to.

>>97989752
>t's feasible just impractical.
Obviously its physically possible to make an aircraft which can take off vertically. Jump jets, hovercraft, aircraft, and space rockets all do that. The difficulty is combining that capability with significant endurance and armour.
In Spaceships terms a normal tank probably has three ICE power plants and one tracked drivetrain system. Weapons are maybe one major battery and one medium battery system. As many as three control room systems. That leaves 11 systems for armor, which is probably metallic laminate with a 60% increase in DR due to reduced volume. That's DR 1,056 distributed across the six facings of a 30-ton light tank. Give everything except the front DR 100 and you can get DR 556 on the front. Not great, but it's a light tank.
Two turbofan engines plus eight tanks of jet fuel would leave only five systems for armor. That's a mere 180 DR across all six facings, not even enough to reliably stop machine-gun fire!
ICE power plants and ducted fans might do the job:
https://samuelbaughn.blogspot.com/2026/05/airscrew-systems-for-gurps-spaceships.html
Although those numbers might be a little optimistic. Still even if you need three power plant systems and three airscrew systems, that's only two more than a tracked drivetrain. Nine armor systems gives DR 756 across 6 facings, or 72% of a conventional tank's protection. If two systems of each are sufficient, you are equal to a conventional tank.
With a hovercraft skirt, you could be even more efficient, probably able to get by with just a single system each for engine and fan, thus being able to pack even more armor on (assuming the skirt uses up one system) than a tracked tank while being able to handle worse terrain!
This is all probably way off, thanks to pushing the spaceships system well beyond its intended purpose. As far as I know, nobody of consequence in the real world considers hover-tanks to be viable today, far less with cold-war technology.

>>97990195
Lumping conventional propellers and ducted fans together is probably a bad assumption. Vehicles gives TL 7 (4th ed) ducted fans about 31% more weight (but 12% less power consumption) per pound of thrust than propellers.
It's also inaccurate to have airscrews draw no more power than tracked or wheeled drivetrains. According to Vehicles, power per pound of weight for airscrews should be an order of magnitude greater than that for tracks! An airscrew system which is pushing 0.45 G should use something like ten power points, so two systems worth of airscrew would need ten systems of gas turbines. That's obviously not plausible for an AFV, as it could carry barely any armor.

>>97990195
>https://samuelbaughn.blogspot.com/2026/05/airscrew-systems-for-gurps-spaceships.html
>Although those numbers might be a little optimistic. Still even if you need three power plant systems and three airscrew systems, that's only two more than a tracked drivetrain. Nine armor systems gives DR 756 across 6 facings, or 72% of a conventional tank's protection. If two systems of each are sufficient, you are equal to a conventional tank.
>With a hovercraft skirt, you could be even more efficient, probably able to get by with just a single system each for engine and fan, thus being able to pack even more armor on (assuming the skirt uses up one system) than a tracked tank while being able to handle worse terrain!
Looks like he fixed the numbers. Now you need two systems of ducted fans and four of gas turbines to get 0.72G, which should be enough to hover (ground effect roughly doubles lift, so 0.5G would be barely enough and 0.6 would be comfortable, leaving 0.12 for thrust, which is decent for a tank). Add a fuel tank for 10 hours operation and you get thirteen systems left for crew, weapons, and armor. Assume 2 control rooms and 2 weapon systems, that's 9 armor systems, which is enough to be a respectable fighting vehicle. A 100-ton TL 8 SM+6 hovertank with metallic laminate could have DR 100 everywhere except for the front, which would have DR 760. Although it wouldn't even be as tough as the TL 7 T-72, which is half the weight, it would be much faster and capable of serious amphibious operations, which might make it semi-viable.

>>97983586
I like discworld and found out about gurps through coming across the game. Are there any reccomended books to go along with it or is it really all I need for a good discworld game like it says on the tinm?

>>97991373
The Discworld Roleplaying Game (Powered by GURPS) is a 100% complete game which contains everything you need for playing in the Discworld setting. I can't think of anything it would benefit from taking from full GURPS.
The older GURPS Discworld (and GURPS Discworld Also) require the 3rd edition Basic Set.

>Reverse Grip
>(...)
>Brawling and Karate parries are possible when wielding a reach C or 1 weapon this way. (...) This special parry is at only -1 – or at no penalty if using a tonfa (p. 225), which is designed for it.
>reach C or 1
A spear is only reach 1 when wielded one handed, does that mean you could use brawling or karate to parry with it when holding it in one-handed reverse grip?

>>97991723
RAW yes.
Realistically, the reverse grip rules don't work for spears.

>>97991774
I'm feeling RAW today so thanks for confirming.
Realistically, were spears ever used in reverse grip? Like the pictures you see on greek vases and such?

>>97991788
Yes, plenty of times. In fact, cavalry lances were used like that too, before they were couched. Overhand thrusting downward.

>>97991788
>Realistically, were spears ever used in reverse grip? Like the pictures you see on greek vases and such?
Yes, all the time. But this didn't reduce reach, conceal the movement of the spear, or allow parries with it held across the forearm. It may have increased the force of thrusts, at the cost of making the movements a little more obvious and compromising parries with the spear. If you really want to distinguish it from the normal spear grip, add +1 damage, change Parry to 0U, and maybe give +1 to defenses against it (might be overkill, but +1 thrust damage is pretty good).

>>97993087
>If you really want to distinguish it from the normal spear grip, add +1 damage, change Parry to 0U, and maybe give +1 to defenses against it (might be overkill, but +1 thrust damage is pretty good).
Lots of spears which were used in an 'overhand' grip are already Parry 0U one-handed, so maybe change to Parry 0U or -2U if already 0U. Or just a flat -2 to Parry.

>Limited use twice per day: -30%
>Meta Tech Real Time: If it normally has a number of uses per game day, it now gets that many uses per hour of game play
>So twice per hour = -30%
>Real Time: Once per Scene = -20%
I feel like these numbers are a bit wrong
How long or short do they think an encounter is? In my experience, one encounter = 1 hour.

>>97993087
>>97993128
-2 to parry +1 to thrust seems balanced to me.

What skill does a centaur use to hike long distances while pulling a cart? Still hiking? Teamster?

>>97993419
Hiking, the cart is just encumbrance to the centaur.
The real question is if you have a human in the cart driving it. Does he roll Teamster?

>>97993511
>Hiking, the cart is just encumbrance to the centaur.
Good point.
>The real question is if you have a human in the cart driving it. Does he roll Teamster?
I think he'd roll teamster as a complementary skill roll, giving the centaur tips to keep the cart steady and so on.

>>97993419
I love GURPS creating questions like this.

realistically, how is a "charge" actually represented? Like when you've got all the warriors on one side running towards the enemy.
It can't be just "move and attack" cause I can't imagine people IRL have a 50% chance to completely whiff whenever they do some sort of charge in a battle.

>>97994675
>other systems don't let players have centaur PCs
>other systems don't have Hiking and Teamster skills
I know it's hard, but try to extract GURPS's delicious cock from your throat a little.

>>97994790
I imagine it's more like an AoA realistically, Move and Attack is running like Usain Bolt

>>97994790
Slams as All-Out Attacks (Martial Arts p. 98): All-Out Attack (Determined, Feint, Strong, or Double) works with Slam at full Move rather than half Move.
Heroic Charge (Martial Arts p. 131): Using Extra Effort, you can spend 1 FP to eliminate the skill cap on Move and Attack.

>>97994804
I mean. "The world's Greatest Roleplaying game" has tiny baby centaurs that aren't capable of dragging carts AND they do not, in fact, have either of those skills.

>>97994817
This makes sense. They run until they're in range of an AoA and then make the AoA.

>>97994838
I agree with everything else but
>Heroic Charge (Martial Arts p. 131): Using Extra Effort, you can spend 1 FP to eliminate the skill cap on Move and Attack.
I always assumed extra effort in combat was cinematic

>>97994838
>All-Out Attack (Determined, Feint, Strong, or Double) works with Slam at full Move
How do you do a "AoA double" with a slam?
Can you do a full speed AoA shield slam and then a sword swing?

>>97994846
>Can you do a full speed AoA shield slam and then a sword swing?
Yes, or you can swing at someone on your way before doing the shield slam.

>>97994840
Yes, Martial Arts agrees.

>>97994853
Wow, this changes a lot on how I'm gonna run gurps melee. Doing a big slam and swinging afterwards fits how I imagine a lot of monstrous humanoids would start the fight.

>>97994839
ACKS has a full-size centaur race (though converting it to a custom PC class takes some work) and proficiencies for Driving and Endurance.

>>97994817
Yeah, All-Out-Attack (Strong) is pretty much made to represent charging at the enemy full-tilt. You can't really defend (except getting a shield up for passive protection, which isn't well represented in GURPS) when you're hurling yourself forward like that, but you hit hard.

>>97995038
>(except getting a shield up for passive protection, which isn't well represented in GURPS)
I think the shields up dungeon fantasy splat has rules for keeping the shield as passive cover. Not sure if it works when you all out attack tho

>>97990875
Honestly anon, I gotta ask, who are you to be so wise in the ways of numbers

>>97995038
>well represented in GURPS
I mean, to me it seems very simple to do. Shields are stated to cover certain limbs/part of the body, so just use random hit locations and you have a chance to be hit on the shield instead

I feel like in practice, when you're actually gaming, Camouflage just never gets used. Every situation you can use camouflage you can also use stealth.

>>97995458
It's far more often a skill NPCs use and PCs roll against, due to the fact that the PCs tend to be the active group which moves around a lot, while the NPCs are on the defense.
It becomes far more of a big deal if you force the PCs to set up camps / patrol bases and leave some their stuff there while conducting operations (i.e. give them more stuff than they can fight effectively while carrying and no safe, guarded location to leave it).
One easily overlooked rule is that even when total concealment isn't possible, successful use of camouflage gives -1 to hit you. That's a decent little bonus.

>>97995458
The rules are fairly explicit that you can use both. If you fail your Stealth roll / contest, then you get a quick contest of Observation vs. Camouflage to remain undetected. Given that visual Observation takes full range penalties, you are very likely to win that contest if you have OK camouflage skill and appropriate gear (it's easy to claim +1 even at low tech levels, and a ghillie suit can effectively allow you to use your Camouflage skill twice, once to set the bonus, and once again while using it).

>>97995748
>>97995783
Fair points. I'll try to keep those in mind so the skill get used more often.

>>97995458
Stealth is used if you are in motion against any sense (whichever is best), Camouflage is used againt Vision when you are still. DF16 has some clarifications in that regard.
It's also an Easy instead of Average skill, and gear only gives bonuses to Camouflage. DF16 makes those also apply to Stealth against vision, but you can easily get a better camo score.

>>97995458
I mean, if you're sniping or staking out a place, or just lying in wait, camo is applicable

>>97996254
In all my years of gaming, I think I've seen about two examples of PCs actually setting an ambush, but dozens of them getting ambushed. From a pure build-efficiency perspective, Observation is a way better investment than Camouflage.
My regular group even has an in-joke about maxing out 'Spot Hidden' in every system.

>>97996333
Interesting. I know I've set up ambushes fairly often at least when I'm playing. It might just be the nature of High/Ultra Tech mercenary work, though. I got a lot of use out of the camo options in Ultra Tech during said ambushes.

>>97995164
>just use random hit locations and you have a chance to be hit on the shield instead
Close enough, welcome back 3e PD.

>>97995164
Wasn't there some rule that gives the enemy -1 to hit to no more hit locations than the shield has DB

>>97998525
See >>97995061

>>97998532
IIRC it wasn't in that book though because I have never read it

File: gurps shields up delibera(...).png (40 KB, 409x893)

40 KB PNG

>>97998540

>>97998550
What I was thinking of was apparently a Krommpost, so quasi-official
https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=1692962&postcount=9

>>97998550
I don't like this system because it requires you to spend an all-out defense
>>97998552
>https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=1692962&postcount=9
And I don't like this one because it's a free buff to shields.
I think Kromm's post is closer, but you should pick to either get a DB bonus or give enemies -DB to hit you, not both.

>>97999156
>I think Kromm's post is closer, but you should pick to either get a DB bonus or give enemies -DB to hit you, not both.
To maintain the 'game balance' it should be something like -2*DB to hit you, which could add up to quite a steep penalty with large shields. Of course, you could always attack through the shield, at the same penalty as attacking through cover.

>>97999178
You're right, due to how defenses work it should be -2*DB, good point.

So, swinging a spear with two-hands so you hit with the shaft would use the staff skill right?
Then what if you're holding it with one hand and swing it?
Would it use the broadsword skill?

>>97999178
>>97999187
I don't quite agree because that would make it strictly superior to static cover, but feel free to explain yourselves

>>97999253
Yes. See Unorthodox Attacks (Martial Arts p. 220).

>>97999302
A +2 cover bonus is strictly inferior to +2DB since every +1 in defense is equivalent to a +2 in attack (which is why deceptive strike is -2 per -1 to enemy defenses).

>>97999312
>Unorthodox Attacks (Martial Arts p. 220).
Right, thanks. I sort of saw that box before but didn't really absorb it.

>>97999178
More complete treatment:
Attack around shield at -2*DB
- Optional Rule: penalty modified by hit location. For slightly more complex system, use -4*DB for hand and arm holding the shield, no extra penalty for foot, skull, or weapon (including the shield itself). More complex systems are obviously possible if you are obsessive enough.
- Optional Rule: the duelling buckler (Low-Tech, p. 116) becomes DB 0.5, giving -1 to anyone attacking past it.
Attacks through the shield get a flat -1 for partial obscurement and deflection, but shield's DR protects.

>>97999302
>I don't quite agree because that would make it strictly superior to static cover, but feel free to explain yourselves
Static cover makes it impossible to hit covered hit locations and gives -2 to hit partially covered ones.
Shields-as-cover (in its simplest form) gives a flat penalty for all hit locations, but this varies from -2 to -6. This is an abstraction representing the fact that some areas are partially covered and some totally, and that the shield is not static but moving with some degree of control from the user (albeit not the precise control used when stopping an attack with a Block).
The number was chosen simply because the standard GURPS trade-off is -2 attack for -1 active defense, as seen in deceptive and telegraphic attack.
The results do seem rather generous. Possibly shields are 'too good' in the original rules and a fair value would be more like -1 or -2 for small, -3 for medium, -4 for large.

So, the expert backstabbing gives +1 striking ST per level when the enemy can't defend at all.
This is the AD&D style "Backstab".
What if I want the D&D5e style "sneak attack" where all you need is a buddy?
"The enemy must not be able to defend" is -60% (striking ST is [5]; Expert Backstabbing is [2]), how much would "The target must have been attacked within the last second" be?
I think I could just chalk it as "Aspected -20%"

>>97999415
Rough approximation of shield coverage:
Small: entire shield-side hand, part of shield-side arm, part of torso.
Medium: entire shield-side arm and hand, entire torso, part of neck.
Large: entire shield-side arm and hand, entire torso, and neck, part of face and legs.

Using David Pulver's armor design systems (e.g. Low-Tech Armor Design, Pyramid 3/52) that equates to:
Small shield: about 5 square feet, 22% cover, 1.3 lbs/sf
Medium shield: about 9 square feet, 43% cover, 1.5 lbs/sf
Large shield: about 13 square feet, 62% cover, 1.5 lbs/sf
Going by the idealised size, speed and range table (each step being 10^(1/6) greater than the previous), -1 to hit should be about a 54% reduction in target surface area. To be more specific, 18-61% reduction is -1 to hit, 62-82% is -2, 83-91% is -3, 92-96% is -4, 97-98% is -5. This is obviously inconsistent with the cover rules, which give -2 for 'half exposed'.

>>97999455
I think the D&D 5e rule is meant to represent the target turning to face your buddy, then you attacking them in their undefended rear. So, strictly speaking, it's just the exact same ability.
However, if you really want to get into emulating the game mechanics, there seems to be two approaches:
First, you can key it off the presence of a friendly combatant who is threatening them. You could phrase this as 'Accessibility: must have been attacked in melee, by someone else, within the last second' which seems fairly specific and worth at least -20%.
Alternatively, you could key the accessibility off penalties to defend. This allows it to scale neatly the more trouble your opponent has defending and covers both exploiting vulnerable flanks (-2 to defend from the side, or a runaround attack) and gaps in defense opened up by multiple lines of attack (parry penalty for multiple parries). However, this runs into issues with exactly what penalty counts; the most elegant being whichever penalty applies to the defense they actually used, but that in turn leads to weirdness like always dodging attacks from backstabbers attacking from the front, because dodges don't take multiple defense penalties. A variant would be to key it off not the defense penalty, but the defense score, such as 'only against targets who don't defend or make an active defense with an effective skill of n or less', which at least keeps the defender from having to add another step in their calculation of the best defense to use.

>>97999635
>First, you can key it off the presence of a friendly combatant who is threatening them. You could phrase this as 'Accessibility: must have been attacked in melee, by someone else, within the last second' which seems fairly specific and worth at least -20%.
I like this one, simple and does exactly what I want, I'll take it, thank you.

>>97999253
No cause the weight distribution is completely different to a broadsword. Also the staff of the spear will strike against your torso as you do it, getting in the way and making it basically not work. Try it with a broomstick yourself and you will see how retarded it is. I would just make the player roll against DX, not even any skill, with a Hard modifier.

>>97993511
You can't just treat the cart by it's raw weight tho, cause the centaur isn't lifting it but dragging it and it has wheels. I would instead look for shit in Low Tech about horses and logistics and figure something out of there.

>>97999713
There are plenty of ways to swing a pole without it getting in the way of your body, furthermore, according to GURPS martial arts, using a staff one-handed is broardsword.

>>97999735
Then GURPS martial arts is fucking wrong and I will die on this hill as a HEMAfag.

>>97999761
That's fair but it IS possible to swing a spear one handed, even if not as freely as using a broadsword, and it's not that awkward to do tho. It's not going to be a DX-5 thing, that's ridiculous.
A horizontal swing, for example would maybe count as a telegraphed swing but not it's not awkward enough to justify a -5.

Why is alchemist fire 1d6 burning damage on a direct in dungeon fantasy but in basic the so called "fantasy oil flask" is 3d burning damage on direct hits? Both do 1d-1 when used as area attacks.
1d6 fire is so pathetic against single targets in dungeon fantasy (when everyone who is anyone is hitting for 2d+) it would make a lot more sense to use the 3d from basic

>>98000187
I just make it 3d6 and use the normal unsealed armor rule instead of the flamethrower damage rule

File: Capture.png (40 KB, 745x486)

40 KB PNG

>>98000398
https://www.sjgames.com/gurps/news.html#22282
>April made two months in a row when we missed our goal to have something new for GURPS. As noted above, the schedule for 2026 now looks less certain than it once did. I hope that by the end of May, we will have that under control and I will be able to return to providing reliable dates.

>>98000398
I'll probably do that, it just makes more sense.

I am slowly inclining more on Per being based on HT

File: alternate attributes.png (17 KB, 406x773)

17 KB PNG

>>98001309
Everybody post your Alternate Attributes writeup!

>>98001381
In general, I'm opposed to using caps on stuff. It's just not good game design. Any new edition of GURPS seriously needs to switch the algebra to 3d6 + modifier to roll over a target number, along with an exponential increase in price to match the curve, getting rid of hard caps entirely. It's just so artificial and unsatisfying to be told by your GM "this is your stat and it cannot be changed". Especially in a framework where complete character customization is the primary feature / selling point.

>>98001381
>>98001309
I don't use alternate attributes because it would be too much work to set up in roll20

>>98001471
My nigga, you need to switch to Foundry for GURPS. Roll20 sucks.

>>98002338
It's free and it works, that's all I need
emphasis on free

>>98002418
I appreciate free, being a fellow poorfag, but I will say that Foundry's one-time licensing fee of $50 (at least that's what it was when I bought it) has more than paid for itself. Also, the people who support GURPS Foundry are cool while the people who support GURPS Roll20 are cringe faggots.

>>98002338
not him but Foundry's is shit relative to roll20. Roll20 I can at least use without the GCS.

>>98002653
>he doesn't use GCS
Why?

>>98001436
>roll over
Homosexuality

File: 1656435937762.jpg (45 KB, 514x935)

45 KB JPG

>>97985225
Thanks anon, I appreciate your advice and your candor. You're right that I don't have a deep knowledge of many scifi genres. But my intention isn't to make a genre guide (or guides) so much as a generic toy chest that can be used for as many genres as possible with as minimal adjustments as possible. My hope is that, even for something super niche, this resource should help the GM.
>>97986991
Yeah, it'll be a boatload of work, but I have some friends helping me here and there and, once I feel like I have something somewhat solid, I can make things available piecemeal as I add more content. For example, I started with 12 character templates and 4 primitive templates. Next I'll probably work on some gear and some upgrade modules so I can start a playtest. And if that goes well enough, I can release it here as I keep adding to it so I can get some feedback and it can hopefully see some use.
>>97985602
>>97985729
I'll try not to disappoint.

>>97999735
>according to GURPS
According to gurps, sword thrusts do blunt damage.

>>98003513
We already got over this conversation.

File: 1711869362958878.jpg (27 KB, 720x777)

27 KB JPG

Haven't played GURPS in years and now I feel like I would be too rusty to come back to it and adapt something I want that will come out but it will probably be based on 5e.

>>98004244
I basically went without playing from start of coof til last autumn, and we're having a blast

>>98004039
I wasn't here when that happened can I get a qrd

Sometimes I feel like I both love and hate GURPS

>>98004651
NTA, but first of all, GURPS "non-thrusting" swords are an artifact from Man to Man, and represent a real category of non-pointy swords, but by and large the kind of sword most people think about, and which were the default historically, are what GURPS calls "thrusting" swords. Honestly GURPS should have dropped the blunt sort ages ago and demoted it to a modifier like the rest found in LTC2.
Secondly, "crushing" here isn't descriptive, rather it's a mechanical tool, much like using "toxic" damage to represent death rays that have nothing to do with poison. It's there purely for the wound multiplier. If your sword has a point, it's far better at penetrating flesh, and thus a target, hence using x2 wounds (impaling) for those, and x1 (crushing) for the blunt-tipped sort.
You could substitute it for "cutting" damage if that makes it feel less weird to you, but be aware that you're increasing the wounds you inflict to x1.5.

>>98004746
thanks. Instead of changing the name for some disadvantages the next gurps release should really fix the non-thrusting broadsword to no longer be the default.

File: 6d-year-old GURPSer.png (854 KB, 2900x1700)

854 KB PNG

>always specifies THRUSTING broadsword as if there were another kind

>>98004780
I wish I could manage to memorize the speed/range/size table

>>98004799
>1
>1.5
>2
>3
>5
>7
>10
>ad infinitum
wa la

>>98004820
This part I learned, I wanted to memorize the size and range parts too
But the fact that 2y is the same line as 0 size and 0 speed/rng always fucks me up

>>98004799
You only need to memorise the sequence 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10 (plus the concept that +6 is *10) and you can do that by remembering it's about times one and a half each step. 1.5 is one and a half times 1, 2 is about one and a half times 1.5, 3 is one and a half times 2, 5 is one and a half times 3, rounded up. It goes a bit weird for the last two, because you're suddenly rounding down instead of up (actually more accurate to say that you were always incrementing the exact number by 146.78% and giving rounded results, but that requires more mental effort than just memorising a sequence of arbitrary numbers). You already know that the seventh step has to be 10, to maintain the +6 : *10 rule, so the only bit you actually have to memorise is that you round the sixth step down to *7 instead of up to *8.
So, in summary, memorise the following rules:
>SM / Range 0 is 2 yards
>Each step is about half again as big as the last one.
>Every six steps is times 10.
>Round off to one significant figure except for the second step in the sequence (1.5, 15, 150, etc.) which is two significant figures.
>Step 5 out of the 6 is slightly weird, because you start rounding down to times 7 (70, 700, etc.) instead of up to times 8.
Now you can reconstruct the S&S/R tale whenever you want.

>>98004836
All you need to remember that is that humans are SM 0 and about six feet tall.

>>98004885
>>98004890
I think I got it.

>>98004799
>memorize
I just have it printed for easy reference
No I don't use electronic game aids, that's AIDS.

>tired: 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10
>wired: 1, 1.5, 2.2, 3.2, 4.6, 6.8, 10

>>98005101
>inspired: 3', 4'5", 6'6", 9'6", 13'11", 20'5", 30', 44', 64'8", 94'10", 139'3", 204'5", 300'...

>>98004244
>probably be based on 5e

Enough with the 5e tyranny

>>97994790
Martial Arts has techniques and rules for custom techniques that let you ignore the skill cap on Move and Attack or Wild Swings but at -1 to skill.
Personally, I just give this to everyone by default. There's nothing about Move and Attack or Wild Swings that stand out to me as being difficult or unusual enough that they should warrant a skill cap instead of just a penalty to skill.
Skill caps only make sense when you're trying something that should involve multiple skills (like attacking while riding or in free fall), or rolling to shoot someone in total darkness or to hit someone by accident.

>>98004746
Nah man, it's retarded. Spatulate tip swords still fucking cut, especially because if you thrust and pierce, you're slicing with the rest of the blade.

>>97985089
This would be a great thing to start, even if you don't finish. You'll get better at making resources and resource sets, and if broad sci-fi toolkit doesn't speak to you, you might refine it into a more focused kit anyways

Templates splits: give each template 20/30/40 etc. points into genre matches, then have the actual skills and abil;ities be broken into broad TL and setting categories

IE: Space, Super tech Sci-fi, psy/magic

a basic fighter template woul; dhave the stats as expected of most genres, but with three buckets of points that then get reassigned into spacerifleman/shield knife fighter/laser sword duelist, making the difference between a jedi knight and a fremen fighter one of the buckets getting split into psy abilities, and one of the buckets survivalist traits. Templates would be meta templates, broken into further sub templates at GM discretion(or player discretion, in a no holds barred type campaign)

>>98009198
That's a great suggestion and is pretty close to my current approach. I currently made 12 PC templates, each at 150 points, that are rather broad and generic in scope. Thematic but potentially restrictive things - traits that only make sense in space, or cinematic traits - are put in containers stating as much. If the GM says it's a gritty game, players can't choose Cinematic traits. That sort of thing.

I'll make a bunch of upgrade modules for cyberware, psi powers, genetic enhancements, etc., for ease of use. Players and GMs who want to really dig in can ignore them and make their own, but people who just want to jump into a game should still have a wide array to choose from.

I'm actually currently wrapping up the Primitive templates... I originally was going to have a single Primitive template, but decided that that's not a proper character archetype. So I made four of them, one for each estate/caste/what have you - Warrior, Sage, Tradesman, and Commonfolk. Again, very broad templates that can make whatever type of character for TLs 0-3. And you can add an alien racial template and you have a primitive alien, or make an Egyptian charioteer who gets abducted by aliens, or some other such stuff.

>>97983586
What's the best setting you've made by combining sourcebooks?

I need a cinematic rule that allows a PC to survive a mortal wound occasionally (like for example if a random mook manages to score a crit to the vitals)
There are a few I know but I don't like them for various reasons
>Flesh wounds
Spending 1 FP to transform all damage to 1 is a bit too much. It trivializes combat, nothing is ever going to do damage.
>spending character points
I don't like the idea of speeding character points mid-session at all
>luck & wildcard points
I don't mind if the PCs buy those, but I want something more limited, those are too broad. I want a rule switch not an advantage you buy.

Of course I could create some houserule but I'd like to see the official rules first. I'll never forget the time I wasted time writing up what essentially were a worse version of wildcard points.

>>98012222
Small correction, I confused flesh wounds with tv action violence.

>>98012222
crit to the vitals isn't actually a mortal wound if you don't fail the death check. "Mortal Wounds" also have their own rules in gurps and are perfectly survivable if you have a surgeon within 30 minutes of the guy whos dying. Another option is just giving your players (or encouraging they take) an extremely limited form of luck for rerolling death checks specifically.

>>98012323
I meant mortal wound in the non-rule mean, as in, a wound that would kill you (a 10 hp person taking 60 damage due to wound multipliers. Yes I know this is very unlikely, it's just an example).
>an extremely limited form of luck for rerolling death checks specifically.
That could work, I'll add to my current ideas

>>98012222
You can simply declare that certain abilities are a 'setting switch' and give them to all PCs for free. Luck (Aspected: Defensive) or Destiny (using the Power-Ups 5 rules) for example.
Alternatively, you can simply change the cost of TV Action Violence or Flesh Wounds to something like 1d damage and become stunned. That's a fairly hefty penalty which discourages frequent use, but its better than getting domed with a 7d rifle to the skull or something.

>>98012222
>I want a rule switch not an advantage you buy.
This heavily limits you. If you would allow advantages, you could simply have everyone take one Extra Life. They get exactly one escape from death, ever.

>>98012385
I might change tv action violence to be more limited somehow yeah.
>>98012395
I just have some sort of autism that makes me dislike giving everyone a specific advantage. I can't explain it.

>>98012602
>>98012222
This is what I came up with:
>TV Action Violence (Revised): Spend 1FP to reduce the damage taken from an entire attack to a Major Wound (1/2HP). However, you get maxed out pain penalties as if you had Low Pain threshold (-8).
You don't get to completely nullify the damage, but you also don't lose the next turn.

Luck recharges per hour of real time, as do many advantages. But lets say I don't want luck to recharge if we're still on the same scene (so if we spend a lot of time in a roleplaying encounter talking, the PC can't use luck multiple times).
How much would that limitation be? Would it be a fair "aspected: -20%"?
Worded like
>Even if an hour passed, ability only recharges at the end of a scene (-20%)

>predatory animals don't have Combat Reflexes
nigga...

>>98013927
Some do
some don't
depending on who is statting the animal

>>98013959
In Basic Set almost none of them do, hilariously enough the Large Guard Dog doesn't
But I play them as if they do as far as surprise is concerned, I can't have the guard dog just stupidly panting for half a minute while there's a whole shootout next to it

>>98013973
Yeah
mental stun on surprise can be pretty harsh for animals, and I'm not sure how realistic it is.
If you surprise a herbivore, is it really just gonna stand there for 10 seconds?

>>98013927
>>98013959
>>98013973
>>98013988
That's because "Combat Reflexes" is actually "Combat Experience".

Could I persuade my semi-invested DnD group into playing this game or would it be too crunchy for the average 5e player?

>>98016608
Sure. Roll Exorcism.

>>98016608
It took a lot of cajoling but eventually I got my group to change sides, but we were all pretty tired of 5e by then. One tip, if you run a game to show them the system, don't run fantasy. Run something different so they can see GURPS' versatility.

Damage reduction partial limitation is retarded
>Partial: Your DR only protects a specific hit location. This is worth -10% per -1 penalty to hit that body part (see p. 398). For instance, an animal with butting horns and a thick skull might have “Skull only,” for -70%. “Torso only” is -10%, and also protects the vital organs. When you take this limitation for arms, legs, hands, or feet, the DR protects all limbs of that type. If it only protects one limb, the limitation value doubles (e.g., arms are -2 to hit, so a single arm would be -40%). If you have arms, legs, etc. with different penalties, use the least severe penalty to calculate limitation value.
This is a retarded way of doing it. Is there a better way?
I'm tempted to just say -20% for each of the 5 body parts (head, torso, arms, legs) with head being -40% and then doubling again for smaller parts of the big part (-80% skull only, -40% hands and feet).
But maybe this way is just as retarded.
I welcome any better ideas


Posted in the wrong thread lol

File: 1778247847451565.png (251 KB, 1654x2339)

251 KB PNG

>>98017291
>.jpg

>>98017449
:)

>>98017449
>implying there's any difference

>>98018113
There's a difference of about 1.3 megabytes.

>>98018386
still gotta check if it prints well though, on computer it's good enough

>>98013125
That isn't 'aspected'. Aspected is when your luck applies to rolls related to a specific theme, like 'combat', 'magic', or 'keeping me alive'. The limitation you want is probably accessibility and I don't think it would be worth -20%. Few non-combat scenes last more than an hour.

>>98013988
There's some house rules floating about which fix this, like mental stun racking up bonuses every turn, rolling against Per or Will instead of IQ, and a 'startle reflex' variant of combat reflexes where you instinctively move away from sudden threats.
There are a few animals which have very bad instincts against certain modern threats which don't match their ancestral patterns. 'Deer in headlights' is a common turn of phrase for a reason. That shouldn't be a universal thing though.

>>98017130
I'd just use the Low-Tech / Armor Design system and have the coverage correspond exactly to the cost. If 40% of your surface area is exposed, that's a -60% discount.

>>98013125
Theres a version of luck that uses days of ingame time rather than hours of game time, I forgot where, but you should use that.

>>98019007
>The limitation you want is probably accessibility
I see, I'll check it out how it works.

>>98019007
>I'd just use the Low-Tech / Armor Design system and have the coverage correspond exactly to the cost. If 40% of your surface area is exposed, that's a -60% discount.
Good idea. Formalized I think I'll write that as "the price of this limitation is -100+(percentage of surface area covered)

What does it take to quick gadgeteer an arc reactor in a cave with a box of scraps?

>>98020438
The quick gadgeteer advantage
a cave
a box of scraps
a scrounging roll
an engineering (gadgets) roll

>>98020438
>>98020474
Assuming Tony Stark already had TL 9^ and the arc reactor is equivalent to a cosmic power C cell (TL 12^, $1k, effective cost $21k) the concept roll would be at -17. This probably means that Stark would make numerous failed rolls before finding a viable one, but as a quick gadgeteer he gets to roll once every 1d minutes, so with skill in the 20-25 range, he could probably figure out a viable design pretty quickly.
Scavenging for parts is at only -2. Presumably Stark rolled lucky and ended up with no additional cost.
Actually creating the prototype would require 1d-2 hours, and a roll with a penalty of -17 plus any for inadequate tools (although this would likely be less than those for a normal inventor, maybe in the -2 to -5 range). Stark probably took extra time in order to raise his skill to the point where he could get something to roll against (assuming his skill is no better than 25). It's also possible he had some form of Luck (Aspected, Engineering) to avoid killing himself with critical failures.
Actually building the first suit of power armor would have been a relatively trivial task, with it being only TL 9 or so and probably worth less than $100k (at TL 9; $300k at TL 8, which is the campaign TL). So rolls would be at a mere -4 plus penalties for tools. The prototype would take 1d hours to assemble, which seems quicker than what is implied by the movie, but I guess he also needs to design and build the weapons (flamethrower and rocket launcher, I believe) and software. Maybe his skill in Engineer (Battlesuits) was only at default at this point, but even so he should have effective skill in the 16-21 range defaulting from Engineer (Power Systems) so no need for extra time.

>>98022597
Using AtE rules:
Cosmic C cell, $25.6M, -44 to rolls, 26d hours of work, requires at least $2.56M in parts. This seems impossible, even for a highly cinematic inventor.
However, AtE assumes a sort-of TL 4 setting, so we could adjust everything by 4 or 5 TLs to reflect the TL 8-9^ setting of the MCU. By reducing the effective TL of the cell to 8 (i.e. 4 higher than the assumed setting baseline) the value becomes $16k, penalty becomes -6, and the time required 1d*30 min. That's very do-able for a cinematic genius. The battlesuit itself (effective TL 5, $160k) is built at +1 skill and takes 1d hours. Weapons are basically TL 7 ones worth about $2k each, so are built at +4 skill in 1d*20 mins. (probably reduced by haste, since Stark can easily take an additional -9 to do it in 10% of the time).

>>98022597
>>98022860
Someone should make a compilation of all the inventing and gadgeteering rules
this all sounds very complex and spread out in multiple books/articles

>>98022888
It really isn't complicated. There are three versions of the invention rules, all of them very similar, and all complete. One is in the Basic Set, one in After the End 2, and one in Monster Hunters Power-Ups 1. Just pick whichever you like best and use it as written.

File: IMG_20260510_064353_622.jpg (193 KB, 788x1280)

193 KB JPG

Was Pulver onto something?

File: file.jpg (52 KB, 584x245)

52 KB JPG

>>98022597
He had already built an arc reactor before creating the mini-reactor. I wonder if that makes it easier.

File: Basic Set Inventions.png (30 KB, 420x114)

30 KB PNG

>>98027497
Why not just glance at the books once in a while? Just for a moment. Read a rule or two.

>>98027548
I'm a player, I don't need to read the rulebook, I just tell what my character wants to do and the GM adjudicates.

>>98027548
what books? they are in printing hell
my birthday is coming up and they better have it up for shipment by then or i quit gRUps

>>98027647
your PC dies, next week same time?
>addressing rest of party
So.. where were we?.

>>98027691
>implying you have a group
lol

>>98027548
No, that's why I keep you around.

>>98027719
my group's tally was just reduced by one, I don't think this is going to work anon, maybe go to DnD? I heard it's great, maybe it would fit your playstyle more? All I want is for you to feel fullfilled. (BA 314)

>>98027827
There's only one difference between gurps and D&D from a players perspective.
I roll 3d6 low instead of d20 high.

>>98027837
Are you D12?
Try harder.

>>98027839
Unarmed attacks don't have -4 off hand penalties either
That's important because making two punches at -4 is better than using rapid strike at -6.

>>98027870
It's the truth

File: file.jpg (340 KB, 1438x857)

340 KB JPG

Check out my gurps cards and pipless d6s.

>>98027879
the dice are nice because of the high contrast between the numbers and the dice' body color
I once looked at every store that had good dice and found:
adventuredice.ca
and
thediceshoponline.com

>trying to judge combat cards by somewhat xraying through a box
uhm show 1, 2, several? i dunno
anyway this reminds me of some cards I saw a few months back that might have come from this set or some other, maybe, they were shit, language was autistic at best, I might have even posted an annotated jpg pointing it out

File: file.png (1.62 MB, 1737x688)

1.62 MB PNG

>>98028001
Eggshell with Romalian type.

File: 1778428916168363.png (342 KB, 2480x3508)

342 KB PNG

>>98027839
Stop making retardedly gigantic JPEG files.

>>98028066
i create raw material, you use it as you see fit

Anybody know a source for good multi-hex figures for GURPS, like animals and such?

>>98028132
I got ogres which are about 3 or 4 hexes, trolls maybe 1.5, giants, 2, dragon like 5 or 5

>>98028157
Yeah that sort of creature I can source from D&D minis too, but horses for example are rarely square...

>>98028043
thanks, pondering..

>>98028213
show example of what you don't like, describe what you want ("square" in terms of VTT is vague, are you using a VTT with hexes?)

>>98028327
>VTT
No, physical table. Like I have a 1-inch hex map and D&D figs but D&D figs tend to be 2x2in or 3x3 in based and so on, while I'm looking for 2x1 or 3x1

>>98028132
>>98028213
Tabletop or VTT?
For VTT, use Blender. Download some free 3D creature models, put a camera in the scene, set its type to orthographic and position it above the asset.
Either make hexagons in Blender and scale them to the creature, or use GIMP or something to do that bit. Position the hexagons so that they vaguely conform to the shape of the creature seen from above.
You can sometimes skip some of this for real animals by searching for 'elephant bird's eye view' or similar and just finding photographs taken from above. Some dinosaurs which don't have accurate easily available 3D models have good skeleton and outline diagrams drawn from various perspectives. The Princeton Field Guide to Dinosaurs has been a great help to me in figuring out how many hexes they should have.

>>98028471
There are various companies which make different size bases for wargames, some of them even hexagonal.
If the bases are made of styrene (HIPS) you can easily glue several of them onto a sheet of styrene ('plasticard') with plastic cement, then cut the outline out.
Rectangular bases work fine too, they just overlap the hex edges a bit. You should be able to find 1x2" ones easily. 1x3" are rarer, but can be made from 1x2" or 1x1" ones with a bit of cutting and gluing (and sometimes some use of plasticard or sprue bits to reinforce the join).
A razor saw and hobby mitre box will make cutting right angles easy. You will probably need the razor saw anyway to cut bases off some models.
28mm models combined with 1" hexes will lead to some oddities in scaling. 1:35 models will work much better, but typically have a very different range of figures available (i.e. almost entirely military) and are intended for model-building enthusiasts (which means they are way more delicate than gaming figures).

>>98028516
>28mm models combined with 1" hexes will lead to some oddities in scaling.
Scaling I don't really care about as long as the bases are the right size, really

>>98028132
What scale?
At 1:35, Tamiya have some livestock and a few prehistoric animals.
For 1:56 'heroic' / 28mm you've got the Warlord games (modern) farm animals, Victrix medieval livestock, and Wargames Atlantic horses all in plastic. Probably just about everything else you could want is out there somewhere in metal, resin, or 3D-printed, but cost adds up quickly.

>>98028554
Do the figures need to be in scale with each other, or just occupy roughly the right size base?
Do you care about the quality of the figures, or will almost anything work?
Do you have a tight budget, or are you willing to pay a lot of money?
Do you have any hobby skills? Any suitable equipment (e.g. 3D printer, model-making tools).
Do you have time to put into making them or want something really quick?

1:35 models will be (almost) the correct length and width for 1" = 1 yard. That means all you need to do is assemble them and put them on appropriate bases. The bases can easily be manufactured from wargaming bases or sheet plastic if you can't find any suitable sized ones. The models will look great, because 1:35 is a 'true scale' scale without distortion. On the other hand, they will be fragile and relatively expensive compared to 28 mm wargaming figures and you may have some issues finding the models you want. If you want a game set in WW2 or the cold war featuring a lot of military vehicles though, you're in luck.

>>98028132
You can sometimes find OK 3D printed minis on sites like Temu and AliExpress for a reasonable price. Quality is variable and scaling is all over the place, so you need to be careful about checking reviews and reading descriptions. There are also various ethical issues, from the fact that most of the designs are stolen (or, more accurately, infringe the intellectual property rights of the original designers) to the general problem of supporting the economy of a hostile dictatorship which is causing a lot of harm to the planet (but good luck not doing that).

>>98028650
The model actually being a bit small for the base would help at C range, models occupying the same hex for close combat is one of the biggest headaches of running GURPS physically
And yeah I can glue shit onto a base but I don't have a 3D printer or anything

>>98028812
If you just want a load of random critters, try Archon Studios or Mantic.

>>98029097
>Mantic
Brainfart, I meant Reaper Miniatures.

>>98027879
pips are cuter

MISSION X IS ALIVE

https://x.com/GMingBallistic/status/2053819099399016714

>>98032708
>https://x.com/GMingBallistic/status/2053819099399016714
>No more “I’ll just soak another 47 points of damage.” A single well-placed burst can change the entire tactical picture. That keeps players engaged and GMs from having to fudge results.
uh-oh, /tg/ will not like this

>>98032708
>>98032738
So it's going to be more streamlined then DFRPG?

>>98033379
I think that's the intention but I think they're not using HP but that other method of tracking wounds which I personally think is way too complicated.

I'll be straight with you guys, I don't like DF (apart from the surprise rules). Why would you make something that interfaces so poorly with the basic rules

>>98034729
>Why would you make something that interfaces so poorly with the basic rules
What do you mean?

>>98034747
I mean there are established rules for the same things in Basic Set, but now everyone is just confused about which rules we're using

>>98034870
>now everyone is just confused about which rules we're using
If you're the GM, it's on you to clearly communicate which of the many alternate rules you're using.

>>98034729
>>98034870
I've been playing DF combined with gurps stuff for a while and I've yet to deal with any conflicts.
Can you give some examples?

Are you sure your "dislike" isn't just autism?

>>98034878
I'd just rather not, I don't even like most of the DF "teehee totally not D&D" rules

>>98034922
Ok? You don't have to use them.
Name one time a player thought you were using a DF rule that was different than the rule in basic.

>>98034950
Travel is one, foraging is another. Not that Basic Set foraging rules aren't stupid, but they're different.

>>98034987
Well yes, but the question was "did a player ever assumed you were using DF instead of basic"?
Cause that was anon's complaint that the rules "don't interface well".

>>98034922
>I'd just rather not
I don't know if this is the game for you, man. The GM sorting through all of the shit available and going "we're using this, we're not using that" is a core assumption of the system.

>>98035021
And they don't, some of them. But I'd rather not be running fantasy games in general

>>98035038
>I don't know if this is the game for you, man.
Fuck you! I don't have a problem with 99% of the books, don't start pontificating at me.

>>98035046
Then in that case you have no reason to dislike DF, it will never affect your games. It's like someone complaining about martial arts existing because it clarifies some rules.

>>98035057
My problem is that there are the Basic Set travel rules (OK), HT travel rules (better) and the DF travel rules (worthless bollocks)

>>98035098
DF travel rules are not from DFRPG you dummy.
you are raging at the wrong thing.

Also after the end has travel rules too doesn't it?

>>98028043
looks good, could come in handy

>>98027873
>Unarmed attacks don't have -4 off hand penalty
source please?

>>98035113
Where exactly was DFRPG mentioned apart from your post

>>98036460
Probably nowhere considering MA124 says the opposite

>>98037345
yes thanks for the check, B14 is also quite clear about it, unless earlier anon blows our mind with an insane combination of rules that would make them right

>>98037345
No it doesn't. In fact, the box 'Harsh Realism for Unarmed Fighters' starts by pointing out that there is no off-hand penalty. The final optional rule in that box 'Strong and Weak Hands' introduces off-hand penalties for unarmed skills, but it's clearly not the default situation.
On the other hand, it isn't really spelled out clearly in my copy of the Basic Set that all unarmed attacks ignore the off-hand penalty. Only Karate explicitly says you can punch with either hand without penalty. Off-hand weapon training says it only applies to melee weapons, but the updated perk version has no such limitation.

>>98037759
>>98037956

I wonder if the revisions of Basic Set 4.5 will fix this specifically.
For a good mind-fuck read Karate, Punching, Brawling, B14, Martial Arts to decide if -4 for off-hand unarmed.

>>98038078
As far as I can tell, the actual rules-as-currently-written are that Karate punches don't take off-hand penalties, but all other punches do.
I think there might have been some revision between printings of the Basic Set. I'll have to get out my paper copies of the 1st and 2nd printing to check.

>>98038342
Just checked and there is no difference between printings regarding this, as far as I can tell. Despite what is says in Martial Arts, only Karate eliminates off-hand penalties for punches.
Off-hand training should probably be an option for most styles which include Boxing or Judo.

>>98036609
>Where exactly was DFRPG mentioned apart from your post
Wasn't the point of Mission X to be a DFRPG but for sci-fi?

>>98038369
>>98038342
>>98037956
I think there's a kromm post about this but I can't find it.
That said, it is absolutely ridiculous to let boxing have off-hand penalties, you are 100% taught to use both hands from the start.

>>98038452
Found it
>https://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?p=1027218
>Just to be clear: There is no "off" hand in unarmed combat in GURPS. The Basic Set failed to make this as clear as it could have, hinting at it in a few skill descriptions but not generalizing it. Martial Arts makes it far clearer. Claiming that there is an "off" hand for the purposes of unarmed combat is fine as a house rule, but definitely not what the entire body of rules published to date supports.
So for those of you that use kromm posts, unarmed combat has no off-hand. For those of you that use RAW only, karate is the only thing that gets rid of the off-hand penalty.

>>98038452
>That said, it is absolutely ridiculous to let boxing have off-hand penalties, you are 100% taught to use both hands from the start.
Boxers still generally have a strong and weak hand though, don't they? There's plenty of talk about 'southpaws' being tricky to fight if you've never fought one before, which wouldn't make sense if all boxers used both hands equally.
Also the GURPS skill 'boxing' and the GURPS martial arts style of 'boxing' are not the same thing. Even if two-hand fighting is central to a style, the corresponding skill may still take off-hand penalties, possibly giving the off-hand training perk a special relationship to the style (as seen for acrobatic kicks in capoeira). Escrima is a both-hands style, but practitioners need to purchase off-hand training for smallsword and main-gauche (which still takes off-hand penalties on attacks for some reason).

>>98038756
>but practitioners need to purchase off-hand training for smallsword and main-gauche (which still takes off-hand penalties on attacks for some reason).
weird that shields don't get off-hand penalties to attack but smallswords and main-gauchos do

>>98039104
Makes sense for smallsword, since the skill is intended for fencers who wield one sword in their right hand, and only applies to escrimadors because of the weird ruling that escrima sticks are short staves, and short staves use smallsword (even though they are used with moves which are completely different to smallsword ones, such as swinging).
I see no justification for main-gauche to take attack penalties, since Handedness (Basic Set, p. 14) says 'this does not apply to things you normally do with your "off" hand, like using a shield.' However, the main-gauche skill is pretty explicit about it.

I think anyone doing unarmed combat untrained will perform poorly. Off-hand even worse.
i did some tae-kwon-doe and i experienced it first hand (no pun intended)

File: Best GURPS supplement.png (2.09 MB, 1100x1430)

2.09 MB PNG

Have you consulted the best GURPS splat?

File: GURPS Marital Arts.jpg (283 KB, 782x1022)

283 KB JPG

>>98039889
Sorry, wrong image

Anyone else just treat throwing as DX and throwing into an area as DX+4? Because DX-3/DX is just too steep and nobody remembers to spec into Throwing anyway, plus I feel like it contradicts the +4 in the scatter rules

>>98039940
Yes, I do that. I don't think throwing an object is hard enough IRL to justify a 50% chance to hit for an average person. No way a normal person is going to be roll at 8 to throw a rock into a 1 yard area on the ground at 5 yards away (DX 10 -2 from range)

File: Round 2 FIGHT brap.png (2.32 MB, 1099x1431)

2.32 MB PNG

>>98039921
Try THIS on your wedding day

>>98039940
Seems reasonable for fairly regular objects, like grenades, balls, and rounded rocks. Probably too generous for awkwardly shaped ones like furniture, jagged rocks, and midgets.

>>98039958
Worse, an untrained but pretty dextrous person at DX 12 has almost a two-thirds chance to fuck up tossing an object to a friend two yards away

Speaking of ranged attacks, does anyone think the regular table of range penalties are a bit too steep?
-5 at 15 yards feels crazy hard but I'm no expert at IRL ranged fighting.

>>98040229
I shoot guns IRL and I guess not really
Even at the range it's not that hard to cock up a 15-yard shot with a handgun

>>98040229
Remember, the game assumes you're in a dangerous "adventuring" environment by default. So you can get a bunch of bonuses when shooting in a normal environment like at a range or in your backyard to offset the range penalties some.

How common are human sized mirrors
I want to make a character that can duplicate himself if there's a full sized (or bigger) mirror present.
But I don't know if it's "common" "uncommon" or "rare" for the limitation.

File: Depends on setting factor(...).jpg (34 KB, 425x340)

34 KB JPG

>>98041358
Low-Tech p. 19 indicates that glass mirrors were not invented until TL3.
Wikipedia indicates that cheap mirrors did not become available until TL5, with the "ribbon machine" for churning out plate glass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror#Industrial_Revolution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_glass#Industrial_production

>>98041389
>Low-Tech p. 19 indicates that glass mirrors were not invented until TL3.
Woops
we're at TL3
guess this character isn't possible

>>98041358
>>98041498
May I instead recommend making this a character who can duplicate himself in any sufficiently reflective surface? This would probably be Common, as it could be achieved with a sufficiently large flat body of water. You could even have it so that he has to be halfway into the water, then wait for it to be calm enough to duplicate.

>>98040074
Throwing is done with power and commited, what you described is tossing, not the same. You could use a house rule that gives you a +4 to the throwing roll if you "pull your punch" like 3 or 4 points under your actual ST to simulate a non-commited toss. Example: tossing my friend a ball would be throwing it st 6 ST when I am 10 ST.

Also, doing that out of combat in a low stakes scenario would give you the mundane +4 anyways, and you can "aim" for 3 seconds giving you another +3. Add the all out attack-commited bonus and it's even easier. So even without my made up houserule, it's not that hard if you apply the rules.

>>98041991
I'll do that. Go with common and maybe add a "nuisance effect: reflexive surface must be placid" or something.

How would you stat women in GURPS?

>>98047853
-1 or -2 ST

>>98047853
Extreme Sexual Dimorphism (mandatory)

>>98047874
What do the three levels even look like

File: Sex differences physical (...).jpg (278 KB, 908x1262)

278 KB JPG

>>98047853
Lower body strength about 75% that of men, upper body strength about 60%. Probably equates to ST -2 and maybe Lifting ST 1.
Running speed about 85-90% that of men. Possibly justifies Move -1 (i.e. max move of 6 vs. 5).
IQ about one third of a standard deviation below male average, with smaller standard deviation. Not enough to matter on a GURPS template.
General knowledge usually measurably worse than men's. Again, not enough to do anything on a template.
Endurance slightly worse, not enough to matter.
Pain threshold more variable, average slightly worse. Not enough to matter.
Less chance of various congenital conditions, such as color blindness. Again, not enough to matter in GURPS.
Personality tends to be more conformist, agreeable, social. None of these traits significant enough to count on a template.

So, basically >>98047863

File: gurps space multiple illu(...).png (71 KB, 970x887)

71 KB PNG

Have you ever used GURPS Space to design a star system?

>>98048841
Yes, though through a program. Like Spaceships, its a system which would benefit from having easily accesible design tools rather than doing it all by hand.

>>98048841
looks lowkey fun to do and a little script would streamline the math for entrepreneurial makers

>>98048841
Yes
I still have it somewhere too

>>98048841
Yes, I did one just the other week, although I didn't randomise anything, just used the rules to figure out whether what I wanted (an inhabitable world orbiting Eta Bootis) was physically plausible.

>>98048841
Only Space 3e, which I don't believe has that.

>>98048841
Not a whole system, but I did use the rules for generating planets for my short-lived sci-fi game.

>>97983586
Any opinions on GURPS Harkwood from those who have read/ran it? It has a fun premise

>>98027879
how you get those? unavailable

saw this around:
>Immunity to Physical Attacks (Affects Others 1 (Costs Fatigue 2 -10%) +45%, Area Effect 1 (Costs Fatigue 2 -10%) +45%, Cosmic: Resistant does protect against effects that Damage Resistance or Protected Sense either stop or provide a HT bonus to resist +50%, Shield +20%, Costs Fatigue 2 -10%) [75]
ya reckon 75 points is a good price for invincibility to physical damage?

>>98052700
Is this Otiluke's Minor Globe of Invulnerability?

>>98052709
no it's Gojo's Limitless from Jujutsu Kaisen.
this is only half of it there's another 75 point for immunity to energy damage too

>>98052700
Why is cost fatigue appearing so many times?

>>98052579
drivethrucards

>>98052700
Not only is that obviously unreasonable, I don't think it's even a 'requires GM judgement' situation. Cosmic can't make advantages do things which are fundamentally outside their remit. Resistant adds to HT rolls to resist affects. Immunity is effectively infinite resistance. Resistant is not DR, even though DR can mimic Resistance.
Even if it were possible, this is obviously not the +50% version of Cosmic, but rather something more like the +300% version.
I think that the closest actually valid build for immunity to damage is Insubstantial (Cosmic, only for damage, +300%).

>>98053603
i found eventually, my quick ocd ass jumped to conclusions
also is this new art on the coming up Basic Set Revised? https://www.sjgames.com/gurps/4erfaq/basic%20set%204e%20interior%20comparisons%20p379.jpg

>>98054624
No, it's from Bio-Tech (p. 163).

File: .png (31 KB, 861x432)

31 KB PNG

Coming soon...
...to Kickstarter... for some reason...

>>97983586
I'm trying to figure out why, as the GM, I'd use styles over letting players freely pick skills, techniques, etc, particularly in the context of Tactical Shooting.
>styles are distinguished from simply having a point in each skill by the Style Familiarity perk, which is used to mark a character as having studied the style and thus having access to its features
>in addition to the perk, you need at least 1 point in each core skill for it to count
>techniques are only improvable if you've studied a style that teaches them
>cinematic skills and techniques are only available if you've studied the style and have TBAM or other required advantages
>perks aren't necessarily gated, instead they're on a 10-point per progression instead of the usual 20-point one for perks related to groups of skills
>all the "optional" things are meant to distinguish specific schools by diverging from the baseline
>advantages and disadvantages are things you'll typically develop as a result of studying the style, or requirements for that
>skills are either additional requirements for a school, advanced skills that require having studied the basics, or recommended ones to pick up on the side
Is that about right? Is there a reason to use this framework in a Tactical Shooting kind of game, even for the likes of MCMAP or Sambo?

>>98059323
They're just there as pseudo-templates for certain styles. Like if you want to make a karate guy with the fistball style you look at the style and give him those things. They can also be used to make wildcard skills.

I use a houserule where if you have a point in every skill and the style familiarity, you can have a custom talent that gives bonuses to all the skills in the style (the talent still follows normal talent pricing rules).

what was the pyramid article about the summoning spell that summons one specific woman each time?

>>98060792
something something "conjuring"?

File: familiar path weird sapient.png (40 KB, 619x591)

40 KB PNG

>>98060792
A Familiar Path (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 75) has two paragraphs on the idea of a sapient familiar.

>>98059323
They're also used, aside from guiding templates, in more realistic/limited games by restricting what you can learn. Say, you're going for a historical medieval game, and you can't learn knight skills (or only at lower levels) unless you go for XYZ martial arts school, to represent having received or currently being trained in such skills.

File: daily illuminator powerpo(...).png (32 KB, 508x710)

32 KB PNG

The Daily Illuminator post for today is a bit weird.
>By now, the PowerPoint party has achieved legendary status as a geeky get-together gimmick.
What? I recall seeing a Reuters article about PowerPoint-based "Date My Mates" events, where attendees give presentations showing off their friends' strengths as potential romantic partners. But that doesn't seem particualrly "geeky" to me.
A Google search for "powerpoint party" returns a CNN article.
>For McCall Mirabella’s 21st birthday party last month, she asked guests to bring only one gift: A PowerPoint presentation.
>Mirabella, a TikTok and YouTube personality with over 1.3 million followers across both platforms, assembled her closest friends and asked them to present a slideshow on anything they could think of. The only criteria was “the sillier, the better.”
Oh, it's some Tiktok thing--still not very "geeky", IMO. Whatever.

>>98060839
>>98060890
i don't think so. it was more of a worldbuilding piece with maybe a Magic spell at the very end. maybe it was an article i read on a blog instead

>>98017291
missile spells cannot be thrown by the staff, it's hands-only.
The All-Out determined should say "-2 if worse".

Long time no see dude. I'm too lazy to go over this again.

>>98063128
>missile spells cannot be thrown by the staff, it's hands-only.
NTA but that makes no sense since the entire point of the staff is to reduce range penalties. Why would anyone carry a staff if it doesn't work with attack spells?

>>98063128
nah to both remarks, but hey you!

>>98063305
There's no ". . . for certain spells"
https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=1954707&postcount=9

Gonkrak take staff break use skewers for hill giant leg barbecue

>>98063128
change worst to worse in ranged modifiers, got it thanks

>>98063650
>https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=1954707&postcount=9
Yeah, that's what I thought. This makes sense.

>>98052506
Only read it. I think it has some great potential and would love to run it or play in it. The guy who writes 1shotadventures has a video about it on youtube, iirc.

>>98052700
I'm morbidly impressed, this is genuinely the most rules I've ever seen used incorrectly or flat-out illegally in a single GURPs advantage.

>>98066951
Is it more of an adventure or a campaign?

>>98068728
It's been a while, but it's definitely more than a one-shot. Maybe more like a short campaign.

File: Spoiler Image (65 KB, 645x346)

65 KB JPG

thoughts?

>>98070081
I have absolutely no idea on what criteria those dice are being judged. Ease of reading the numbers (why no actually easy or difficult to read dice)? Using only dice of those types in your game mechanics (but then why are there both 1d6 and 3d6)? Using exactly that set of dice to make a specific roll (what in the name of Christ is the 'optimal' set optimal for)?
It feels like an attempt to make something like the 'last night I (Bond) (Burger) your sister' meme, where it is just some arbitrary bullshit which looks like it might make sense, but doesn't, leading to people coming up with convoluted 'explanations' and thus generating engagement.

>>98070081
How is this related to GURPS? This just proves the fact that the 18th century were more civilized times.

>>98070081
The gold on white sucks, the rest are fine.

>>98070081
pips for the win

File: IMG_4525.jpg (193 KB, 655x805)

193 KB JPG

>>98047853
Women or Catgirls?

File: 1725913739354431.png (480 KB, 690x805)

480 KB PNG

>>98076962
Skullcatgirls

I hope GURPS Ring of Fire is good.

>>98078099
How can it not be good? It's just a setting book, summarizing the series. As a person who likes the idea of the 1632 series but detests how the actual books are character-focused rather than textbook-like (like For Want of a Nail and Look to the West), I don't see how it could possibly be bad.

>>98063650
This would have been very relevant to me a couple months ago, but now I'm playing a swordsman

So, I've got this GURPS campaign I started cooking up and I wanted some feedback from some intelligen/tg/entlemen.

My elevator pitch is: What if Faerun advanced to Shadowrun's level of technology and society, but had the plot of Buffy the Vampire Slayer?

What that means is that it's a typical fantasy world that's advanced technologically enough to have cybertech and other advanced technologies, while still having magic and some monsters. The reason for the technological advancement is due to a "hero from another world" who arrived and brought new ideas with him. I haven't decided if it's a typical Isekai thing or if he's an astronaut that crash landed. Anyway. Since his arrival centuries ago (I haven't decided if he's dead or not, but he's not in the picture anymore), things started to change. Now, it's all advanced and everything. The other major thing it the Shadowspear Corporation, this world's version of Amazon but even worse and larger. It's your typical cyberpunk thing.

Now, what the player's don't know, is that the Shadowspear Corporation has been experimenting with immorality and zero cost energy creation, which has led to some... Problems. Problems like monsters and undead that are starting to appear and prey upon the populace. The company is trying to cover it up, the government is cooperating, and a lot of people are being hurt and killed.

The only problem I have to figure out is how to get the player's characters involved in all of this. I'll keep working on that, after I've filled in more of the details and what kind of characters I'll allow. While also trying to figure out how to play again.

File: GURPS 01.jpg (57 KB, 750x600)

57 KB JPG

>>98079344
Have a picture because I forgot it...

>>98078175
>..I don't see how it could possibly be bad
You come closer suddenly notice a >vehicle< appear on the front cover; it is blocking your path. You think to yourself: 'I have done this before what could possibly go wrong?' and proceed forward with caution. Make a perception roll for me will you?

>>98079409
I don't get the joke. If you're drawing a comparison to GURPS Vehicles, then (1) GURPS Vehicles has nothing to do with GURPS Ring of Fire, and (2) even if it did, GURPS Vehicles is good, not bad.
Is GURPS Vorkosigan Saga or GURPS Girl Genius bad? (Honest question--I haven't looked at them.)