File: Iron GURPS.gif (33 KB, 765x860)

33 KB GIF

Iron GURPS thread. Roll 'em.

How do I turn a Tight-Beam Burning attack into a laser? That is, how should I price each of the following as enhancements or limitations:
>Rain, fog, smoke, snow, and similar phenomena interfere with your attack, adding extra DR to the target equal to the Vision penalty (per meter).
>Multiply your attack's Armor Divisor by (5) when it strikes material transparent to visible light, like glasses, visors, windows, etc.
>In a cinematic game, your attack can bounce off of mirrors as if it had Ricochet enhancement, but any mirrored surface is also impenetrable if angled correctly (requires a Block roll, but ignore Damage to Shields).

>>98756471
According to Powers, the first part and the third part together are just treated as a Feature (+0%) when writing up laser weapons as Sample Abilities.
The second part feels comparable to Surge, Arcing (ignore all but 1 DR on conductive metal armor, +100%), but at at half level, so I'd price it something like +50%.

>>98756530
Ah, okay. That seems about right.

>>98756471
>Rain, fog, smoke, snow, and similar phenomena interfere with your attack, adding extra DR to the target equal to the Vision penalty (per meter).
The only strictly rules-compliant way I can think of would be to buy some of the damage with a limitation of 'only with vision penalties less than n' repeated for every possible vision penalty. A more sensible approach would be to simply make a new nuisance effect.
>Multiply your attack's Armor Divisor by (5) when it strikes material transparent to visible light, like glasses, visors, windows, etc.
Simply purchase (additional) armour divisor as a limited enhancement (Basic, p.111).
>In a cinematic game, your attack can bounce off of mirrors as if it had Ricochet enhancement, but any mirrored surface is also impenetrable if angled correctly (requires a Block roll, but ignore Damage to Shields).
Ricochet as a limited enhancement, and something like accessibility (only against non-reflective targets).

Tiny Terrors seems kind of shit:
Concepts are mostly weak jokes, often referencing boomer media like Monty Python and the Holy Grail (and the killer rabbit already has stats in Dungeon Fantasy).
Introduces random bullshit like normal fairy folk being good, and more good the smaller they are, just to give a distinction between playable fairies and their overpowered evil counterparts.
Builds monsters around the advantages of being small (which are very considerable in GURPS) with none of the disadvantages. In fact, makes most of them absurdly strong and tough, or with unprecedented levels of advantages such as Magery 12.
Adds loads of special rules which can't be replicated with normal GURPS stuff, often without it even being necessary for the concept.

File: Ka V-80.jpg (92 KB, 908x674)

92 KB JPG

I'm going to try putting David Pulver's gun and missile design systems (part of the vehicle design system) to the test for the next month. If anyone has any requests for weapons for possible inclusion as examples in the final text (or an add-on) or examples of weapons which seem likely to push the boundaries of such design systems (and thus show if they have flaws), just name them here.
Note that you will need a fair bit of data on the real-world weapon to be available to say if the design system is working as intended, so sources would be helpful.

File: Capture.png (8 KB, 286x271)

8 KB PNG

>>98756315
>What happened to all the GURPS blogs and which one do you miss the most?
I'm still here. I've just been too lazy to do anything.
(Though maybe I don't count as a blog since I don't have an RSS feed. I should fix that.)

File: Capture.png (6 KB, 719x135)

6 KB PNG

>>98757039
Wait, I do have an RSS feed! I just completely forgot it existed for four years. Oops.

About dual wielding and magic, correct me if I'm wrong here:
>Regular magic
AFAIK you need to first put the spell on your hand, but once it's on your hand, you can throw the fireball with one hand and make an attack with the using the normal dual wielding rules right? Or even rapid strike.
>sorcery
I think all spellcasting in sorcery is concentrate actions so you cannot dual wield those. Or rapid strike.
>advantages as magic
Assuming you didn't add malediction, all of the attack advantages like binding, innate attack, affliction ranged obscure, all of those are regular-ass attacks so you should be able to cast and smack.
>ritual casting
all are concentrate, like sorcery, so no casting and smacking.

File: Sorcery attacks.png (112 KB, 1100x465)

112 KB PNG

>>98758876
>Regular magic
>AFAIK you need to first put the spell on your hand, but once it's on your hand, you can throw the fireball with one hand and make an attack with the using the normal dual wielding rules right? Or even rapid strike.
Correct. Missile spells 9and jets, whips, etc.) are activated using attacks, with all the usual rules for attacks. You can even dual-wield spells.
>sorcery
>I think all spellcasting in sorcery is concentrate actions so you cannot dual wield those. Or rapid strike.
Some sorcery spells require attacks rather than concentrates; see image.
>advantages as magic
>Assuming you didn't add malediction, all of the attack advantages like binding, innate attack, affliction ranged obscure, all of those are regular-ass attacks so you should be able to cast and smack.
Correct.
>ritual casting
>all are concentrate, like sorcery, so no casting and smacking
Depends on what you mean by ritual casting. Some ritual systems allow conditional casting which can activate with an attack.

>>98761159
>Some sorcery spells require attacks rather than concentrates; see image.
Ah, I see, so after you switched to your spell, you can cast and smack as normal.
You'd go
>turn 1: concentrate to ready firebal. Turn 2: Fireball one hand, swing the other. Turn 3+: repeat until you need a different spell
>Depends on what you mean by ritual casting. Some ritual systems allow conditional casting which can activate with an attack.
I meant ritual path magic, and I think you're right, ritual path magic has conditional casting.

Thanks for the clarifications.

Say I want to put an obscure attack after a melee attack as a follow-up. (the idea of the attack is a "limpet smoke mine" where you glue it to an enemy and it generates smoke all over the enemy)
Do I have to put in the "ranged" to turn it into a ranged attack first or does adding "follow-up" already does it for me?

>>98762027
Follow up is an attack modifier (gun symbol in unrevised basic set, 'A' in the revised one) and can only be applied to Affliction, Binding, Innate Attack, and advantages modified with the Ranged enhancement. Thus you need to add Ranged to Obscure to make it eligible for Follow-Up (Basic Set p. 102).
This does lead to the rather absurd situation where you might have to add Ranged to Obscure in order to make it eligible for Follow-Up and then make it a follow-up for a melee attack.

>>98762204
Oh well, it's a bit silly but what can you do.
There really should be a "melee attack" enhancement instead of only being a limitation.

File: Hazel_Custom_(High_Mobili(...).png (447 KB, 750x800)

447 KB PNG

Page 10 bump
Have you ever played a character who wields multiple shields?

>>98762268
It is in Thaumatology, p. 114

>>98764865
>Only for crushing, cutting, or impaling Innate Attacks
>Take the Melee Attack limitation (p. B112) as usual, and then add a +100% enhancement
Not quite what I mean. This is again taking something that is already a ranged attack and then turning them to a melee attack. What I mean is how several powers have the ability to become attacks by adding ranged, there should also a version of that that turns them to melee attacks.
Obscure being the easiest example. No reason you shouldn't be able to stick a smoke generator on someone with your hands.

>>98764948
Look at You've Got the Touch box in Power-Ups 8 on p. 17. If that doesn't help I guess I just don't get what you're trying to do.

>>98765935
>If that doesn't help I guess I just don't get what you're trying to do.
NTA, but I think that what he wants is to be able to make an inherently non-ranged ability into a melee attack without having an enhancement called 'ranged' added to it. The rules already seem to allow the effect he wants, it's just the convoluted stack of modifiers, one of which has a confusing name, which he doesn't like.
In theory, this could be handled in the same way that melee capable (power-ups 4, p.19) is; a variable cost enhancement based on a flat cost plus the value of the equivalent melee attack limitation. Unfortunately, obscure has a unique cost for ranged, so you can't set it to just +40%+(melee attack value). So the rules for such an enhancement would basically be to stack ranged and melee attack, which is the same as simply taking both modifiers, as you have to under the official rules.

>>98766713
I still don't get what he's trying to do. Assuming >>98762027 is him he wants to give an effect beneficial to the target of an attack as part of that attack. There is obviously something specific he is after that he has either not described thoroughly or that I missed his description of. I don't see what he is trying to do from how he is trying to do it and it seems neither does he.

Were he one of my players I would be asking him to describe what effects he is after and do so in plain English. I would then buld it and he could explain why and how that build doesn't do what he described. Right now it seems he is stuck on using follow-up which I suspect might not be the ideal way to achieve his actual goal.

>>98766861
>he wants to give an effect beneficial to the target of an attack as part of that attack.
No.
When you use obscure as an attack, it is a penalty. Anyone in the area has -X to a specific sense roll (usually vision), and the basic idea is a smoke grenade, where you throw it somewhere, and it obscures the area.
What I want is simply a way to put the obscure on someone as part of a melee attack without the convoluted way of making it ranged, then adding a limitation to transform the ranged attack into a melee attack.

I just think it's weird that there's a ranged enhancement which transforms normal, non-attacking abilities into ranged attacks but not a melee enhancement that does the same thing but is already a melee attack.

>>98767105
>When you use obscure as an attack, it is a penalty. Anyone in the area has -X to a specific sense roll (usually vision), and the basic idea is a smoke grenade, where you throw it somewhere, and it obscures the area.
Which is a hinderance to the person making the attack and a benefit to the target. Any futher attacks the attacker makes against that target are hindered. If you just want to toss an obscure grenade use the Ranged enhancement of Obscure.

>What I want is simply a way to put the obscure on someone as part of a melee attack without the convoluted way of making it ranged, then adding a limitation to transform the ranged attack into a melee attack.
You can put obscure on someone as part of an affliction. Affliction is easily converted to a melee attack. Using Innate Attack as the delivery for a follow-up in order to do what Affliction was built for seems to me to be the whole source of your troubles. The Melee Attack limitation (p. B112) is what turns a ranged attack into a melee attack. Affliction is a ranged attack which can be then turned into a melee attack and which can put an advantage on the target. Obscure is normally a self-only effect so you need something to get it to a target. That something is either Ranged, Melee Attack or Affliction.

A "limpet smoke mine" or "smoke grenade" is not an offensive tool it is a defensive tool. Giving someone cover from future incoming fire by shooting them is like biting them with fangs which inject super soldier serum.

What are you really trying to do here? Not "how do you want it to function mechanically."

So, I'm okay with HP recovery from Healing, Regeneration, medicine, magic, etc., scaling with HP. That only makes sense. One problem I've run into that doesn't quite sit well with my logic is scaling the healing from traits like Leech and Damage Resistance (Absorption).
I'm running a high-power game that uses logarithmic point costs for ST, TK, DR, any attack that inflicts Control or Injury (but not Fatigue or attribute penalties), and similar abilities, so it's very easy to get very high levels of HP, DR, and Leech. The problem here is that it's extremely easy with my house rules to refill HP or improve traits to absolute ridiculous extremes. For instance, a dude with ST 100 [300] and DR 20 (Absorption, +100%) [200] could take a single attack for 20 basic damage, then suddenly just heal 100 HP or double his HP by spending those character points from absorption. I really feel like 20 basic damage should equate to 20 HP of healing or improvement at most, or half that since each HP is worth 2 character points at base level. If a PC wants to heal or boost traits more efficiently, then he should take multiple levels of Absorption.
I'm thinking of keeping the HP scaling from healing, but somehow reducing the character points gained from DR (Absorption) and anything gained from Leech. Maybe divide it by the user's HP/10? But then PCs may just dump HP and buy up high levels of DR and Damage Reduction. Maybe that's okay; I'm not sure. Maybe give diminishing returns to trait improvements, using the SSR table as a guideline? But this doesn't really address healing. In any case, this also means that traits other than ST, TK, HP, etc., are very hard to raise, but I think that's fair, since many such traits scale differently anyways. Depending on the situation, even 1 FP can be far more valuable than 100 HP.

>>98767812
>Which is a hindrance to the person making the attack and a benefit to the target.
Nope
the person is also at -X to everything.
>You can put obscure on someone as part of an affliction.
this is just as convoluted as adding the ranged enhancement forllowed by a melee limitation, and it's cheaper too.
Any build that requires affliction to do something that is supposed to be a penalty but ends up counting as an advantage is overpriced when using affliction. See any attempts at making a "shrink enemy" spell.

>is not an offensive tool it is a defensive tool
Its an offensive tool because now the target is completely blind (assuming obscure 10).

And "how do you want to function mechanically" is extremely relevant because having to jump through hoops to do something simple is retarded.

>>98767909
Why not just charge the unmodified cost for traits gained via absorption? You've already got a discount for high DR, so it would be 'double counting' to give the discount again on purchased traits.
I don't think that HP gained through DR with absorption or leech is supposed to scale with your HP (or with the victim's in the case of leech). Things get pretty weird if you allow that.

>>98768224
That would solve the problem for healing/improving traits such as ST, HP, DR, etc. Although, I feel that other traits would still be too cheap.
The big reason that I went with logarithmic point costs for these traits is because, in my experience of GURPS, something like +10% ST and +1 HT are roughly equivalent value, but +1 ST and +1 HT are not.
If I can't come up with a solution, though, then I'll go with your suggestion until I come up with a better idea.
>I don't think that HP gained through DR with absorption or leech is supposed to scale with your HP (or with the victim's in the case of leech). Things get pretty weird if you allow that.
I kind of agree. But I remember a Kromm post from a while back saying that HP scaling for Absorption and Leech is the actual RAI and RAW interpretation. That's what I was referring to when I mentioned it earlier; that's what I thought didn't make sense.

>>98768375
maybe this can help?
https://mygurps.com/index.php?n=Main.AbsorptionRevised

Say you have a scorpion man that can make an extra attack with his tail.
You buy striker
and extra attack
but you don't want extra attack to be used with his regular hands/weapons.
How much is an accessibility: Only to attack with his tail be? -40%?

>>98769170
For Striking ST, Powers p. 79 prescribes −60 % for One Attack Only. You could extend that to Extra Attack.
For Extra Attack, Powers p. 49 prescribes −20 % for Single Skill. You could rule that Brawling (Humanoid with Tail) is a separate skill from Brawling (Humanoid).

>>98769291
>For Striking ST, Powers p. 79 prescribes −60 % for One Attack Only
This seems more fair. Pretty sure single skill is only -20% because most skills have multiple weapons.
Having Extra Attack only for ax/maces (which is like 5 weapons) give the same price reduction as extra attack: only for tails feels a bit wrong to me, so I'll go with -60%.

>>98764294
Not a dual shield weild, but a player of mine in a Bionicle game used only a shield as his Toa weapon. He was the Toa of Air, and used his powers to jet around the battlefield, doing good damage with his shield rush attack.

Good times

>>98768375
Some options:
Charge full price for Leech, and have it scale with HP. An ability which causes damage and heals you proportional to HP doesn't need logarithmic pricing if HP is priced logarithmically.
and
Scale the points you get from absorption with the opposite of whatever logarithm you use to scale the cost of DR. This may involve annoying math in the middle of combat, but balances everything out.
or
Charge full price for DR with absorption or charge the cost of the absorption enhancement as if the DR was full price. In either case, drop the price of absorption which only feeds into a single trait to about +5%. Optionally, remove the option to put it into any trait and make them take a modular ability as their single trait if they can use it to fuel multiple abilities.
or
Make an entirely new absorption advantage. [1/level], maximum level equal to your DR/5. Each level lets you turn 5 points of damage which is stopped by your DR into character points which can be spent on one of these options (chosen when the advantage is purchased):
A: a single trait, as per absorption enhancement
B: healing HP, at 2 points / HP (scaled with your HP)
C: healing FP, at 3 points / FP
D: filling ER. at 3/1 ratio

>>98756315
>what happened to all the GURPS blogs and which one do you miss the most?
Not enough of a connoisseur to know the GUPRS blogs that are out there but I miss Dungeons & Gurps uploads on YT, he seems to be on cooldown lately. Last video 3 months ago. I especially enjoyed his short fight scenes.

>>98756398
roll 3d100

>>98776775
dice+3d100

File: 1703835391660013.png (134 KB, 340x447)

134 KB PNG

>>98756989
Children, help this man make totally not GURPS Vehicles.

Wildcard! skills only.

Would that work for a more streamlined / pulp kind of game?

>>98776881
Yeah, it could work. Power Ups 7: Wildcards should help give you ideas. It suggests 15-20 wildcards to cover everything in a game that doesn't use standard skills. You could take something like the Skill List from, idk, the FATE Core RPG and use each skill from there as a wildcard.
If you want a bit more distinction, then I suggest taking each of the 30 different Skill Trunks from Power Ups 10: Skill Trees, and turning of them into a wildcard, but pricing them at twice the cost of a VH skill, instead of three times the cost.

Rolled 51, 94, 81 = 226 (3d100)

>>98776775
>>98776785
It goes in the options field

Rolled 9, 12, 94 = 115 (3d100)

>>98777283
Mage: The Ascension, Voodoo, and Tactical Shooting? Voodoo was already basically a rip-off of Mage with an even more retarded woke spin, so it's basically just Mage with more detailed gun rules.

>>98777829
Autoduel, biotech, and voodoo. So it's voodoo with sick car chases and bioroids and wetworks. Could be a pretty sweet game.

Rolled 10, 34, 47 = 91 (3d100)

>>98780576
Forgot to roll

>>98756315
>my gurps books are just on my shelf collecting dust because nobody wants to play
>only hope now is just playing online TTRPG sessions.
Bros it hurts. How do you cope? Nobody at the LGS seems interested in trying out GURPs. And GURPS has a reputation of being crunchy and too math heavy so most want something simple.

Lastly how's the print on demand quality between Amazon (I am a leaf if that matters) and Drive Through RPG?

>>98782834
It's as crunchy as you let it be. If you are lazy while approaching a fight just roll a d6 to see if they win. Don't have to be complicated. The success rolls for other things are simple I think. What's tough is crafting and leading an adventure that is fun to play. The same could be said of any RPG, maybe?
My brother will spend a few days here with me soon and we will try to play casual GURPS sessions with no pressure. I'll report back with results.

I have spent the last few days consuming GURPS books, trying to wrap my head around the worst organized writing for a game system I have ever seen. Despite this, the underlying system seems pretty cool. My preconceptions have been changed, thanks in part to reading and watching people explain this convoluted shit in a reasonable way. Though I do hate book flipping just to figure out what something unexplained and sometimes unsourced actually means. If that helps at all, because, again, half of this is written like someone explained the system forty years ago and adopted a shorthand without realizing no one knows what the fuck they're talking about. I plan to run some test scenarios solo just to get a feel for it.

>>98785046
The worked examples make a lot more sense
see Dungeon Fantasy for the biggest one.

>>98785046
>How many game systems is this for you, lieutenant?
https://youtu.be/Xlg7oEGwax8?si=hTovsI4gFubYFS6f&t=36

>>98756398
Rolled on my own. 33, 34 and 44.

>>98785973
>Dungeon Fantasy
>Egypt
>Imperial Rome
Delvers from across the empire brave ancient Egyptian tombs and their horrible guardians to retrieve treasures beyond reckoning. Kino.

File: gurps social engineering (...).png (31 KB, 674x561)

31 KB PNG

Page 10 bump
Have you ever used the Heraldry skill in your games? Have you ever played a character who had his own coat of arms?

>>98795516
Yeah it gets rolled at default or something like 11. As a result I have given up on PCs recognizing important people by their insignia

If I give Super Jump Limited use, do I get to use super jump for 1 minute or is it a single jump?

>>98797436
1 minute. Ongoing effects gets 1 minute per use. Instantaneous effects get 1 activation per use. What counts as as "instantaneous" is never clear, because jumping could be interpreted as instantaneous effect in a certain way. It's confusing, I know. I never quite understood it either. Just assume that an advantage gets 1 minute per use, unless it's specifically called out as one of those that get only one attack or activation per use, which includes: Affliction, Binding, Healing, Innate Attack, Neutralize... and that's all I can recall off the top of my head.

File: 1787181471969782.jpg (157 KB, 1000x667)

157 KB JPG

What would a d100 GURPS homebrew look like

File: kw0kge3e3bh41.jpg (50 KB, 720x546)

50 KB JPG

>>98756398
44, 59, 33

>>98797548
Thank for the explanation, I wish the books were a little clear on that.

>>98797677
BRP, with more options.

Just learned that GURPS Armor Design is coming out about a year ago, so here's my personal armor creation app that this reminded me of. Have fun anons.

https://gurpsforge.netlify.app/

>>98801712
>https://gurpsforge.netlify.app/
Cool app.

>>98756398
76- Steam tech
24 - Cops
21 - China
Chinese kung fu cops in steam punk Hong Kong.

File: gurps fourth edition revi(...).png (62 KB, 951x620)

62 KB PNG

>>98804494
I haven't seen anybody complain about anything but (1) the deletion of slavery rules...

File: basic set fourth edition (...).png (300 KB, 504x939)

300 KB PNG

>>98804534
...and (2) the groveling apology for removing """offensive""" terms.

>>98804538
>apology for removing
*apology for previously including

>>98801845
Thanks I also just realized I am a bit retarded and wrote "Armor Design is coming out about a year ago" instead "in a year" and you're a bro for not making fun out of me, anon

>>98805218
Haha yeah, I totally noticed and didn't mention...

Can you put reduced time on Healing to be able to heal as a free action?
I mean it's not an attack (not without the ranged modifier anyway), so I feel like this should work.

>>98806095
Don't see any reason why not. As you say, it isn't an attack and it doesn't have any special time reduction rules, so it seems to be fair game. Given that it's already overpriced, and there doesn't seem to be any way to remove the cumulative penalty for repeated use, I can't imagine there will be any balance issues.

>>98806138
Thanks for confirming.

Why is this Eggplant guy's pdf compendiums only on boosty? Shit is inaccessible.

>>98807473
Probably something to do with the fact that he's in Russia, and Russia is at war. I imagine that between his government being paranoid about enemy agents operating within their territory and Western companies refusing to do business with them, there are a lot of restrictions on his internet. I think he mentioned discord being banned there.

>>>98807473
What do you mean by "inaccessible"? When I click on the download button, it prompts me to sign up, which I'm not going to do. But it seems accessible to me.

>>98809493
I thought he was Bulgarian or something.

>>98809515
You can't sign up, it errors out. As >>98809493 said war stuff, which I realized after being pissed about it. But there shouldn't be an issue with him throwing that shit up on some other file service. I just love clicking through hundreds of individual blog posts.

What's a good disadvantage to replace Trickster for a fairy race?
I had added it to a fairy racial template cause "haha fairies trick people" but it's too annoying for any player race to have.

>>98814819
Off the top of my head, I think Curious, Impulsiveness, Short Attention Span, and perhaps certain Compulsive Behaviors and Odious Personal Habits can be useful for representing the whimsical behavior of fairies, so take your pick.

So a player wants to take Energy Reserves in my game, and he brought up a problem I hadn't thought of before: multiple Energy Reserves.
The way I'm reading the rules, it's possible to have multiple single-point Energy Reserves, each recharging at 1 point per 10 minutes. This makes buying a single pool kind of pointless, because it's always better to buy multiple pools for more recharge.
I am deliberating several different ways to approach this:
>forbid multiple ER pools (but this makes certain concepts I want to allow impossible)
>ER recharge rate is shared between ER pools (but this will cause a major headache if different pools have different modifiers that affect recharge)
>all ER pools refill to maximum in 100 minutes, or 10% per 10 minutes if ER is 10+. This seems like the fairest choice. Although, if I go this route, then I'm tempted to extend a similar benefit to regular FP (let FP fully recover with 100 minutes of rest, or 50 minutes if you have snacks, regardless of FP). Otherwise, ER is just too good if it has scaling recovery while normal FP doesn't.

>>98815092
Pretty sure you can only have multiple pools if they have different purposes, like for different powers and such.

>>98815092
>>98815547
>Pretty sure you can only have multiple pools if they have different purposes, like for different powers and such.
I think this is basically correct. Each energy reserve is tied to a specific power source (Powers, p. 7) and can only be used to pay the cost of abilities (and skills, spells, etc.) associated with that source. There is no overlap, so you can take a 1 point magical ER and a 1 point psi ER and they will recharge independently, but you can't use the former to feed your psi abilities or the latter to pay for magic spells.
If you want some of your psi ER to have different rules, you can put modifiers on some levels of it (as per Partly Limited Abilities, Power-Ups 8 pp. 6-7) but it is still all part of the same ER.
However, the rules aren't terribly explicit on this point, so I'm mostly extrapolating from the fact that doing it differently would lead to the perverse result of it being better to take multiple energy reserves, for exactly the reason stated.

File: gurps reign of steel zone(...).png (58 KB, 743x736)

58 KB PNG

>AI influenced by green parties
>hates nuclear power
kek

>>98819315
>killing humans, but only in environmentally friendly ways
lma0

I'm writing up a necromancer.
What zombie templates do you guys like to use?

>>98820110
I mostly just use generic eggplant zombies
https://enragedeggplant.blogspot.com/2019/09/monsters-zombies.html

>>98820110
GURPS Zombies generally covers pretty much every type of zombie I would want and the rules in there are fine, so I just pick from there. The basic-bitch animated corpse template works well for sword-and-sorcery necromancers (e.g. the one in The Scarlet Citadel). Although literary ones tend to be a bit more 'ensouled' than implied by game mechanics, the difference is subtle and not really worth bothering with.

>>98820110(me)

Looking at the costs for Allies, especially considering Zombies with it's 5% = 0.2cp rule, a zombie horde is really cheap.
You can have 100 zombies, even intelligent ones, so long as they are at 0 points or below, for 12 points available all the time.
Using Basic Set for 1 point being the lowest cost of an ally still leaves us at 60 points for such a horde

If I got a generic system and only used the CRB, could I make a functional and fleshed out werewolves vs gray aliens fighting on the moon using Nazi lunar bases as staging grounds with GURPS or are splats mandatory?

>>98821620
What is the CRB?

>>98821620
You could do that, but you would have to improvise some templates (neither werewolves or grays are in the basic set) and probably fudge some equipment / vehicle rules.
'Splats' isn't a generic terms for RPG supplements, by the way. It is rather specifically referring to the White Wolf model where each of the factions within a line would have their own supplement, such as Clanbook: Malkavian, Clanbook Gangrel, and so on. The generic version became known as a '*book: *' which was pronounced 'splatbook: splat', since asterisks were informally called 'splats' in reference to them looking like a bug which had been 'splatted' (crushed into a messy blob). Eventually this led to any book which was part of a series with one volume for each part of a fairly predictable set (e.g. one for each race, character class, etc.) being simply a 'splat'.

>>98821620
3rd ed GURPS has better rules for nazis, werewolves, and spaceships, but you're going to need a bunch of supplements to make it work. 4th ed can just about handle it with the basic set.

>>98821651
Core Rule Book(s), presumably.

I'm thinking of allowing Super-Effort for Control and Create, among other advantages (like ST, DR, TK). Anything I should be wary of?
I'm fine with letting Control gives thousands of DR with Power Block and Create doing thousands of damage with improvised attacks. Enemies will have ultra-tech battlesuits and handheld nuclear weapons; this is why I'm allowing Super-Effort, so superhumans can compete with technology.
But I sense that stuff like combat penalties through Control and Afflictions through Create might be too much, since combat penalties and Afflictions scale logarithmically rather than exponentially in most GURPS rules.
I'm thinking of either adding a cap or using logarithmic scaling for these particular benefits, though I don't know which is most fair and sensible. For afflictions, reading "Create Level" as "meters" on the Size/Speed/Range table and applying the Range penalty to the HT roll seems fair, since Afflictions add SM to resist according to GURPS Powers. For combat penalties, I might just cap it to -10, since that's hwo a lot of natural phenomena like Visibility penalties work; but I'm not sure if that makes sense for all situations.

>>98821869
Combat Penalties should be based on what is being created, super effort should just scale how much of the area he can give these penalties.
Like if you are using Control to create difficult terrain than the penalty is based on the kind of difficult terrain you create. Doesn't matter if you have (or use extra effort) Ice Control 500 if what you say is that you're creating slippery ice, the penalties are based on what slippery ice gives.

No idea if this is raw but that is what makes sense to me.

>>98821894
RAW, you're partly right. Combat penalties are based directly on the level of Control, up to whatever limit makes sense for the stuff being controlled. For stuff like Light & Darkness, the penalty makes sense to cap at -10. For something like Control Ice, the GM might cap the penalty at -2 for Bad Footing on slippery ice; although the player might argue that it should be higher, since he paid for Control Ice 500, he should be able to make the ice perfectly frictionless; then you have arguments over the physics of quasi-liquids and dipole interactions. For something like Control Gravity, there is theoretically no limit, because GURPS already has rules for Different Gravity, and those penalties go onto to infinity (or until your heart stop because the gravity is too high to pump blood anymore). But what should be the limit for something that GURPS doesn't really give limits for, like Control Wind or Control Earth or Control Space-Time?

>>98821869
If you don't want to deal with massive bonuses and penalties to skills, resistance rolls, etc. you could simply define a new form of super-effort which only enhances ST-like values. So you could control absolutely tons of something, but still only give reasonable penalties to sense rolls or whatever. I think this is the approach I would recommend, with the value at about +200%.
However, consider that the extreme cost of abilities like Create with a +400% enhancement might be enough to prevent abuse. If someone spends a thousand points on Control Metal 10 (Super Effort, +400%) they have an effective control level of 100 while using super effort, but just spending all those points on Control Metal 50 gets you half the skill penalties and a quarter of the weight / area. Buying it as telekinesis, DR, and obscure gets you 83 levels for 1k points, and you can bring the cost down further by making it affect only one category of stuff.
Obviously things get a bit more crazy if you expect players to spend significantly more than a thousand points on an ability, but at that point you may need to consider what thousands of points in DX, IQ, and skills will do.

>>98822090
>super-effort which only enhances ST-like values
>at about +200%
I think I might just go with this then

>>98821998
if you're dealing with an actual substance, then at some point it stops being a penalty (i.e. something that disorientates you or makes it hard to do precise movements) and starts being something you need to overcome with ST / damage. -10 seems like a fair point for that.
For something more abstract, like space-time, then I think you can basically just carry on adding penalties all day. You're paying 20 points base, +100% for natural phenomenon, +400% for super effort, and at least eight levels to even make the super-effort worthwhile; you should be able to really fuck shit up for everyone to an almost unlimited degree. A thousand-point innate attack with cosmic (irresistible attack) and a decent amount of area effect is virtually unstoppable. A thousand points split between afflictions with malediction 3 and will lets you completely incapacitate most opponents. A thousand points in IQ and mind control is likewise absurdly powerful. When you're dealing with characters who can actually compete with nuclear weapons in a points-buy system, you're going to get some seriously abusable options. I think all you can really do is talk to your players and agree to try and stick to genre conventions, not just figure out how to break an all-too-delicate rule-set.

>>98821651
>>98821698
These two posts are prime examples of why people associate GURPS with autistic people.

Most people who play RPGs know that CRB refers to Core Rule Book and Splats are additional non-core books providing supplemental material. Even D&D retards would understand these terms. GURPS mains are lost unless it is explicitly stated to them and will reach for "um, actually" explanations.

>>98823063
I've seen "splatbooks" before (though only very rarely), and I think the anon's explanation was unreasonably autistic--IMO, it's perfectly fine to refer to non–Basic Set GURPS books as splatbooks. But I've never seen "CRB" before.
t. been on /tg/ for a decade

>>98823074
I will also note that for most of its existence, GURPS didn’t have a single core book — it’s called the Basic Set for a reason. (1E and 2E were box sets, 3E got two Compendiums, and 4E was always two books until Revised.)

How thick is 19lbs of leather armor on the torso?
I was using the armor app to make a "leather jacket" to protect my vampire-hunting cowboy PC and DR 3 for 19lbs seems pretty good considering a lot of the ghouls in the campaign do 1d6 damage.

But I don't want to look out of place while wearing this "leather jacket".

File: Capture.png (82 KB, 1771x716)

82 KB PNG

>>98825423
(1) Low-Tech p. 104 explains that, in order to grant DR 3, leather armor must be "heavy leather"--pic related. So just use that description.
(2) Low-Tech Armor Design (in Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 52) explains that leather grants 8 DR per inch. So DR 3 implies 3/8 inch (9.5 mm) of thickness.

>>98825423
Nothing higher than DR 1 cow-hide leather is going to look anything like normal clothing, nor be sold as such.
You might be able to make DR 2 clothing with the very toughest skins and careful tailoring, but it's not going to be commonly available, and it will be more like a modern motorcycle jacket with thinner sections on the inside of the joints than a typical 'cowboy' style leather jacket.

>>98825464
>>98825555
So it'd look a bit too conspicuous to walk around in, all right, thanks for the explanation.

>>98825757
Well, it sounds like it's a somewhat modern setting? At least 1800s, you could just have a tailor sew a bit of mail or rivet steel plates in your leather jacket. That'd be fairly inconspicuous and provide a lot more protection than basic leather.

>>98825768
It's set in 1898.
>sew a bit of mail or rivet steel plates
That sounds like a cool idea. I'll try that instead.

>>98825423
>>98825757
>>98825768
Concealed steel plates in vests have been around for basically the whole modern period and were available commercially in America during the civil war at the latest. Unfortunately, bites tend to target every body part except the torso, so armour there is of limited use.
GURPS traditionally gives 'heavy boots' DR 2, which may be a little optimistic for pure leather. These can protect your ankles and maybe calves, but that's more useful against snakes than monsters.
Traditional cowboy thick denim (reputedly so stiff that jeans could stand up by themselves) might qualify as DR 1 against cutting, as per winter clothing in Low-Tech.
Many 19th century cowboys would have worn wool coats rather than leather jackets. Victorian wool coats were made of felted wool and were quite tough (and warm, and heavy), probably as good as light leather, providing at least DR 1 against cutting.
A traditional bowler hat (more common in the old west than Stetson style ones) might give DR 1 against crushing to the skull.
Any cowboy will want a pair of tough work gloves, which again is good for at least DR 1 against cutting.
Although not official, I would give all of the 'heavy clothing' which gives DR 1 against cutting similar DR against burning and corrosion.
Long story short, DR 1 is quite possible, anything better is going to only cover small areas or be obvious.

File: Capture.png (109 KB, 923x937)

109 KB PNG

>>98825881
See GURPS Old West p. 37 for cowboy clothes.

>>98825881
>Unfortunately, bites tend to target every body part except the torso,
You can still put plates or mail in the arms, which is probably the most likely place to be bit besides the neck while standing.

>>98825910
The most common places for human bite wounds IRL are the hands and face. The hands mostly because they are often shoved towards the mouth, whether that is to grapple, strike, or parry. The face because that's the most convenient target for a bite if you are grappling while oriented in the same direction (the most common result of a standing grapple, even if it ends on the ground). Neither is easy to protect with discreet armour.
Dog bites are often on the legs or groin (presumably because that's where dogs can easily reach), sometimes the hand or forearm (from the human putting their limb near the dog's face, for similar reasons which end up with bite wounds on the hands).
Vampires, presumably, favour the neck.
Of these locations, only the forearm seems possible to armour discreetly.
GURPS rules don't really support bites hitting the arm instead of the main target, since that rule only applies to weapons for some reason.
Still, DR 3-4 instead of DR 1 is pretty great if you're facing about 1d cutting damage, since that makes crippling the limb impossible, reduces average damage to very little, and can cause the biter to suffer damage from the hurting yourself rules. If using the blunt trauma and edged weapons rules from low-tech it will also prevent penetration, reducing injury and avoiding any contamination.

I'm making a text adventure engine and I'm shopping around for systems or parts from systems that I like. I know almost nothing about GURPS except that it's known for being autistic (a good thing for me, since the computer will handle the autism for the player just fine.)

Any aspects that you think GURPS does extraordinarily better than other systems? Things you'd leave out? Suggestions on how I should get how it works?

I haven't done any tabletop in 10+ years, so there's a lot I don't know. Basically familiar with DnD/Pathfinder from videogames.

>>98829153
Read "GURPS Lite". It's officially available for free. You can see what it does for yourself.

>>98829484
Thanks, I appreciate that

>>98829522
Oh, but to answer your questions: It's very complete. The guys who wrote GURPS made it so that it can function as the system for any kind of game. I do mean any. There's a lot of rules, you probably want to pick and choose specific traits and rules to include in your engine. Like, use parts of GURPS instead of all of GURPS.

>>98829153
Character creation: GURPS uses a points-buy system which allows very flexible character creation. Unlike most RPGs, you buy attributes, skills, and traits from a common pool. Traits and attributes can take modifiers, which alter how they work and what they cost. This is easily abused, so possibly not great for a video game unless carefully balanced.
It doesn't just use a shallow 'reskin' for similar things. Although it builds on common mechanics, firearms feel different to bows, magic feels different to psionics, and most genres have supporting game mechanics which make them play differently.
The writers (mostly) know what they are talking about. This has become less true recently, but many GURPS writers put a lot of effort into researching a subject and a lot of thought into presenting it in a playable way. This isn't something you can easily take, but it's worth bearing in mind that sometimes doing the reading and thinking (and real experience of what you're writing about) can make a big difference. Don't just steal from games, or you will end up with slop. The closer your research comes to reality, the better your product will be.