Old Thread >>43614380

"But why GURPS?"

1) The splatbooks/worldbooks are universally written by people who know what they're talking about. The Fantasy book is written by archaeologists and historians, the Space book is written by astrophysicists, the Guns book is written by gun experts, etc. The factual mistakes are few and far between, and almost always acknowledged later. They give great advice on how to make believable worlds, how FTL affects society, how magic changes warfare, how real supernatural elements change secret societies... or how to ignore all realism and make whatever setting you want in a way that players can't take advantage of. They're great reads, even if you don't use the system.

2) GURPS has rules to handle anything. You don't need to use them all (why bother with rules for asphyxiating in a vacuum in a game about biker gangs?) but they're there. So if a game doesn't go where you expect, and your party of adventurers buy a wagon and start managing a merchant caravan company, there are books to support that style of play in a systemic way, integrated with the core rules in a way that makes sense. This also makes it great for crazy blends of game. Dungeonpunk with automatic firearms? Yes.

3) GURPS by default uses "heroic realism". This is when the odds on the heroes' sides but reality doesn't bend for them. Two bullets will knock a human unconscious (but not immediately kill him - this is fairly realistic) but hitting a moving target more than 100m away in a firefight is hard as hell. It suits games that go for a realistic or gritty feel and gives a break from the slightly cartoony damage sponges in games like D&D but can be customised with optional rules to change the feel from "Fuck You, There Are No Heroes and the World is Shit" right up to "The Heroes are Good and Always Triumph Over Evil". Incidentally, what makes it heroic realism also makes it the best game on the market to play a game about Operators Operating Operationally.

I love Sorcery!

If quarterstaffs are actually meant to get a massive +4 bonus to parry it would say so somewhere.

>>43686840
if you mean sword and sorcery for the nostalgia try GURPS Conan where u get the classical feel with evil witches, powerful warlocks and raging barbarians who distrust the unknown and enigmatic magicians

If you're talking about fantasy magic try GURPS Thaumaturgy, GURPS Magic and GURPS Elementals.

if you want things like occultism and mysteries around witchcraft try GURPS cabal

Or you can write your own setting and magic system, gurps gives you the tools to do so

>>43686943
quarterstaffs are not that good, aside the +4 parry they don't have a good damage to anything armored and weapon damage fuck with the parry

If you don't gurps you're a faggot. Just sayin'.

>>43686979
But they don't have a +4 parry, nowhere in Martial Arts or the Basic Set states they do.

The more reasonable interpretation is that any balanced staff weapon gets a +2 since Martial Arts says a spear can be used as a staff without penalty and spears do not have a separate entry in the staff table in Low Tech but polearms do.

>>43686947
I'm assuming you're a moron:
Sorcery is a GURPS magic system, dumbass. Some shit in Pyramid that eventually got its own book.

>>43687050
you mean "GURPS thaumatology; sorcery"?
also you should cooldown and understand that the word "sorcery" have many meanings.

>>43687021
quarterstaffs have a +2 weapon parry bonus and a +2 staff skill bonus, the staff skill bonus is applied to anything wielded using that skill

>>43686943
It says pretty clearly in both basic set and Low-tech that they have +2 to parry. Not sure where anyone would get +4 from.

What is the *best* way to use Sorcery? Understanding that it is a very subjective question, is it better to focus on boosting talent to be able to bit improvisation penalties and eventually be able to improvise 25/50/75/100% threshold with little or no penalty? Or does it make more sense to usually focus on just learning the spells you need, and taking the handful that are cheap enough to improvise as a small perk?

File: 1410273476152.jpg (50 KB, 307x539) Image search: [Google]

50 KB, 307x539

>>43687150
No, they do not. If you hold a quarterstaff like a sword you lose the parry bonus so clearly the +2 only comes from using it as a staff.

>>43687153
People are assuming the +2 in the weapons table and the +2 in the skill entry are separate.

I'm honestly considering just scrapping the bonus to parries. Martial Arts introduced the defensive grip and, more importantly, the benefit for parrying with a two-handed weapon. I think those mechanics effectively remove any justification for giving staff weapons a +2 to parry; both "Parrying with Two-Handed Weapons" and staffs attribute their benefits to the increased surface are of the weapon, and when I imagine the defensive benefits of a staff, it's being held in a way similar to a defensive grip. I might change Grip Mastery to allow basically infinite switches per turn like Form Mastery does; start your turn in Defensive Grip, switch to normal if you want to swing, then pop back into Defensive Grip.

>tl;dr I'm treating it as an artifact of 3e.

File: qarter.jpg (46 KB, 1023x160) Image search: [Google]

46 KB, 1023x160

>>43687219
Naginata also receive the +2 bonus when shielded using Staff but they do not have a +2 listed, and you know why? because they are unrelated bonus

>>43687150
That Anon has been posting that in every thread to date since Sorcery came out you mong.

>>43687272
Where does it state that the Naginata gets a +2. Its an unbalanced cutting polearm.

Are you really saying it makes sense that quarterstaffs get a massive +4 bonus but this is never explicitly stated anywhere?

This ties into the bigger problem of the spear/staff divide being absurd as it is currently. By RAW using quarterstaff techniques with a sharpened pole suddenly means you need to use spear skill even though you are doing the exact same moves. And spear training in real life includes using the shaft two handed to defend and strike with the lower/butt end in the exact same way as a quarterstaff immediately after using the point. Are we to believe every single person who trains two handed spear use has the form mastery perk in real life?

Also if you use a spear with staff skill you are suddenly only allowed to use the blunt end for thrusts because reasons. Game balance is not a sufficient excuse when MA was going for more realistic combat.

>>43687341
Staff and Spear default to each other at -2, which translates to a net +1 to parry assuming all long balanced shaft weapons get the bonus.

I think it might just be a Form Mastery thing. Attack using the Spear skill, defend using the Staff skill. One-point investment in a perk makes sense for common stuff like this. It also separates those that only know how to jab with a spear from those that know how to hold it properly as a defensive measure. Alternatively, since the default goes both ways, a staff-fighter with a spear attacks at a -2 (though the spearhead is small, it is enough to throw off your balance with the weapon if you're assuming the uniform weight distribution of a staff) but gets the full parrying benefits.

It doesn't fix everything (without that perk, RAW, you still can only jab with the blunt bit) but it's a workable bandaid IMO.

There's also a houserule floating about that just treats the difference between Spear, Staff, and Polearm weapons as Familiarity issues and condenses those skills into Pole Weapons DX/A, or even round up to Hafted to include Two-Handed Axe/Mace as well for those grey-area weapons that are sometimes considered a polearm and other times just a long-hafted axe.

>>43687341
>Where does it state that the Naginata gets a +2. Its an unbalanced cutting polearm.
it gets a +2 when wielded as a staff(which limit the damage to crushing[LOOK THE FUCKING TABLE] but gives a +2 to parry)
it happens to every other weapon used as example that can be used with staff skill.

>Are we to believe every single person who trains two handed spear use has the form mastery perk in real life?
do you know that perks are simple things(costs 1 point)? and lots of them can be earned with practice?

>>43687501
It does not get +2 in that table because its unbalanced just like no other polearm with a striking head gets a bonus when used with staff skill as per the skill description. Did you even look at the image you posted? And the quarterstaff ONLY gets its +2 parry bonus when used as a quarterstaff, if its used as a sword you get nothing. There is no +4 bonus, its a +2 bonus for using a balanced pole weapon with staff skill and that's it.

The ONLY weapons that get a +2 parry bonus by the book are balanced hafted ones used with staff skill, the example given in Martial Arts is the spear which can be used as a staff without penalty and thus gets the exact same +2 bonus as the quarterstaff.

>>43687483
Well it is better than nothing.

>>43687272
No it doesn't. The skill description in the Basic Set saying staff weapons get +2 to Parry doesn't mean it's automatically factored in to statblocks. It's there to tell people looking at the skills "hey, pick me if you want a bonus to parries!" without making them check the individual weapon stats. It's a convenience thing. Saying "staff weapons get +2 to parry" in the skill description and including +2 to parry in the statblock does not mean they get +4.

Using your logic, fencing weapons are actually DOUBLE FENCING because the benefits are listed both in the skill description and in the stat-block.

File: 1398467467581.jpg (3 MB, 1927x2748) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1927x2748

>>43687634
This also means the large knife has a -2 to parry.

It says its a -1 in the skill description and its stat block has a -1 parry score.

>>43687725
Exactly. Those numbers in the skill description is there to give people a heads up, tell them what they're getting into and what they can expect from their point investment. It's not a binding contract that exists outside of the weapon's statblock. It's a preview.

>>43687760
It would be hilarious if true though.

That fine quality balanced spear with a guard from a few threads back would give you +5 or +6 to your parry score. +7/8 with weapon bond and combat reflexes.

>>43687725
>>43687634
>Staff (DX/Average): Any long, balanced pole without a striking head.
This skill makes good use of the staff’s
extensive parrying surface when
defending, giving +2 to your Parry
score.
this is talking about the skill

>Knife (DX/Easy): Any rigid, hilted
blade less than one foot long, from a
pocketknife to a bowie knife.
this is talking about a skill too, and then after a "." he continues totalk about the weapon
>A knife has a very small parrying surface,
which gives you -1 to your Parry score.
Defaults: Force Sword-3, MainGauche-3, or Shortsword-3.

and Fencing weapons is not under any skills. its a description about what fencing does and no skills says that they have/give fencing, what does have fencing only is said at the weapons table.

>>43687807
How the fuck is "the staff's extensive parrying surface" talking about the skill separate from the weapon while a knife's "very small parrying surface" is just a preview of the weapon itself.

>Fencing weapons is not under any skills
>no skills says the have/give fencing
Did you miss the big paragraph under melee weapons that says Fencing Weapons, describes what that does, and then explicitly lists the weapon skills that fall under Fencing Weapon?

You have to be trolling. No one can be this stubborn and obtuse without actively trying to be.

>>43687807
The Knife has a -1 because it has a small parrying surface, the quarterstaff has +2 when held like a staff because it has a large one. Did you even read what you copied?

And if the +2 for a staff is inherent and separate to the skill why does it only get the +2 when used with staff skill and not with any other skill you can use it with?

>>43687634

Can we make it +6 because it gets an additional +2 from being mentioned in this thread?

>>43686808
>Incidentally, what makes it heroic realism also makes it the best game on the market to play a game about Operators Operating Operationally.

I think you mean Savage Worlds

File: what-did-you-say.jpg (37 KB, 550x382) Image search: [Google]

37 KB, 550x382

>>43690738
Wrong general.

File: 734558021.jpg (25 KB, 309x433) Image search: [Google]

25 KB, 309x433

>>43686792
I've just recently been discovering GRUPS, and I'd like to try it with my local, but the combat w/ it's maneuvers and weapon-based maneuver modifications my be a little much for them to jump right into.
When thinking about how to get around it (because I didn't want to just take out maneuvers and stuff), I was wondering;

Has anybody ever rounded out/streamlined GURPS into like a set of Rock>Paper>Scissors situations? Not unlike Fire Emblem, where Sword>Axe>Spear>Sword, but with a little more to it than that; but not much? Because that's sort of what GURPS combat already is, but on like 12 simultaneously operating levels.

BC for the sake of simplifying general activities I was going to play it as you suffer -1 for minor inconveniences, -2 for notable drawbacks, and -4 for super-serious fuck-ups; with anything worse than that just being, "No, do something else," or auto-failure.

So like, what if you've got Parry, Block, and Dodge, right? Dodge has nothing to do with your weapons, and You're left with Parry and Block.
So then you've mainly got like Thrust, Swing, and then say Trip, Disarm, and Feint.

So what if you made it like Parry=Block > Feint ? Thrust = Swing > Trip = Disarm > Parry=Block, with a +1 going to whoever's at the advantage, and the person with the better roll does their thing and prevents the thing the other guy was doing AND does the thing they're doing [things that are not adjacent to each other receiving no modifiers]
Not that that organization makes any sort of sense; that's just an off-the-cuff (and probably terrible) example of what I'm talking about.
Because then like Swords get +1 Parry, Axes get +1 Swing, Spears get +1 Thrust, etc (on top of their general traits like being thrown, or easily concealed, or whatever)

File: simplestGurpsCombat.png (64 KB, 345x327) Image search: [Google]

64 KB, 345x327

>>43691060
These are recommendations for the minimum combat rules to use with GURPS. From here, you can start slowly adding complexity probably.

Personally, the rock scissors paper thing sounds somewhat interesting, but also like another rule to think about. You might instead be safer trying to limit people to more "conventional" type weapons if for example, you are worried about accidentally giving parry+8 to bo-staves. When you get comfortable with easy weapons like blades, axes, maces, bows, and guns, start adding the weapons with exceptional rules.

>>43691060
Not to my knowledge. It also sounds like you're complicating the combat system and then trying to simplify it. Eighty percent of the time, combat is fought though the standard Attack maneuver, and fighters will use the most damaging attack. Eighteen percent of the time, it's one of the two or three actions that the character has specialized in (feints, hooks, sweeps, etc.). Only in that remaining 2% will combatants start throwing out anything and everything.

Basically, I'm saying it's overkill to do an R>P>S web when most of those options aren't used in most combats.

Now, that second idea of weapons getting some sort of bonus based on their class is *much* more doable. There's precedent too. Fantasy-Tech and Low-Tech both talk at least briefly on 'what if rumors about medieval/fantasy equipment were true' and talk about stuff like katanas getting an armor divisor of (2) or gothic plate's fluting being so good at deflecting blows it actually increases your effective Dodge. I don't have much advice to give on it, though; my group and I are all stick-in-the-mud 'muh realism' faggots and this idea is pretty gamist.

File: 1344x756_6525_The_warrior_2d_fantasy_axe_warrior_picture_image_digital_art.jpg (159 KB, 1344x756) Image search: [Google]

159 KB, 1344x756

>>43691060
>>43691312
>>43691453
After putting more thought into it:
Thrust > Strike = Kick > Trip > Disarm > Feint < Thrust
Thrust: SL+1, Thrusting Damage
Strike: SL, Swing Damage
Kick: SL-1, Swing Damage, Knock-back by 1/4th your ST if they fail a DX or ST roll
Trip: SL-2, render target Prone; Kneeling if they succeed a DX roll
Disarm: SL-2, knock one exposed/visible item from target, SL-4 if it's strapped on or held in 2+ hands.
Feint: SL-2, gain +2 vs. the target of the feint on your next actin against them; lasts until the end of your next turn.

It's implied that you've parried your opponent in the process of any given successful action, but there are the actions:
Guard: Only defend against your opponent's actions, and do so at SL+2.
Block: If you have a shield/armored-arm, as Guard but at SL+4.
Evade: Roll at SL+1 vs. your opponent's attack, and move up to SM spaces, you can go up to twice that far by opting to land prone. If you Evade into cover, gain an additional +1 vs. Ranged Attacks.

and then there's
GO ALL OUT
Double Attack - Roll an attack against your opponent at -1; if successful you may roll a second attack in the same turn at -2; they may roll against the second attack at SL, or as normal if they Guard/Blocked.
Mighty Attack - Roll a single Strike or Thrust against the target, at -1, but deal +1d of damage if it's successful.

Ranged Attacks
Aim - spend a turn aiming at a target; if you shoot/throw at the target in your next turn gain +2 to the roll.
Shoot/Throw - roll at SL, -1/Range Increment of the weapon, and -1 if the target is mostly behind soft cover, and -2 if the target is mostly behind hard cover, fully/prone=x2
Soft Cover - mostly obstructive
Hard Cover - could actually stop the projectile.

In this version you'd get 1 Action/Turn in combat.
Ready still does non-combat things; as does Concentrate, but you suffer a -2 to reactive rolls vs. sudden assault if you're Concentrating on an activity; which is mandatory for

>>43692567
which is mandatory for more complicated things*

The second Double-Attack should also just be -1, and the Mighty Attack should be at -2, not -1.

>>43692567
Or even just
Kick/Haymaker=Strike>Punch=Thrust>Parry=Disarm=Trip>Strike

(Armed)
Thrust: SL+1, Thrust Damage
Strike: SL, Swing Damage

(Reactive/No-Damge)
Parry: SL+1, no effect
Trip: SL-2, render target Prone; Kneeling if they succeed a DX roll
Disarm: SL-2, knock one exposed/visible item from target, SL-4 if it's strapped on or held in 2+ hands.

Unarmed (-2 vs. Armed)
Punch=SL, Thrust Damage
Kick/Haymaker = SL-1, Swing Damage, Kockback 1/2(ST-10) if they fail a DX/ST check

So can staves parry swords and other edged weapons without breaking?

I'm not a big fan of the maneuvers system of combat. I think it's too many options with different sub options. I like the style other rpgs use where you get x amount of actions that can be used for different things. Do any of the books have other variant rules for combat that anyone knows about before I start grasping at straws?

nobody get
>>43693102
confused w/
>>43692567
>>43693023
just btw
we's not the same person

>>43693023
you know what? just take parry out of there; it's to be implied you successfully countered your opponent if you win the contest.

>>43693102
How is 'you can do one thing from this list per second' any different from 'you can do X things from this list in Y seconds'?

>>43693102
>I like the style other rpgs use where you get x amount of actions that can be used for different things
That doesn't seem like an issue with the number of maneuvers but the length of a turn.

>too many options
See >>43691453
Yeah there are quite a few options, especially when you factor in techniques, but 90% of the time it's just some flavor of attack or a character's stand-by special move (you don't have to learn them all, just be familiar with the three the party actually uses).

Also I'd take a laundry list of combat options over 3.PF's FULLATTACKFULLATTACKFULLATTACK.

>>43693354
>>43693324
I think he just means he'd prefer a set of condensed general activities, than a plethora of specific actions. I disagree, but I get it.

>>43693102
Uh, what? I'd love to help but I don't understand your question. In other systems you get multiple actions to do things per turn, and in GURPS you get... actions to do things. Like, you can always do free actions and take a step and initiate a maneveur and often you need to spend multiple terms completing your manevuer anyhow so it all works out.

I really don't see what you're asking for here. What sort of variant would you like? Giving people multiple actions per turn instead of a 1x maneveur? "This campaign gives you Altered Time Rate [In Combat Actions Only] for free at CharGen" - > every character now has multiple "actions" to spend on "different things" each turn.

Is it too complex? Just boil it down.

Attack
Move
Ready

Not that complex. It's not like you ever really need any other maneveurs than that.

>>43686979
They don't have a +4 bonus, they have +2 bonus. The skill description is describing the weapon and why it gives this bonus (parrying surface), same as plenty of other skills handily describe requisite or included perks or things to consider.

If the "Staff" skill actually gave *the character using it* anything from *having the skill* it would follow the same standard format as *every other entry that does this* and go "At [attribute]+[x] level you get [bonus], at [attribute]+[x2] level you get [bonus2]".

Kindly take your weirdly specific rules readings and stuff 'em. It doesn't work like that and it never has.

>>43687238
Yeah, seems reasonable. It's pretty much what I did.

>>43691060
... what? How does... what?
>>43692567
Wait, did you just re-invent the combat system and end up with almost exactly the same combat system?

Sure, go ahead. That's a little strange but if you want all skill tests to be flat 3d6 with modifiers for techinque+weapon use, you certainly can. It's a less effecient, more complicated system that means a lot of strange rulings but you certainly can do it that way. I'm not entirely sure why you would, and I'm even less sure why you'd re-invent it in a specific way that ties into Rock-Paper-Scissors. This isn't a video game, there's no need for internal balance versus single player AI with predictabe rules, and you're meant to simulate actual people doing things.

Swords and axes already give you + to swing, look at their description. Kick already gives you negative to skill and damage and knockback Feint is...

what's with the +2? Are you re-making every single roll into being a quick contest?

They technically already are, given that you roll Skill vs Defenses.

What are you trying to do here? Why change All Out Attack to GO ALL OUT ALL CAPS and just mildly change the rules?

What? Just, like, read the combat section. It already does all this.

>>43693838
with a smattering of -3, a myriad of +1s, and a basting of x2s, and a number of nearly redundant situational modifiers.
I'm not attempting to re-invent the wheel, just smooth it out.

>>43693714
That's kind of what I mean, yeah. But I'll give an example of another rpg.

In Edge of the Empire your turn consists of 1 action and 1 maneuver. A maneuver is used to move, aim, reload, ready a weapon. An action is used to attack, use a power or make some other form of skill check. You can exchange your action for a second maneuver, or suffer 2 Strain (equivalent of fatigue) for a maneuver.

And I kind of like that set up. Attack, all out attack, move, move and attack, aim, ready, etc is too much. But move, Attack, ready doesn't feel like enough. And 1 second doesn't feel like enough time per round, I feel like their would be a lot of "I aim and do nothing else" turns. As a general rule, I like each turn to be productive and have my players rolling something.

I was thinking up the length of rounds to 2 seconds and allow maneuvers in any combination of: move, aim, Attack, and ready. With doubling up on an attack being an all out attack.

>>43694081
Fair enough, if that works for your games. Combat turns in GURPS flow by pretty quickly though, and you seldom need more than the 1 second. There's many turns of "doing nothing" but only because the "nothing" prepares you for the action, ie.

a: I move
b: I am
c: I duck for cover
/
a: I sprint, almost closing to B
b: having aimed, I shoot desperately
c: I vault out of cover to surprise A
[b rolls ranged attack, a defends]
/
a: I all out attack b
b: I try to hobble away!
c: I tackle A from the side in a surprise move
[a attacks b, b defends, c attacks a, a defends]

combat done.

But hey, whatever works for your game. I've gotts say though that "in EotE you can do 1 action and 1 maneveur, and actions are attacks, powers and all skills and maneveurs are these 4 things, and you can also change them around, and do more, or get strain, or..."

is about even with
"in GURPS, you attack, move, aim, ready, with options to make a special kind of attack or a special kind of move if you really want".

Hell, if you absolutely want you can just dictate that "Characters get 1 attack per round, but can spend 1 Fatigue Point to get extra Move / Ready / Interaction maneveurs in case they want to try other things than attack, or wish to be able to Aim+Attack, or move+attack more easily... at the cost of rapidly running out of FP", and then just ignore the 1 second. That's not a hard cap. That's a unit of time used as an example. Pretend it takes however long is reasonable.

>>43693714
>>43694081
Also, if it isn't obvious, I am not interested in GURPS for the simulation. I like fast paced games that are relatively easy on the rules. I'm interested for all the options and that sweet sweet bell curve.

I may as well post another example of what I mean since I'm shit St explaining what I want.

In the 40k rpg each turn you get one action. A variety of different things are a full, or half action. Like firing a semi auto weapon is a half, while firing full auto is a full action. Movement and aiming can be half or full. Reloading is measured by how many actions, etc.

I don't like this style that much, but it's something. The maneuver mechanic in GURPS feels like I'm picking a template each turn for what kind of actions I'm doing.

>>43694273
You're right, I guess they are about equal. It's just such a foreign concept to me, I'm kind of afraid of it. I suppose I could try it and see what my group thinks. I will cut down some options though, there are way too many for our needs. I just thought there would be a bunch of interesting combat variants.

So is Judo plus a few points in Brawling and the stamp kick technique the most efficient way to make a dangerous unarmed fighter?

So, here I am making my own setting, and wondering if I need to make my own system, since GURPs doesn't factor in for limb damage, or degrees of success/failure.

But then I find out that there are rules for both those things.

Where has this glorious system been all my life?

>>43694857
For truly unarmed, it's damn good on a budget. Not sure if it's the BEST, but I have personal experience that it's a solid combo as long as you have a pair of solid boots and the enemy has a skull/brain hit location.

>>43694975
It has always been here my son, waiting for the day when you would return to Us.

Praise Kromm!

File: DiceGod.png (14 KB, 716x372) Image search: [Google]

14 KB, 716x372

>>43695008

Whoever that guy is, PRAISE BE!

On a side note, I'm designing a setting that I've had in my head for a good while. Without getting into too much detail, is it better to let players come up with their own goals and stories based off their characters problems/ambitions, or is it better to hand them a mission in the form of a "job" from an "employer"?

>>43695134

That has a lot more to do with the sort of players you have and the kind of game you want to play. I generally give my characters some kind of goal, even if it is a mission-of-the-week style-game.

>>43695134
Kromm is 4e's head guy. Heaping praise upon is name is theorized to speed along the production of 4e's Vehicles. He also does damn good work, is quick to help people on the forums, and is all around a decent dude.

Like >>43695179 said, that's more a campaign decision than a setting decision. Sandbox vs. Threads of Fate vs. Paycheck Motivation. You can run all three types in fantasy, modern, sci-fi, etc.

>>43695179

The setting is a sort-of Dieselpunk world, with the game itself taking place in River City, a cosmopolitan metropolis. There are agencies of "Personal Enforcers" that are contracted to send people out to do dirty work.

But such a setup limits the options of the characters to investigative and combat roles. I want the players to explore their characters more, and it feels like that kind of "job" way of doing things lends itself to more game-y mentalities rather than narrative ones.

The alternative would be to force the players to accept some kind of negative situation in their character's lives, but that too feels contrived and limiting.

>>43695762
I find in GURPS, unless it is against the game concept, people will buy their own problems in the form of various Disadvantages.

A handful of Dutys, Enemies or Dependents can do a lot of good for driving the game at times.

Bump for great GURPSness.

>>43687020
but sir I AM a faggot and I GURPS


oh, has anyone found/made a good FATAL>GURPS rules translation for 4e? In particular I'm looking for how to derive vaginal, oral, and anal circumference. Probably something involving a combination of HT and... DX (maybe), divided by some arbitrary number?

>>43689362
It's been mentioned at least 5 or six times at this point, so you'd better add those together for a neat +10.

>>43699595
I'd say it should be based on SM (bigger body = bigger opening) and HT (having higher HT wouldn't make it larger, but it would increase the threshold it could be expanded safely without inducing injury). With that in mind, FATAL lists it as 5-6" in circumference for an average human, 7-9" for an average bugbear or troll, and finally 9-12" for the average ogre. If we assume SMs of +0/+1/+2 for those races respectively, we get some numbers we can use.

After altogether too much math for this subject, I think the most accurate equation based on the given values is
>(HT/4) + (3*SM) + (5/LM)
Where HT is the character's Health score, SM being the character's size modifier, and LM is the Linear Measurement of the given size modifier (height in yards if you want to be individual-specific). Plugging the given values into this equation gives us racial averages of 5" for humans, 7.2" for Bugbears/Trolls, and 9.5" for Ogres, assuming HT 10. While these figures do tend toward the low end of the bell curve, large SM species, especially brutish monster races, have an innate bonus to HT and as such the given values will tend to be higher in practice.

And now to drink myself into a neverending sleep. It's up to you motherfuckers to handle the rest.

>>43686792
Where does one get hard chores of GURPS books?

>>43700486
Hard copies

>>43699595
You cannot be serious.

>>43700437
>I'd say it should be based on SM (bigger body = bigger opening) and HT (having higher HT wouldn't make it larger, but it would increase the threshold it could be expanded safely without inducing injury). With that in mind, FATAL lists it as 5-6" in circumference for an average human, 7-9" for an average bugbear or troll, and finally 9-12" for the average ogre. If we assume SMs of +0/+1/+2 for those races respectively, we get some numbers we can use.


I only brought it up to give y'all nightmares.

>>43700498
Warehouse 23 sells some, others you might be able to find used on Amazon.

A common option is to buy PDFs and then print/bind them yourself or pay a PoD service.

>>43700486
Assuming you meant hardcovers, you have three options:
1) Warehouse23, the official SJGames site. Direct support of the publishers, but limited runs and a hesitation to reprint older works means you have a very limited selection. I think in the last general had a list of currently available 4e books, but if what you want is not on this small list, there's not much for you here.
2) Resale, either digital (eBay and similar sites) or brick and mortar (Half-Price Books and other used books stores). While you might be able to find something worthwhile (especially in the physical stores), chances are all there is are a handful of shitters trying to sell 4e books for $90~ a pop.
3) Print-on-demand sites. If you legally purchased a PDF from SJGames, you can send it in to a variety of print-on-demand services to have it done hardcover. It's all legal assuming you actually bought the PDF (most services will check the metadata to make sure). I crunched some numbers a while ago, and by my count it doesn't cost much more to get a PDF and a printing of a professional-quality hardback that it would have been to get the books originally. There are also *much* cheaper options (high-quality but softback, cheaper hardbacks, etc.), but all in all it's not a bad deal.

>>43700626
> chances are all there is are a handful of shitters trying to sell 4e books for $90~ a pop

I half-thought of buying a buncha Thaumatology hardcovers when it dropped, then sitting on them and jacking up the prices like they were textbooks. So disappointed because it looks like it actually worked for a lucky few.

>>43700626
Hmm. I may end up looking into option 3 then.

Thanks.

I've been wanting to try GURPS, but I just can't find the books anywhere.

Now, I want to do historical fiction(musketeers, pirates , Vikings, mythic Britain, Mongolia, mythic China and shogun Era Japan), fantasy (witcher, so if, Elder Scrolls), as well as high action urban fantasy (Gargoyles, shadowrun, Anita Blake, supernatural, grimm)

What are the books I would most need?

Let's skip seeing books for now, just the crunch. What are the main books id need?

>>43700740
If you're just now getting into GURPS, stick to the Basic Set. Yes, all those splats are awesome, but they add a lot of options and risk drowning new players in a bottomless sea of choices.

However, once you and your group has mastered the basics (it shouldn't take long), I recommend what I've come to call the Holy Trifecta; these three books are almost universally useful, regardless of your setting. First up is Powers. This book greatly expands on the Advantages in the basic set, including new modifiers for them and rules for their use. Even in a wholly realistic setting, Powers can be incredibly useful. Next is Martial Arts. If you game has any sort of combat, this book will be of use. Whether you're planning on fighting with broadsword and shield against a horde of orcs in typical fantasy-land or flying through the treetops while dueling the man that killed your kung-fu master or whipping out a lead pipe to defend your little bit of modern-day Manhattan, Martial Arts has you covered. Lastly is Thamatology, basically Alternative Magic Systems: The Book. While Thaumatology one is less universal than its sisters, it is so damn useful if your game includes any sort of supernatural, it earns its place in the trifecta.

There are also the -Tech books to consider. Each book, with the exception of Bio-Tech, gives a more detailed look at the equipment of periods in time. Low-Tech covers stuff from prehistory to the age of sail, High-Tech handles everything from the Industrial Revolution to modern day, and Ultra-Tech deals with the technological what-ifs of the future. Bio-Tech is unique in that it's discipline-focused and not time-focused. Anything having to do with biology or genetics is covered there, from TL0 plant grafting and selective breeding to theoretical TL 12 genemodding. These can all be added in fairly easily; there are few additional rules, it's mostly equipment and history lessons, and D&D has taught us how to handle long equipment lists.

>Cont

>>43701025
After that, though, things get a little hazy. SJGames now favors smaller splats over full-length works. While this makes publishing faster, it means we can no longer point at a single book and say "this has all the awesome shit you could ever need."
•Thaumatology: Ritual Path Magic. GURPS's favored child for quite a while. Originally written for modern-day secret magic campaigns in the vein of Harry Dresden, WoD, Supernatural, etc., it was quickly adopted by GURPSfags looking for a robust, modular magic system that favors slow casting times and subtle workings. If that sounds like something you'd want, give it a shot.
•Thaumatology: Sorcery. The new kid on the block, at least in terms of magic systems. Sorcery is centered around using Advantages as spells and promotes more specialization and creation/use of iconic spells than RPM. Still very flexible, though.
•Martial Arts: Technical Grappling. A new subsystem for grappling. If you want more detailed system for grappling, this is your best bet. It doesn't slow that game down as the mechanics are very simple: grappling inflicts Control Points that same way punches inflict damage; CP represents how strong your grip is and both penalizes the target and can be spent to set up other grappling moves like throws or locks.
•Social Engineering. Greatly expands on the game's social mechanics. Not a lot to be said had here, but the book is very useful. The only thing keeping it from the Holy Trifecta is that it's not a full book and a lot of gamers are content with murderhoboing.
•Power-Ups. A bunch of generalist splats that focus on different aspects of the game. You've got lists of enhancements, limitations, perks, quirks, talents, wildcard skills, and oddly enough one book dedicated to a blade-magic system (it was the first in the series and I don't think they knew what they wanted to do with it yet).

Plus there's a ton of great but more setting-specific books out there.

I'm a little confused on what it means to replace a reaction roll with an influence skill roll. Since the two rely on different results, how can you determine what is good or bad?

>>43694985
Its a shame Judo is so expensive really.

>>43694857
>So is Judo plus a few points in Brawling and the stamp kick technique the most efficient way to make a dangerous unarmed fighter?

It's one of the better options.

An alternative build would be Judo plus everything that benefits fighting on the ground; follow up your throw by jumping on top of your opponent, pinning him. The downside is that you are vulnerable to attacks by anyone other than your target so it isn't great for high level characters who want to take on several opponents at once.

The other common unarmed build is to just take a striking skill and rely on kicks, which offset the issues with reach.

Are there 150 point modern explorer/treasure hunter/adventuring archaeologist type templates anywhere?

Got a question for you guys: Saucer grenades (from Ultra-Tech, p.147) in a grenade launcher, how do?

>>43703241
Use the stats from Tangler

>>43703282
Tanglers are 25mm, though, and saucer grenades are 40mm minimum. I'm mainly looking to have some way of distributing bouncing explosives over a very long distance, so if there's another way of doing it, please let me know.

>>43702233
A reaction roll is the only one with that sliding scale of attitude (poor>neutral>good>very good etc.). For simplicity's sake, influence rolls are binary; success nets a Good reaction while failure results in a Poor reaction. Crit failure/success might expand this to Bad/Very Good, but essentially it's going to either be Poor or Good.

Social engineering has an optional rule that switches to a degrees of success/failure mechanic i.e. success by 5 = Very Good, regardless of crit.

>>43701025
>>43701196
Wow, thanks!

This is gonna be a huge help.

I'll try out basic set, and tack on extra books later, starting with these ones you mentioned.

File: copyrasty, copyrasty everywhere.png (26 KB, 317x460) Image search: [Google]

26 KB, 317x460

>>43704161
How To Be A GURPS GM is probably the best GURPS book for beginners, including players.
http://www95.zippyshare.com/v/Dwa5Jmvj/file.html

>>43704195
I'll give it a read. Thanks

Does anyone have any ideas on how to get rid of money and buy items with character points? I am going to run a Rogue Trader game, where the characters are rich bitch mother fucker with nigh uncountable wealth. So I don't want to just give them 20 billion dollars to start and have them go to town. They have a ship and a huge crew, but it won't be involved enough to bother statting. And for personal items I want to have 'packages' of items as lenses. And I have no idea how to price them.

Also, I want to have their wealth serve as a skill shared among the party that they can use to buy shit. And Rogue Traders frequently buy hundreds of thousands of weapons at a time to arm their private armies.

It's a pretty big scale of wealth and I'm not entirely sure where to start.

>>43705270
Pyramid 3/44 has an abstract wealth implementation. Haven't looked at it, so no idea how good it is.

>>43703017
Sadly, no, but there are a handful of useful template you can crib from when making your own.

Horror has the Explorer template that clocks in at 95 points. Since it's meant for a horror game, it's a little anemic for standard adventuring, so I would put those extra points into ST, DX, and HT.
On the flip-side, you have the 350-point Reality Archaeologist from Horror: The Madness Dossier. While still for a horror game, TMD is about combating horrifying threats that use language and memes to control humanity, so it's more of a badass combat-ready explorer in the vein of Indiana Jones. While you would have to drop 200 points to make this a 150-point template, that's a lot less hard than it sounds; a decent chunk of the points are dedicated to setting-specific things (90-point patron, knowledge in eight different languages to get around/understand alien mind control, special techniques related to using the language yourself, etc.).
Lastly, Pyramdi #3/17 has two templates that might be useful. There's the rookie shovel bum at 68 points and the more experienced old hand at 100. Like Horror's Explorer, you need to add some combat and survival stuff to make these guys a bit more adventure-ready, but at ST and HT 12, the old hand is a pretty solid base and those 50 points can be dedicated solely to skills instead of skills and attributes like Explorer.

>>43705377
I forgot to add that the rookie shovel bum template might be useful as a lens to add onto another more adventure-capable template. Action 4: Specialists has a bunch of trait packages, where if you want your character to be good at X, you take this lens worth 25-50 points and combine it with the other lenses you have.

Actually, you might be able to add it to Specialist's 100-point Basic Action Template that's meant to ensure that, no matter what your character focus is, you have the ability to survive and contribute in an action-packed cinematic game. You'd come in a 168, which means minimal trimming and/or addition of a few meager disadvantages.

>>43703241
They don't. Grenade launchers don't launch hand grenades, they launch their own style of ammunition that uses similar-sized warheads.

That's raw, at least. If you want to make up a gun that launches saucer-shaped rubberized grenades, that's still doable. It would have to be it's own weapon though. I don't see why there'd be a rules issue, though. Scatter rules already apply to normal grenade launchers, and the only thing that makes saucer grenades different is what happens after a scatter. Just increase the weapons range to a grenade launcher's range and change the skill from Throwing to Guns.

It looks like the only 40mmG guns are the EMGL and Auto EMGL (UT 142). The ammo weighs 0.33/shot compared to the saucer grenade's 0.5/shot. If you want a more accurate distance, use the gun's range and multiply it by 2/3 (it doesn't say anything about saucer grenades being more aerodynamic, so the extra weight lessens the range). Change the direct hit damage to 4d cr.

Think it's worth buying "Extra Attack (skill only) (feint only)"? How much would the discount be for "feint only"?

>>43707029
IIRC, Accessibility recommends something removes about half the utility of an advantage is worth -20%, so I'd go with that. At first glance, it doesn't seem worth it; after all, you can't attack with it, so it has to be worth less than that, right? However, if you have the skill to pull off feints regularly, the ability to feint and attack every turn while retaining defenses is huge. Active defenses are central to GURPS combat, and the ability to constantly reduce your opponents' is a huge boon.

>>43686792
Noob question

Can you increase or change your advantages or turn disadvantages into advantages after the initial character making? So for example (and this is pure example, as that's the first thing that comes to mind) you have Shadow Form as disadvantage, then gather enough points to pay it off and then turn it into advantage, the one that can be actually turned off instead being a perma shadow

>>43707583
Sounds like a quest.

>>43707583

Sure. With the GM's approval, why not?

>>43707605
Told you, this is an example. Maybe a different one. Let's say you've got ONE level of some advantage. Can you change it later to 2nd level or something like that?

>>43707647
No reason you wouldn't be able to, or how would mages level up?

>>43707029

IMO you'd be better advised to invest in TbaM/WM and increased Skill and change one attack of a Rapid Strike to a Feint.

>>43707583
It's up to your GM, but in general, yes as long as there is an in-game reason (even this can be waived undone cases). It's common in supers and martial arts games to buy powers and abilities laden with limitations to represent their lack of control (costs FP, limited use, Unreliable, Unconscious, and Takes Extra Time are popular) that are bought off as the character progresses. Similarly, with therapy or surgery or significant events, characters can buy off most disadvantages.

The only issue may be that the point difference between the Shadowform advantage and the disadvantage is HUGE. It's going to take a lot of saving up to afford it.

>>43707693
Dunno, I've got my hands on Basic Set literally yesterday.

>>43707784
But it's possible. That's all that I need to know - if it's even possible at all to buy off your disadvantages or even turn them into advantages.

Thanks

File: 1427050165086.jpg (219 KB, 656x880) Image search: [Google]

219 KB, 656x880

I'm not entirely happy with how the Gladius is handled.

For reference, my players are from the late republic, and are using the Gladius Hispaniensis. It's got the same stats as a short sword, but it was historically regarded as causing stabbing wounds that where particularly gruesome and often lethal, and if not lethal, disfiguring. Additionally the Gladius Hispaniensis was only about 2-3 inches shorter than the average arming sword (which is statted as a broadsword), and still above or at cut-off for shortsword that GURPS uses (24 inches). It seems they where using the Pompeianus to stat the Gladius, which was basically just a shitty swortsword and would eventually be phased out with the spatha because once you took away all the benefits of a Gladius, people forgot why they used them and replaced them.

My thoughts are to add C to the range of the weapon when thrusting (you could draw it back to stab an enemy who was pushing the shield against you), and using the stats for broadsword with imp damage for the thrust. Anyone object?

>>43707786
The basic guidance for gms is that the players can if it would make sense.
It might never make sense for someone to get extra arms in a gritty realistic campaign, it might make sense for someone to get desensitized to the point of losing squeamishness, in other campaigns, it might make sense to increase wealth.
In less realistic and more fantastic campaigns, it might make sense level up regeneration, or it might make sense to get a new super power out of the blue, or it might make sense to learn to control unconscious powers better, or it might make sense to learn to rapid fire a missile attack from steady practice.

As long as it is in genre for the style of game you are playing, there is a decent justification, and the gm doesn't mind, you can do anything with your points.

New to GURPS, read lite and most of the basic set. I've been looking through the other sourcebooks and I am amazed at the quality. I'll probably even buy the pdfs I want for myself.

File: Screen Shot 2015-11-18 at 2.30.06 PM.png (439 KB, 712x667) Image search: [Google]

439 KB, 712x667

>>43708021
Are you using the rules for Focused Defense? I used it with my not!Hoplite spearman in one game and the easier manipulation of reach was awesome. It might represent drawing the weapon back better.

Also GURPS says gladiuses (gladii?) range from 20"-25" and a cursory glance at wikipedia says it was between a little under 18" to a little over 25.5". I know wikipedia isn't the most accurate, but a couple other sites that popped up had similar values. I think for the average blade it would fall under shortsword.

anyone ever play gurps traveller?

WWII with mechs

>>43708619
The Gladius Hispaniensus was 23-27 inches, usually being found at the higher end of that spectrum. Most often around 25-26. Which is above the cutoff GURPS uses.

It's the Mainz and Pompeii types that are more clearly short swords, which puts the Gladius in an uncomfortable position stat-wise, especially since the Hispaniensis was more than capable as a slashing weapon. The problem is GURPS tries to use the same stat for three very different swords.

Also thanks. I will take a look at focused defense.

>>43708927
Sorry, yeah, if it's closer to a broadsword, use a broadsword's stats. I think GURPS went with the Pompeii as the model for their generic as it is considered the most popular (though I don't know how people can figure that out; maybe number of models recovered?).

>>43709019
They 'adopted' it some fifty or sixty years after the birth of Christ I think, might be less. It was easy to make, didn't necessarily require the same amount of high quality iron. So it was also the most popular of course. Though you see examples of earlier types up until the late empire. I suppose it always came down to how much money the soldier had to spend on a sword.

I always found it odd they ever changed it.

>>43707647
I hate to say it, but that's really up to the GM, and a lot of it comes down to setting and genre allowances.

In a Dungeon Fantasy game, it's perfectly fine for males to buy more Magery with little explanation, and likewise, thieves (for example) can buy more Striking ST [sneak attacks only, -60%] with little explanation. In a supers game, it would be narratively fitting for a character to buy off Terminally Ill and buy up Regeneration (a la Deadpool).
The only thing to keep in mind is that usually GMs will set an upper limit on levelled traits.

I hate to say it, but it's really up to the GM.

Lets see if this works better this time.

GURPSfags of /tg/, post your custom martial arts, gunplay, and social styles. Compare and rate. Are they cool? Effective? Flavorful? A miserable pile of skills and perks?

Is this system light/good for newbies?

What's the core book for GURPS? I can't find it

>>43711762
Works well for newbies to play, if the GM does his job right. Could potentially be overwhelming for a new GM, but it worked out alright for me.

>>43711796
Basic Set 1: Characters and Basic Set 2: Campaigns.

>>43711762
If you use GURPS-lite it actually is good for Newbies

>>43711762
Yes, but only in the hands of GMs willing to do the legwork and keep things simple for the players.

It's helpful to think of GURPS as a game-design toolbox than a proper system. If you want to build a chair, its better if someone's with you to guide you through it the first few times and give you only the tools you need that to have the entire toolbox tossed at you and be tolled "I need that chair made by Friday."

>>43711796
Basic Set. Actually two books proper (SJGames figured it's cheaper to sell two books than use the really expensive binding it would take to keep a single 570+ page book together).

Does anyone have the OGRE supplement from a previous version of GURPS?

>>43710995
Hey fellow brother/sister in Christ, I prefer the term GURPSFriend. :)
I would try to design a style if I needed to, but the ones in the Martial Arts book already seem to cover all my bases, so ashamedly, if I were to make a new style, it would just be a minmax of the best of two schools, or changing out the primary weapon of one school with another.

But I was playing around with the idea of a Castlevania Belmont style focusing on Whips, flails, and kusaris as the Vampire Killer can't seem to decide which one it really is, with various throwing weapons like Axes and knives to simulate subweapons and acrobatics thrown in, topped off with all of Richter Belmont's special martial arts button combos.

Your friend in Christ,
-Anonymous

>>43714388
I like doing variants. For my samurai + Wild West game, for example, I shamelessly ripped off some clans from L5R and applied their weird, signature styles and abilities to GURPS's combat styles. I picked one from MA that was really close and added/subtracted bits until they felt more unique.

Also I found out that Perks are *amazing* for making combat styles distinctive. For example, the style of the immovable and sturdy Alligator clan didn't feel very defense-focused until I added Skill Adaptation (Judo Throw to Two-Handed Sword Parry). The Viper clan's swordsmen didn't feel like it belonged in a group of sneaky shits until I threw in Combat Poisoner and Dabbler.

>>43714336
Yes, but it's too big to post here.

File: goldblum.jpg (70 KB, 720x720) Image search: [Google]

70 KB, 720x720

>>43700437

Sup, a green GM question

What amount of starting points is the "right" one for LONG going campaign (I anticipate about six months at least, with two games per week), so the characters won't start as weaklings, but there will be still place for improvements.
It's fairy tale Kievan Rus setting, so roughtly TL3 with folk magic. I was thinking about 150 points, but then run a trial and I was hardly able to make a magic user, while there was no problem making an overpowered cavalier. On 200 points everyone feels way too powerful, while at 100 points it's hard to make stats right without openly dumping things.

Human, halp!

>>43720641
Check out Dungeon Fantasy 15, it has some great 125 point templates, they may provide you with an idea on how to cram magic user into 125-point limit. You can also make 187-point templates by combining 62-point templates with 125-point lenses, or 175-point templates by combining DF15 templates with 50-point lenses from DF3.

>>43720641
100+25 is more than enough to make a competent anything. You might be overestimating the amount of points needed to perform common tasks.

>>43720722
Might be true, since for me less than 12 in given skill is incompetent for someone who supposedly is good at this.

When I think about it, unless that's a tertiary ability or some flavour, I never made a character with less than 10 in any given skill.

>>43720641

What magic system are you using?

Are you expecting to run a combat-heavy game? Because 'fighter' builds in GURPS are generally better at fighting than other characters (with the exception of characters built around optimised innate attack, affliction, etc.)

Can you post example character sheets?

>>43720746
Keep in mind that a basic roll is for performing the task under stress. 12 points is someone who will be able to do their thing under fire most of the time, which is quite a feat for non combat characters if you think about it.

>>43720750
Thaumatology with leaning on Ritual Magic mostly.

I'm expecting stuff from Rus fairy tales. It's easier to say this than trying to explain what does it mean. So anything goes, from slaying monsters to solving criminal cases to going on a cup of cold milk with old hags.

The notebook with them is at home. I'm at work now. So it will be kind of hard to post them.

>>43720746

I certainly wouldn't want to rely on a skill of less than 12 for anything important. That's what I would consider the bare minimum for skills directly relating to what you are meant to do; I wouldn't make a soldier with weapon skills much lower than that, a taxi driver who didn't have that in his drive skill, a thief of any kind without at least that much streetwise and stealth.

That said, 12 isn't exactly hard to get. Two average skills at Attribute+2 is 16 points. You should be able to spare that.

>>43720773
Ritual Magic, if optimized, is a hilariously powerful system. You can do a very solid ritual magician at 75 pts.

File: 1447677266195.jpg (1 MB, 1588x2376) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1588x2376

Stat me

>>43720773

You mean Ritual Path Magic?

For a start, consider whether you really need to cast spells quickly and on distant targets. You can save a massive amount of points by simply not taking the Adept advantage.

The most powerful effects in a RPM caster's toolbox tend to be adding 'buffs' to their allies. Unfortunately, this means that the spotlight will be on the fighters even more in combat.

Have you read the article in Pyramid 13 about fairy-tale path and book magic?

File: 1425808585383.jpg (40 KB, 479x720) Image search: [Google]

40 KB, 479x720

>I play GURPS

>>43720824

Apparently it can chuck a 44g arrow at 54 m/s, which is about 64 Joules of KE. Going by the Deadly Spring rules, damage is about 1d (realistic) or 1d+1 (cinematic).

Not sure about other stats... the rules in TDS don't really cover rubber band weapons.

Trauma surgery is a valid optional surgery specialisation right?

Where can I find the GURPS rules for massive blunt force damage? Like a person getting hit by a car, or a big boulder?

>>43721222
Under Collisions and Falls, Basic Set pp.430.

>>43721077

Most of the math from TDS seems to work out OK when I just use the length of rubber band and substitute that for an equal amount of sinew. Efficiency comes out to 13% which is almost exactly what the stats for the real weapon say. The only real oddity is that the draw weight suggests it's optimised for a ST 15 user.

Anyway, I get...

Damage: 1d imp
Acc: 2
Range: 110/220
Weight: 4/0.1 (some significant guesswork on weight)
RoF:1
Shots: 1(5)
ST: 15
Bulk: -8 (doesn't seem right)

Overall, I think just using the stats for a pistol crossbow would work well enough for most games.

>>43721112

Yes. Low-Tech lists it as a possible specialisation.

>>43721299
Been a long time since I used GURPS. Didn't the Supers book have some special rules for people getting hit by really big thrown projectiles, like cars?

File: 1357218541644.jpg (56 KB, 800x638) Image search: [Google]

56 KB, 800x638

Does anybody else find the settled possessions/adventuring gear distinction absurd?

I have seen people on the forum claim you are 'gaming' the system if you use the warhorse you get as part of cost of living as a knight for combat. When the game outright puts things you use for combat and have no logical reason not to in the list of stuff you cannot use on 'adventures'. Does a wandering knight have to buy a second warhorse because the one he gets with CoL is forbidden to actually use for its intended purpose?

>>43720931
Never had Pyramid in my hands

>>43722277
The book says (murder)hobos carrying all their possessions on them are perfectly fine.

>>43722376
Its not just that though.

Even the lowest knight is going to have several armed companions. But by the RAW it seems you have to both pay their upkeep with CoL and then pay for them again with points as allies to have them actually be useful.

>>43722422
Allies are plot significant/protection, basically. You don't have to pick up a new Allies advantage every time you get a new hireling, and you don't get a new Dependent disadvantage every time you meet an adorable kid.

>>43722277
>>43722422

What are you basing this on? I've always assumed that you can use anything you 'own' (including employees, serfs, etc.) as adventuring gear. I assumed that the 20% limitation was only for stuff beyond what seems reasonable for your job.

So a low-rank knight could claim ordinary armour, a normal horse, a good sword, a squire and maybe a couple of archers or spearmen as normal possessions paid for with cost of living, etc.

Of course, those retainers will only be average people with average loyalty and may not always be available for adventuring; you need to have someone guarding your home while you are away, you might have to send them off to fight in the king's war, etc.

Stuff from the 'adventuring gear' budget I thought was for exceptional stuff like specialist hirelings, weapons better than your status would indicate, etc.

Actual allies are for really special followers who are true friends (i.e. will never betray you and only abandon you in the face of real horror) and might have skills well outside the norm.

>>43722277
No, I think it's an incredibly meaningful distinction that adds a lot to the game because it specifically adds you to think about "What sort of wealth is your actual wealth really?"

IF you just want to be Knight McMurder with your AwesomeHorse go ahead, and that works, and clearly in games intended for that to be viable then that'll be the way it works.

But in a lot of cases it's useful to at least think about what your wealth really represents, and how much of it is tied down at any given time in housing, items, cars, jets, mercenaries, rubies in a giant pile, etc etc. It means you have to consider "well, my character has [X] but they're to type to invest it in [y] so some of my money is probably tied up with [y] items...

If you're trying to simulate real people in a "real" situation, it makes sense that some of their wealth is really unusable for the typical perspective of "adventure" (go to location, kill dudes, get reward from local quest-giver).

If I would have several Advantages with Maximum Duration at a certain level, but they've got no set "start" maneuver required, could I activate all of them for free at any point? Would it be limited to my turn only?

>>43723094
I think most actions require a Ready/Concentrate maneuver to activate. I guess you could Link them all together, though, so it'd only be one maneuver.

Activating on someone else's turn in response to something is using the abilities as a Power Defense. See Powers.

>>43723252
Then as a follow-up question, how does Maximum Duration work on Regeneration? Does it work by default or does it not apply since Regeneration is "always on"?

>>43723094
>>43723271

If you don't need to do anything to activate them, yeah, you can switch them all on for free.

I think Maximum Duration should really only apply to abilities where it is actually meaningful to shut your ability down and need to restart it, which means you need a starting condition of some kind. For instance, flight works well if you need to land before the duration runs out. Regeneration would only seem to make sense if it activates when you get injured and any missing HP left when it runs out stays there, or something similar. Generally I wouldn't use Maximum Duration as the only limitation on an advantage; it should really be combined with things like preparation required.

>>43701196

This is excellent. However, this being the internet, allow me to quibble.

To me, a basic GURPS game needs the Basic Set plus the appropriate Tech book. Period. Martial Arts is fantastic and universally applicable, so it's pseudo-core. Social Engineering isn't QUITE up to that level, but it comes close. But really you can play nearly any game concept out of the Basic Set and a tech book and be perfectly happy.

Then you get the magic/powers books. Psionic Powers, Sorcery, and Ritual Path Magic. Of them, only RPM is a genuinely new mechanics-- the other two are only VERY clever applications of existing core rules to create whole new game systems. All three are excellent. At this point, I'm still hungry for a new treatment of skill-based magic, but only because these books show how good it can be.

The three hardbacks along these lines are Powers, Magic, and Thaumatology. Magic is a good system, but noticeably inferior to the other three treatments of the subject. Especially since you can't create new spells. Powers and Thaumatology are excellent for hacking together new systems and advantages. GURPS Horror is worth a mention, too, since it introduced the very useful corruption mechanic. Power-ups: Imbuements sneaks a powerful new system into core (but no way to create new imbuements).

The Power-Ups series in general is a mixed bag. You've got Imbuements, but then Perks only catalogs the perks already published. Impulse Buys is seemingly a cattle call of things you can do with XP, but buried in it are some very powerful mechanics that can be the basis of whole new power concepts. All are worth buying.

Then you get the Martial Arts expansions. Tactical Shooting and Gun Fu are excellent. Technical Grappling is widely respected but I just can't get into it. Not just because it's complicated, but because the mechanics don't feel very GURPS to me.

Spaceships deserves a shout-out because while specific to sci fi, damn if it isn't a fantastic treatment.

File: Ls9ZNzI[1].png (381 KB, 960x1040) Image search: [Google]

381 KB, 960x1040

Brohoof, fellow GURPSFriends.

Anyone have the Transhuman Space core book?

>>43705343

It's ok. I definitely think that we need an improved wealth system but what we have is good enough.

For a Rogue Trader game, have you considered re-skinning the Patron advantage and calling it "Profit Factor"? Essentially, that's what profit really is. At the scale of wealth that we're talking about in a RT game, it stops being like a bank balance or credit card and starts being more about a position of power and authority within an institution. Your wealth starts taking on a life of its own.

>>43708021

I'd just pick a weapon from Low Tech or Martial Arts that in your opinion fits the gladius better.

Martial Arts was published when HEMA was really hitting its stride. It's one of the most accurate medieval weapons RPG supplements available, but it isn't perfect and there have been discoveries and changes in the current thinking among professionals that obviously aren't in the book either. (Plus it's shoehorned into compatibility with the GURPS approach to skills, weapons, and words like "broadsword".)

With all that said, there's so much variety that I think it's safest simply to pick another weapon that it more closely resembles.

>>43708709

No, and if you're going to buy the supplements get them now. At end of year the books are all going OOP due to license expiration.

>>43724184
YES.

>>43722277
>Does anybody else find the settled possessions/adventuring gear distinction absurd?

No, I think it's important.

This is where we set aside simulationist quibbling about tracking every penny in your bank account, and focus on how it impacts the game being played at the table.

Tony Stark has a network of luxury homes, fast cars, great suits, and a truly epic liquor cabinet. The same goes for Bruce Wayne. By RPG game standards, he's a fool for not converting all that wealth into cash and then buying even more adventuring gear. But their wealth is a critical part of their character concepts. So you distinguish between wealth-as-status-signalling, stuff that is mostly a plot hook and scenery, and adventuring gear that has a substantive impact on the character's ability to overcome challenges.

Being "rich" gives me a certain level of status. The rest is very important to the character but means very little to the player or story in hard gaming terms.

Also, through history you've had many people who have wealth and status but not access to adventuring gear. Or people with access to lots of cool weapons and gizmos but none of the creature comforts of being wealthy.

File: y8frpUv.png.gif (5 MB, 245x200) Image search: [Google]

5 MB, 245x200

I've never played GURPS, but it is often recommended.

Can you give me the elevator pitch?

>>43725161
I would, but the copypasta here >>43686808 says it about as well as I could.

>>43725201

Every time someone posts, refers or replies to that post, I read it over again and see how many fucking spelling mistakes I made, and how much more there was I wanted to say if the character limit hadn't stopped me.

Where to start.

I have never, ever played as a mage in GURPS. And since we are always drawing tickets who will play which role in the party after deciding what characters we need for the adventure, I've draw a magic user this time.
I have literally no idea how to build this. I never even opened magic books and now I've got archive panic, going through them all at the same time.
So please, help. The game is TL4 tongue-in-cheek swashbuckler with magic. We've got 200 points. The party is a thieving caper, my character role is to find magic objects, at least suspend curses and somehow make stuff invisible or at least camouflaged.
Spells cost so much I can't do shit about it. The time of casting is not a factor, so I guess I can drop that, but I still have no clue how to make it all work under 200 points.

>>43725250
Meh, the GSP mistakes aren't bad enough to detract from it, though I understanding cringing at making those sort of mistakes. I don't think anyone would mind if you want to re-upload and edited version; chances are whoever makes the next thread will notice it and use it instead. As for having to cut it short, I think it works out in our favor. It's an elevator pitch meant to stir up interest; if anyone wants more detail, there are a fleet of GURPSfags standing by to answer any more detailed questions (myself included). If its a page and a half of singing the system's praises, it wouldn't be nearly as effective in my opinion.

>>43725327

If you need LOTS of spells, it's more efficient to invest in a high level of IQ and Magery. With enough points invested in that, you can pay 1pt for a spell at IQ level, which will probably be 12+ at that point, which makes you pretty damn competent.

>>43725327
Is this using the basic/default magic system? Decent IQ and a few levels of Magery should make any spell reliable enough with minimal investment.

>>43725356

I didn't want to added masses. It amounted to like two or three sentences spread around but I was butting right up against the character limit.

>>43725379
>>43725387
And it will work... how? Again, I never played as a mage

>>43701196
>>43724082

To that list I'd add Action 2. It's chase rules should be part of the core rules and it's got a lot of useful stuff like abstract ranged combat, abstract difficulty, the complimentary skill and teamwork rules which I find makes it basically good to have a printout of in almost every game.

>>43725668
If you know GURPS, and this is your first time using vanilla magic, all magic spells are just IQ/Hard or IQ/Very Hard skills.

Magery is +1 to IQ strictly for spells, so think of it as an extremely broad talent... though some high tier spells have a prerequisite for a certain number of levels.

Vanilla spells get a price break in FP consumption whenever they reach a skill level of 15,20,25, etc, so aiming for enough IQ + magery so that all hard spells are 15 or all very hard spells are 15 (making the hard spells 16) with just one point in each is usually priority uno.

One critical utility spell you want is recover energy, which is different than most normal spells, at level 15, it lets you recover 1fp/5 minutes (kinda like fit, except this works for everything fit is limited to everything but magic), and at 20 you recover 1fp/2minutes. You never roll to use recover energy; it is just a standout hack of the spell system and a flat out abuse of what skills should be, but nonetheless, you want it.

Also, Energy Reserve instead of FP, it costs the same, and for spells it works the same, but it can't be used for anything but spells. In exchange for this, you can recover Energy reserve without resting, which is really useful for utility spells if you plan on, for example long marches through desert, and you don't want to have to take a nap every hour to recover enough FP to recast cool. Energy Reserve also recovers simultaneously with FP, so if you take 20 minute break, and recover 1fp/10 minutes and don't have recover energy for some reason, you will recover 2 vanilla FP, and 2 Energy Reserve FP.

I'm pretty new to vanilla magic too (doing a dungeon fantasy adventure for the first time), but that's the things that I personally thought looked like good ideas to consider.

>>43725668
Spells are like skills; they work as a modifier to an attribute (IQ, in this case). Since spells are IQ/Hard, one point invested in a spell gives you a relative level of IQ-2. Obviously, if you get your IQ high enough, that -2 won't matter; if you have IQ 18, you only need to roll an 18-2=16 or less to successfully cast the spell (98.1% chance of success). However, IQ is expensive at 20 points/level. Magery, however, is added to your IQ to determine your spell level and costs less than IQ. Getting IQ 18 would cost 160 points, but getting IQ 14 and Magery 4 is less bullshit and cheaper at only 125 points.

>>43725669
I actually use BAD, complementary skills, and teamwork rules so often that I forgot they AREN'T in the basic set.

How do symbol and semantic magic gel for both bein used in the same game?

I was thinking of having them be two separate schools of thought on magic, with symbol being more intricate and possibly more powerful.

>>43726090
One important element I left off on the part about lower FP cost. You can eventually cast spells for 0 FP if you do get the skill that high.

>>43726503
They're decently balanced against each other in most cases, but how you set up their parameters determines their relationship. Symbol's ability to set-up things beforehand in countered by their reliance on pre-made spells and items.

In my game, I had Symbol and Syntactic magic as rival magical approaches a'la D&D Sorcerer vs. Wizard. To drive this point home, I had most of Syntactic's parameters based on Energy, while Symbol's was almost exclusively Penalty/MoS. In-game, syntactic magic was exhausting to use but very powerful even in unexperienced hands; it was the magic of headstrong fools with more vigor and vitality than sense. Symbol magic, on the other hand, took only minimal energy but required careful motions and took a long time to prepare; it was the magic of ancient antisocial mages holed away in their towers that preferred thinking about things to actually DOING things or experiencing life.

For your game, I would recommend also having Symbol magic being based on Penalty/MoS; it's good for evoking an image of it being a very intricate art. As for power, that's a bit trickier. Power is relative. In my game, Syntactic might have been more powerful because a mediocre mage can blow all his FP on a single huge highly destructive spell. At the same time, Symbol might have been the most powerful because true masters can handle spells that give a -10 to cast and STILL pull it off with a MoS of 15. Lastly, neither might have a clear advantage over the other when you compare mages of the same level of competency; a 200-point Symbol mage would invest most of his points into his spellcasting skills while a 200-point Syntactic mage would invest only a reasonable minimum and dump the rest into HT, FP, Energy Reserve, etc.

>>43726090
>>43726585
>>43726184
Thanks a lot, anons, should make things a lot easier to manage now

>>43725327

Here's a basic spell-list which I think works well for a starting mage.

Healing: Lend Energy, Recover Energy*, Minor Healing*.
Knowledge: Detect Magic, Identify Spell, Analyse Magic, Sense Mana.
Light and Darkness: Light, Continual Light, Gloom (or Darkness), Flash*, Blur*, Bright Vision*, Invisibility*.
Meta: Counterspell, Dispel Magic*.

Spells marked with an asterisk should be known at level 15, the other ones are either unimportant or are usually cast when you have enough time to try several attempts. Buy IQ 14 and Magery 2 and put 2 points into the ones you need at level 15, 1 point into the others. That's 128 points and you can sell the Will and Per scores back down again if you want.

This build gives you a few good tricks: healing is obviously helpful, continual light is a great utility in low-tech settings and you can identify other people's spells and neutralise them. In combat you have the brutally effective Flash spell, which lets you penalise a whole group of enemies quickly. You can also give a defensive buff to yourself or an ally with the Blur spell. Bright Vision is to cast on allies to protect them against Flash. Invisibility is just generally useful; use it in combat to get a significant advantage or to avoid combat alltogether.

>>43725379
>>43725387
You should aim at an IQ+Magery that gives you a 15 skill with a 1 point investment, right? That is the key sweet spot if I recall?

>>43724184

/)

I had to check it myself to believe you, it's legit

>>43725669
>>43726184
>I actually use BAD, complementary skills, and teamwork rules so often that I forgot they AREN'T in the basic set.

This and this. I use those rules too and forgot they aren't truly core rules.

GURPS fourth edition festival (pyramid issue from last year) has lots of rules like that, mostly drawn from other titles.

>>43729763

I lol'd when Sorcery came out and I saw that. I was wondering how long it would be until someone said something on /tg/ about it.

>>43724184
They've quoted literally everything at some point or another.

>>43734799
Yeah, they even quoted L. Ron Hubbard once. Not as bad as MLP, but still.

File: 1270421252525.png (4 KB, 237x203) Image search: [Google]

4 KB, 237x203

Just getting into GURPS what amount of the points people usually play with 100, 200, 500 or 800000 ?

>>43735363
You usually need to specify disadvantage limit when you are talking about point limits in GURPS. My favorite point limit is 125/50 (used in DF) - it results in pretty competent characters, but they still won't have enough points to be jacks of all trades without being masters of none, so specialization is important for them.

>>43735363
100-150 is recommended "starting adventurer" point values. In D&D terms, level 4-6; not quite scrub and certainly more competent than your average Joe, but they've got a way to go to being true powerhouses. 500 is closer to superheroes, and in my opinion, that's effectively the tipping point where it's no longer feasible to use GURPS; simply distributing so many points in an effective way is a huge pain in the ass, so you might as well just use a system with a higher scale of power.

I'm personally a fan of 75/-50, but I loves me some down-to-earth gritty games, and my players are good at hunting down and exploiting every situational modifier, so we end up having fun operating operationally, whether it's a game about demon hunting in a black fantasy campaign or fighting in a bloody civil war as rookie mech pilots.

>>43735547

>level 4-6; not quite scrub and certainly more competent than your average Joe

If i like DnD around 10-15 range where character are strong but not yet bullshit gods like would 300 points a good number ?

New Pyramid: Cutting Edge

https://mega.nz/#!qlETBAgI!v-ABvSQoidbHmFu5Vzuu3ihruKkIDRp9vlw9nZpGvxk

>>43735779
300-400, yeah. I think 400 is the point value for Monster Hunter PCs. However, it also comes down to how those points are spent. A quick glance at the templates from MH and only a single template has an IQ lower than 12, and everyone has DX 12+; the templates also normally have 15 or 16 in their key attributes (+100 or more points on that single attribute alone).

I'm tired but I think the point I was trying to make is that even at higher point values, characters might not be super powerful but instead have a significantly larger scope or breadth of abilities.

I don't quite remember why I thought that was relevant, though.

>>43735910
Awesome, can't wait to take a look at in Anon, thanks. Also, worth nothing that Pulver appears to be coming back onto the writing scene, and he was the one of the dudes behind Vehicles.

4e Vehicles confirmed? 4e Vehicles confirmed.

>>43735910

>Eidetic Memory: Cutting-Edge Armor Design

Well, looks like I have more work to do for my armour generator...

>>43735779

300 points will manage pretty competent fantasy dudes: the top-tier fighters in Game of Thrones, the heroic protagonists in LotR, movie Conan and so on strike me as being about that level. Able to take on multiple enemies which would be a real challenge for a normal person or handle big monsters if working as a team.

The better realistic knights would probably approach that kind of level too, but with more points spent on social advantages.

>>43735910
Holy shit it's got something for Car Wars/Autoduel!

>>43735910
>>43736164
Holy fucking shit, and I was going to complain about lack of the rules for custom modern armor!

This whole thing is just what I need for my idea of "kevlar gets invented in TL6, leads to early proliferation of armor", which I was previously doing based on Low-Tech armor and that one rule from HT.

>>43736164
>>43736271

Taking a deeper look at the article, he's written it a little confusingly. The main problem is that the ballistic armours' given DR is their protection against cutting and piercing, so you have to divide to get their normal DR, which is totally backwards to how he implemented aramid in the last article. The way my program is currently implemented, that multiplier can't be varied based on armour material.

That, and his numbers are off for the most of the WMs of the TL9 materials compared to mine. Mine are derived from the values in Ultra-Tech, going through the equations backwards to get the WM. Then again, the new "optimised fabric" construction might be what he used to get those numbers.

I'll have some more time tonight to comb over these and implement something to test it all out.

>>43735971
>4e Vehicles confirmed? 4e Vehicles confirmed.

It actually is confirmed - that said, there are no dates because they're keeping it under their hats, but it's definitely going to happen and not very far in the future.

I'm Looking for expanded grappling rules. Specifically, those that apply when there's a lot of size difference between the opponents, like, say, an SM -2 goblin and a SM +2 giant. Related, I'm also looking for rules on climbing large opponents during combat.

>>43737126
One of the Pyramid magazines had article just about that, but I can't recall which one.

>>43737126
>>43737156

Pyramid 77

>>43735910

Notice the cool new cover artwork? They're through with re-using the crappy stuff they commissioned 20 years ago that was mediocre even then. By dripping this into their portfolio, they're ensuring that they have a nice large gallery they can put into books.

I love GURPS but one thing virtually everyone agrees on is that the artwork sucks donkey dick. This goes nice step towards fixing it.

>>43736659

The Report to Stakeholders is out. A few highlights:

No new GURPS hardbacks last year or this year. The major issue was lack of resources because they're throwing everything into other more profitable projects.

Of their top 40 products by revenue, 35 are Munchkin, 3 are Zombie Dice, there's a chez geek title and Illuminati Deluxe. Total revenue for all products is $8.5 million.

They commit repeatedly to pushing some GURPS titles out the door. And by that I mean physical books. Vehicles has been under development for years; the limiter isn't cash but David Pulver's time and getting an idea that is workable. They want something as excellent as Spaceships. The last Vehicles was pretty cool but it did lasting damage to the GURPS brand with its complexity, so they don't want a repeat performance. Being good is worth being late.

So what I'm thinking is that either they've broken through some conceptual barrier with Vehicles (great!) or have some other hardcover under development that they think they can get out this year.

Either way, the real question is this: when it's such a niche product, why bother with GURPS at all? IMO it's a combination of three things. First, it's Steve's baby and his company. Second, it's about loyalty to the fans, which in turn engenders loyalty FROM the fans. It's easy to forget that GURPS support from a business perspective is a marginal investment if even that. But...

SJGames depends to an unhealthy degree on one product line. If Munchkin went away, as it inevitably will, then where do you get your revenue? GURPS isn't just a single product line, it's a core from which you can spawn several product lines and exploit untapped markets. It keeps them in the RPG/publishing market, with a mature property and a stable of very, very talented developers and very, very devoted fans. It's an insurance policy, and in that sense it's very very cheap indeed.

>>43738153
>So what I'm thinking is that either they've broken through some conceptual barrier with Vehicles (great!) or have some other hardcover under development that they think they can get out this year.

Mars Attacks and Discworld are meant to be coming out soon, aren't they? It seems very likely they will be hardback books.

What are the chances of the new Car Wars being a fun, accessible game which I can play with casual gamers? I hear bad things about the older version being too crunchy and poorly balanced.

>>43738184

Oh yeah I forgot! Yeah, those are likely.

>>43738153
The two hardbacks on deck are Discworld and Mars Attacks/

>>43738184
>>43738342

I am slightly too excited about the prospect of a new, shiny 4e Discworld book.

File: vampire gurps.jpg (68 KB, 450x581) Image search: [Google]

68 KB, 450x581

>>43686792
Anybody here like GURPS Vampire: The Masquerade or any of the 90's GURPS WoD books?

>>43736440

Taken a look - yep, Pulver's numbers are whack. There's no material in the article that even approximates reflex armour, and the laser-ablative polymer, which can't be intended to be anything but the "ablative armour" from UT, just works out wrong. His numbers make the all the ballistic armours heavier and more expensive than they are in UT by factors of around x1.5-x2.

The rigid armour materials are even worse. If you try to make light clamshell from the only reasonable material (polymer nanocomposite), it's 4lbs heavier, and $33,000 more expensive than UT's.

So I'm not really sure whether I should actually integrate these into my program, since they're so bogus.

When I gm GURPS, I feel like I'm pulling punches as the enemy. (GURPS is the only system I've ever played, so dunno if this is a system problem or not) I feel like I could have legitimately killed the players several times easily if I just said "yup, gonna definitely use this guy's luck (or just moderate skill) to break your wrist/leg/shoot you through the vitals/skull since you just all out attacked" I feel like, on the one hand, it would be annoying for the players to game over like that, but on another, it's annoying that they make the tactical mistakes that enable a golden opportunity like that, and maybe just splattering their brains is the right thing to do so they know next time, "don't run straight at the guy down the long hallway carrying a gun/who can obviously cast spells." But on the third hand, rule of cool, right? Heroes can win if they take big stupid risks, right? But... They didn't take dare devil... So maybe I should only pull punches if they do something reckless and cool with an advantage like that?

>>43739404
When I run GURPS, if a player makes a big tactical mistake, his PC is very likely to die. Deaths can also come from bad die rolls. I just roll with it and expect the players to do the same.

>>43707784
Also, you can change problems, into other problems.

And if you want to make your players cry and bitch, run all the rules in the OP's image, from Martial Arts.

If you want to not be a dick take the suggestion of Tactical Firearms and allow even normally realistic characters to have some level of "lucky" because really, a lot of the guys who make it long periods of time, are basically "lucky". You don't live a violent profession without being in some way, lucky.

Or you can square with the fact you are potentially going to ruin a character after one firefight and have the entire remainder of the session or campaign be about how he slowly dies/circles the drain/is engaged in a death spiral of constant injury and debility and failure because he's hurt and won't really ever recover completely, and will eventually get himself killed because he's too slow from an old wound, or die of lead poisoning, or just not really be able to get up for another go one day and retire.

>>43739404
1) GURPS caters to a lot of different playstyles. On one hand, it's awesome because you can run a lot of games with the system. At the same time, it stinks because it means you HAVE to decide at the beginning of the game what sort of tone you're aiming for and resist all urges to diverge from that tone. If you want to do rule of cool, that's fine, the system can support it. If you want to do gritty realistic operations, the system supports that too. But for the love of god don't switch halfway through a campaign (or worse, a session). Stay consistent! Doesn't matter what you pick, but STAY CONSISTENT. I'm a huge muh realism faggot, so I have to resign in my natural inclinations when running a happy-go-lucky noblebright fantasy game or else everything goes tits up because the knight charges a beastie expecting a challenging but possible fight and get absolutely creamed.

2) It's really easy in GURPS to underestimate opponents when writing them up. Broadsword-14, yeah that sounds about right for a bandit, dude uses sword a lot, right? Haha nope that's professional duelist level of skill. Throwing a handful of what you think are mooks at the party and having what should have been a minor roadbump turn into a bloodbath for the players is a classic mistake for new GURPS GMs. Err on the side of incompetence.

3) Luck is stupidly good for situations like this. It takes the fudging out of your hands.

Also, check out How to be a GURPS GM. Really useful.

>>43739092

I wouldn't really call them bogus, they just don't need to fit with Ultratech, as it's an older book that was rushed out (and there were background crises). Especially if they use different terms for thigns.

The energy weapon design article doesn't fit perfectly with UT either.

>>43739913
I like how to be a GURPS gm. I'm asking all this because I'm a forever gm, but one of my players stepped up to the challenge so I could play, and I was working out which issues I personally have difficulty with to make special mention to the potential gm. Besides that one, the other vaguery that gets me in the light hearted type of df campaign we are doing is figuring out the appropriate quantities of treasure. The only guidance I've seen in all df is "safer to give too much than too little."

In my experience, if using the treasure table, it's easier to roll it out ahead of time (or maybe roll out several ahead of time to have a quick list) because figuring it out dynamically takes a lot of time.

I'm the person in the group that reads all the books and wishes someone else would at least try to read the sections that I demarcate as critical. ("Mapper player, read this section on navigation and mapping before next session." Next session: "I want to do something that is obviously wrong." "Did you read the thing I told you to read, that I literally screen shotted and highlighted for you and should have taken less than five minutes?" "...yes?")

>>43738677
I have all three in the series and played them.

They're... interesting. I wouldn't call the bad, but unless you have a hard on for the lore, and maybe even if you do, I'd almost rather just make a base "Vampire" and "Werewolf" racial template and buy "Disciplines" with just proper point buying.

RAW it is a bit of a mess combining a very balanced and well thought out system like GURPS and what is essentially the opposite in Storyteller.

>>43738153
What I always said is that they need to crowdfund a standalone Dungeon Fantasy book, with all the rules from BS and other books that are required to run DF, and some GOOD art and design.

I remember that other crowdfunding campaigns by SJGames were pretty successful, and they are also good for publicity, especially since it is hardly unlikely that they won't deliver on that project - they already have all the material, they just need to compile it into one or two books and commission some art for it.

>>43740109

I wouldn't mind retconning away Ultratech, but I'd prefer if he comes out and says so and maybe also explains how to reconcile the new article with published material. Especially since he wrote that book.

Pulver's always erred on the side of playable in-game over simulationist accuracy, which is great but GURPS is a little more faithful to real world considerations.

>>43739404

My general feeling is this:

1) As a GM, I try to reward players for doing things I like rather than punishing them for things I don't. In general. If a player is screwing up the game or group, then I sit them down for The Talk and if that doesn't work kick them from the group.

2) If you encourage players to be hypercautious and never make mistakes (by which we mean both genuine tactical errors and also "doing things the GM doesn't like), then you'll get hypercautious characters in a campaign where the players stop taking the initiative and driving the story. I'd favor "needs of the story" over verisimilitude where the two come strongly in conflict.

The "exception" is if gamers start doing intentionally suicide-y things or stop taking threats seriously. But that's not really an exception. It's a case where both the needs of the story AND verisimilitude come together to demand that player characters be maimed or killed.

>>43741508

They've said that they won't do a kickstarter for GURPS like that. Mainly because their GURPS output is limited by quality concerns and editorial bandwidth, not startup capital.

Also, keep in mind that you can use a service like Lulu to create a professionally bound sourcebook that concatenates all your DF pdfs together. By the terms of their copyright, SJGames lets you do that and it's not a problem at all.

File: 1430514705683.jpg (59 KB, 460x345) Image search: [Google]

59 KB, 460x345

So GURPS general, have you ever stated yourself in GURPS?
Did you stat yourself for realism and accuracy in modern times, or a fantastical proxy of yourself?
How many waifus have you stated? Ever since I discovered that I don't hate this game, about a week ago, I can't stop.

On an unrelated note: Has anyone made proper STALKER/Roadside Picnic guides/modules for GURPS?

>>43745235
>have you ever stated yourself in GURPS?
Yup. I think it's a good exercise in learning the system as well as learning to knowhate yourself.
I'm -10 points or thereabout.

>Has anyone made proper STALKER/Roadside Picnic guides/modules for GURPS?
Not that I know of, but I've been part of a lot of discussions on such topics. From what I gather none of the mutants except bloodcykas and Chimeras are a threat, and anomalies tend to fall into either "will kill you for sure" or "not a threat".

Also you need new rules for dealing with radiation, turns out in reality cheap vodka isn't such a great way of purging Rads after all.

Also also, poorly maintained firearms firing low-grade ammunition gives you a lot of jams, spending precious time trying to fix a jam mid-combat can entirely change the outcome of the fight, especially if only a few stalkers are involved.

>>43740109

The numbers for the flexible armour are a LITTLE out. The numbers for the rigid armour are OUTRAGEOUSLY out. As in, TL9 light clamshell is $600 by Ultra-Tech. By the new armour design article, it's $33,600.

I think this might be that the rigid materials are designed to be plate inserts for ballistic vests, rather than armour in and of themselves, but it seems weird.

>>43745729
> From what I gather none of the mutants except bloodcykas and Chimeras are a threat, [..]
Was it factored that a starting-out PC loner wouldn't be a 125/-50 hero, but like... idk, 60/-50 joe-smuck?Some STALKERS have military histories, and others have been living in the zone(s) for a time, but even they'd be like 80/-50 at the absolute most.

> and anomalies tend to fall into either "will kill you for sure" or "not a threat"
> poorly maintained firearms firing low-grade ammunition gives you a lot of jams, spending precious time trying to fix a jam mid-combat can entirely change the outcome of the fight, especially if only a few stalkers are involved.
Both statements are also accurate to the source material, so yeah.

>>43746676
Anyone somewhat serious in the zone will have at least Guns skill 12
AK-47 has Acc 4

The biggest deal is that Flesh, Boars, Pseudodogs etc. don't understand the concept of a firearm, and aren't entitled to a dodge roll. And of course an AK does a fuckton of damage, 5d+1 pi if I'm not mistaken.

>and anomalies tend to fall into either "will kill you for sure" or "not a threat"
Thing is, that doesn't make for very fun roleplay. "Roll Perception or Hidden Lore: Anomaly, whichever is higher", "You fail. You take 10d crushing trying to escape the Whirlgig"

>poorly maintained firearms firing low-grade ammunition gives you a lot of jams
This too isn't very fun to actually roleplay, and very hard to balance. If you fail your roll and your weapon jams you're bound up for at least 3 turns, with "Joe-schmuck" skill levels like these, more likely you're busy for 6 turns. That's 6 seconds in which you'll very likely get killed horribly

>>43747291

>The biggest deal is that Flesh, Boars, Pseudodogs etc. don't understand the concept of a firearm, and aren't entitled to a dodge roll. And of course an AK does a fuckton of damage, 5d+1 pi if I'm not mistaken.
Why not (I'm not familiar with the setting)? Are guns so rare that none of them have ever seen one go off? Animals tend to remember that sort of scary loud noise. Even more so if they have ever been shot or even nearly missed.

>Thing is, that doesn't make for very fun roleplay. "Roll Perception or Hidden Lore: Anomaly, whichever is higher", "You fail. You take 10d crushing trying to escape the Whirlgig"
This is from a computer game right? Insta-death and reload? If so, Luck and/or burning character points can mitigate a lot of this sort of thing.

>That's 6 seconds in which you'll very likely get killed horribly
Only if you're alone or drastically outnumbered and the opposition just does attack-attack-attack with no maneuvering or aim or evaluate or taking cover.

Still, if your gun jams in a firefight you a) New York Reload, b) take cover while your allies pick up your slack, c) throw a grenade, or d) die like an action movie extra because you're acting like one.

>>43747291
You can get gun skill 12 w/ 50/-50, and protagonist PCs could totally be like 75/-50; just up DX and/or one other stat, then spend your other 20~30pts on buying the survivalist/gunman/scientist skills you want at +0 and then use the points you get form your Disadvantages to raise/specialize the ones you want your character to be good at. There's nothing really exceptional about a loner, outside of being a big-balled mother fucker, so all those points are going strait into skills.

The dumb mutants also normally roll in packs, and the non-dumb mutants can turn invisible, live through a spraying of 5.56, and/or kill you from 20m away w/ their mind-bullets (and totally know what a gun is).

>>43748113
Flesh/Boars/Pseudodogs are mutated animals. They literally don't know what a gun is; they're primal.

>>43748145
And the mutation leaves them stupid and without the instincts any animal has?

>>43748113
>Why not (I'm not familiar with the setting)?
Dodge in relation to firearms requires that you're aware of the shooter aiming at you, a simple animal (like 90% of Stalker mutants) doesn't have that kind of awareness, it doesn't understand the difference between you holding the "bang-stick" to your shoulder and you having the "bang-stick" slung on your back, it can associate "loud noise" with "danger", but can't associate "barrel of firearm pointing towards me" with "danger", and therefore isn't entitled to a dodge.

>This is from a computer game right?
Yes. The games are the most lenient when it comes to that stuff, the book and movie are way more aggressive. The Meatgrinder described in the book and mentioned in the movie turns a human into ground meat, that's total bodily destruction, or at least 110 points of injury, around 30d of damage. And it doesn't have ANY visual cues, the only way you can know it's there is if someone else accidentally stepped into it before you.

>Only if you're alone or drastically outnumbered and the opposition just does attack-attack-attack with no maneuvering or aim or evaluate or taking cover.
Against humans? If you're in a good position, then it's fair to assume that so is your opponent, if they see you fixing a jam they'll either relocate to a more advantageous point or aim+shoot three times.
Against mutants? Well, they'll really just charge you, closing the gap in a few turns and then just goring away.

Quick-drawing another weapon really is the way to go here, but Stalkers are typically very encumbered as-is, so you'll have to be careful with what you carry. A pistol is fine, but not much more than that.
This is in heavy contrast to the games though, where fixing a jam is almost always (exception being the LMG's) quicker than switching weapon.

>>43748342
Animals can connect the "bang" and the pain I imagine, but probably not the stuff about a projectile coming from a certain trajectory of the firearm.

I don't think animals could Dodge firearms either. Maybe, MAYBE at a serious penalty based off of IQ? Like -2 per IQ under 6? Maybe more.

The players have to be very, very good. Or the characters do. Or they have to be very, very lucky. A lot.

Or you have to tone down the lethality regardless of canon.

Or, if the players want strict adherence they have to be prepared to make new characters a lot.

File: S_6ce1a0_5503510[1].jpg (30 KB, 500x333) Image search: [Google]

30 KB, 500x333

>>43748490
> And it doesn't have ANY visual cues, the only way you can know it's there is if someone else accidentally stepped into it before you.

Can you make your own spells in GURPS, and if so, how and in which book?

>>43748490
> but Stalkers are typically very encumbered as-is
shitty Stalkers
half of that game is inventory management so you're not traveling heavy, and it operates on having a sidearm.
in the book even they rarely took more than a backpack of supplies with them; each zone is only a hundred or so square km; unless you're planning on going through to the other side you're in and out in a day or three, at most.

>>43748823
even the core book touches on it; check out Fatnasy/Magic/Thumagology

File: 1436006996850.png (745 KB, 680x586) Image search: [Google]

745 KB, 680x586

>>43748752

kek, saved.

Doesn't actually work on the meatgrinder though, because it only reacts to living beings. In the book at least, even a chunk of meat won't work.

>>43748840
WRONG GUY
I meant
>>43748774

>>43748843
I'd have the skill Zone-wise, which represents your character's in-zone experience. It'd be like Naturalist but for in-the-zone. When within X yards of an Anomaly, depending on the Anomally, the GM'd secret-roll the character's Zone-wise to see if they notice. I'd make the Meatgrinder like... -8 to notice, within 1 hex, and then deal 2d+2 damage to all areas and throw you out the other end on the opposite side if you step in it. Fire-gouty-thingy, on the other hand; much more visible, you can see that thing form 30y away, and at no penalty, but it deals 2d damage that ignores armor bc fire and pressure.

Maybe even make a Random Zone Event table, and have the characters roll Zone Wise for every 10hrs they spend in the zone or something, and the GM does this in secret and then takes the worst roll among them and adds the difference of that roll and their Zone-wise skill to a roll on the RZE table and then that thing happens to the person who rolled the worst.

Now, that guy got the Meatgrinder; the poor bastard. However, the GM would like roll 3d6 once, and compare it to the Zone-wise skill of all the stalkers present/within like 5y of the Meatgrinder, and if the roll is under their Zone-wise SL-8, they'd tell them w/ a note or something, and then that character would be like, "DAVID, ZUPYNYTY!"

>>43748823

A backpack with supplies is easily over 40 lbs, when I did military service our standard load (not combat load, but it's not like you can choose when to get ambushed if you're in the Zone, you don't have an actual frontline or anything like that) was just over 100 lbs, and included the backpack itself, a sleeping bag, a spare change of clothes, raincoat, gas-mask, food for 1 day, and two extra pairs of underwear, etc. No tent, no gun nor ammunition included, and definitely no ballistic nor combat vest was included in that weight

So with that in mind, a stalker traveling *very* light, not carrying a tent or anything like that, will have a medium load even before his gun and ammunition are factored in. On top of that he'll probably want an anomaly sensor, PDA and/or radio depending on which interpretation you go with, since radiation is a big deal he'll likely want to get something a bit more substantial than a rubber coat and a pair of wellingtons, if he intends to spend more than 1-2 hours in the field he'll need extra filters for his gas mask, if he plans on getting into a firefight he'll need a combat vest and probably a ballistic vest.

>>43749033
>and then takes the worst roll among them
Don't do that, it completely defeats the purpose of guides. They're a HUGE deal in book movie, and game lore, but kind of glossed over in the actual game mechanics.

Hell, Guide is one of the most important characters in the game lore, and he does one thing, he guides people.

Has anyone ever written up a template for what skills a basic public school education should give you? Originally this came up for me when I was talking about running a superhero game and somebody said they wanted to run a character with the highest level of invulnerability with nothing else, and I mentioned they should probably have at least a few skills to represent basic life skills. Considering how broad and detailed the skill list is it feels like there should be a basic list of stuff most modern 1st world characters would have 1/2 or 1 point in.

>>43749066
A light load, medium at most, does not = "very encumbered."
and by the Basic Set a loadout of basic camping gear, including everything from your "personal basics," to a personal tent, is right around 45lbs. Post fire-arms and, say, 4 magazines a piece, you're looking at a grand total of 65~70lbs, right at a heavy load, but that is if we're assuming you're ST 10. That's also packing for comfy; more than any non-military/group STALKER ever canonically took into the zone in fact.

>>43749143
> Disadvantage: Guide
> "He's dead jim, -10pts"
jk
But yeah, rationally, if there were a designated guide everyone would be following behind the guide, and he'd be the one closest to any anomaly because of it; so he'd be the one provoking the roll in the first place, regardless.

>>43749268
A large part of it for the average person is the "most mental skills default to IQ-X" effect that's an assumed factor, isn't it?

>>43749352
That doesn't seem terribly representative though, feels like there should be a way to differentiate between a mediocre IQ character who payed attention in high school and a smart guy who grew up on the streets without an education.

>>43749268
well, 1-8th grade is basically a rotation of reading/writing/math/history/basic sciences, so the average 1st-world civilian (assuming they paid attention in school), should put at least 1 point into at least five of mathematics, biology, physics, history, artistry, an additional language at Broken fluency and no literacy, and/or chemistry.

>>43749509
> a way to differentiate between a mediocre IQ character who payed attention in high school and a smart guy who grew up on the streets without an education.
that's why you can put just 1 point into Average/Hard/Very Hard skills, taking them at wha tis still IQ - 1~3, because "he doesn't have a higher education, but he's got a knack for mechanical engineering," or whatever. When I tried to stat myself I realized I'd have have to use this expanded sheet they've got because I had to put just 1 character point in like 20 different skills because I've got about a 40/60 or 50/50 chance of doing/knowing stuff about them.

>>43749321
>and by the Basic Set a loadout of basic camping gear, including everything from your "personal basics," to a personal tent, is right around 45lbs.
That seems a bit optimistic to me, but maybe. Our gear was military, but it was hardly "up to date", and was built to Last rather than being built to be Light.
I guess climate also matters a lot when it comes to weight, during the winters in the Zone you won't survive the nights without a stove or fireplace

But yeah, 65-70 lbs is where I'd put the minimum for a stalker, a civilian stalker like in the movie or book would likely have gotten away with less (but where's the fun in roleplaying that?), he's also got to make an actual profit somehow, in the movie artifacts aren't really featured, in the game they're almost weightless, but in the book they're heavy and cumbersome. Depending on what you go with here that's yet some more extra encumbrance.

All I'm saying is a stalker is typically very encumbered, he'll have at LEAST a medium load, most likely a heavy load, there's not a lot of room for extra stuff.

File: knife eye attack.png (327 KB, 724x414) Image search: [Google]

327 KB, 724x414

Imbuements. What do you think of them? Did you already used them on your game? How do they play with other abilities like psi and magic?

Do you keep "Odious Racial Habits: Eats Sentients" if you, personally, don't eat people, due to it being a kind of a racial social trait and people assume you do or should you buy it off if you don't eat people.

>>43751176
I think you may replace it with cheaper Social Stigma.

Does anyone use 'Improvement Through Study' (both training and adventuring, B291-292) and 'Quick Learning Under Pressure' (box on B291)? Especially in a DF-like campaign (a bit more serious and less point total).

How do I simplify shield breakage rules? I want shields to be breakable, but I don't want to keep track of shield HP and damage dealt to them. I want something similar to Parrying Heavy Weapons, where I would need to roll shield HT or something if suitably heavy weapon hits it.

>>43749033
I just remember that lone from early on in the book:
"He fell in the jelly."

So, is it time for /gurpsg/ to write a STALKER book?
Anyone already got monster stat blocs to share? Templates that can be re-used?

>>43751752
Use the parrying heavy weapons rules but treat shields as half (or some other fraction) their actual weight to represent the fact they are flimsier than weapons and generally get hit more solidly?

Or figure out how much damage you want to wreck a shield in one go and have that be the amount which destroys them, ignoring everything else (effectively giving them x DR and 1 HP)? Probably something like enough to cause a major wound to the shield normally?

In either case, only count crushing, cutting and large area burning damage.

>>43738468
>>43738342
>>43738184
>delicious mentions of Discworld
>tfw I haven't ever managed to play it in any way shape of or form, regardless of edition

>>43742199
His point is DF is so profitable relative to much of GURPS that releasing it as a standalone sub system would make them money.

>>43749268
>>43749509

GURPS IQ can represent general education, not just innate intelligence. So it's possible that there will be an attribute difference between an educated kid and an uneducated one (but probably not because one point is a pretty big difference and some stuff learned outside school is also part of GURPS IQ) although it seems just as likely that would lower the 'street' kid's IQ below average rather than justify a boost to the school educated one.

One big difference is going to be that the school educated kid will have at least one written language at native level, while the kid who missed school will probably be no better than accented (and might even have his spoken language at accented).

Basic education could justify very low points in a lot of skills, but for most of them I'd expect only exceptionally good pupils to have 1 point in any given skill by 16. Here in the UK we start to specialise after that (or at least we did back in my day) which seems much more likely to justify actual skills (although at low levels still).

The universally used skills in school are probably Computer Operation, Research and maybe Writing or Typing. Arguably navigating the school system well might require Administration.

The Dabbler perk is a good way to cover people who have some training in a bunch of skills but not enough to justify a full point in each.

Any teenager might be able to justify very low levels of Streetwise and Current Affairs; street criminal culture is very closely related to youth culture and current affairs is one where experience isn't much of an advantage.

Another thing which people learn in school is the social mores which let them demonstrate they aren't low-status; this isn't a skill as such, it's part of not having low Status or a Social Stigma (Minority Group or Uneducated).

Of those, I'd say the main thing which distinguishes a school-educated person from a 'street educated' one is the difference in language skills.