File: MeIRL.jpg (173.8 KB)

173.8 KB JPG

90% of unofficial GURPS content now seems to just be one extremely autistic guy who is trying to stat the entire past from the carboniferous to the cold war.
Why aren't there more people like that? You can't convince me that the GURPS fanbase is lacking the necessary level of autism. There should be dozens of obsessive-compulsive loons writing up every steam locomotive, or species of butterfly, or something.

>>97366018
>Be me
>Faggot who has fallen in love with HTML, and also likes GURPS
>Start having fun with converting GURPS PDFs to HTML and statting GURPS vehicles in HTML
>Fall ill with depression
>Stop doing HTML stuff
>Amass enough wealth at work to retire early
>Slowly recovering from depression (hopefully)
>Dungeon Fantasy 8: Treasure Tables is the most relaxing GURPS book to convert, since the conversion actually involves making huge improvements to the tabular formatting, rather than just brain-dead copying and pasting into

and

>>97366018
I’ve done this, I think most groups do this, it just doesn’t get posted or is redundant. I can’t tell you how many different Warhammer Fantasy or TES GURPS files I’ve seen over the years.

>>97366530
>TES GURPS files
Speaking of which, I've been posting in this bread about my TES conversion for a few months now. The files are already available in GCS (though you need to update to the latest libraries version manually), but my conversion document/sourcebook is almost done. I'll upload it to the Mega when it's finished.

Toon 2E
Munchkin 2E
GURPS 4 Revised
Is SJG long for this world?
It looks like America's current economic situation has messed it up badly.

>>97367917
GURPS content has been a withering, dying corner of JSG for over a decade, the current state of the U.S. didn't cause that.

That's it.
I'm going to build my own generic system, with vehicles and mecha combat.

>>97368064
Breast jiggle simulationist math formulas please.

Is 3e firearms combat at all different from 4e? Does the rate of fire stat work the same way?

>>97366018
I remember trying to make a lot of fucked up alternative playstyles to work on GURPS, they always never end up tested since no one want to waste a game to try it or I just got bored of them.

>>97368295
>fucked up alternative playstyles
What does that even mean

>>97368452
I tried make a percentile take on skills and a no damage rolls rule.

>>97368083
RoF is probably the same for projectile guns but hit calculation is completely different

Where are the rules for modern-day explosive reactive armor? Rules for MS-HEAT intended to defeat it are in High-Tech, but there don't seem to be any actual rules for the armor itself.

>>97368908
GURPS Vehicles p. 92

>>97368921
Why must you make us all hurt, anon?

>Q: Why did you revise for sensitivity? Was that not a lot of work for something most people do not care about?
>A: Apparently we disagree on how many people care about this in 2026. We do. We wrote it as we would write it if we were starting afresh this year. The one exception is the replacement of "he" with "they" and so on. The accumulated effect of that change would have altered too many page endings.
He chads keep on winning

>>97367917
I just hope they launch Vehicles 4e before they shut their doors.

>>97369247
never gonna happen by their own words

>>97368908
Ultra-Tech IIRC
It's a personal model but you can extrapolate to vehicles, maybe

File: 4glbnu.jpg (79.4 KB)

79.4 KB JPG

>>97366047
One of the most based and useful contributions to this community.

>>97367917
It's been rough since covid, but they should have been making a lot of money during the pandemic and just weren't because GURPS is catastrophically mismanaged.

>economy on path to improvement but consumer spending is down because we got real fucking close there to a recession
>tariffs being introduced to explicitly punish offshored manufacturing
>decide that now is the perfect time to release a physical run of a new revised basic set instead of just making it a PDF only

It's almost impressive.

>>97369140
>"We can't pay to edit Vehicles because we want to pay our editors to edit the basic set again but this time remove all the mentions of eskimos."

Steve should be shot and Kromm raped at least a little.

File: 1667170964979304.png (244.3 KB)

244.3 KB PNG

Should i buy the new revised basic set like i bought the basic set new like 6 months ago. Also i am concerned whether merging both books will put further strain into the book spine. Also there's like 20 pages of new rules i don't think it's that worth it

>>97370622
if you already have a physical version of the basic set then no I don't think it would be worth it

>>97370622
I think all the new rules are gonna be shit we're already familiar with. If I had to guess at any "new" rules would be something with rapid fire always using random hit locations. Otherwise I am 100% on it just being a sidebar at the slam rules explaining the DF slam rules, or a sidebar explaining the alternate weapon skills from Alt Gurps, ect.

>>97371234
"Q: What rules are in the addenda you mentioned?

A: The preview PDF on the book's web page will include the table of contents, but in brief: favorite new advantages, modifiers, perks, and techniques; expanded treatments of alternative abilities, Talents, disadvantages, and skills (regular and wildcard); widely used rules for equipment, such as cost factor (CF) and batteries/power cells; additional options for success and Influence rolls, physical and mental feats, extra effort, and other actions; more maneuvers, hit locations, and optional modifiers for combat; and entire systems useful on adventures, such as Assistance Rolls (AR) and Basic Abstract Difficulty (BAD). Space limits excluded multi-page advantages (like Control and Create) and additional chapter-length systems (like Ritual Path magic)."

>>97369967
He might like it

>>97370622
I don't think SJG deserves money but if you don't think their actions are cringe then I guess ask yourself if avoiding having to read the word gypsy is worth 40 bucks or whatever it is they're charging. Even disregarding my 'bias' against them and moves like this I don't think I would think it worth it, especially if I already owned a basic set.

>>97366018
I have often considered collecting all my notes, and houserules, and publishing them. Several anons have even asked for it. I've posted links to a few of the spreadsheets I've made here before. Like the big table of generic TL9 guns.

With all the stuff I've written for my cyberpunk game I might have enough for a Monster Hunters, or After the End sized pdf with just that. Might clean that up, and post it. Maybe make a blog. That's what gurps people do right, make blogs?

File: gurps_rev_exm2.jpg (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB JPG

just seen pic rel.
lol
how is this supposed to count as a good revised version? Is this really the best layout design they can come up with in 2026?

>>97374698
>somehow made it look worse
I prefer outdated thanks. That's just vomit.
This confirms my Kromm was never a good editor theory and just piggybacked off of goated authors.

>>97374698
This is the professional editing work that is so limited and valuable that vehicles 4e had to die for.

File: 1750477706286193.jpg (71.8 KB)

71.8 KB JPG

>>97374698
>all that wasted space around the quote
>lines wrapping with the image

>>97375317
>This confirms my Kromm was never a good editor theory and just piggybacked off of goated authors.
He's not responsible for layout, that's a completely different job.

>>97374698
>determine damage for one hit, subtract DR and multiply
isn't that overpowered? The result of rolling a single d6 and multiplying by 100 is very different from the result of 100d6.

>>97375869
I don't think I've used that rule once in actual play.

>>97375869
The fast damage resolution rules work out the same as the normal ones so long as you aren't dealing 1d damage, since that case has flat probabilities. In both cases, you repeat a single attack a number of times, the only difference is that you're assuming all hits rolled the same damage (and thus have the same penetrating damage). You are not multiplying the raw damage in a single blow, you're multiplying the result of DR being substracted from a single hit.
Not accounting for ablation rules, and going with DR 3, you'd be dealing on average 100 times 0.5 injury (so 100 because any penetrating damage deals at least 1 HP of injury), against 347 for 100d.

>>97374125
I might not buy it. I heard they said they're going to "remove all references to slavery", i mean what?? It's not like slavery has been a thing from most of human history.

Does an UT android need absolute timing or does the personal computer perk they have include one. I'm trying to save a player like 2 points.

>>97376456
You may be misremembering the controvery over the Slave Mentality disadvantage.

File: gigavnbothered.jpg (68 KB)

68 KB JPG

>>97376518
Why is there a controversy regarding that disadvantage? Didn't Aristotle say some people are slaves by nature while some are by convention?

>>97376667
Slave Mentality has never meant any form of human slavery, its instead a more specific term referring to automata and creatures with no independent will, which iirc is why its being renamed. If you wanted something to represent the IRL mentality of people who are easily enslaved, it would have vastly different mechanical effects. No human being in history has ever had anything close to GURP's slave mentality disadvantage.

File: 1744982343081p.png (181.5 KB)

181.5 KB PNG

Is it really a "bad" thing SJG is retarded and can't make GURPS become more widely known and played? Think about it, imagine all those "people" that keep ruining other RPGs by shaping them to cater their ideological beliefs coming to GURPS. With a wider audience not only would it save GURPS financially, but it would provide Sean with the funds necessary to turn GURPS into a tool for globohomo.

>>97376728
>No human being in history has ever had anything close to GURP's slave mentality disadvantage.
Bullshit. It isn't always a characteristic of slaves, but people who have had their autonomy taken away from them for long enough do tend to develop something very close to GURPS Slave Mentality. It's called 'institutional syndrome' now. I deal with people suffering from it all the time. Of course the real-world condition isn't a perfect match for the GURPS version, but that's the case with basically all mental disadvantages.

>>97376728
>iirc is why its being renamed
You're completely wrong, of course. Sean has explicitly stated that it is being renamed because the words 'slave mentality' imply that it is possible for some people to be more suited to slavery than others (an idea supported by literally thousands of years of lived experience from diverse societies) and that is colonialism (despite abolitionism being a colonial ideology which was imposed by force on people of color, who were generally pretty keen on taking, trading, and keeping slaves). It's pure politics, nothing to do with accuracy.

>>97376518
Not OP but Kromm did say in the thread that they literally control+F'd slavery and removed most of the references to it unless it met 'stringent' rules. They also capitalized Black because that's the popular thing to do.

>>97376773
Anon, a person with slave mentality can and typically will literally starve to death while surrounded by food because they haven't been ordered to eat. Read the description of the disadvantage, and what templates its used on (hint: it is never used for slaves, and pretty much exclusively used for machines and automata)

Speaking of slaves how do I generate the cost of a slave? Take the daily labor about and average that out over their projected lifetime?

>>97376867
>can and typically will literally starve to death while surrounded by food
Yes, there are people that require prompting to eat even when food is easily available. Sometimes they starve to death despite having all the resources necessary to feed themselves. Same with bathing, wearing appropriate clothing, and sometimes even going to the toilet. This really isn't some bizarre unheard of thing. It's fairly common when you combine learning disabilities with psychotic disorders and long-term confinement in an institutional care or detention setting. Lots of people put quite a bit of effort into preventing them from neglecting themselves to death.

File: gurps slave cost.png (49.4 KB)

49.4 KB PNG

>>97376911
Basic Set p. 518: Five times the amount the slave could make at a job if he were free
That's the canonical method. The method that you describe might be more realistic.

>>97376955
>five times
*five years times

>>97376955
>it was in Basic
Embarrassing miss on my end. That makes more sense for laborers but for skilled slaves (like doctors and educators) I think I'll use my estimate. Thanks anon.

>>97376911
It's a bit more complicated than that, because there are opportunity costs of investment, so a slave that pays for themself over 20 years won't be worth it if you can just lend money to businesses and make your investment back in 5 years. You also need to account for cost of keeping the slave, which can vary depending on the type of slave (there is such a thing as luxury slaves who you would be expected to keep at a certain degree of comfort).
The 3rd edition Basic Set (p. 193) used a rule of thumb that a slave was worth the equivalent of five years pay to a free labourer of equivalent skills. That seems about right for antebellum America: https://www.measuringworth.com/slavery.php or a bit high for ancient Rome (where a typical slave might be about 1,000 days wages for a labourer).
Of course, prices vary widely. Today you can apparently purchase a slave in the DRC for about $100, which is only about a month's average wages there. Criminal gangs in the West seem to sell people for fairly small amounts compared to potential earnings from them, due to the high risk of slave-owners losing their investment (i.e. the slaves escaping or being seized by law enforcement) and possibly facing additional penalties.

File: stressedpepe.jpg (97.6 KB)

97.6 KB JPG

Finished reading the basic set. What should i do now?

>>97377472
host a game :)

>>97377480
What's some good gming prepping resources/advice? I searched and found the Alexandrian and Lazy DM.

>>97377540
Maybe read How to be a GURPS GM first if you haven't already.

>>97377472
depending on the nature of the game you want to do, I would either recommend reading:
Low Tech + Martial Arts
or
High Tech + Tactical Shooting

>>97377707
I think i'll try to get familiar with the system first before going to more in-depth books. I'll use tech books for equipment, though.

>>97377880
The low and high tech books are very good, probably the best and most useful besides Basic Set. There are some worthwhile home rules/alternate to consider though, and I always recommend looking into Martial Arts just for the much better bleeding rules and hit locations than Basic. Alternate GURPS has a few that are just better than basic, including the Alternate Gun skills, and a big recent one I'm fond of is using the DF slam table in place of the slam rules in basic. Those can all come later but keep them on your radar.

File: 1583848470648.png (558.4 KB)

558.4 KB PNG

>>97377472
Maybe be our GM?
We are open for any kind of scenario. Kind of beginners ourselves.

File: 1734536892768268.jpg (119.5 KB)

119.5 KB JPG

>>97378551
I don't like cats.

>>97378891
make a world without cats then. that's the nice thing about TTRPGs.
contact me if you're up for a game https://app.roll20.net/users/16288673/bogged

>>97376860
>They also capitalized Black because that's the popular thing to do.
Huh?

>>97377472
Start creating your setting. The first steps are you figure out your fetish and your political ideaology.

File: 1561234267559.jpg (47.6 KB)

47.6 KB JPG

>>97379108
When i get confident as a gm i may contact you.

>>97377472
Read whatever book catches your fancy.

>>97376955
As an additional GURPS source, Pyramid 3/87 (page 17) gives slaves an approximate value of $21,000/slave, which is about $350/month by the "5 years of full time pay" metric.

This feels really expensive. I remember GURPS: Aztecs pricing it at:
>Household Slave: $1,000
>Without faults, able to sing and dance well: $4,000
And half that in the countryside.

>>97387032
The new Basic Set won't even have the slave section

>>97387069
We were a country once

>>97366018
I'm doing this with dinosaurs (I think lwcamp also did this but only did a couple of broad categories) and it's reaching autistic level of referencing. It's not really ready to share and my concern is if I do it'll be written off as completely wrong by anons more autistic than me.

File: 1715197096717367.jpg (172.1 KB)

172.1 KB JPG

>>97387419
Maybe. But, anons less autistic than you (like me) will be thrilled to have a bunch of badass dinosaur stats to use.

>>97387556
I'll be honest, dinosaurs would be good fantasy monsters but I have never once used a single one in all my years of GMing

>>97387419
>>97387556
>>97387570
I used the stats from the one blog someone posted here for my not-warhammer fantasy campaign
And I'm gonna use them again in my GURPS action campaign inspired by x-com and x-files (X-Com Files if you will) when they go to an island lost in time.

>>97366018
I should give my Borderlands gun system another go. It's just sitting there on my hard drive unfinished.

>>97387900
Is it good?

File: 1746749737962385.png (178.5 KB)

178.5 KB PNG

>>97389081
I don't know, haven't got it in a state that's worth testing yet.
Idea is there are three different versions (light, medium, and heavy) of every weapon type (assault rifle, shotgun, smg, etc.). Medium is the baseline and light and heavy are the same gun but with different stats pushed in the corresponding direction (light usually means less damage but bigger mag size and heavy the opposite).
Then you apply the manufacturer to these bases which changes the gun's stats. For example Dahl weapons have better handling and reload, Vladof have more firerate, Torgue fires explosive gyrojets. This would also include making some stats worse.
On top of the stat changes would be the manufacturer bonus mechanic like Hyperion guns having "inverse" recoil (the longer you shoot the more accurate it is although I haven't figured out how this would work in gurps), Maliwan being always elemental, and Tediore having the throw like a grenade to reload mechanic. These are all based on BL2, and there would be a "gen 2" version of all guns that add the mechanics from BL3+4 like Jakobs ricochet on crit/headshot or Bandit weapons having a heat-up mechanic.
Here's a very old sheet I made of all the different weapon bases and manufacturer bonuses plus some other stats I cobbled together. It definitely needs more balancing plus figuring out how some of the mechanics would work. I got a few ideas down for elemental damage but nothing serious yet. Also I was working on a basic intro one-shot to go along with this but it isn't finished either.

>>97387419
I have done a bunch of dinosaurs, but I kind of ran into a block when I reached stegosaurs and ankylosaurs.
My advice is to put it out in public. Someone more autistic than you pointing out what you got wrong is one of the most powerful tools an unpaid writer has. It's like a free editor.

File: 1742614797835049.png (784.5 KB)

784.5 KB PNG

What's some rule so oddly specific that 3 dudes have used it in the entire existance of GURPS?

File: gurps vehicles expansion 1 OTEC plant.png (33.4 KB)

33.4 KB PNG

>>97389471
The rules for ocean thermal energy conversion plants in GURPS Vehicles Expansion 1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_thermal_energy_conversion

>>97389471
I'm sure all the parachronic shit is like that

>>97376496
Absolute Timing is more automatic than the personal computer. If you wanted to know how long it takes to do something but only have the PC perk then you would need to take some effort (probably concentrate maneuvers) to bring up a "timer" application and then set and stop a timer. With absolute timing you just watch someone do something and go "that took 15 minutes and 30 seconds".
The PC timer would be more accurate, though, if seconds or fractions of a second mattered.

>>97389494
Pretty sure most of the industrial scale shit has almost never been used by anyone

>Enhanced Dodge costs 15 points/level because you can dodge any number of times and require no equipment to do so. Versions that work only once per turn, or that require expensive gear (like a BMW 750i E38), are cheaper: (...)
>Action 1 pp18
does that mean that in campaigns where I'm using a rule where you get -1 to dodge after every dodge that enhanced dodge should be cheaper?
Like 10/level instead of 15/level?

Why can't you default a fast draw attempt?

"GURPS is easy, it has only 3 main mechanics you need." they say.

>>97390873
Thanks. I'll not say anything then and let him keep it.

>>97392473
It only has the one core mechanic.

>>97392775
Have Fun :)

>>97392775
This is a lie, right

I was reading the part in the Campaigns book where they talk about drawing maps. They just tell you to use 2 hexes per inch or 5 hexes per inch paper or whatever to draw your maps for reference. I thought that it would be very difficult to find such paper, but turns out that students of organic chemistry, and some home improvement people who work with hexagonal tiles, and some handycraft people also have uses for hex grid paper. So I bought some hex paper notebooks for my map making purposes from amazon and I am rather excited.

>>97393366
One of my players made me some laminated hex sheets for gaming purposes at work

>>97391413
IIRC kromm's reasoning, it's because Fast-Draw is a "borderline" cinematic skill that sits in an awkward place between heroic realism and truly cinematic. Parry Missile Weapons sits in a similar boat.
>https://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.php?p=228233&postcount=5
If you want to add defaults to these skills, it probably wouldn't break the game. Something like "DX-4 or weapon skill-4" for Fast-Draw might be appropriate.
I personally use a more generic "multiple maneuver" house rule that extends the precedent set by Rapid Strike and Acrobatic Stand to every maneuver.
>You can try any combination of multiple maneuvers (Ready, Concentrate, etc.) on your turn at -6 to skill per extra maneuver (like a Rapid Strike).
>If your maneuvers have different active defenses or movement, then use the worst defenses but the best movement from among them.
>If a maneuver doesn't require a roll, then the GM may call for a DX or IQ roll at +6, plus your penalty for multiple maneuvers.
>You can also try an extra maneuver later in your turn at no penalty to previous maneuvers, but at -12 per extra maneuver (like an Acrobatic Stand).
>Failure means your turn ends, and critical failure causes a fumble of some kind (drop your weapon, fall down, mental stun, etc.), so extra maneuvers are never risk free.
This rule probably isn't necessary in most low-point campaigns, but for me it's come into play quite often in campaigns where PCs have exceedingly high skill.

>>97392920
No. Everything in GURPS revolves around the core mechanic of the 3d6 roll under system.

>>97392775
t. literally hasn't read the Basic Set
(1) Success roll--use 3d, aiming to roll at or under a target number
(2) Reaction roll--use 3d, aiming for a high result
(3) Damage roll--use Nd, aiming for a high result

>>97394932
I guess those last two count, but I wouldn't put them on the same level as the success role.

>>97394849
I like this rule because it would also lead to the existence of advantages like weapon master and trained by a master but for things that aren't weapons.
>Archmage
Tho thinking about it I probably would extend Trained by a Master to also work for physical feats, so if you want to do a triple climb at -18 trained by a master would make this -9

>>97392775
It's as complex as you want it to be, all rules are optional.

Is there a gurps index that lists where every single advantage, skill, and gear is located and in what book?

>>97394849
It's hardly cinematic, decent shooters get very good draw times. Mine's glacial but I barely train and don't expect to draw on anyone in my lifetime so it's all good

>>97397396
It really is just Basic Set, Martial Arts, Powers, and Power-Ups. Some skills and perks from Tactical Shooting and Gun-fu. Then maybe DF, or even Horror. You might find one strange unique case in Supers or Psionic Powers that is a total stretch but sounds fair in paper.
>gear
Basic, LT, HT, UT, DF, MA, AtE, and Zombies. Maybe Monster Hunters as well I don't know I don't like it.
Don't you dare include spaceships or transhuman space under the gear category anon.

File: Fallout_GURPS.jpg (328.6 KB)

328.6 KB JPG

So in another thread, people recommended I just use GURPS for a more classic Fallout game, problem is I never got a single explanation of just what supplements and such would be recommended to read up on and use (not counting After The End of course). Could I get a explanation here? Very new to GURPS and honestly would like to know how to play and run it.

>>97399585
Basic Set, ATE, High-Tech and Ultra-Tech (maybe Bio-Tech idk)

>>97399585
>>97399608
To elaborate:
Basic Set covers the core rules of the game.
AtE covers the apocalypse specific rules of the game.
High Tech gives you all the equipment you want to run the game, as well as a few rule sections for the finer points. In GURPS terminology, High Tech refers to everything from the Industrial Revolution to the present day.
Ultra Tech covers future technologies, and includes power armor, laser weapons, ect.
Bio Tech covers genetic engineering, which is relevant for FEV stuff but really you don't need to read Biotech, it doesn't have anything super new that isn't already in Basic Set.

I would recommend you look at Tactical Shooting and Martial Arts, both of which come with expanded rules for gunplay and melee respectively, and will be useful for making the combat feel better. You might also take a quick skim of Low Tech if you want to do a lot of tribal focused stuff. Follow the order of books as listed, if you need a guide.
I know this seems like a lot, but you really only need to read Basic Set and AtE to completion, the techbooks you mostly just want for the equipment lists.

>>97399585
It would have been 3E, 1996 or before
So Basic Set Revised
GURPS High-Tech
GURPS Robots
GURPS Psionics
GURPS Cyberpunk (Probably not)
GURPS Ultra-Tech 1 (2 was 1997, same year and so was too lat for the negotiations)
GURPS Space (2E, which might have had weapons and technology not covered by Ultra-Tech)
GURPS Compendium I + II were 1996, so maybe too late
GURPS Dinosaurs (Fallout spun out of a time-travel game, but the book was from 1996 and so would be maybe too late)

>>97400194
Oh I don't mean exactly like how Fallout would have used GURPS, but just running it like it was the older games compared to the newer Fallout 2d20's overwhelming focus of 4 and 76.

While searching for a hit location table with everything (which I did find), I stumbled upon this article from way back in 1992
https://www.sjgames.com/gurps/Roleplayer/Roleplayer27/Concentrated-Defense.html
Is there a version of this for 4e?
Failing that, is there any reason why this "Concentrated Defenses" rule wouldn't work if I just used it in 4e with no modifications?

>>97401038
Crazy to think that if this guy was 20 when he wrote this he'd be over 50 now. GURPS really has been around forever.

File: gurps martial arts gladiators focused defense.png (60.3 KB)

60.3 KB PNG

>>97401038
GURPS Martial Arts: Gladiators p. 21 uses the name "Focused Defense" for turning sideways fencing-style. Basically, this "presents" one side for +2 to hit and "denies" the other side for −2 to hit.
Dungeon Fantasy RPG: Shields Up p. 7 uses the name "Deliberate Cover" for using your shield to protect a specific "band" of hit locations as part of an All-Out Defense (Cover) maneuver. Basically, this grants cover DR and −2 targeting penalty to the covered locations.

>>97401167
Interesting. These are very much not as useful as the article (+1 to parry is ok I guess), but are much more realistic.

>>97401167
>Dungeon Fantasy RPG: Shields Up p. 7 uses the name "Deliberate Cover" for using your shield to protect a specific "band" of hit locations as part of an All-Out Defense (Cover) maneuver. Basically, this grants cover DR and −2 targeting penalty to the covered locations.
Funny, I ended up treating it similarly even if I have never read that particular splat. Although I don't even require an AoD maneuver, maybe I should

So, making something cost 2FP (like say altered time rate) makes the ability require a ready to activate, and reduces the cost by -10%.
Breaking the rule of an ability to make something not require a ready to activate is cosmic, increases the cost by +50%.
Now if I want something to cost 2FP but also not use a ready, that would make the thing cost +40%, which is obviously illogical.
I'm thinking the cosmic here would actually apply to the limitation "cost FP" so it would make it so a 2FP cost would be -5%.

Does this seem fair?
also I am right that cost fp makes Always-on abilities require a ready, right?

Is getting shot in the vitals really that much more dangerous than getting shot in the neck? (x3 vs x1)

>>97401528
Given that's where your heart and lungs are? Yes. Significantly more dangerous.

>>97401548
But movies taught me that get your throat cut = instant death!

>>97401528
The 'vitals' is literally just your most essential organs minus the brain, so being hit in them is really bad. It doesn't include things like your intestines, pancreas, etc. A shot to the neck is only going to kill you quick (seconds) if you break either the spine or a carotid artery. Any serious penetrating wound there is going to kill you slow (minutes or hours), but that's true for most of the torso too.
Generally speaking, I'd say GURPS undersells the effects of wounds to the torso and neck a bit, and maybe makes limb wounds a little too nasty. If there was an elegant way to do it, I'd have neck hits increase the wounding modifier of impaling and piercing by 'one step' in a progression of 1/3, 1/2, 2/3, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3... and have them do the opposite to the limbs.

Speaking of hit locations, I want to simplify hit locations a bit.
The idea being that you would aim for a general area, and your margin of success indicate the exact location.
So it would be 3 locations:
Torso: -0
Limbs: -2
Head: -5.
And then margin of success would tell if a torso hit is a vitals hit or if a limb is an artery/joint hit.

In that situation, where you would you put the neck? Torso or head?

Crushing blows to the neck should probably get the improved stun and knockdown that Martial Arts gives the vitals. There are lots of major nerves running through there which can seriously disrupt your entire body if they get squashed hard. The 'brachial stun' where the vagus nerve is over-stimulated by a blow from the forearm or a club is a classic example of this.

>>97401665
I don't understand what you mean. Are you talking about something like this?

Simplification of hit locations:
>There are only 12 targetable hit locations: Torso, four limbs and the neck, and four extremities and the face/skull.
>If you achieve a large margin of success, a torso/neck hit can be upgraded to a vitals hit, a limb/extremity hit can be upgraded to an artery/joint hit, or a face hit can be upgraded to an eye hit. (A skull hit cannot be upgraded.)
>If you miss by 1, you can roll on a secondary table where there's a small chance of hitting a hit location adjacent to the one at which you were actually aiming.

>>97401735
Correction: A neck hit can be upgraded to an artery/joint hit, not to a vitals hit.

>>97401665
I like that idea.
I think that it works better if the neck is part of the head.
Arguments I can think of for torso:
>the neck is anatomically more similar to the torso than the head, containing mostly structures which are shared with the torso
>no other -5 to hit location in the torso
>exposing only the head from cover is likely to leave your neck protected
...for head:
>things which prevent attacks to the head (e.g. opponent too tall or high above you) should generally also prevent them to the torso (I think this is the most important thing)
>armour which protects the neck is usually attached to the head
>easy to imagine going for the skull and hitting the neck, less so for going for the neck and hitting the groin or vitals

>>97401735
As in, instead of having all the hit locations (neck, face, skull, torso, vitals, limbs, hands, feet)
you just have 3
>head (includes face, skull, eyes...)
>Torso (includes vitals, stomach, groin...)
>limbs (includs joints, hands, feet...)
And I'm wondering where to put the neck.

>>97401745
I think reading these arguments, neck as part of head works better.

>>97401765
"Aiming at the limbs" doesn't make any sense. That's four separate areas, not one.

File: Hit location based on margin of success.png (33.4 KB)

33.4 KB PNG

>>97401735
>>97401745
>>97401765
The numbers may change, I did this by memory, so the balance may be off compared to the actual penalties.
Thoughts?

>>97401806
I mean that you'd aim at a specific limb, but the table would list just limbs since the penalties are the same regardless it's left arm or right leg.

>>97401368
That seems fair and mathematically sound. There is precedent for similar logic in Limited Enhancements (Basic Set p.111).
However, I think that you are wrong about adding an FP cost automatically causing you to require a Ready to switch, and even if it did, you shouldn't need Cosmic, but only Reduced Time (which would still be pointless, so you need to use your method anyway).

>>97401851
Good to know
about cost fp requiring a ready, I thought I read a kromm post about it but I can't find it.

>>97401813
I think this is good in general, but I have some quibbles:
The groin is smaller than the pelvis and should probably be harder to hit.
You should be able to hit the joints in an extremity (e.g. ankle, knuckle)
You included spine twice in Head and not at all in Torso, which seems like an error
How does this interact with chinks in armour?
How does this interact with partially armoured locations such as upper/lower arms?

>>97401528
Neck shots are still bad obviously, but unless they hit the artery (1/6 chance) they aren't instantly life threatening compared to being shot in the lungs or heart.

>>97401925
>The groin is smaller than the pelvis and should probably be harder to hit.
Good point. I'll switch around the margin required.
>You should be able to hit the joints in an extremity (e.g. ankle, knuckle)
Oh yeah, I forgot about that. I'll add it in.
>You included spine twice in Head and not at all in Torso, which seems like an error
Yes, it's an error. It was supposed to be "by 3 (1 from behind) skull, and 4 (2 from behind) spine". That said, I did add the torso spine.
>How does this interact with chinks in armour?
Good question, since it's -8 torso and -10 everything else, it changes a lot. Not sure how to do it.
>How does this interact with partially armoured locations such as upper/lower arms?
I'm actually not familiar with this rule, all my games used full armor for locations.

>>97401968
Getting shot in the trachea is no better than getting shot in the lung. Either way, you're suffocating from a combination of not being able to get air into the lung and drowning in blood. A puncture in some parts of the left lung might leave you fairly functional for a while.
The jugular veins aren't quite as bad as the carotid arteries, but it's still a very serious blood vessel, and any internal bleeding drains into the chest cavity, collapsing the lungs.
A hit to the vagus nerve can put you on your backside without even significant tissue damage. There are many other important and poorly protected nerves in the neck too.
A load of even more important nerves run through the spine, which is most vulnerable in the neck.
Together, these structures probably make up more than half the volume in the human neck (this doesn't generalise across species; humans have more delicate necks than ungulates, for example).
Even if you miss all of those things and only mangle muscle, you will be in severe pain and lose some movement in your head and arm.
On the other hand, the torso is also full of fairly important organs. There simply isn't much of your body which you can just have deep holes made in without serious issues.

>>97402125
>A puncture in some parts of the left lung
NTA but why the left lung specifically

>>97402026
>Good question, since it's -8 torso and -10 everything else, it changes a lot. Not sure how to do it.
The existing rule is kind of janky, since it encourages going for extremely hard targets like eyes and arteries. On the other hand, most of the actual gaps tend to be around joints and other vulnerable structures, so it kind of makes sense.
Maybe you could just increase the MoS needed to hit a location through CiA by a certain number? Something like 4 to 6 seems plausible. Alternatively, leave it as a penalty to the actual attack roll. The existing -8 for the torso could work fine, although I think it is a little excessive.
>>97402026
>I'm actually not familiar with this rule, all my games used full armor for locations.
It's not really well implemented in the existing rules, being just a random roll. But this adds an opportunity to make things more elegant. You could make it so that 'spending' 1 MoS allows you to avoid armour offering 1/6 or 1/3 coverage, 2 MoS avoids 1/2 coverage, 3 MoS avoids 2/3 coverage, 4 MoS avoids 5/6 coverage, and 6 MoS hits a CiA, for example.

>>97402199
It's smaller than the right lung. You need about 2/3rds of your lungs to remain functional, and that means you can lose most of the left one and still stagger around for a while (until enough blood and air get into your chest cavity to collapse your remaining one).

>>97402236
>Maybe you could just increase the MoS needed to hit a location through CiA by a certain number
>1 MoS allows you to avoid armour offering 1/6 or 1/3 coverage, 2 MoS avoids 1/2 coverage, 3 MoS avoids 2/3 coverage, 4 MoS avoids 5/6 coverage, and 6 MoS hits a CiA, for example.
I like this. It's probably the better way of handling it.

>>97402288
>It's smaller than the right lung
Wow I had no idea about this. The more you know.

>>97402314
Be careful about how it interacts with things like lack of sliding rivets, masterful tailoring, and weapons which reduce the penalty to hit chinks in armor.

>>97402797
I'll give a review of low tech to see all the minor rules I'm forgetting before using in my campaigns.

Is Serendipity overpriced? You can do the same thing and more by spending 5 points to get one Impulse Point.

>>97403181
Yeah but if you read the explanation of Impulse Point you'll see it has a requirement that the player be a homosexual. You aren't one of those, are you anon?

>>97403181
Serendipitous Guidance (Power-Ups 5, p. 8) says that one use of Serenity is equivalent to 2 impulse points (i.e. it is capable of a moderate change rather than a minor one). Wild, Wild Destiny (ibid, p. 5) or Other Kinds of Points (ibid, p. 18) allows you to buy impulse points at [5] per level, but they don't all refresh every session! A single impulse point which refreshes every session is worth [15], so Serendipity is actually a 50% discount on impulse points except for the special case of having no IP by default and buying a single one, which would indeed get you the equivalent of half a level of Serendipity for less than half the price of Serendipity, while being more flexible. However, this can never get you the level of coincidence that Serendipity offers, only adding things which 'fit the scene perfectly'.

>>97401925
>The groin is smaller than the pelvis
Speak for yourself

>>97403543
>You aren't one of those, are you anon?
Actually I am a bit of prancing la-la homo-man

>>97403676
>Serenity is equivalent to 2 impulse points
2 Impulse Point with "Doubly Aspected: Only for serendipity" cost 4, recharging an extra point is 10, so actually by using impulse points you end up with costing 14 to do the same thing.

>>97404020
>Actually I am a bit of prancing la-la homo-man
I didn't think your kind played a real man's system like GURPS

>>97404053
Us bara fans love gurps.

>>97366018
It became feels like making clothes for my doll which I'll definitely give to my child. Maybe niece. Someday a nighborhood children. Infact nobody wants it nor I have anyone to give and actually none of them fit the doll at and the doll can't stand on its leg anyway let alone the soulless stare that only soothes people who can't keep eye contact with moving pupils.

>>97404020
>2 Impulse Point with "Doubly Aspected: Only for serendipity" cost 4...
Where is this from? I don't see how serendipity is 'doubly aspected' or how you get a -60% discount from doubly aspected when aspected is a -20% limitation. Is there a Pyramid article or something which expands on impulse points?

>>97404137
Sorry, bad math, doubly aspected is -40% so you'd get the cost to be 6, making it 16, making me wrong.
and yes, there is a pyramid article about impulse points, 3-100; pp 4, Impulse Control.
And I thought "player guidance only" was -40% but it's actually -20%, so I'm doubly wrong.

Just forget I said anything, I'm wrong on every account.

>>97404137
OK, found it. Impulse Buys from Pyramid 3/100.
Serendipity is not doubly aspected, since Serendipity is explicitly stated to cover all kinds of Player Guidance. It is only aspected.
Even if it were doubly aspected, that's a -40% limitation, reducing the cost of two levels to [6], which would be more than Serendipity 1 even if you only had to pay for one level of Enhanced Refresh.
But you need two levels of Enhanced Refresh to refresh both your points every session. So the total cost is actually [28], almost twice the price of Serendipity! I think to be fair you should allow Aspected on the Enhanced Refresh too, which brings it down to [24], but Serendipity still looks like a bargain in comparison.

>>97404203
>But you need two levels of Enhanced Refresh to refresh both your points every session
You only need one level, since the basic impulse point already refreshes every session.
>Everyone recovers 1 IP/VP per session by default. Enhanced Refresh 2, which raises this to 2 per session, costs ±10 points.
Everything else is correct.

File: Bradley.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

https://samuelbaughn.blogspot.com/2026/01/bradley-fighting-vehicles-in-gurps.html

This was a fucking pain to research. Probably made quite a few errors, but I did my best.

>>97404692
nice
Shame I'm playing a GURPS ACTION campaign in 1981, so just a bit too early to see the bradley.

>>97399746
Any tips on how one would do playable Ghouls, Super Muties, various robots like Mister Handies, etc? Just would like to know if they already have stuff for that or if I'm gonna hve to hunt down the Fallout homebrew that got made and tweak/fix the shit out of that.

>>97407363
Template Toolkit: Races will have everything you need to make templates for all of these, including the robots. It's specially nice because it also teaches you how to create monsters/robots with 4 legs, wheels, tracks, tentacles, etc.
That said, fallout is popular enough that I guarantee if you google it you'll find some dudes homebrew you can take a look for inspiration.

>>97407389
There's a fairly complete one in the trove IIRC

In GURPS action, hiding in the middle of combat is at -10
but in movies, even characters who aren't very stealthy like Ahnold in Raw Deal are able to sort avoid notice in the middle of a gunfight just by crawling around while in cover and he gets a couple of dudes by surprise.
I feel like in a proper Action movie, any hero who is able to make the enemy lost sight of him should be able to stealth around without the huge penalty.

>>97407792
>hiding in the middle of combat is at -10
Can you post a screenshot of the paragraph?

File: GURPS ACTION II PP37 - Sneaky Fighting.png (151 KB)

151 KB PNG

>>97407831
right here under disappearing

>>97407792
You can represent that with just normal movement. Get into concealment, move in a way the enemy can't see, and then surprise them. The disappearing rule is for truly cinematic 'off camera' action where you just seem to appear in the optimal place without worrying about whether there is a clear path with actual concealment between you and your destination.
That said, you can also probably stack some modifiers onto your Stealth roll. Disappearing in low-visibility surroundings, after using a distraction, should boost your chances of success, and a cinematic hero can always do shit like buying success with impulse points.

>>97407941
>The disappearing rule is for truly cinematic 'off camera' action where you just seem to appear in the optimal place without worrying about whether there is a clear path with actual concealment between you and your destination.
That makes sense, now that I think about it.
>stack some modifiers onto your Stealth roll
Fair, I don't give enough modifiers when rolling stealth.

>>97366018
I'm afraid to share what I make because I worry its not good enough

Reading PU-9 kinda makes me wonder how different the game would be if Kromm just dropped all legacy stuff and made things his way.

File: a137e0_ae433239d5004f4eab4cd39fe8aca71b~mv2.png (274.9 KB)

274.9 KB PNG

>>97404692
I was thinking about how you can make IFV's work at TL10. Any reasonable dropship would struggle to carry more than an armoured infantry platoon so what happens to the specialised IFV based vehicles in a late TL8 company, they make do without them to avoid being caught out if the specialist vehicles get scattered or shot down? If every vehicle has a TL10 gatling laser on top SPAAG/artillery vehicles are potentially less useful.

>>97409333
I'm talking out of my ass, but I feel he was a proponent of fixed attribute costs instead of the 3E costs. Then there's the HP belongs to ST and FP to HT which saves the game from being retarded. I would guess the collision rules were his idea, too.
I'm not sure he'd change anything, or rather I think 4E was what he wanted for the game. Maybe he'd separate IQ from Will or Per idk

>>97404692
You're on roll Sammy

>>97409447
Pretty much every AFV will need serious anti-air to survive on a TL 10 battlefield, and beam-weapons combined with high computing power and bandwidth means you can probably distribute your AAA across all your vehicles rather than having to 'put all your eggs in one basket'.
As we come into TL 9, it seems like conventional artillery is kind of being replaced by smart weapons, drones, loitering munitions, etc. can't say if that trend will continue, but UT's TL10 stuff certainly seems like it would support an 'all missiles and robots, no dumb guns' paradigm. Again, this allows you to put a couple of munitions on every vehicle rather than concentrating all your firepower in one place. If you need a huge, messy bombardment, just use a mininuke.
Anti-tank is already somewhat dominated by IFV missiles, and TL10 hyper-velocity brilliant missiles will work even better in that role.
I think a lot of other specialist vehicle functions will be handed off to smaller robots, which again lets you split them across multiple transports.

>>97409636
Another factor is that light artillery (e.g. mortars) can effectively be replaced by autocannon and even machine guns if you have good enough fire control software. At the moment you need to concentrate your indirect fire weapons into batteries so that you can coordinate with a forward observer and so on. At some point in the near future, it may be possible to just point some gadget where you want to have a load of shells fall, let your battlefield management software figure out which nearby unit has the time to do it, have their computer figure out the trajectory, and their autocannon just points into the air and rattles off a few bursts.

Are there any actual plays on YouTube or in a Podcast that shows how GURPS...well...actually plays?

>>97409722
Theres a few. Idrk how good they are I don't like those things

>>97409447
If you can't reliably get hundreds of vehicles onto the surface, consider what kinds of missions you actually hope to accomplish. You're probably going to be restricted to special-forces tier stuff, which either means supporting local allies, 'surgical' operations against relatively weak opponents, and designating targets for orbital bombardment.
For a lot of that, you don't really need much in the way of specialist vehicles. You may even be better off riding on jeep-sized self-driving trucks with decent stealth rather than an IFV.
Remember the 'survivability onion'. Mobility and stealth are lighter than armor, and often more effective. If you have to get into a fight, offense is usually the best defense if you have to move every ounce to and from orbit, so really good sensors and serious firepower is probably going to be a higher priority than nanocomposite plating or whatever.

>>97374698
I've been using Acrobat to slowly remake the Basic Set by removing all the mid-column images and keeping the pages in the same column number they'd be without the images. Do you think I should leave the empty space at the bottom of the pages from moving the text upwards blank, or move the image to the bottom?

>>97409447
At TL10, space-mobile infantry will probably be either robots or wearing battlesuits, so they may well be able to carry out many of the tasks which would have required a specialist vehicle at TL 8.
Such infantry will probably want to remain concealed, so they can't handle air-defence by just spamming beam weapons fire at anything that flies or act as communication hubs broadcasting to their comrades. Instead, they will need more heavily armored units which don't have to be stealthy to act as air-defence and radio relays (the infantry use tight-beam communications to push data to the relay unit, which then broadcasts it). I guess a heavy IFV makes sense as the heavily armored unit, with the infantry using it as a transport and possibly fire-support too.

File: skyranger-30-austria-rheinmetall-1024x1020.jpg (241.1 KB)

241.1 KB JPG

>>97409636
This is an early TL9 system but basically every APC can be turned into an IFV with an unmanned turret with an autocannon that fires smart HE at infantry/drones or AP at light AFV's. With each turret having 8 missiles you could theoretically have infantry/drones designate a target then fire missiles over a hill at something. A TL10 version could simply add an AA laser.

Guns are still extremely useful if every modern combat vehicle has a point defence/AA system.

File: patria-6x6-med-vapenstation-och-rok_FMV.jpg (440 KB)

440 KB JPG

>>97409685
Funny, the British army kept water cooled machine guns until the 60's as indirect fire weapons until mortars replaced them.

>>97409778
>>97410015
Heavy IFV's are great but a 25 ton+ vehicle is not very aerospace mobile.

>jeep-sized

Depending on how good dropships are you might end up with something like an Ultra Tech Cadillac Commando or Patria 6x6.

Did they change the definition of what TL9 for the new basic set considering TL9 was supposed to start in 2025 per the (old) rules?

>>97410279
we are living in TL9 tho
it's just gay and lame

File: gurps TL9 definition.png (19.4 KB)

19.4 KB PNG

>>97410279
It does say "2025+?" with a question mark on Basic Set pp. 27 and 511, so that number is not to be taken literally. And we currently have only LLMs (glorified Markov chains), not actual "artificial intelligence".

File: gurps ultra-tech TL9 definition.png (85.2 KB)

85.2 KB PNG

>>97410574
Also, we definitely don't have nanomaterials, labs-on-a-chip, fuel cells, nuclear fusion, quantum computers, antimatter, et cetera.

>>97410602
>we definitely don't have nanomaterials, labs-on-a-chip, fuel cells, nuclear fusion, quantum computers,
>he doesn't know

>>97410238
>Depending on how good dropships are you might end up with something like an Ultra Tech Cadillac Commando or Patria 6x6.
I was initially thinking that there wasn't much point having all your troops packed into one vehicle when you can disperse them among many smaller ones (with no wasted manpower for drivers, because they are robotic vehicles). But looking at the rules in UT, it seems like you would want something big enough to carry at least a mainframe and possibly a macroframe computer, and once you've got several million dollars worth of computer, it's probably worth protecting it too, so you want at least enough armour to handle the kind of threats that might get through a laser point-defence system (e.g. nukes at a distance, spammed artillery, smart mines, beam weapons, gauss HMGs, autocannons) and a reasonably capable anti-air laser. That all adds up to at least a big truck's worth, so you might as well throw a squad of infantry into it as well.

>>97410931
>I was initially thinking that there wasn't much point having all your troops packed into one vehicle when you can disperse them among many smaller ones
I don't see why that'd be the case. A bunch of smaller vehicles and smaller squad sizes increases the logistical and strategic burden of moving all those guys around and limits their ability to put firepower down range. It's arguably less important when they're overmatching irregular opponents, but in a near peer fight even with force multipliers like integrated loitering munitions, ballistic computers and power armor they're gonna be at a disadvantage in a firefight against a larger unit of infantry.

File: g3rla0u2f8w81.png (543.5 KB)

543.5 KB PNG

>>97410931
You don't want to go full M44, that's a hell of an egg basket. 6x6, 8x8 and tracked can all carry an autocannon, a decent computer, a gatling laser and a single squad. Just have to balance capability with mass, everything is about mass with spacelift.

>>97410574
Guns Stats states that 2025 is TL9, no question mark.
Obviously we don't have all the things predicted in Ultra-Tech, since UT was more based on science fiction than actual predictions about the future, and even if they tried to be totally realistic, it's hard to predict the future several decades ahead. Also, we're one year in. We didn't have smartphones, hybrid cars, drones, or 3D printers in 1981.
I'm not sure that AI is really the best example of what we don't have either; the best LLMs seem comparable to what I would expect from a GURPS IQ 8 dedicated AI; incapable of replacing a normal human, but better than an animal (sometimes), or genuinely retarded person. I'm not sure what level of compute you need to run one, but the Complexity 5 personal computer in UT doesn't seem far off what is necessary and it seems likely to be possible to do similar stuff with a smaller machine soon. That's kind of roughly the level I would expect to be cutting edge one year into TL 9.

>>97411190
>I'm not sure what level of compute you need to run one
https://rentry.org/recommended-models
tl;dr: A 12-GiB graphics card generally is sufficient.

According to Thinking Machines (Pyramid vol. 3 iss. 37, from year 2011):
>Complexity 5 = typical 2010 computer; can beat humans at specific games
>Complexity 6 = 2010 high-end commercial server; equivalent to a human brain
>Complexity 7 = theoretical as of 2010

GURPS High-Tech: Electricity and Electronics indicates that a 2010 (advanced VLSI) desktop (workstation) computer has Complexity 5 for 500 $, Complexity 6 for 10 k$, or Complexity 7 for 200 k$.

According to Ultra-Tech p. 25:
>A Complexity 5 computer can run a dedicated (non-learning) AI with IQ 9
>A Complexity 6 computer can run a dedicated AI with IQ 11
>A Complexity 7 computer can run a dedicated AI with IQ 13
I guess it's arguable that (1) the high-end LLMs like Github/Microsoft Copilot count as dedicated (non-learning) with IQ 13, and (2) the LLM running on my Complexity 5 computer can write short erotic stories with IQ 8. But we still definitely don't have non-volitional (learning but non-sapient) AI, let alone volitional AI.

Seems like they could do with a High-Tech addon

Ahem.

Kill Realm Management. Behead Realm Management. Roundhouse kick Realm Management into the concrete. Slam dunk Realm Management into the trashcan. Crucify filthy Realm Management. Defecate in Realm Management's food. Launch Realm Management into the sun. Stir fry Realm Management in a wok. Toss Realm Management into active volcanoes. Urinate into Realm Management's gas tank. Judo throw Realm Management into a wood chipper. Twist Realm Management's head off. Report Realm Management to the IRS. Karate chop Realm Management in half. Curb stomp pregnant Realm Management. Trap Realm Management in quicksand. Crush Realm Management in the trash compactor. Liquefy Realm Management in a vat of acid. Eat Realm Management. Dissect Realm Management. Exterminate Realm Management in the gas chamber. Stomp Realm Management's skull with steel toed boots. Cremate Realm Management in the oven. Lobotomize Realm Management. Mandatory abortions for Realm Management. Grind Realm Management fetuses in the garbage disposal. Drown Realm Management in fried chicken grease. Vaporize Realm Management with a ray gun. Kick Realm Management down the stairs. Feed Realm Management to alligators. Slice Realm Management with a katana.

I want to stat a monster that can survive a getting shot by an m16 at full auto for like 2-3 rounds but will still die to gunfire eventually.
What's the best way to go about it?

>>97414991
Injury Tolerance

>>97415045
>Injury Tolerance
Hmmm, good point.

>>97415045
>>97414991
That, or ablative DR

>>97411481
If copilot has IQ 13, I have IQ 18

What is the limitation I can use to have a DR that works against everything except for a specific weakness?
Like DR 5 against everything except silver.

>>97415148
I found it
it's the Bane limitation on GURPS Horror page 14
it's also mathematically WRONG

>>97409722
I enjoyed the 4 or 5 episode youtube series Ex Novo, by some guy called "Bertrand Reyna-Brainerd" but it's just a neat old recording of a short campaign, not a great display of GURPS mechanics.

So Im relatively new to ttrpgs. I always wanted to play. Fell in love with Gurps. Ive practiced a few 1v1 fights now, and I bought foundry and dungeoncraft to make maps and stuff. Hope I have something to share later.

Btw, returned to 4chan after a long hiatus. What's up with this captcha from hell.

>>97415896
the captcha gets easier if you're from a place with few spammers, and harder if you're from a place with a ton of spammers.
Also you have to allow cookies.
Like to me it takes a single click, and that's when it doesn't go "captcha not required", which is about 75% of the time.

File: kcco_vs_elid_by_mannaru.jpg (439.1 KB)

439.1 KB JPG

>>97414991
M16 has Dmg 5d, Acc 5, RoF 13, Rcl 2, and Shots 20+1. The average professional soldier will have skill 12.
Let's suppose the engagement range is 10 meters (-4 to hit) and the monster is doing nothing but standing there. The soldier takes one turn to Aim, then goes on All-Out Attack (Determined) for +1 to hit and blasts away at his full RoF for two turns: one turn at RoF 13 (+3 to hit) and the next turn at RoF 8 (+1 to hit). After that, he'll have to reload. He gets his full Acc bonus (+5) to the first volley for an effective skill of 17, and if using Follow-Up Shots from Tactical Shooting (which I always do), he gets half that Acc bonus (+2) to his next volley for an effective skill of 12. On an average 3d roll of ~10, the first volley will score 4 hits, and the next volley will score 2 hits, for 6 hits total.
The average roll of 5d is ~17. Your monster needs to tank at least 6 hits of 17 damage before going down, but not be impervious to rifle fire. I'd give the monster DR 15 and HP 25. Tanky enough that an average mag dump will barely drop it to HP/2, but not so tanky that it can stand up to the same assault twice without risk of keeling over. But really, you can go about this any way you want. You can drop DR and bump up HP, give it Injury Tolerance, slap on Unkillable 1, or whatever have you.

>>97415995
Thanks for the breakdown, this greatlu helps me figure out the exact numbers I want.

>>97415896
>What's up with this captcha from hell.
Relatively new. Kinda gay kinda okay. Better on mobile, I've found.

>>97412884
I would actually pay good money even to SJG for an update to HT which added a bunch of stuff which has been invented since the original was published.

>>97415304
>mathematically WRONG
Do you mean that if you follow the guidelines for Accessibility (PU8) then it seems like 'very common' is equivalent to 'half of everything', so it should have the same value both as a limited defense and a bane?

>>97415896
>What's up with this captcha from hell.
Bots are getting better, but I've got no idea how this is harder for them than reading distorted / semi-obscured text or recognising puppies. If you really want to experience the full horror, try it through a VPN, where it makes you do it five times and then tells you that you are banned at the end of it.

>>97417382
There's a pyramid article with a few things but a whole companion book could be written at this point & with Gun Stats there isn't a need for it to include firearms anymore.

>>97417382
>Do you mean that if you follow the guidelines f
It doesn't follow transitive properties.
Also has the retarded idea that the rare version should be a fucking perk

>>97417406
>perk
*quirk

File: 1754777234940265.jpg (70.9 KB)

70.9 KB JPG

I didn't like how How to be a GURPS GM advises adventure creation. It looks too railroaded. Any other alternative advice? I looked at the alexandrian but much of his advice like the node based design sounds more suited for a mystery adventure, not a military/partisan hunting session i have in mind.

>>97417406
>It doesn't follow transitive properties.
Explain, please. That seems like it might be interesting, but I'm a mathlet.

File: ACKS 2 Judge's Journal chapter 1 contents.png (24 KB)

24 KB PNG

>>97417622
ACKS 2 Judge's Journal chapter 1 has 24 pages of GMing advice.

>>97417622
>I looked at the alexandrian but much of his advice like the node based design sounds more suited for a mystery adventure, not a military/partisan hunting session i have in mind.
Ultimately, most good adventures are some combination of mystery, wargame, and character drama. Locating partisans is very much about putting clues together and narrowing down the field of possible options until you finally corner them. For that, mystery adventure advice is sound. Once you've found them, then you transition to more of a wargame scenario, but that doesn't need much advice: just give them whatever level of competence and equipment seems realistic, and have them use basic real-world tactics (which often boil down to 'some move into a position from which they can kill the enemy, while others are making it difficult for the enemy to move' in modern games). Character drama is simply a matter of populating your world with fun people, which usually means dysfunctional idiots, because everybody loves a loser who makes them look good in comparison.

Looking at GURPS but dealing with some serious info overload starting out. Any good ways to help deal with that and simplify it a bit? Like a youtube video series or something that just goes over it bit by bit?

>>97418938
You can familiarize yourself with basic game concepts by reading the glossary in the Campaigns book.

File: Alexander Class.png (93.5 KB)

93.5 KB PNG

>>97409447
Looked up the dropships, this is pretty cool, has 100 240mm missiles and can still drop an armoured platoon. If you assume LAV-III sized IFV's 90 tons gives you about 10 tons spare for combat robots to support the vehicles. A 240mm missile case could hold 5 TL10 Genius missiles, the dropship could nuke several major targets then still saturate the LZ with dozens of shaped charge missiles to autonomously hunt down enemy vehicles before your guys even hit the ground.

>>97418938
>but dealing with some serious info overload starting out.
Is there anything specific slowing you down?

>a youtube video series or something that just goes over it bit by bit?
I don't know if this does it "bit by bit" but I remember watching it like 4 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMk_hbTtU0I&list=PLqckpAfDuMM8XEVuncbGtV5U_4GPcdkyK&index=4

>>97418938
Try reading some of the gurps derivatives like dungeon fantasy and discworld, they present just the bits that are needed for their campaigns, should be easier to assimilate.

Finally releasing my Elder Scrolls conversion, creatively named "Ptolemy’s Elder Scrolls." It's substantial, and pieces of it should be useful even for those who won't play a TES game.
I was hoping I could upload it myself to the Mega, but I can't, so I'll ask Meganon to do that himself...
You can find the pdf and gcs files on the discord server, under Member Blogs. They include:
>Race, Birthsign, and Class templates.
>New languages, traits, talents, and perks.
>Lore-friendly specialties for skills like Hidden Lore and Animal Handling.
>New armors, equipment modifiers, narcotics, and a large potion list.
>A complete Ritual Magic spell compendium mapped to *The Elder Scrolls* schools.
>17 new spells from *The Elder Scrolls* universe.
>A revised Enchantment system based on Soul Gems.
>A custom Alchemy system for gathering reagents and brewing potions.
>Disease stats and rules for acquiring them.
>A comprehensive bestiary of over 100 enemies.

Hope you enjoy!

>>97421562
>discord
cringe

Making your own website isn't hard, you know. https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/services/hosting

>>97421562
Very nice anon.

>You can find the pdf and gcs files on the discord server

I will, politely, wait for it to be in the trove. The discord and forums make me want to blow my head off with a shotgun.

>>97421562
I like elder scrolls but I ran into a problem when I wanted to do a game where every detail I remembered had been creatively 'recontextualized' by the MMO that came out and it just annoyed the hell out of me.

>>97421566
Maybe one day.
>>97421594
Very understandable. Hopefully we can get it uploaded to the trove soon.
>>97421610
I just ignore the MMO

>>97421562
Cheers, finishing a project is always deserving of praise.
I'll check the mega later when I have more time.

>>97421678
It's insane to me how much the MMO is just pulling shit out of their ass to the detriment of lore concepts introduced in previous games. Any morrowind lore page on the UESP is now a sludge of shit.

>>97421610
The best way to interpret elder scrolls is to make the starting point for canon whichever game you think is best, and then ignore any lore which does not fit, even tonally, with it. For me this is Morrowind, anything added in a later game is not necessarily included as canon unless it meets morrowind's standards.

>>97422788
I agree, and it's Morrowind for me, too. The conversion is built with that approach, too.
>>97421566
>>97421594
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WIw-pp8LBOfO9JbeKCtgRxXv8wVrdN-w

Here you go. It's not the Mega, but it's not discord, either.

File: gurps henchmen two can die multiple characters per player.png (91.2 KB)

91.2 KB PNG

The multi-second turn is often used in tactics games (X-Com, XCOM, Xenonauts, Battle Brothers, etc.), but is frowned on in GURPS because it promotes "alpha strike" tactics, which are unbalanced, unrealistic, and bad for roleplaying.
However, has anybody tried playing a tactics game in GURPS? Perhaps the multi-second turn would work better in such a milieu.

>>97423057
>However, has anybody tried playing a tactics game in GURPS?
Isn't that just GURPS combat

>>97423081
I mean a tactics campaign with a zillion faceless "PCs" like Fire Emblem or Jagged Alliance, rather than a typical roleplaying-focused campaign.

>>97423122
I still think you could do one second turns rather than shoehorn multi-second turns in

>>97423122
gurps gets too slow past a certain number of PCs. NPCs are easy enough to simplify using various cinematic mook rules (only able to attack and not defend, only 1 hp, and so on), but full PCs slow things down.

>>97422886
Oh very cool. I'll check it out when I get home

>>97423057
I have played GURPS as a tactics game, wherein each player gets a decent number of units to control, and the one second turn is still optimal. It even works better, since actions normally viewed as "wasting" a turn don't feel as bad when you have multiple characters to control. The simple fact is that GURPS combat is built around turns taking one second, and that it breaks pretty severely when you allow more than one action.

Hey, elder scrolls adaptation guy
Your book says that it is based on Dungeon Fantasy RPG
but the Warrior sign gives "Extra Attack (Multi-strike) [30]"
Dungeon Fantasy RPG has Extra Attack already come with multi-strike, and still cost [25].

>>97423057
I don't really see the need for a multi-second turn. Most turns in X-Com are just "Move and Attack", which you can do in one turn in GURPS, albeit at a penalty. If you want to enable melee characters a bit more, then you might remove the skill cap on melee and swap it for a -1 penalty (as per the guidelines for Custom Techniques from Martial Arts). You might also allow techniques to buy off the Move and Attack penalty.
If you want to allow different combinations of maneuvers in a turn other than just Move and Attack, then you might want to borrow a house rule from >>97394849.
Many classes in X-Com 2 also get a capstone ability that enables them to perform extra actions under special circumstances. You can represent that with Altered Time Rate, Compartmentalized Mind, or Extra Attack with appropriate limitations.

>>97423465
>X-Com 2
*XCOM 2
Please remember that X-Com (original) and XCOM (reboot) are two different things.

>>97423519
Aight. I apologize for any misunderstanding.

>>97423332
Dungeon Fantasy, not DFRG.
And I meant more about assumptions of gameplay and general rules rather than being beholden to those exact traits.

>>97423057
If anything, a large number of combatants makes multi-second turns even worse. You end up being able to 'alpha strike' even worse, because you can not only move into position, aim, and attack before anyone can react, but do so multiple times in a row. That essentially makes whoever acts first the winner in close quarters fire-fights. It would be like getting total surprise every time.

>>97423638
Oh I see, nevermind then.

>>97423669
All good. Thanks for reading it lol

>>97423332
It says DF on my version, not DFRPG.
>>97422886
Thanks for sharing dude. Here's my thoughts:
You should say how much Magicka is worth per level on page 3. I know you compare it to FP and later on the Breton cultural template you can figure out its 3/level, but it helps with presentation and also to redirect possible players.
IQ = MP could be a fun campaign.
Are there many cold attacks in this world? I'm not paying 18 points for DR6 against Ice, anon.
I don't think you should give weapon talents at all. Players should be recommended to take those combat skills instead. I get the feeling you haven't played GURPS before.
Can't you use concept art from the games instead of AI slop? If it wasn't GURPS I wouldn't glance at it in case you also used AI for the text.
I don't care about magic or alchemy, so I skimmed the rest. I would give the archer Arm ST +1 to +3 because ST 11 is really poor and the Arm ST is actually realistic.

>>97423889
I'm trying to see if I can convince my friend to GM it for me

File: EKj7M0j.jpg (78 KB)

78 KB JPG

>>97423933
Thanks for giving it a look.
>You should say how much Magicka is worth per level on page 3. I know you compare it to FP and later on the Breton cultural template you can figure out its 3/level, but it helps with presentation and also to redirect possible players.
Yeah, that's an oversight on my part.
>Are there many cold attacks in this world? I'm not paying 18 points for DR6 against Ice, anon.
It protects against ice spells that do crushing or impaling damage, so it can be a common enough damage type.
>I don't think you should give weapon talents at all. Players should be recommended to take those combat skills instead.
I like them. They're flavorful, lore-friendly, and cheap enough that it's not a big cost if you go against type.
>Can't you use concept art from the games instead of AI slop?
No. Aside from legal bs, there wouldn't be consistent tone across the book. And the art looks good.
>I don't care about magic or alchemy, so I skimmed the rest. I would give the archer Arm ST +1 to +3 because ST 11 is really poor and the Arm ST is actually realistic.
All the class templates are suggestions. Players should be able to make and play what they want in proper TES fashion.
>>97424018
If he does, I'd love to hear how it goes!

>>97422886
Oh awesome. I'll check it out once I get home. I tried before but this was as far as I got before I swapped out to something else.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BZiNsqyRnmhpN2hAJbV3ub7dPT034ISJ/view?usp=drive_link

I like giving xp for concrete things instead of just giving some at the end of every session.
I want to like give 1xp per challenge/trap/fight they overcome (whether through guile or brawn), and then a big lump when they complete some objective, like 5xp. Would that be find with GURPS? Or is that too much XP per session?
For context, my sessions usually are around 4 hours and we normally do one fight/challenge per hour or so, some times it's faster, sometimes it's slower, and there's usually at least one objective achieved in a session.

This is for dungeon fantasy RPG btw

>>97422886
I'm going to use your shit in my ongoing DF game because I'm lazy
Many thanks

>Stun Grenade: Everyone in 10-yard radius must roll HT-5, at +5 for each of Protected Hearing and Protected Vision, or be stunned. Roll HT-5 to recover each turn. $30, 0.5 lb.
>HT -5 to recover
holy shit stun grenades are powerful

>>97427149
Yes
Unfortunately I only get to run fantasy games because my players don't care about modern or scifi

>>97427160
Nothing is stopping you from having an alchemical item with the same effects.

>>97427199
Nah it's just not the same as Felicia catgirls kicking down the door with 4mm PDWs in hand and tossing flashbangs

>>97427149
Is there a way to track hearing damage in GURPS?

>>97427282
Tactical Shooting has something on that IIRC
I can't check because I have to run a game in 50 minutes

File: 1752653278413696.png (81.7 KB)

81.7 KB PNG

>>97427313
Found it, page 34-35.

>>97427794
>a large-caliber handgun like a 9x19mm
>large-caliber
Huh?

>>97427794
>large caliber handgun
>like a 9x19mm parabellum

I am the Cult of the .45 (Tactical Shooting pp 5-6) and I say kill them all.

>>97427149
Stun weapons in general are incredible. TBF regular ass grenades also do really well at the same TL.

>>97427838
A grenade in a room is like the third funniest thing to you hurl at a party.

>>97427832
>>97427836
What did you guys say? Sorry, my ears are a bit damaged.

>>97427149
It seems absurdly good. Even with hearing protection and standing 10 yards away, most people will be stunned and take an average of 15 seconds to recover. That means a SWAT team flashbanging a room before entry will incapacitate half of their own team!
A 'typical' stun grenade is apparently about 160dB and 12M lumens.
According to Powers: Enhanced Senses, any noise above 130dB causes pain, but only while it lasts (far less than a second in this case). Hearing loss is automatic Hard of Hearing for a day, then a HT-3 roll and suffer it for 1d months on a failure. No rules for Protected Hearing helping with this. Distance helps with the HT roll up to 8 yards, then there is basically no effect beyond that.
Tactical Shooting has somewhat different rules: gunfire gives -4 or -5 to Hearing (vs. a flat -4 for Hard of Hearing) depending on whether outside or indoors (this is basically just different loudness levels, so a flashbang should be at least -5, probably more), lasting for 20-HT minutes, then allowing a straight HT roll every second (why bother with this detail?) which benefits from the +5 for Protected Hearing (which otherwise doesn't seem to help at all).
Going by High-Tech: Electricity and Electronics, the flash should be good for a HT-1 roll at 1 yard, causing -4 to vision for MoF minutes on a failure (and Blindness for MoF seconds on a critical failure). The roll becomes straight HT at 2 yards, and no roll required beyond that unless you are adapted to darkness. That seems fairly weak to me.
According to some internet sources, the concussive force of a flashbang's detonation can cause effects on the inner ear within 5 feet. This seems like about the only thing likely to result in outright physical stun and it shouldn't extend anything like 10 yards.
The easiest fix would seem to be changing the area effect to use the rules for dissipation (Basic Set, pp. 413-414) and the actual effect to just normal physical stun.

>>97427920
I think it's safe to assume solid walls and other large obstacles effectively block the area of effect.

>>97428265
That makes sense for the flash, but the noise should travel fine around corners.

>>97427033
The Basic Set suggests around 1-5 XP per game session, assuming that every game session is 2-4 hours. That's an average of 1 XP per hour of play. If you have one "scene" (battle, challenge, puzzle, etc.) per hour on average, then that should be in line with the book's suggestions. But don't let the book tell you what to do; it probably won't break anything if you want to give out XP at a faster or slower rate.

>>97428536
Thanks, it's good to know it won't break anything. I didn't really like the way the book recommended giving xp.

File: Loudness Levels.jpg (380.4 KB)

380.4 KB JPG

>>97427282
GURPS Powers: Enhanced Senses has detailed rules for using existing senses (as well as designing entirely new senses).
Rules for Hearing damage are on page 21.

>>97428617
Nevermind, >>97427920 beat me to it.

>>97369946
>pandemic
>economy on path to improvement but consumer spending is down because we got real fucking close there to a recession

Brother, you seem a little bit oblivious

File: gurps dungeon fantasy 24 finer points.png (34.3 KB)

34.3 KB PNG

>GURPS Dungeon Fantasy 24: LitRPG
kek

>>97429616
>character point draining monsters
oh no
This mechanic itself makes the book at least relevant for people wanting to emulate old school D&D, but the rest is kinda meh.

>>97429616
I don't think I will buy this. I already have better rules. The article in Pyramid #3/99 "What Doesn't Kill Me Makes Me Stronger" has rules for earning character points from kills. Also there is Pyramid #3/72 "Dungeon Fantasy Video Gaming" which has a table you roll on for a random benefit when you get a kill.

>>97428485
It's a bit complicated, a rifle being fired in a booth at an outdoor range doesn't sound nearly as loud as one being fired next to the booth even if the door is open

>>97365984
How do you calculate the point cost of (modern) armor?
HT's Frag Helmet is easy enough:
>DR 5, skull
That'd be Damage Resistance 5 (Partial, Skull Only, -70%) [18].
However, body armore is more complicated, here's HT's Assault Vest for example:
>DR 12/5* (higher against piercing and cutting), torso and groin
Presumably, torso and groin have to be bought separately since Partial doesn't discuss multiple protected body parts, so Partial (Torso only) at -10% and Partial (Groin only) at -30%.
Split DR has me stumped though. One approach would be to buy DR 5 Flexible, and add DR 7 against piercing, then DR 7 against cutting, but those aren't flexible; this works out to 99.2 points. Another would be to buy DR 12 against piercing and against cutting, then DR 5 Flexible against the remaining five damage types; this works out to 211.2 points. A tweak would be to treat "every other damage type" as Limited (Very Common), which would change the point cost to 140.8.

Anybody else hate Change Posture and make up houserules for it? I only require it if you're going from prone to kneeling, otherwise I just let people either drop to kneeling as a free action or take -1 movement point as part of a move to rise from kneeling

>>97433089
Unless I'm mistaken, you only use a ready to go from prone to kneeling, otherwise dropping prone/kneeling is a step or costs one movement point if you're moving.
Getting up from kneeling is costs your step, so you can't move on the same round.
There's also acrobatic stand to go from prone to standing, and if you crit success you can still attack on the same turn.

My personal house rule is to steal the 3e acrobatics technique called chest roll that allows you to go from kneeling to standing and still get your movement.
I'm also thinking of creating a cinematic version of Acrobatic stand that the default is -10 but allows you to do it as a step without needing a crit success.

>>97433225
I mean sure but I don't do that using step instead of moving nonsense, it bogs down the game. It actually doesn't even say RAW that you can Move and end up kneeling/rise from kneeling in the same turn unless I'm mistaken.

>>97433290
>RAW that you can Move and end up kneeling
that's in martial arts.
Rise from kneeling is a step, so you can't move on the same turn. Though you already said
>I don't do that using step instead of moving nonsense
so I guess that doesn't apply to you.
But to me it makes sense to me that some maneuvers take most of your second so you can't also move your entire movement.

>>97433300
Ah yeah we don't use MA because it would bog down the game even harder. The Basic Set rules would be okay if you were running anything other than Dungeon Fantasy - but - since DF games involve a lot of people dropping their packs and picking up their packs mid-combat, it's just going to stall the game

>>97433317
Martial arts is by far one of the best gurps books, I don't think it bogs down combat at all. Honestly, I'd say gurps is incomplete without it. The combat options added by MA are a must for any campaign that focus on melee combat.
>dropping packs
a free action if you have adventurer's backpack
>picking up
Can't say we ever needed to pick up the packs before the end of combat, usually people have the potion belt for anything they need mid-combat.
Also I think having to deal with excess encumbrance mid combat is part of the fun of dungeon fantasy.

>>97433355
I wouldn't use MA unless I were running something relatively low power level and realistic, personally. Tip Slashes work against fellow unarmored 16th century duelists, not against armored ghouls.
Encumbrance actually makes the movement part even worse IMO, your typical DF character may have a Move of 4 or even 3 when encumbered and if you're spending two turns even picking shit up, you're going to be left in a terrible position combat wise

>>97433391
All the techniques are just as relevant in DF (though I usually transform them into advantages using that pyramid article). And the expanded combat maneuvers and additional combat options really complete the basic set.

>>97433410
Which Pyramid article? I did allow TA for one of my players but I don't use most of it

>>97433438
Pyramid 3-044 - Alternate GURPS II (Skill to advantages)

>>97433487
Interesting, I guess you could use that to aid in creating a template for a race that has innate jumping ability without necessarily possessing the skill or going to full on Super Jump

>>97433521
By making a technique an advantage you can now attach limitations and enhancements, making it way easier to create special powers and abilities.
Also makes all the imbuement stuff more useful since you can turn them to ready advantages without needing the entire system weighting you down.

>>97433089
Why don't you use Crouching? Its a free action both ways, you just can't do it twice in a turn.

>>97433753
a) nobody remembers it exists
b) technically you can't pick stuff up in a combat crouch
c) limited use otherwise in a medieval tech level game

>>97418938
This video goes a bit into GURPS combat. Specifically ranged combat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0lmn_Acy6Q

>>97433089
>Anybody else hate Change Posture and make up houserules that are straight up already in the game?
As other anons said, you should check the expanded rules for Change Posture in Martial Arts. It's codified more nicely, and you don't need to use the entire book, anon.
>>97433993
>technically you can't pick stuff up in a combat crouch
It literally says you can. It's one turn to crouch and grab something on the ground. Then another to ready it. You could also rise from standing on the second turn. It's literally in the Ready in Combat section of the book.
>limited use otherwise in a medieval tech level game
I agree, but it's also the difference between a dead unarmed guy and a fighting man. It's on the player if he doesn't try it, however.
>>97424721
>I like them. They're flavorful, lore-friendly, and cheap enough that it's not a big cost if you go against type.
This dogshit opinion lives rent free in my head since you posted it.

>>97434706
>It's one turn to crouch and grab something on the ground.
No, you mean kneeling. B383 says kneeling, not crouching.

>>97434781
You're right. I got gaslighted. Both Martial Arts (p.104) and Gun Fu (p.10) say you can crouch to grab something from the ground as if it wasn't new information.
I'm sure this useful fix will not be in the revised Basic Set.

>>97434883
I guess technically you can pick up stuff from crouching then, it's not like I don't use the Wait rules from Tactical Shooting already

>>97434706
>This dogshit opinion lives rent free in my head since you posted it.
Lots of races in DF have bigger point taxes for things players may not use. I think you may just be a munchkin. When you make characters, do you ever give them points in things that flesh out their backstory despite not being useful for the campaign? Or are you 100% optimizing?

>>97434966
NTA but most of the races in DF are so shit I made my own versions.
I'm forever GM, so I can't be a munchkin btw

>>97433037
For multiple locations, use the rules for Either/Or Limitations (Power-Ups 8, p. 6). So Torso and Groin would be -3% (this is a stupidly bad deal, but at least better than buying the whole advantage twice).
All the assault vest's DR is flexible, so you can add that to everything.
Buy the base DR 5 with just Partial and Flexible.
Then you buy an extra DR 7 which works only against cutting or piercing. You can use Either/Or again, which would give -16%, or just treat any two damage types as 'very common' for -20%.
Total cost is something like:
DR 5 (Flexible, -20%; Partial, Torso or Groin, -3%) [20]
DR 7 (Flexible, -20%; Partial, Torso or Groin, -3%; Limited, Cutting or Piercing, -16%) [22]

>>97433037
>>97435011
Personally, I feel like DR is very overpriced in high TL settings which is why I stole this houserule from some halo game some guy posted the character creation info here
>Damage Resistance cost, and DR per level scales with Tech Level.
>TL 0-4=5/level
>TL 5 to 8 reduces the price by 1 until you get to TL 8 where 1DR = 1pt
>TL 9-10 you get 2 DR per pt
>TL 11-12 you get 3 DR per pt

>>97435069
I think that's reasonable but tank characters are still fucked, at least you can make a light armored car character now

>>97435122
>ank characters
Combining DR with Injury Tolerance: Damage resistance so you take 1/2 or less damage from every attack should make tanks decent.
Plus making DR cost 1 means that you get 5 ablative DR per point, so all that combined should allow anyone to make some tough tanks.

>>97424721
>And the art looks good.
Copium. Enjoy your bigheaded stumpy slop.
>>97434966
You're so wrong you don't even know by how much. I don't know if you read my post, even.
>This Talent adds to Shield, Spear, Broadsword, Two-Handed Sword, Axe/Mace, and Two-Handed Axe/Mace.

DX 12 [40].
Axe/Mace (DX+3) [8]-15; Broadsword (DX+3) [8]-15.
Worth 56 points.

DX 10. Nord Battlecraft 6 [30].
Axe/Mace (DX+5) [1]-15; Broadsword (DX+5) [1]-15.
Shield (DX+6) [1]-16; Spear (DX+5) [1]-15; Two-Handed Sword (DX+5) [1]-15; Two-Handed Axe/Mace (DX+5) [1]-15.
Worth 36 points. Each Skill at DX+5 or (E) DX+6 is worth 20 points. Talent and skills cost 36.
Starts with 84 points more than the rest of the players.

DX 12 [40]. Nord Battlecraft 2 [10].
Axe/Mace (DX+2) [2]-14; Broadsword (DX+2) [2]-14.
Shield (DX+3) [2]-15; Spear (DX+2) [2]-14; Two-Handed Sword (DX+2) [2]-14; Two-Handed Axe/Mace (DX+2) [2]-14.
Worth 62 points. Each Skill at DX+2 or (E) DX+3 is worth 8 points. Talent and skills cost 22. Starts with 26 points more than the rest of the players.

5 points to raise both shield and your weapon alone is stupid, on top of that you get a reaction bonus.
Dipshit.

>>97435342
You’re doing a white-room optimization exercise and pretending it’s a balance argument.

Yes, if someone intentionally dumps DX and stacks a broad Talent, they can get good point efficiency. That’s how Talents work.
What you’re ignoring is that DX isn’t “weapon skill points.” A DX 10 character is worse at every other DX-based roll in the game. You’re trading general competence for being good with a handful of combat skills. That’s an intentional tradeoff, not free points.
The Talent is there because it's racial and thematic, not a profession package, and the reaction bonus is there for flavor and social context.

If your only lens is vacuum optimization, sure you can break it. But you're a forever GM, right? You know a dozen ways to punish a player who wants to make a build like that, especially in a game with dangerous mages.
See, I knew you were an optimizing powergamer.

>>97436201
Didn't read what this is even about but surely you can cap Talents

>>97436201
>You’re doing a white-room optimization exercise and pretending it’s a balance argument.
I included the last example so I'd know you don't even read my posts. Read the last two lines of my post.
Dipshit.
>The Talent is there because it's racial and thematic, not a profession package, and the reaction bonus is there for flavor and social context.
Do Nords raised in different civilizations get the talent? That's what your racial template implies.
>See, I knew you were an optimizing powergamer.
You didn't know shit. You didn't even notice that this was an issue in your last post.
Dipshit.

>>97436223
I go with max of 6 like DF because it fits the power-fanrasy genre, but of course a GM can always reduce that if they want something more grounded.
>>97436244
I read it. Your last two lines don’t change the argument, they just restate the same optimization premise with different numbers.
Yes, the racial template implies cultural norms. That’s intentional. If a GM wants Nords raised outside that culture, they can remove or swap the Talent. That’s how GURPS racial templates have always worked. If you take issue with biological and cultural features being present in a race template and think you can't do something about it yourself, separate them out.
You’re also still treating DX as a pile of weapon points and ignoring every other DX-based roll in the system. That’s the core tradeoff you keep refusing to acknowledge.
You don’t like the design philosophy. That's fine.
But repeating “dipshit” isn’t an argument, and it doesn’t turn a standard Talent tradeoff into a balance flaw.
I’m comfortable with the design. You’re free not to use it.
>inb4 I won't because it's dumb!
That's cool too. You don't have to like it.

>>97436338
I'm the forever GM here >>97434982
And I think the talent is bad from a completely different angle than the other anon.
I don't like weapon talents in general. You really only need one weapon skill so weapon talents are pointless 99% of the time, except for the 1% when they're way too good.
That said he is being a huge whiny bitch about this for no fucking reason, no idea what caused him to get so triggered over a racial talent.

For what it's worth, outside of this one talent I liked the rest of your work anon.

>>97436338
>they just restate the same optimization premise with different numbers
>design philosophy
yes because "don't you care about character flavor?" in one post and "you're optimizing it too much!" in the next means you know what you're talking about. Get the fuck out of here.
>That’s the core tradeoff you keep refusing to acknowledge.
No. In the sensible last example I showed you that the player gets 26 extra points because he has the talent and he also has DX 12. There's no trade off and I don't need to refute a point that you can't even make.
In my last sentence I showed you why raising to combat skills (which are rolled often per session and in usually in tandem), each costing you four points to raise individually, and you raise them by spending 5 points for the talent, is stupid.
>I’m comfortable with the design. You’re free not to use it.
If your argument is "it's wrong but others can fix it", then you got the worst of Bethesda down. 87 pages of bait well played anon.
You don't play GURPS. Your mental gymnastics amaze me.
>>97436374
Agreed but he's dumb and he refuses to be sensible.

>>97436374
Thanks anon, I'm glad to hear it.
>>97436413
This was framed as a flavor objection before you pivoted to an optimization spreadsheet.
GURPS is a customizable system. “GMs can change or remove things they don’t like” is how it’s meant to be used.
My players liked the Talents. I like them. They’re lore-friendly and genre-appropriate.
It’s fine if you don't like them.
But having a meltdown over design differences is just pathetic.

>>97436940
>This was framed as a flavor objection before you pivoted to an optimization spreadsheet.
This is why you piss me off so badly. You continue to make the shittiest responses to everything: Talents are good despite being weak. Talents are good despite being OP. You never said anything about DX and how it's a trade off! You keep changing your mind!
No. I've been making the same point over and over.
You don't know how to read, and you would rather make up a story in your head. You can roll 1d216 for all I care but you're still wrong about everything you say each time.
Fuck off.

File: 1758532437616401.png (152.6 KB)

152.6 KB PNG

>>97437302

>>97437302
>waah I didn't like this thing in shit I got for free so I'm gonna chimp out
Nigger

We've never used the "time use sheets". Are we playing wrong?

>>97437577
Yes. It has been know for many decades that you cannot have a meaningful campaign if strict time records are not kept.

>>97435342
How often are going to be using a spear, a broadsword and an axe, and would you really be that much stronger than someone who only uses a single weapon?

>>97438341
How often is anyone going to use a spear or axe in general