/gurpsgen/ - GURPS General

Hmm. OK.

Been reading thaumatology and thinking about how I want to handle magic for an upcoming fantasy game I'm considering running.

Is there somewhere with a few more fleshed out magic system examples?

I've got a few ideas, but if I could find a couple of built examples it would make things easier.

Though I do have some thoughts on what if like to have it do.
>Spellcasting should come either from manipulating the laws of nature (by mages who either memorized the rules and can use existing spells, or who understand the fundamentals enough to build their own spells or improvise in the fly), or gifted to humans in exchange for either ongoing service, or as payment for a favor, by powerful supernatural creatures, such as demons, fey, elementals, or spirits.
>Magic has high energy costs, and as such is is cast mostly using external sources, such as trying to channel ambient mana(something that should require a roll), rather than relying on your own fatigue/energy.
>Slowed casting, such that it's mostly not a hand to hand combat skill. Ideally the caster should be spending a few turns gathering mana, and then a turn or two more actually casting the spell. Simple spells would end up being potentially viable in hand to hand combat because of their low or nonexistent mana requirements.
>In the case of magic from a demon pact or the like, mana channeling might work differently.
>Magic would likely be keyed off will. Granted magic might be keyed off health.

>What options would I need to choose to make that happen?

Are there rules for designing new spells that I overlooked somewhere?

Anyone have any stories or adventures from running a Mesolithic/Neolithic/Ice Age-inspired game in this system? Or games that had cultures like pic related with no metal-working before their contact with the outside world?

So I have a mage with sunbolt from the Magic book, I wanna go around and pew pew people in combat with it like the dick I am.
However, if I do this isnt there gonna be a prety high chance of me eventually summoning a demon mid combat by accident?

From what you want, you're looking for Path of Magic.

Do you mean ritual path magic?

>Spellcasting should come either from manipulating the laws of nature (by mages who either memorized the rules and can use existing spells, or who understand the fundamentals enough to build their own spells or improvise in the fly), or gifted to humans in exchange for either ongoing service, or as payment for a favor, by powerful supernatural creatures, such as demons, fey, elementals, or spirits.

Mostly a flavour concern, but would work for distinguishing what each type can do and what advantages they need - Wizards having Thaumatology and magic skills capped by a Science skill, Gifted getting it from their Patron but having access to exotic things that scientific magic doesn't yet understand.

>Magic has high energy costs, and as such is is cast mostly using external sources, such as trying to channel ambient mana(something that should require a roll), rather than relying on your own fatigue/energy.

Ritual Path Magic works like this - and you can do things like despoiling the land for more power, and sacrificing animals.

>Slowed casting

Another thing that RPM does. Very slow casting, unless you have an Adept advantage (which is perhaps something that a Patron entity can grant for their Paths), but either way it's better to prepare precast spells and long-term effects - unless you're damned good.

>In the case of magic from a demon pact or the like, mana channeling might work differently.

I think both RPM and Thaumatology had "Black Magic" - might be in Pyramid 66, which has lots of great RPM ideas - where you could draw energy from "dark forces"... for a price.

Dungeon Fantasy also differentiates "clerical" magic, by having it based on reaction rolls - might be worth a look.

I went insane for a moment and produced a spraying fire cheat sheet with two equations for use when only ruler is available as well as example of how it all works. The logic of it sounded sane and I ran a few tests, so it seems to work, but feel free to comment on it and point out any mistakes.

Thanks! I'll look it up!

Now qn 2: of I want to include magic items, which players can definitely lose, but which are interesting and powerful, rather than just +numbers, how would you go about making them and is there a source with premade magic items I should look into?

Interesting examples include the dragon balls, the Chinese zodiac talismans from Jackie Chan adventures, the demon chi artifacts, also from Jackie Chan, and (less so) the oni masks from Jackie Chan. Well throw in jack sparrows compass and the one ring as a couple more examples.

Basically artifacts/wondrous items, and things that come in sets, for the plot hook of trying to collect them all.

Yes.

GURPS 3e had 3 big Magic Items books, which are all basically fine in 4e rules and don't usually need any updating. Some are very neat trinkets, some are ridiculously OP like fucking hell dear gods the horror, and some are both neat and powerful.

RPM lends itself to making one-shot magic items and potions, and it has rules for making permanent items as well. It's a very freeform system, so it can totally have lots of interesting effects.

Dungeon Fantasy also has a couple of artefact books as well.

GURPS Cabal has some interesting magic items - and a really cool mystic cosmology - with my favourite item ever, the Uraeus of Tefnut.

I wouldn't have thought to check cabal. Thanks!

Oh, and GURPS Warehouse 23 (inspired by Indiana Jones, and similar to Warehouse 13 but more fnord) has a ton of neat things.

I sometimes like to dare people to include this one in their game... but I don't think it's worked yet...

Second formula can be simplified to (MHD farthest + MHD closest)/2

I have insanely strong Deja Vu right now

Is there a GURPS 4 equivalent to Runequest guilds or empires?

Jesus Christ that's a mean item.

Neat idea, though if I only had a ruler, I'd just use it to draw a conical template.

Thanks, updated it a bit and added a picture for prettiness.
I made it for my personal use with Roll20 and such, since I had issues with that during my last session.

NPCs check their moral SL under various circumstances. On failing, they typically attempt to disengage and break contact with attackers, taking wounded comrades with them if they can without risking themselves.

Checks, and modifiers..

After taking 1/4th HP in damage at +1
After any major wound at -2
Successful Intimidation. (Penalty equal to degree of success)
Losing more then 1/4th the starting group without inflicting any hostile casualties at -1
Losing more then 1/2 the starting group at -3
Leader lost at -2

Someone with the Leadership skill can try to rally broken moral with a skill check modified by worst penalty suffered by anyone fleeing. It's an action on their turn.

Irregular troops, raiders, milita, ect tend to have about 10, trained troops get 12, veterans get 14, fanatics/madmen are immune. Because EVERYONE in a group checks at the loss thresholds they tend to snowball once people start running and can have a whole group of attackers rout.

I like the rules because it encourages players to take out leaders first and means that human/sophont foes don't fight to the last man and to the death. It also means the players can face more foes then they'd think, as injury and panic will send opponents fleeing.

Nice.

House rules, or is that actually from somewhere?

What's SL? Skill Level?

SL = Skill Level, basically just "roll under this on 3d6"

Just a house rule.

How do you determine their morale SL?

Eyeball it, pretty much.

Irregular troops, opportunistic raiders, criminal gangs and mobs get 10. They might fight though pain but without a leader to hold them together they break and run fairly fast.

Regular troops, hardened criminals and the like get 12. This makes them a lot steadier and less likely to run away en-mass unless things are fucked.

Disciplined veterans get 14. Even major wounds or massive losses might not make them flee. If they do leave, it's likely to be a controlled, fighting withdraw or negotiated surrender rather then rout.

Crazed people and true fanatics just don't roll moral. A player might figure something out to drive them off, but just killing them won't do it.

Personally, never been there, but the best Fallout/post-apoc rule of thumb is "Take a local landmark, blow it half to hell, make survivors worship the ruins somehow"

so if theres a fish cannery? everyone has food, but everyone has lead poisoning
Local monument? Modify it in an amusing way, cover it in mutants
fun geographical feature? Its now on fire, and full of nuclear bees.

After a brief googling session, I'd say Social Engineering: Pulling Rank and/or Dungeon Fantasy 17: Guilds. Both books focus on how the PCs operate as part of a larger organization, how that organization can help them, and what the difference is between the various ranks. SE:PR is the "generic" version with all the rules in place while DF17:G includes a series of premade organization types (e.g. thieves' guild, noble court, mercenary company, extended family/clan, craftsman guild, etc.) relevant to a fantasy D&D-esque setting and does a lot of the decision-making for you; it also includes only the more relevant and streamlined rules.

Just to nitpick. You should use Effective Skill (or ES if you have to). That's the term in the rules for 'roll under this on 3d6.'

Have you thought about merging your morale guidelines into fright checks? I use fright checks for morale with very similar modifiers to what you have.

I think Social Engineering also has rules for morale checks with detailed modifiers, based on Reaction Rolls.

Does Maryland have any cryptids or urban legends? Good source for unique mutant critters.

Riverboat settlements that drift up and down - they farm or hunt on land, but it's too dangerous to actually live there, perhaps because the local supercritter hates large bodies of water (or can't cross them, if it's a more supernatural apocalypse).

Crater lakes filled with altered life.

A city filled with gribblies, where the only safe passage is the waterway.

A settlement that's grown over the top as a giant ramshackle bridge, using it for hydroelectricity and to collect tolls.

Whoops, turns out that was for RQ: Guilds, Factions, and Cults only. RQ: Empires looks like it has more of a nationbuilding aspect to it. I think the go-to for this is a combination of Mass Combat, Boardroom & Curia, and the article "City Management" from Pyramid #3/54 Social Engineering.

MC is useful because, well, nations have armies, either to go a-conquering or to defend themselves from their asshole neighbors that also want to go a-conquering. There have been some supplements to MC -- a Pyramid article that transplats MC to a grid for more tactical control, and another article that includes more detailed rules for make new MC units (including translating the PCs to Hero units!) -- so feel free to ask if you want more info on those.

B&C is dedicated to the logistic of organizations -- their manpower, their budget, skills of the members, etc. -- and includes rules for setting up/expanding organizations. In this case, the orgnaization should have the Governing type (possibly among others).

CM is useful because the empire will likely start as a small independent city-state the PCs will have to govern directly. While B&C handles the "big picture" aspect of budget and expenditure, CM covers more detailed aspects like civil construction, government projects, and other more "local government" things. It probably won't be super-relevant later on, as the PCs are likely to have someone else rule over the individual towns while they focus on larger matters, but it can be useful in the beginning.

Do you know of a RQ trove or would you up those two somewhere? I don't seem to have them.

You may be thinking of the Loyalty score for hirelings/allies/etc. Reaction rolls already tend to cover morale anyway under Combat/Potential Combat Situations.

Turns out it even says so explicitly (p. SE71):
>If the PCs aren't seeking an end to the violence, a reaction roll for the NPCs can serve as a "morale check" if the fight is turning against them. On a Good or better reaction, an NPC or group will flee or surrender; they will not offer friendship, and their further reactions have no bonuses. The NPC's leader may make a Leadership roll to keep them in the fight -- success gives -1 to the reaction roll, or -2 on a critical success.

I'd probably have NPCs roll after a Major Wound and have groups roll after some losses or an important loss liek their commander if organized. There's a list of modifiers I'm too lazy to type out a couple pages back at the beginning of the chapter (p. SE68)

Sorry, I don't have any RQ books. I just googled the titles to find out what they were about and to figure out what GURPS books would work best for emulating them.

What the everloving fuck is up with Supersensitive? It's basically a permenant -1 to IQ and DX that jumps up to -2 reasonably often, but it's priced at only -15. If you try and remake this disadvantage using the recommendations for making your own disadvantages, you're looking at -40 at the very least!

yeah, thats always bugged me too; why is it so cheap, but provides such a terrible flaw?

Maybe to balance Combat Reflexes which is exceptionally cheap?

I think there's a perk floating aroudn that allows you to re-roll a critical failure; if the second roll is a success, it's just a normal failure.

However, demon summoning is a pretty low chance, as it requires a critical failure and THEN a roll of 18 on the miscast table; if Sunbolt is your main spell, you should have it at 16+ at least, so you would need to roll two 18s in a row to accidentally summona demon or do something else equally destructive. That comes out to a 0.214% chance of occuring, or 1:466.

Planning on running one soon. There's the 3e Iceage book that may be worth a look, plus the plethora of "Caveman vs. Astronaut" arguements on the forums.

Considering running a State of Decay game in GURPS. I'm attracted to GURPS because of the realistic gun mechanics, the rules for digging (good for building a stronghold against zombies) and the fact you can build ordinary people. I'm figuring 50 point builds.

Thoughts? Also how to make headshot zombies practical with the -7 to hit head? I know a lot of aiming will be involved but these people,will barely have any gun training.

Be careful with headshots and zombies, I think the GURPS default of assuming a zombie is "undead" means most bullets just pass through them like rotten pig lard, and very little injury is incurred.

I dont follow your logic
+1 to active defenses != -1 to all DX and IQ skills when in the presence of people
I dont even see where you came up with the example...

I believe shotguns have better chances to hit due to multiple projectiles per shot, but I don't quite remember how does it work.
Anyway, noobs are going to aim for torso or even worse - shoot on general direction for random hit location.

No defense rolls for the Z's? A -7 sucks ass, but it sucks a lot less if a defense roll is not going to take away your lucky hit. Also, aim.

of all things, read up on the GURPS Zombies supplement for 4e; lots of discussion in there on all the different plavors of zombie under the sun. You should be able to find a listed example in there on what you want your zombies to be like

yeah, an all out attack +1, braced +1, aim +3 or better... it can cut some of the penalty off, but zamboz be zamboz man

Unless you're dealing with way too many zombies, you'll probably have time to aim, and can all out attack without much risk.

Yeah, a shotgun's an excellent choice - anything that isn't a handgun would be, really.

If it's a horror game -- and since you're combining zombies and low point vlaues, I assume it is -- the difficulty of shooting the skull is actually a good thing; you don't want your horror elements getting blown the fuck out by an untrained scrub.

The short version of shotguns: it's the same as a burst of automatic fire, including the to-hit bonus for high RoF, but with Rcl 1.

>plethora of "caveman vs astronaut," arguments
I'm new here, and new to this system. Explain a bit?

The best stress test of a system is to pit Cavemen (TL0 dudes) and Astronauts (TL8+) against each other in the same situaiton, and see who wins. Sometimes its a case of a fight to the death, other times, a footrace or the like.

What typically happens?

GURPS's capacity to handle a bunch of different settings means you can use the rule set to not only accurately stat out both cavemen and astronauts, but have them fight as well. "Caveman vs. Astronaut" was originally a joke from the Buffy spinoff series Angel where two characters were bickering over who would win in a fight: a caveman with the strength and skills honed by his rough paleolithic life, or the highly trained and conditioned modern-day astronaut (no weapon!). Since then, it sort of entered "nerd culture" and still rears its head occasionally (pic related).

Its basically Batman vs. Superman but (theoretically) more based in reality and less on the whims of whoever is writing the respective character at the time.

Realistically? It devolves into the minutea of the system with people arguing how to more accurately stat out the combatants.

And here's the original source for posterity's sake.

God, the writing in Joss Whedon's shows really shines over the years

Come on, user, what happens next? I must know!

The "caveman vs astronaut" thing is a way to say that GURPS can fit characters from (m)any background(s) into one system, and have them fight realistically.

The astronaut wouldnt be able to "outthink" a guy who spend all his life hunting and ambushing animals bigger than him.

Talking in GURPS terms, the caveman would have several skills at a professional level, that would be FAR more useful in a fight. He even knows how to use rocks to kill.

How many points/disads do the caveman and the astronaut have?

Depends on the astronaut. If it's the Air Force vet who pilots the craft, he'll be in peak physical condition and know a thing or two about fighting. But if it's the biologist along for the ride...

It doesn't matter the astronauts formation. The caveman knows how to hunt, ambush, move silently... Now, if you pit him against a cop or a soldier, I would take my money from the caveman.

>Cops
>Soldiers
user, stop masturbating to military men. Most of them are as shit as you. Take their guns away and pin them alone (you know, without backup, something both desperately needs) and it's a street brawl of a chaotic mess.

Guys pls stop. It was a joke and now you're actually fighting about it. You've been memed.

Thats because some o fus are cavemen and others are astronauts.

But which group is better than the other, user?

And a caveman is somehow better?

By virtue of their lack of modern calorie input and healthcare?

They aren't knights. They won't have extensive training and practice in fighting other humans, and they won't have much combat experience either - because it's way too dangerous to do anything more serious than assert dominance. They're scavengers and hunters, and savagery counts for something, but it isn't a skill.

But that's the question, isn't it?

If you keep an eye on the thread, I'll get you a link in a couple hours.
Both books largely focus on building the organization (guild or empire) as an entity and controlling it, but guilds also has a section on how pcs fit into the organization. I'll look into the sources you suggest.

You know what? We should *actually* fight over it, as in, a proper fecht. I'm pretty sure there are stats for cavemen and astronauts.

We'd just need to establish equipment for both.

>street brawl of a chaotic mess
Then I'ill just keep masturbating to muscled, hairy and agressive cavemen.
It all reduces on how we imagine the cavemen. I usually think that "primitive" cultures are as advanced as ours, but in different ways. Cavemen are not animals, they are as intelligent and resourceful as modern humans, they just have different skills.

Willingly >memed

Returning to the "serious" conversation. I want to reduce a little bit the lethality of a scifi game, but return to normal lethality if PCs insist on being careless and screwing up.

I was thinking in having a shield that grants you some DR for a few attacks and then it has to reload. Like 2-2-1: 2DR for two attacks, then 1 and then 0. This DR would add to any armour DR.

The point is to grant them one or two turns to amend their mistakes.

How does shields affect fights against cavemen?

The same way shields affects fights for anyone: hard cover blocks incoming damage, you don't get hurt.

I was talking about sci fi shields. The ones that make you glow in a faint blue light when you get hit.

>equipment
But then, if we give the caveman weapons, we have to stat a Russian cosmonaut with their fancy gun.

The astronaut could have whatever they keep in their reentry pod. Say, they've just washed ashore in the liferaft (and happen to be in good health) and run afoul of a young hunter (also in good health).

I love you guys.

cave men win, I agree with spike.

I'm not sure 2DR matters that much in sci-fi game, I mean, damage values are huge.
Make it defence bonuses instead, like regular shields, maybe? A good +2 to dodge once, then +1, then 0.
Or a Luck advantage, defensive only, so they reroll their dodge every hour.

2 DR can stop pebbles, not lasers. You gonna need more DR.

I was trying to point out that costs don't always have to line up and make sense. Combat Reflexes was just the first example to come to mind. I probably could have put it better. But let's see how wrong I am and whether my intuition stands up to logic. How do the two cost out?

Let's say "any sapient beings within 20 yards" is a -20% limitation (I think it would be higher, but this way makes Supersensitive more expensive). Skills Only is -10%. Also bundled in is Detect (humans, common; vague) [10]

So Supersensitive is DX -1 (when sapient beings are within 20 yards, -20%; skills only, -10%) [-14], IQ -1 (people w/in 20 yards; skills only) [-14], Detect [10]. that's pretty close to -15 points. That's not an exact model of the disadvantage but modelling it more accurately requires juggling the limitation percentages and is more prone to disagreement. Even if the modelling makes Supersensitive work out to -30 points it's still only on par with how unbalanced Combat Reflexes is as a package deal.

Combat Reflexes is Enhanced Block [5], Enhanced Dodge [15], Enhanced Parry [10], +1 Fast-Draw Skill [1 to 4], Fearlessness 2 [4], and some other small benefits that are probably worth a perk or two. That's at least 35 points.

I'll have to roll some combat rounds to calibrate it then. The thing I want is an energy shield that reduces damage for a few rounds and then depletes. "It'll keep you alive for enough time to find a cover."

+dodge or luck would be more useful as cybernetic implants. But I'll consider the alternative if shields don't seem to work.

Also, fluff is not strictly necesary but I like when I can come up with plausible stuff. I was thinking in several shield generators distributed over the head and the torso, proyecting a soft magnetic field. When the generators detect an incoming projectile or beam, they can strenghten the field and emit plasma or other particles in order to reduce the impact.

What you want is a halo Spartan shield, right?

It absorbs *all* damage until it depletes.

I wouldn't model that with DR at all, I'd give it enough temporary hit points do the job.

The HP depletes and the PC then has their armor and whatnot as a fallback.

If they don't get hit for like 30s to a minute, it recharges.

>"It'll keep you alive for enough time to find a cover."

My advice would be to use the standard conformal force screens from Ultra-Tech, but make the DR ablative rather than semi-ablative. 60 ablative DR means a few laser pistol shots will bounce off but the second round of combat might involve taking a hit for real. It's a nice way to get them to learn how to do combat, since it acts like a HP cushion to show them how quickly HP can evaporate when hit.

>It's a nice way to get them to learn how to do combat, since it acts like a HP cushion to show them how quickly HP can evaporate when hit.

I'm more for a SW/ME kind of shield, not temporary invulnerability. But temporary HP seem to be a good way to model them.

Damn, I have to start reading that book before making questions. I still have not enough knowledge of the material to come up with a bok that could have the rule I need.

It's a *lot* of stuff to read, but I feel glad that I have my back covered for almost anything I can come up with.

I use a similar system but I use the average Fright Check number of a unit as the morale check and a few more modifiers. I have a full write-up at: southernstylegurps.blogspot.com/2016/02/npc-morale.html

>temporary HP seem to be a good way to model them.
a point of Damage Resistance with ablatative is 99% a Hit Point anyways

I did a similar thing for my first game ever(TM); they were given 'experimental force field projectors' after I chewed through a WW2 era-spy with a few bursts from SMG's in an ambush.

DR 30 (force field, ablatative, hardened(+1), bullets only, gadget[belt])

I'd say including Detect is a little redundant; you know when you're suffering a penalty and how big the penalty is, especially when it's something as blatant as tumultuous psychic noise in your head.

Also the penalties continue, so a further -1 to IQ/DX with increasingly strict accessibilities.

Plus, yeah, the inevitable squabbling over percentages for the attribute penalty.

I agree it probably is redundant but it was explicitly in the description as a beneficial side effect and is written up almost exactly how vague detect works only without having to roll to detect (which I probably should have included as an enhancement but didn't).

Either way, even if I'm off by 100% Supersensitive is still only just as mispriced as Combat Reflexes. And those aren't the only two.

But it's not like the whole concept of points for advantages and disadvantages is flawed just because some of them aren't priced according to my view of what's right. I can overlook those little details in that light.

must be a holdover then, from the 3e conversions

Like how vampiric bite got clarified into the leech advantage?
Or how psychic talent got clarified into talents
Or how this that and the other advantage held over got left in at that point total for 'reasons'

I'll personally be putting Supersensitive up to about -30 base cost now. And maybe Combat reflexes up to 25...

Delusion("One point in gardening skill is as useful as one point spent on the Infinite Ammo perk.")

It really comes down to muscle here. You've got to give it to the astronaut. He's going to have 8" and 90 pounds on a old-stone-age hunter/gatherer from steady, high nutrition during development.

I though Combay Refleces was explicitly underpriced to make combat easier; the devs consider it THE advantage for any fighting character, which means most adventurers and thus most PCs.

I don't know if I like reaction rolls for this. Being less likely to surrender because the bad guy is ugly and spits chewing tobacco casually on the ground seems stupid.

I wonder if hunter-gatherers didn't have better, more reliable nutrition than middle-ages people that near-completely relied on crops and seasons. I mean back then, a good season meant an economic boom and a bad one a recess, and it happened all the fucking time.

So if you run a fighty campaign, should you make it free?