/gurpsgen/ GURPS General: I don't know what I am doing edition

I think its 50% from worse body DR so modern tank like T-72 has 82.

Not the original user, but I love the idea too. I'd avoid shamelessly stealing from Dead Space unless I'm explicitly running GURPS Dead Space, though. Which implies coming up with new innocent mining tools turned weapons of gruesome violence, new baddies, a different plot, and maybe a different genre altogether. I love dead space, but the one thing it fails to deliver is that the character is completely unsuitable for his context, I think GURPS can pick up the slack in this area.

Yea, Dead Space is more of a light Horror Survival genre and what I'm trying to run is a High CP, constant action, high octane game. I am just wanting to get a neat story hook, and since I am not too used to Ultra tech some pointers on what super science shits too broken

In my campaign, there is going to be a band of royal gunslingers that utilize magic bullets as part of their arsenal. As a result, I want to be certain about how a specific character concept would work. Here is the start of what is hopefully a comprehensive guide on customizing Ritual Path Magic charms for "gun mages". I beseech experts on RPM and GURPS in general to chip in.

--- --- ---

Whether you are simply going through with a plain ritual or utilizing a charm to cast a ranged missile effect, the offensive "External (Indirect) Damage" magic possesses Acc 3, Range 10/100, RoF 1 and Rcl 1 by default. The Innate Attack Skill (or DX default) is used to throw it.

Here is where it all starts to get tricky.

Page 27 says "It is legal to turn a bullet or arrow into a charm; the trigger
is “when shot into a target.” If the shot misses, the charm dissipates
when it hits the ground; otherwise, it goes off once in
contact with the subject! There is rarely a need to include a
range (p. 18) modifier on the spell, as it is considered delivered
via touch."

Let us say that a character skilled at Ritual Path Magic attempts to aid his monster hunting friend armed with a Thompson/Center Contender (an Acc 3 compeition single-shot pistol in GURPS High-Tech) by converting some of his .44 Remington Magnum rounds into 4d burning "External (Indirect) Damage" charms.

1. Do the rounds deal their normal 5d-1pi+ damage in addition to the 4d burning bequeathed by the enchantment?

2. If the enchanter decides to bump up the Range (see Page 18) of the spell itself (4d burning in this case), does that affect how far the mundane projectile itself will fly? What happens if you apply Enhancements such as Cone or Surprise Attack to the spell on the bullet...do they only come into the play once the bullet itself would hit the target, or do they affect the attack the moment the bullet leaves the barrel?

Better yet: is it possible to build a firearm from the ground up that does nothing but shoot "charm bullets" who's sole effect is whatever the gun mage enchanted into them? Think of this as a sort of "arcane shotshell" that is expended once the magic goes off.

Is this a straight up Engineer (Small Arms)/TL roll followed by some sort of Thaumatology roll?

If so, how do you determine statistics such as Acc and 1/2D plus Maximum range? Is it safe to say that the range of any dedicated "charm bullet" spells would also be Acc 3, Range 10/100, RoF 1 and Rcl 1 by default?

Most importantly...would the spell's Acc and the firearm's Acc "stack"?

>Banestorm

I just love how the setting book tries to convince GM's not to 'contaminate' the Banestorm setting with technology.

Even though the thing that separates Banestorm from other settings is that there is a portal to earth.

Pretty sure that literally every other Banestorm campaigns ends up about fighting over the resurgence of gunpowder into society.

1) Yes. The bullet remains a bullet, and potentially lethal, when Charmed. If you want to avoid killing someone you'd have to get rubber rounds and avoid head, spine, vitals, or just aim for the leg with cold loaded .22LR like some kind of asshole that thinks that is a funny way to deliver a Healing charm.

2) The bullet, generally, triggers on impact. If you instead trigger it "when fired" you could enhance the bullet's range and make it guided, but I'd strongly suggest not making it explode at that point: It would go off in the gun, instead of at the target.

Enhancements go off at the bullet's point of impact. If you make your fire Explosive, it explodes there, same with a cone or jet.

You could make a Charm gun, but you'd need to use Range penalties with it because it would be casting spells. Or you could make a weapon intended to shoot harmless projectiles, like a Nerf gun, and use it to fire charmed projectiles.

Am I the only person that likes my fantasy with guns?

>If the enchanter decides to bump up the Range (see Page 18) of the spell itself

It wouldn't do much unless you wanted an AoE charm bullet effect. The spell originates from the charm itself, so contact effects don't need to worry about it.

Yeah, outside of Abydos, the Underground Engineers vs the Ministry of Serendipity is the most interesting plot thread in the book.

Of course, inside of Abydos, I find it hard to believe that the Ministry has any real power - so, given the constant existential threat of Megalan crusaders, all you need to do is show how their undead labour synergizes wonderfully with more modern application.

>undead labour synergizes wonderfully with more modern application.

Plus, easy creation of semi-intelligent robots is something that TL8 would have a hard time upsetting.

Necromancers wouldn't lose much societal power at all when it's their creations staffing the production lines or otherwise substituting for a huge amount of low-skilled work.

In fact, Abyos might find it needs MORE skeletons than its own population can provide...

I like Action!

Does anyone know what the MSRP of the Dungeon Fantasy box and screen will be?

So, I'm trying to build a paladin of sorts who gets increases to his stats and a couple of exotic abilities so long as he follows his Paladin Code. I can see using Pact on the advantages, but using it for attributes themselves feels overly cheap and cheesey. Any thoughts on other ways to handle this?

Attribute improvements are like any other advantage; there's nothing wrong with popping Pact (or any other applicable limitation) on. However, if you *really* don't like that, treat it as an Alternate Form; you transform into your powerful paladin mode (henshin posing optional) and that is what has the Pact limitation.

Sounds perfectly fine to use Pact to me. Some people are rewarded with Power Investiture (which include a Pact-like element). As a warrior, you were instead rewarded with a strong arm and a stout heart, also with a Pact requirement.

How dangerous would a communist Europe + Russia be for the USA? (Post world war 1)

Unified, or simply every major European nation has their worker's parties rise in power and by coupe or election become the major power?

A unified communist Europe, like some grand Soviet empire, would be pretty terrifying. The US would be on the defensive and end up looking to the east for trade partners and allies. Japan and the Republic of China would be strange bedfellows with a United States staggering to recover from the great depression, but might be the best they could do.

An un-unified communist Europe would be a likely powder keg. I'd expect to see the whole thing explode into a brawl, though with different alliances. I defiantly don't think communist Germany would accept anyone else's domination.

About $50 dollars.

That's pretty much how Samson works in the bible.

"You could make a Charm gun, but you'd need to use Range penalties with it because it would be casting spells. Or you could make a weapon intended to shoot harmless projectiles, like a Nerf gun, and use it to fire charmed projectiles. "

Do you have a working stat-based example? Again, I am trying to decide what the base Acc of such a weapon would be (if it would even possess a base Acc in the first place) and if the Acc of the "External (Indirect) Damage"" charm spell stacks with it.

Once I determine those two factors, I can start custom-tailoring the rules for "Gun Magery Only" Ritual Path Magic charms.

On second thought, the magic gun itself might not possess an Acc or 1/2D stat at all...this should be entirely dependent on the magic charms/shells themselves.

However, I might mess around with the idea of magic guns attuned to a particular element or type of Innate Attack. A fire-aspected magic gun (encrusted with garnets or even rubies!) might bestow a +4 or more on rolls when crafting charm bullets/shells for IT that primarily deal with the element of fire.

One last question: is it possible to create a Linked or Follow-Up damage effect with RPM? Think of the classic H.E.A.T. round that first punches through armor while exploding on the surface of the armor OR a tranquilizer dart loaded up with tranquilizing drug.

Are there any good fourth edition books or sources for mech customization?
I am toying with the idea of a campaign in similar theme to Front Mission 1 and not sure if there is already made assets to run a game like that.

Surely they would be strong, but I doubt they could start an invasion.

There are a bunch of ways to approach mechs in GURPS.

1) Build them as characters. Obviously very customizable, but if mechs are something you can simply buy rather than unique personal gear, you may have trouble pinning down a fair GURP$ cost. Additionally, building a mech with character points means there's no intrinsic balance/limitation to mech designs. For example, traditionally, mecha that are super-armored are also slow as hell because all that armor is heavy, and most systems will reflect this. A mech that buys up DR does not *have* to buy down Basic Speed/Move; balancing things like this is strictly the purview of the GM.

2) Build them using Spaceships. With the Robotic Arms and Robotic Legs supplement, the Spaceship design rules cover mechs well enough, and there's still a lot of customization possible. However, currently Spacehips can only handle vehicles of SM+4 or larger (or SM+3 if you squint at it and pull a few tricks), so mechs that are closer to battlesuits/powered armor is a no-go. It's also not a very granular system; the choices you make are all very large-scale e.g. "do I want a reactor that has three times the output but takes up twice as much space?" instead of the more number-crunchy "do I want a reactor with +15% power output but +9% mass?" Some people really like that aspect of mecha games and will be disappointed with Spaceships more abstract approach.

3) Build them using the rules from 3e's Mecha. This gives the highest level of granularity, a ton of options for customization, has "mech-deisgn logic" built right in AND lists everything in GURP$... but you have to use 3e's vehicle design rules. Thankfully, calculators and automated spreadsheets make the process way faster and *WAY* less painful, but it's still a bit of work, especially if you plan on making, like, a catalog of these things.

3e Mecha should also have a large number of pre-made mechs you can rip off.

So, GURPSfriends, I've got a question.

What is the quickest possible time to reload smoothbore muzzle-loaded gun? I know different equipment changes the time needed in different ways, but I'm not sure what should be counted first - or if they combine, for that matter. For example, paper cartridge cuts the time in half, but that's barely saying anything, when other elements are measured directly in seconds.

Would 3e mecha convert easily to 4e?

A while ago a friendly gurpsanon recommended that the regular Attack maneuver be removed completely to force the use of Defensive Attack or Committed Attack as the basic defaults.

My question to the Illuminati is whether or not this house rule renders the Unbalanced weapon trait less of a disadvantage, since the Committed Attack maneuver entirely precludes that weapon's parry, and Defensive Attack specifically allows and Unbalanced weapon to parry.

Historically speaking, I believe that three rounds a minute was considered excellent. The average was probably closer to two.

I'm more about game mechanics than historical version. I know it's possible to go below 10 seconds with a breech-loader, but I don't know specifics, too. Plus I'm more interested in muzle-loaders

Seems like your answer should be in the book, then.

IIRC, Low-Tech doesn't specify in what order you apply reduction from paper cartridges and fast-draw (ammo). Personally I'd halve the time after all other bonuses were applied.

Did flipped them, LowTech didn't answer my question, you know? Hence I'm asking GURPS General, to get something like this user suggests

Speaking of which - I'm doing it in exactly reverse order. Hence the question.

Varied by age. Late percussion-cap muskets with steel ramrods and minie-balls could be reloaded in ~12 seconds, and four rounds per minute was considered average.

The Brown Bess and other 18th century muskets could generally manage to be fired twice per minute, with three rounds a minute the sign of a well drilled, well trained veteran.

17th century firearms typically managed one round per minute.

For the most part, yes. Grab the (legitimately free) 3e>4e conversion PDF as the ST changed a lot between additions (your ST 40 mech will be around ST 20 once you convert it), but once you make it and run it through that, you should be golden.

is gurps a good system to get into if you and your friends dont know anything about anything of rol playing and may not be all that keen on something rules heavy?

Not the full system, but if you're looking for something that would require little effort to get into, you should consider GURPS Lite. Here is a copy of it, it is freely available online.

thanks man

GURPS lite is good for certain simple games. If you want to play something more involved once you've got yourself going on lite, Try Dungeon Fantasy. It's BIG HEROS going into BIG DUNGEONS and fighting BIG MONSTERS for BIG LOOT.

>TTRPG means fantasy setting
I fucking hate this attitude.

Well there are always one of the other series if you want something simple and out of the box. After the End for post apoctalyptic deals, Monster Hunters for a crazier version of WoD Hunters, and of course Action for modern day deals where you can be a slick spy or just a bunch of Rambo esque mercenaries.

I agree with that sentiment though, too many people immediately think of D&D and its derivatives when tabletop RPGs are brought up.

Fantasy is the most approachable setting though. If you go more modern, society becomes more capable and the space for heroism sort of shrinks.

DF is the easiest to use if you only have Lite at hands.

I don't know if I agree with that, but I will agree that modern games are harder to run. The players are also more likely to dislike restrictions like "LC 4+ equipment only".

I definitely disagree with the idea that "heroic possibilities shrink with the modern age". Look at the Uncharted games, or any number of action movies from the last decade. Sure, there's "cell phone problem", but there's workarounds, and if everyone at the table is keen to play a modern game then that's just as much a part of the suspension of disbelief as dragons and magic.

The space for heroism doesn't shrink, it just takes more effort to find. Hence why fantasy is more approachable.

>Fantasy is the most approachable setting though
[Citation needed]

No, seriously, prove it, rather than perpetuating a complete nonsense coming from times when the whole hobby was just starting to exist and there was literally nothing else than fantasy games.
Because last time I've checked, the really most accessable settings were:
- modern day campaigns
- followed shortly by historical fiction
For the very reason of not requiring learning anything about the setting. If your entire focus is on accessability, then those wins with literally anything.

Also
>TTRPG means heroism
>In a GURPS thread
Seriously?

>>TTRPG means heroism
>>In a GURPS thread
>Seriously?
You do know that GURPS by default hovers around "realistic-ish action movie", right? Plenty heroism there.

As you move forwards in time, a few troubles for immersion and verisimilitude comes up
>Communications improve
>The state's ability to enforce law and order improves
>The world gets mapped out
>Reasons for risktaking disappear as social security and living conditions improve

Which doesn't mean you can't have heroic modern campaigns. There's plenty of action moves that show how. But the closer you get to modern day, the more structured the campaign also sort of becomes, as PC:s are forced into stuff like government work and/or subterfuge to do adventuring in a believable manner.

That's why fantasy is approachable. You don't need any fancy worldbuilding to make a bunch of adventurers feasible. You don't need to go to great lengths to make your plots "work". There's always adventure around the corner.

And thanks to history class, most people know the basics of how people lived back then. Stuff like magics and not-elves can be explained as the players encounter them in the game.

>[citation needed]

I've made the assumption that fantasy is the most popular genre for TTRPG. The amount of systems that caters to it are probably the largest, and they also have very large fanbases. This would make it appear as if fantasy is the most easily approached from a user and maker perspective.

So you are playing with completely new people to TTRPG and you assume that because lion share of existing material of genre-specific games is fantasy, then the easiest way to introduce them to the hobby will be using fantasy material, even if you aren't exactly locked with ANY setting when using GURPS?

That's some prime leap in logics. I'm not saying I'm not understanding your pattern or reasoning, but they simply don't apply when you are starting with normies with no prior experience. In fact, making them "learn" something about the new world or rules governing it (lore-rules) makes it LESS accessable, especially when you are running a game using generic system.
Generics really work out better with real world and historical fictions when dealing with new players. They already have game rules to learn, overburdening them with lore is the easiest way to scare them off.

user, you've just made an argument that, say, Predator is less heroic than, say, Princess Bride, just because one is modern setting and the other is medievalesque fantasy.

And unlike the other user, I can't see any logic behind your statement, it's just a bunch of bullshit you say, because you think it's that way, rather than stating facts.

>you've just made an argument that, say, Predator is less heroic than, say, Princess Bride

>Which doesn't mean you can't have heroic modern campaigns. There's plenty of action moves that show how.

???

>But the closer you get to modern day, the more structured the campaign also sort of becomes, as PC:s are forced into stuff like government work and/or subterfuge to do adventuring in a believable manner.
>are forced into stuff like government work and/or subterfuge to do adventuring in a believable manner.
>forced

That means the user is a lazy fuck who can't create a half-decent scenario, but rather than admitting his inequalities, pushes the entire weight of it on the players, who are merely actors in a story he created.
In short, fantasy medieval settings are easier to handle for half-witted GMs rather than more accessable to players, because they require less effort, less structure and can be 100% improvised without sounding silly.

Which means the user should go and watch some action flicks from the 80s and just about any buddy cop movie. Not to mention buddy movies in general, dramas, horros and other shit around.
Because issues with "fantasy is easier" usually boil down to "I'm so underexposed to cinematography it's not even funny".

And I suggest films for the simple reason that you can watch 3 films in a time required to finish single book.

Not exactly to agree, but one thing is sure - good GM is a person well-versed in fiction, be it literature, films or even animu. Because the job of a GM is to structure a scenario, set up different pieces and think ahead of player and baiting them into specific actions.
And it gets much easier when you have a lot of references, rather than trying to figure out things on your own.

My question is - how? Sounds like a good idea, but I don't exactly see how this can be pulled with rules. Then again, I only know the basic magic system.

Powers has Leech, which has a modifier for stealing youth. As for the resistance/immunity, no clue.

Leech with enhancements can steal hp and age, maybe even attributes, I don't remember. For powers that cost age, perhaps short lifespan or terminally ill with mitigator as temporary disadvantage limitation. Maybe something with Draining or whatever it's called.

>They already have game rules to learn, overburdening them with lore is the easiest way to scare them off.

I disagree with this. You don't need (and probably shouldn't) hand your players a 30~page document of lore for your setting. Just let them make a bunch of farmboys or whatever if they are new.

The lore is something that's there to be experienced as they play. It's not supposed to be homework. As such, the "relative" complexity of lore doesn't matter.

Finally I'd argue that modern setting also tend to have more complex lore. Fantasy settings are easily painted white and black, with simple outlines of who is good and who is bad. Modern settings tend to be a bit more complex (instead of a king you got a company owner; instead of a war between knights of two kingdoms you got a middle eastern conflict; instead of wilderness you got laws and regulations)

>That means the user is a lazy fuck who can't create a half-decent scenario, but rather than admitting his inequalities, pushes the entire weight of it on the players, who are merely actors in a story he created.
>In short, fantasy medieval settings are easier to handle for half-witted GMs rather than more accessable to players, because they require less effort, less structure and can be 100% improvised without sounding silly.

Original user here. That's exactly it. Remember that I'd argued from the perspective that fantasy settings are more approachable right?

Approachable to WHOM. That's my point. They aren't easier for players.

This user is right, but I have no idea how to add building-in resistance for it.

I don't know if this "to whom" question is very central. If the setting is more approachable to a GM he'll also have an easier time making it approachable to his players.

I also think it seems like people in this thread are underestimating how complex our current day societies actually are.

I'm surprised no one has brought up setting austerity yet. What people are pinning on fantasy vs modern is actually low-austerity vs high-austerity, it's just that most people assume all fantasy is low austerity and modern games are high austerity.

It is totally possible to run a high-austerity fantasy game. Rulers don't necessarily let heavily armed wanderers just do whatever, even in settings with magic and dragons. It's not a stretch to have players land in hot water for killing off bandits and the like -- at the very least, they're proving themselves to be dangerous and are making the ruler's guards and soldiers seem unnecessary.

It is also totally possible to run a low-austerity modern game. Despite everyone's assumptions, this is actually quite common; Diehard, for example, is set in a low-austerity modern setting as John McClane, and off-duty policeman, takes down a building of both American citizens and foreign nationals and doesn't spend the next decade tied up in legal proceedings and/or explaining why he started an international incident because everyone he killed were Bad Guys. Similarly, forensics and in-depth investigations just don't happen if the plot calls for it (either to set up a Bad Guy or because the PCs were the ones doing the illegal stuff).

Things are only as tied up as you want them to be.

This is a good point, but I've never heard it given a name before. Why "austerity"? That word seems like it has no relation to what you're describing.

First brought up in GURPS: Horror IIRC. It's called "austerity," I'm assuming, because it describes the sternness of the setting, or how realistic and far-reaching the consequences of one's actions are. It's the counterpart to verisimilitude.

It's the first and only system me and my friends (all TTRPG virgins) have used. We started with Lite and then gradually incorporated aspects from Basic and other supplements. I would say that it works fantastic. Lite is really easy to get a hold of and is still fun to play. Try it out and see for yourselves. If it doesn't suit your group you can always choose another system without having wasted any time.

This is completely true.

My problem is usually though that player perception will sort of color their expectations and make them do certain stuff.

In modern campaigns, your players will get obsessed with covering their tracks, not getting caught on cam, etc. Which is fine if that's what you want. I mean, it's half the fun if you do a cyberpunk game in my opinion.

If you want a simple and straightforwards game where the players get to try out the mechanics, this sort of stuff might get distracting though, and in that case fantasy becomes easier, because nobody will care if the players kill outlaws/barbarians/monsters, and the players will understand this more intuitively.

How many points would you need to create John Wick?

200-250, with another 25 or so in disadvantages. But anything more than 250+25 is literally overdoing it.

After all, he's good at very, very narrow speciality

yeah a very narrow specialty that has very broad applications.

I've been running mostly GURPS for 7 years now, but I fucking wish I got to use all the modern and sci-fi stuff.

>Pitch a cyberpunk setting to my group
>Two players love it
>Others just hold off on making a character in the hopes we'll ditch it and just run fantasy

Every time.

Unless they play with someone else as DM, I don't see the issue, tell them that these two thought it'd be interesting and to try it or find somebody else that dm's as well as you do.

Still doesn't make him worth more than 275 points.

Give them pre-made characters instead.
It's that simple. I usually run one-shots this way. Just giving players a pool of premade characters. They don't need to work on them, I know what characters are in the pool and the one-shots are tailored for that.

I never said it did.

>killing people
>very broad applications

I have tried this, but it doesn't work on my players. The less enthusiastic players never tell me they aren't interested, even if I made premades they'd still delay and stall until I run fantasy.

Maybe it's the lethality that gets them -- but the enthusiastic guys are all about the tacticool and don't like decreased lethality.

How many people are in your group?
Maybe it's time to thin down the crowd? Or get flesh blood?

Time for another group!

Any good hints for a a post nuclear wasteland game?

What sort?

yes, killing people has broad applications, politically, criminally, and militarily, murder has very broad applications. Huh, I'm pretty sure you didn't think before you spoke.

I am aiming for a cross between Stalker and Fallout games.

After the End is a good read for any post-apoc game.

I'm guess a cross between S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Fallout would be massive wastelands filled with weird anomalies, monsters, bandits, and loot, with a focus on survival and generally gritty tone; tech would fluctuate a lot. Any of the -Tech books could be useful (though genericness is your friend, making High-Tech less useful), plus maybe Tactical Shooting if you want to go full cheeki breeki operator. Tactical Shooting hinges on the players already being familiar with the core system of GURPS as it does add a lot of detail, so if this is everyone's first game, stick to Basic Set, AtE, and bits and pieces of Ultra-Tech gear scattered throughout the wasteland/in the hands of enemy factions.

that certainly sounds fun.

The Holy / Dark Holy spell from Final Fantasy Tactics. If you're familiar. How would you model it.

What does it do?

Single target high damage magical attack with holy element. Tracks the target no matter where they go, spell hits no matter what.

Innate attack with your choice of wounding modifier, cosmics for no roll required and no active defense allowed. Buy up the damage to something like 6d, and you're golden.

Well, damage is damage. GURPS powers discusses morally aligned and elemental aligned powers if you want to read up on that.

Tracking a target sounds like homing. Never missing though would be a cosmic effect. See GURPS Power-ups 4. For instance "No die roll required" or "no active defense allowed" might work.

Everyone else I know buys into all the GURPS memes and/or just prefers 3.5 because system mastery or something. These are the only people I know who do play GURPS, I just wish they didn't have such a boner for fantasy.

There's nothing wrong about catering to to your player's preferences.

With that said, have you thought about a more fantastic sci-fi? More Star Wars than Ghost in the Shell? Your players might be on-board with that if they get to play as magical space elves exploring the lost catacombs of the vulcans.

This sort of thing could ease your players into sci-fi.

Sure thing, but I require some inspiration. I can't pull generic fantasy from my hat, because it doesn't excite me.

Science fantasy isn't a bad idea, I think my players might be down with it. Something along the lines of Jorune/Conan where much of the magic is McGuffins. Although I have to take the all-elf approach off the table because one guy won't play elves (or blacks).