GURPSnet-Digest Friday, January 17 2003 Volume 04 : Number 3766 In this issue: Improvisional Enchantments Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: Antimatter creation and storage? Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: Antimatter creation and storage? Map generators? Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT RE: Map generators? Call for SCA Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: Call for SCA Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: change of address question Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue [Fwd: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue] Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT List Administrator? Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: List Administrator? Re: Call for SCA Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the GURPSnet-L or GURPSnet-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:10:51 +0100 From: Oliver Schoenwald Subject: Improvisional Enchantments Hello, I already asked this list to give me some input for my house rules regarding enchantments. Recently I found that G:Magic Items I includes an article about improvised enchantments. Alas, I don't have this book. So, if you don't mind, I would like to ask those who have access to this book to give me a short info about this article. I don't want the exact rules, only a short summary. If someone used these rules already I would be like to know how he/she liked them. Thank you in advance, Oliver ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:02:31 +0100 From: Thomas Ackermann Subject: Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT For Skills, mostly DX or IQ are important. HT is equally important for anyone. ST is the only thing where your players are right IMHO :-) But then again, ST gets more cheap after ST 15 and is of equal use for fighters and mages and psis ... And such "intelligent", "social" characters have quite much skills to spend points to (incl. Psi and Spells) and also often need Literacy. Just some points that may help :-) - -- Thomas Ackermann | Tel. +49-(0)228/631369 | Mobil: 0178-2016033 Email: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:19:09 +0100 From: Thomas Ackermann Subject: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Hi! When a character uses Might on himself, say ST 12 added up to ST 17 (+5 ST for 10 Fatigue) to be able to use an Axe without readying time, we face the situation that he will be at ST 2 effectively! That means, Move and Dodge are already haved ... That could even be OK, but also he will be like ST 2 for any Close Combat contest of ST - meaning that any baby can know him down, grapple him, take him down and pin him or suffocate him. Is that realy what should happen with a spell like Might?!?!?!? Whatīs your opinion? - -- Thomas Ackermann | Tel. +49-(0)228/631369 | Mobil: 0178-2016033 Email: ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:11:22 -0600 From: "Chris J. Whitcomb" Subject: Re: Antimatter creation and storage? From: "Lucas Bodnyk" > I dunno why this popped up in my head, but I believe I > read somewhere in GURPS Vehicles I think it was, that > we are capable of producing and storing antimatter > today. I was previously of the assumption that we had > succesfully created antimatter using particle > accelerators, but I was not aware that we had the > means to store these particles, or that they even > existed for a practical length of time... > > If we actually can create, and store, antimatter, > could someone provide me with a link to a webpage that > will satisfy my raging curiosity, or even a hardcopy I > can pick up at the library? You might try picking up the book Hyperspace by Michio Kaku (ISBN: 0385477058) IIRC, the creation and storing of anti-matter is presently possible, but requires a tremendous amount of energy and the cost of that energy is extremely prohibitive for what little practical results it gives. Its something like the cost of the energy to store it is 100 or 1000 times greater than the energy that would be created by the antimatter itself... Kinda like the old alchemical idea of turning lead into gold. If you have to spend $10,000 in resources to produce $100 worth of gold it becomes a self-defeating process. - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.435 / Virus Database: 244 - Release Date: 12/30/02 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:31:28 +0100 From: Oliver Schoenwald Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Hallo Thomas, I think you misunderstood the rules for spending fatigue for spells. The mage will loose 10 fatigue points from his 12 points coming from his ST of 12. But this means he is fatigued to 2 fatigue points, not weakened to ST 2. He stays at full ST, but he will look for some kind of rest to recover from his fatigue. The only direct effect that might happen by spending fatigue is that when he reaches 0 fatigue, he falls unconscious or deeply asleep by pure exhaustion. Maybe you confused the spending of fatigue for spells with spending HT instead or additionally to fatigue points? Oliver Schönwald Thomas Ackermann wrote: >Hi! > >When a character uses Might on himself, say ST 12 added up to ST 17 >(+5 ST for 10 Fatigue) to be able to use an Axe without readying time, >we face the situation that he will be at ST 2 effectively! > >That means, Move and Dodge are already haved ... > >That could even be OK, but also he will be like ST 2 for any Close >Combat contest of ST - meaning that any baby can know him down, grapple >him, take him down and pin him or suffocate him. > >Is that realy what should happen with a spell like Might?!?!?!? > >Whatīs your opinion? > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:57:46 +0100 From: Thomas Ackermann Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 01:31:28PM +0100, Oliver Schoenwald wrote: > I think you misunderstood the rules for spending fatigue for spells. The > mage will loose > 10 fatigue points from his 12 points coming from his ST of 12. But this > means he is > fatigued to 2 fatigue points, not weakened to ST 2. He stays at full ST, > but he will look > for some kind of rest to recover from his fatigue. The only direct > effect that might > happen by spending fatigue is that when he reaches 0 fatigue, he falls > unconscious or > deeply asleep by pure exhaustion. > > Maybe you confused the spending of fatigue for spells with spending HT > instead or > additionally to fatigue points? Hello Oliver, thanx for your reply, but it seems *you* did missunderstand the rules for spending fatigue :-) Please look at B134, Fatigue: "[...] While you ST is reduced due to fatigue, any "test of skill", attemt to to lift or throw and object, or other use of strength will be made at the reduced ST score. Likewise, your score in any ST-based skill will be reduced by the amount of your fatigue. For instance, if you have ST 10 and have suffered 4 points of Fatigue, you perform as though your ST was 6!" Interesting, yes? :-) The next point just makes this a bit more easy for fights: "However, the basic damage you do with weapons will remain unchanged. This is for playability, to avoid constant recalculation of weapon effects." That quite clearly says, that a knight with Heavy Encumbrance will loose 4 ST after a battle of more than 10 seconds ... This means, that a fighter can only fight ONE fight, effectivly! He will be no match for a fresh opponent! That also means, that a fighter just cannot use any maguc, because he will be easy meat for fresh opponents ... :-( Is this a bug in GURPS?!?!?!?!!? Byebye, - -- Thomas Ackermann | Tel. +49-(0)228/631369 | Mobil: 0178-2016033 Email: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:08:14 +0100 (MEZ) From: Johannes Trimmel Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Thomas Ackermann wrote: > > Please look at B134, Fatigue: > > "[...] While you ST is reduced due to fatigue, any "test of skill", attemt > to to lift or throw and object, or other use of strength will be made at > the reduced ST score. Likewise, your score in any ST-based skill will be > reduced by the amount of your fatigue. For instance, if you have ST 10 > and have suffered 4 points of Fatigue, you perform as though your ST was > 6!" > > Interesting, yes? :-) > > The next point just makes this a bit more easy for fights: > > "However, the basic damage you do with weapons will remain unchanged. > This is for playability, to avoid constant recalculation of weapon > effects." > > That quite clearly says, that a knight with Heavy Encumbrance will loose > 4 ST after a battle of more than 10 seconds ... > This means, that a fighter can only fight ONE fight, effectivly! > He will be no match for a fresh opponent! > > That also means, that a fighter just cannot use any maguc, because he > will be easy meat for fresh opponents ... > > :-( > IMO under adrenaline you should be able to ignore some effects of missing fatigue. I have not made rules for this however. I don't think it is unrealistic that a fighter really needs rest after a battle especially if he is encumbered. His fatigue (resp his lack of it) however will have less effect on his combat performance then it will have on what he will do when not under stress. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Better a solution that makes the problem worse then no solution at all. Johannes Trimmel ++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 08:18:51 -0600 (CST) From: Bret Indrelee Subject: Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Ludovic Chabant wrote: [ snip ] > When you want to > create an intellectual/charismatic character, you only have to spend > points in one stat. But when you want to create a physical character, > you have to spend points in 2, maybe 3 stats. Do you think it's > unbalanced ? Or did I get it completely wrong ? (I tried to search the > pyramid and roleplayer archives but I didn't find anything really > useful). [ snip ] > So what do you think ? It really depends on the type of character you are creating and what you expect to be doing in the campaign. In my experience, all of the attributes are useful. This is especially true at lower tech levels. ST determines how much gear you can comfortably carry. DX is the basis for your physical skills. This includes the ability to protect yourself. IQ is the basis for your knowledge and social skills. HT determines how much damage you can take. Failing a HT roll is a bad thing. It should also be noted that there are a couple of social skills that are based on HT rather than IQ. I've done SciFi adventures where lots of people bought down their ST and up their IQ. I took a more balanced approach and found it was quite viable. Although I did not have the huge skills that some of the other characters had, I didn't become totally useless outside my niche. To me, that is one of the strengths of GURPS. Characters can be reasonably competent in a variety of skills. You don't have to be a one-skill-wonder. - -Bret - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bret Indrelee | "Unleash the baby ducks." bret@io.com | www.sluggy.com/daily.php?date=020522 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:15:16 +0100 From: Oliver Schoenwald Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Hi Thomas, yep, seems that I didn't remember that kind of rule. So, following the base rules, your scenario would be right. However, this doesn't have to be a bug in GURPS, if you take the use of powerstones or manastones into account. So, if a warrior-mage wants to add some ST, he would reserve a powerstone to use for this spell. About the encumbrance: i think is quite realistic. Someone heavily encumbered shouldn't be able to fight for a long time. The exhaustion should be felt soon and be hard enough to make further fighting difficult and dangerous. This leads to (as I think) the realistic situation that a heavily armored knight fighting on foot against several lightly armored (and less encumbered) foes coming all together and dodging his attacks long enough or coming one by one, would loose by sheer exhaustion after some time. I see that these rules are disturbing when playing a high fantasy/fantasy opera campaign, where fighters can fight for hours and kill dozens of foes without much sweat. I think that in that case I would just ignore and change that rule enough to make my preferred fighting style workable (as long as the same is used for the non-player-characters/opponents). However, I think that the rule is quite realistic. I did some sport fencing during childhood, and that was the very light sport florett (don't know the english translation). A real fencing round was quite exhausting, and of cause we didn't wear real armor and didn't swing heavy weapons. Ciao, Oliver ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 08:27:30 -0600 (CST) From: Bret Indrelee Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Thomas Ackermann wrote: [ snip ] > That quite clearly says, that a knight with Heavy Encumbrance will loose > 4 ST after a battle of more than 10 seconds ... > This means, that a fighter can only fight ONE fight, effectivly! > He will be no match for a fresh opponent! > > That also means, that a fighter just cannot use any maguc, because he > will be easy meat for fresh opponents ... > > :-( > > Is this a bug in GURPS?!?!?!?!!? In all honesty, I would consider it a feature. Instead of casting the might on yourself, you could cast it on a teammate. It would also be possible to draw the fatigue from a powerstone. If this is something that the person is doing a lot, there is always the option of enchanting the axe handle with Staff and planting a powerstone in the axe (making contact with the wooden handle) so it is always readily available when you want to use the axe. There are several other ways that a resourceful person who has learned the Might spell could make use of it. - -Bret - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bret Indrelee | "Unleash the baby ducks." bret@io.com | www.sluggy.com/daily.php?date=020522 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:17:05 +0100 From: Ludovic Chabant Subject: Re: Antimatter creation and storage? IIRC, scientists don't store the antimatter just as is. You store it in 2 different places : the positrons (anti-electrons) somewhere, and the anti-protons somewhere else. Then, when you want to make a big boom, you put them together. I also heard they where trying to figure out whether anti-matter behaves just like regular matter in a gravity field. I suppose there's no reason anti-matter shouldn't fall down like everyone else, but they're checking it out anyway. Last time I heard, the anti-matter was annihilated way too quickly, by bumping into matter, for them to measure anything meaningfull. Anyway, if someone knows how to store complete anti-atoms, I'm curious. I mean, you can't lock it in a magnetic field, and you can't put it in a box that's not made of anti-matter... Chris, could you check back your book for info ? thanks. L.A.B. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:43:00 +0000 (GMT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?james=20robertson?= Subject: Map generators? I am mapping a world for my players at the moment and I wondered if anyone knew of any good mapping tools? I don;t mind whether it is online or a downloadable: I just need something to make my life easier! So: any ideas?! Many thanks, James __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:57:38 +0100 From: Thomas Ackermann Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 08:27:30AM -0600, Bret Indrelee wrote: > In all honesty, I would consider it a feature. > > Instead of casting the might on yourself, you could cast it on a teammate. Please consider that the effect holds true for an ordinary knight oder heavy footsoldier! Donīt need to talk about using magic ... ONE fight of 11 seconds and our ST 11 is ST 7, our ST 12 is ST 8 So, after one fight, fighting is already over for them - just send another person to grapple him, take him down and pin him to suffocate him to death or so ... Thatīs it already! Iīm not sure that this is realistic ... Byebye, - -- Thomas Ackermann | Tel. +49-(0)228/631369 | Mobil: 0178-2016033 Email: ------------------------------ Date: 17 Jan 2003 16:41:31 -0000 From: "Volker Bach" Subject: Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:54:13 +0100, Ludovic Chabant wrote : > > It's my first post on this list, so hello everybody. > > I hope I won't start any flamewar or look like a troll or something, but > I'd like to talk about the GURPS's 4 stats model. When you want to > create an intellectual/charismatic character, you only have to spend > points in one stat. But when you want to create a physical character, > you have to spend points in 2, maybe 3 stats. Do you think it's > unbalanced ? Or did I get it completely wrong ? (I tried to search the > pyramid and roleplayer archives but I didn't find anything really > useful). > > I've been using GURPS for just one little year, now, and I'm incredibly > happy with it, but this bugs me a little, and my players pointed out > this "flaw" at various occasions. We agreed that an equal number of > stats in mental/social and physical/health fields would "feel more > balanced", but we also agreed that it would need a lot of tweaking to > change that point in GURPS (especially because of the hundreds of skills > and ads/disads). Well, there are varying schools of thought on the desireable number of stats, and I'm not a strict adherent of any. The trouble is, once you start adding you will soon come to see more gaps that need filling - I'm quite happy to leave the job of fine-tuning to the Ad/Disad System. However, I have variously fiddled the numbers when it comes to IQ because I think it does cover too much. This may be the outcome of GURPS's origin as a combat-oriented system - it pays too great store by physically 'useful' traits. Thus I usually take Will and Perception out of IQ, leaving them at 10 unless purchased separately. I mean, I don't think that a highly intelligent person is usually very strong-willed or perceptive, or vice versa. The 'Will' options from Compendium I (IIRC) might help you there. Volker ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:17:09 -0800 (PST) From: Anthony Jackson Subject: Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT Ludovic Chabant writes: > > It's my first post on this list, so hello everybody. > > I hope I won't start any flamewar or look like a troll or something, but > I'd like to talk about the GURPS's 4 stats model. Congratulations. You have successfully identified one of the traditional GURPS flamewars. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:19:53 -0500 From: "Delcar@mail.delcarsdungeon.com" Subject: RE: Map generators? I'm fond of NBOS's Fractal Mapper, and Fractal World Explorer. www.nbos.com Original Message: - ----------------- From: james robertson james_robertson_37@yahoo.co.uk Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:43:00 +0000 (GMT) To: GURPSnet-L@lists.io.com Subject: Map generators? I am mapping a world for my players at the moment and I wondered if anyone knew of any good mapping tools? I don;t mind whether it is online or a downloadable: I just need something to make my life easier! So: any ideas?! Many thanks, James __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com - -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:29:24 -0800 From: Daiv Subject: Call for SCA Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue At 5:57 PM +0100 1/17/03, Thomas Ackermann wrote: >On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 08:27:30AM -0600, Bret Indrelee wrote: >> In all honesty, I would consider it a feature. >> >> Instead of casting the might on yourself, you could cast it on a teammate. > >Please consider that the effect holds true for an ordinary knight oder >heavy footsoldier! Donīt need to talk about using magic ... > >ONE fight of 11 seconds and our ST 11 is ST 7, our ST 12 is ST 8 >So, after one fight, fighting is already over for them - just send >another person to grapple him, take him down and pin him to suffocate >him to death or so ... > >Thatīs it already! > >Iīm not sure that this is realistic ... I am not sure that it isn't, but let us find out. Are there any people here on list who are or were members of the SCA or some such, and there fore have experience with fighting in heavy armor? Recognizing right off that the situation is not totally analogous, for a number of reasons, but it is certainly relevant to the debate. Assuming that the rule is reasonable and correct, though... I think it is an indication of how the game is designed to be balanced. If you have Str 12, you should not be fighting in armor / equipment that slows me down too much. I need lighter armor, lighter weapons, that I can still use effectively. So, I would have to say, it is a feature, not a bug. Just a thought. I am wondering if, also, the cost of the heavy armor, versus the coast of increasing your ST (in Character points) is not part of the design. I will have to look into that. -Daiv - -- wireless network 802.11 transparent bamboo ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:19:57 -0800 From: David Stroup Subject: Re: Call for SCA Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Daiv wrote: > 5:57 PM +0100 1/17/03, Thomas Ackermann wrote: >>On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 08:27:30AM -0600, Bret Indrelee wrote: >>> In all honesty, I would consider it a feature. >>> >>> Instead of casting the might on yourself, you could cast it on a teammate. >> >>Please consider that the effect holds true for an ordinary knight oder >>heavy footsoldier! Donīt need to talk about using magic ... >> >>ONE fight of 11 seconds and our ST 11 is ST 7, our ST 12 is ST 8 >>So, after one fight, fighting is already over for them - just send >>another person to grapple him, take him down and pin him to suffocate >>him to death or so ... >> >>Thatīs it already! >> >>Iīm not sure that this is realistic ... > > I am not sure that it isn't, but let us find out. > Are there any people here on list who are or were members of >the SCA or some such, and there fore have experience with fighting >in heavy armor? Recognizing right off that the situation is not >totally analogous, for a number of reasons, but it is certainly >relevant to the debate. It's been a few years since I've taken up the rattan, but I'll try. A fight certainly tires you, no doubt about it. BUT ... an average person would take 40 minutes (at one fatigue/10 min.) to recover from that amount of exhaustion. I don't think an 11 second fight tires you that much, no. But then, I consider that to be a general problem with GURPS' implementation of fatigue; the recovery rate is really balanced more towards spell-casters using fatigue as 'magic points,' not towards a realistic modeling of the way fatigue works. Don't forget that an 11-second fight -- the way GURPS runs fights -- isn't realistic, either. You may get a blinding fast exchange of blows... but not 11 seconds of either constant attacks of movement at a flat-out sprint every single second; I'm not sure what the fatigue effect of moving for 11 seconds at GURPS' one-second combat round hyperspeed would be. I'd say the reduction in ST is realistic, *but* it's the sort of temporary exhaustion you can shake off during the melee -- while both fighters are circling each other. Long-term fatigue (and ST) loss should sneak up on you more slowly. Perhaps if you had both fatigue (recovers 1/round) and exhaustion (recovers 1/10 min.) ... for every 4 fatigue you take, take one exhaustion... you can get winded in an exchange and shake it off, but you'll slowly see your long-term endurance slip too. Of course this too breaks down with GURPS bullet-time combat rounds -- at this rate you can lose 4 or more endurance in a minute of furious GURPS-speed exchanges. > > - -- ____________________________________________________________ David Stroup Clackamas Review/Oregon City News check out 'Yossarian' comic strips on-line at http://www.io.com/~dstroup ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:47:33 -0800 From: Clayten Subject: Re: change of address question owen clark wrote: > > How do I change my email address for the list? > Subscribe with your new address and unsubscribe with the old one. Do it in that order to make sure you don't miss anything. You don't want to keep using Hotmail? I can't imagine why. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:05:36 -0800 From: Clayten Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue Thomas Ackermann wrote: > Please consider that the effect holds true for an ordinary knight oder > heavy footsoldier! Donīt need to talk about using magic ... > > ONE fight of 11 seconds and our ST 11 is ST 7, our ST 12 is ST 8 > So, after one fight, fighting is already over for them - just send > another person to grapple him, take him down and pin him to suffocate > him to death or so ... > Well, grappling someone armed with a sword, who swings it as if at full strength, isn't a piece of cake. But, I read that rule as, at least ten seconds of all-out movement. If you model a real fight that probably takes a minute or so of wait manuevers and feints. And, it only kicks in at the end of the fight. For me, that's not as soon as you take one guy down, it's when the adrenaline starts to fade. If you are in a fight, win, and then sit down and wait for your heart to slow down, you will be at a disadvantage if jumped. However, if you keep going and look for another opponent, I don't think you've entered that cool-down phase. If you want more realism, give one fatigue per ten seconds of active fighting, up to a maximum of encumberance + 1. This avoid the silly issue of a nine second to-the-death fight being free, but a ten second one being fatiguing. It seems to pass my reality check. If I'm riding my bike along on level ground and come to a steep hill I can almost always make it to the top, but depending on how far it was, I'm more winded once I'm there. Two medium hills seperated by thirty seconds are harder than one big hill I can just get over with. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:08:05 -0500 From: Emily Smirle Subject: [Fwd: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue] Thomas Ackermann wrote: > ONE fight of 11 seconds and our ST 11 is ST 7, our ST 12 is ST 8 > So, after one fight, fighting is already over for them - just send > another person to grapple him, take him down and pin him to suffocate > him to death or so ... > > Thatīs it already! > > Iīm not sure that this is realistic ... One fight of 11 seconds at one attack, parry, and infinite dodges per second, or erratic movement at a sprint for one second intervals. That is INTENSE and taxing. What normally happens is a two to five second attack/defend interchange followed by focused defence and wary circling, repeat as necessary. If you use the lull rules from CII, I'd say halve fatigue loss in combat, at the least. secondly, wearing someone down is certainly a valid tactic, but a kind of dumb one. If you have that many mooks standing about, why don't they just mass tackle him? - -- Let the sun never blind your eyes Let me sleep so my teeth won't grind -- "Grind", Hear a sound from a voice inside Alice in Chains ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:22:49 -0800 From: Clayten Subject: Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT Ludovic Chabant wrote: > It's my first post on this list, so hello everybody. > > I hope I won't start any flamewar or look like a troll or something, but > I'd like to talk about the GURPS's 4 stats model. When you want to > create an intellectual/charismatic character, you only have to spend > points in one stat. But when you want to create a physical character, > you have to spend points in 2, maybe 3 stats. Do you think it's > unbalanced ? Or did I get it completely wrong ? (I tried to search the > pyramid and roleplayer archives but I didn't find anything really > useful). > Well, in a world where damage is cheap (Cyberpunk for instance) you might want to make strength cheap to allow for big muscle-bound guys who fit the genre but aren't worth 60 points. Either slash the cost of strength, or allow it as a cheap cyber enhancement. In a fantasy world, I think the costs are balanced for a low-magic world. If you want to do much damage, you need strength. That's fine, because smart people aren't in combat, so you're not competing directly. If you allow magic though, you need to consider that a mage with just IQ and Magery can have a spell at 20, doing 2d per turn without fatigue costs, and balance accordingly. To make magery more difficult, don't allow "Extra Fatigue", make them buy strength to be able to cast more spells. Also, make people make health rolls when hit for much damage. If they've got HT10 and roll versus 10 when they take 5 damage, they're much worse off than someone who rolls versus 14 when he takes 7 damage, especially because the HT14 guy will likely have ST14 and be wearing heavier armor, making 7 damage rarer. In other words, come up with challenges that emphasize every stat. Make all players cope with them. Make them realize that being Johnny-One-Stat isn't a valid strategy without a team to back them up. Don't forget though that the mage has Magery which is pretty much the same as buying yet another stat up to 13... ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 09:52:08 +0000 From: Revenant Subject: List Administrator? Is Dataweaver still around? Who is the administrator of the list now? Thanx. - --------------- Revenant [revenant@bigpond.net.au] ------------------ The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:07:29 +0100 From: Thomas Ackermann Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 05:07:23PM -0500, Emily Smirle wrote: > If you use the lull rules from CII, I'd say halve fatigue loss in > combat, at the least. Fine, but still, i think that the loss of ST as a result of fights (or even the use of magic) is a fact that most people did not look at - or even used! If using magic or beeing in a second, third fight is such tiring, your opponents can easily see that! I an donīt think that this can really be the correct result in the combat system of GURPS! Iīm nearly sure that not even Kromm ever used this rules like it is written. And for, this means that this rules should maybe be changed ... The solution *could* be a different definition of "one fight". Maybe it is still *one* fight, when the next fight is still within the next 120 to 180 seconds (like in the sidebar B134), so that you could at least fight a sequence of short fights within 2 or 3 minutes and only then suffer such a strong loss of ST (or still only *after* a completere series of fights - regardless of how much. Think about mass combat ...) But that still does not solve the problem of magic or psi or super ability using characters! And also there, i donīt think that the written rules are what people use - including Dr. Kromm :-) > secondly, wearing someone down is certainly a valid tactic, but a kind > of dumb one. If you have that many mooks standing about, why don't they > just mass tackle him? Huh? Whatīs the difference between Step and Attack into Close Combat, Grapple your opponent and then take him down to Step and Move into Close Combat to try a Flying Tackle? The result is always the same ... You already will look soooooo tired (barely able to hold your weapons, maybe your Move will already be halved - at ST 2 or 3) that all your opponents will directly just get you down. And thatīs it, for you! Not nice. Not good. No fun. Byebye, - -- Thomas Ackermann | Tel. +49-(0)228/631369 | Mobil: 0178-2016033 Email: ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:14:32 +0100 From: Thomas Ackermann Subject: Re: List Administrator? On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 09:52:08AM +0000, Revenant wrote: > Is Dataweaver still around? Who is the administrator of the list now? The list-admin should be the sender that all the listīs mails, i think: owner-gurpsnet-l@lists.io.com Good luck :-) - -- Thomas Ackermann | Tel. +49-(0)228/631369 | Mobil: 0178-2016033 Email: ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:31:37 +0100 From: Thomas Ackermann Subject: Re: Call for SCA Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 12:29:24PM -0800, Daiv wrote: > Assuming that the rule is reasonable and correct, though... I > think it is an indication of how the game is designed to be balanced. > If you have Str 12, you should not be fighting in armor / equipment > that slows me down too much. I need lighter armor, lighter weapons, > that I can still use effectively. So, I would have to say, it is a > feature, not a bug. Letīs see: GURPS Warriors, Heavy Foot Soldier, in generell use "the heaviest armor available" For example p73, sidebar: Durmak Eye-Biter: ST 12, typical orc warrior with scale armor, shield and mace: Heavy Encumbrance GURPS Warriors, Knight, the same story .... Those Template have ST 12 to *enable* tem to wear Heavy Armor! If they will be weak like a child after some moments, that would be mostly funny for them opponents :-) But think more big: The same problem holds for any use of Psionics, Super Ablities, Magic Spells or other abilities! And the story goes on: Think about all that fighting mages from GURPS Wizards or magically enhanced Martial Artists. The ST loss for encumbrance and series of fights *as well* as the ST loos as result of Magic should not make the characters weak like childs! Byebye, - -- Thomas Ackermann | Tel. +49-(0)228/631369 | Mobil: 0178-2016033 Email: ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:47:52 +0100 From: Thomas Ackermann Subject: Re: Might-Spell and ST and Fatigue On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 02:05:36PM -0800, Clayten wrote: > Well, grappling someone armed with a sword, who swings it as if at > full strength, isn't a piece of cake. Huh? Grappling someone with a sword is the *easiest* way to defeat a superior sword-fighter and the like! Just Step and Attack into Combat - he getīs an attack at you, but you can defend normaly with your weapon. You should NOT use a shield - but he will most probably have one - what will lead even more to his end. Let go of your weapon as a Free Action and Grapple just his upper body with both hands. He will be at DX-4 (and any DX-based Skill at -4) ... Take him down in a Contest of ST what will be quite easy if he was using a bit of Magic, Psi or Super abilities in front or just came from a another fight - and this will be quite easy: You can use ST, DX or Judo against his weak ST.Then pin him. Ready. Not a piece of cake? :-) OK, you could interprete the "Attempt a pin" rule on B112 about +1 for every 10 lbs he has over you as his *complete* weight, so with armor and equipment - then a pin will be more difficult and you need help with that. But i donīt think this rule is meant like that, as the armorerd fighter will have his own problems with his weight - even think about the more realistic rule on B103, sidebar: Changing Position in Armor, then a fighter in Heavy Armor is even more a joke then before. It will not be a piece of cake but babyīs play ... I donīt think that can be right in the GURPS system. Some think needs to be changed - we need an errata! > And, it only kicks in at the end of the fight. For me, that's not as > soon as you take one guy down, it's when the adrenaline starts to > fade. If you are in a fight, win, and then sit down and wait for > your heart to slow down, you will be at a disadvantage if jumped. > However, if you keep going and look for another opponent, I don't > think you've entered that cool-down phase. > > If you want more realism, give one fatigue per ten seconds of active > fighting, up to a maximum of encumberance + 1. This avoid the silly > issue of a nine second to-the-death fight being free, but a ten > second one being fatiguing. Yes, for me - i just would ignore that ST-rule for fatiguged characters. You will have your effective ST not reduced till the evening - or maybe even over-time, so 10 or 12 hours of work, fight, magic ... You will be at halved Move and Dodge at ST 2 and 3, and will need to stop fighting at ST 1 and fall unconcious at ST 0! But otherwise, you will be completely effective for any contest of ST or oter use of ST! So, just ignoring or deleting that sentence in Basic :-) But i would like an official statement on that! Byebye, - -- Thomas Ackermann | Tel. +49-(0)228/631369 | Mobil: 0178-2016033 Email: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:59:04 -0800 From: "David P. Summers" Subject: Re: IQ vs ST/DX/HT This has been discussed alot. I think think things are fine the way they are, since physical actions are so much center of so many campaigns. (If I made any change, I might just combine HT and ST, but I guess I wouldn't bother). Others have agree with you (and are very "dedicated" to their positions :-). There have been "long" threads on this in the past. At 9:54 AM +0100 1/17/03, Ludovic Chabant wrote: >It's my first post on this list, so hello everybody. > >I hope I won't start any flamewar or look like a troll or something, but >I'd like to talk about the GURPS's 4 stats model. When you want to >create an intellectual/charismatic character, you only have to spend >points in one stat. But when you want to create a physical character, >you have to spend points in 2, maybe 3 stats. Do you think it's >unbalanced ? Or did I get it completely wrong ? (I tried to search the >pyramid and roleplayer archives but I didn't find anything really >useful). > >I've been using GURPS for just one little year, now, and I'm incredibly >happy with it, but this bugs me a little, and my players pointed out >this "flaw" at various occasions. We agreed that an equal number of >stats in mental/social and physical/health fields would "feel more >balanced", but we also agreed that it would need a lot of tweaking to >change that point in GURPS (especially because of the hundreds of skills >and ads/disads). > >So what do you think ? > >Thanks. > > L.A.B. - -- ______________________________ summers@alum.mit.edu (This is the net. My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.) ------------------------------ End of GURPSnet-Digest V4 #3766 ******************************* To subscribe to GURPSnet-Digest, send the command: subscribe GURPSnet-Digest in the body of a message to "Majordomo@io.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-testlist": subscribe GURPSnet-Digest local-testlist@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "GURPSnet-Digest" in the commands above with "GURPSnet-L". --==IFJRGLKFGIR51773UHRUHIHD--