[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Note: I don't quite have the mental reserve to keep this one at full pace, and I'm noticing more and more that taking breaks from it results in losing some of the connections of branches. Sorry about that. Some branches will have to be dropped, and I'm okay with them counting as a victory against me on those fronts (if this is considered an argument). If it's considered a free discussion, then it's probably not a problem anyway

.

no worries

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

It seems to be the way GURPS does attack-modifying skills - roll the secondary skill, and if it succeeds, you just roll your main skill at no penalty:
Succeed at Physiology and you ignore Physiology Modifiers on your main roll.
Succeed at Blind Fighting and you attack or defend as if you see the opponent (assuming you don't go for a specific hit location).
Succeed at Breaking Blow and your attack is at ×2 ST.
Succeed at Stealth and your attack is sneaky.

.

Maybe, but those are some pretty different things some are inherently linked and sympathetic to attacking and some are not for example. I'd hesitate to inherently group them together in abstract.

No matter what I'd penalise one or the other according to what was happening, and attacking is harder to do stealthy than walking slowly, just as running is. Because you are splitting your attention and trying to do two things at once. (I wouldn't do this if it was stealth than attack, just stealth and attack)

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Guess there's no more point in pressing for such analogies if we just see them differently like that.

.

Probably true

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I was about to repeat the 'not more than +10 from non-combat or non-combat-like bonuses', but I guess this is a category about the existence of which we disagree.

I don't disagree in theory about the category, I disagree that it's a hard and fast total cap on both, since I can go over +10 using a combination of bonuses.

If you could choose either combat or non combat bonuses in ranged you'd have a point but in general they are not mutually exclusive. And the only case where they are (precision aiming) I'd argue is just a way of accessing the equivalent non combat bonuses (that equal each other) in a combat situation if you meet the requirements (which would also apply in similar way to TA even i you did class it as a 'non combat mod').

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

The 'heritage' of the modifier seems to be indicative of why it was made non-stackable, at least one of the reasons. You've seen the quote; IANSOP - I can't expand on it any further until the holidays end.

It's only indicative of it being a potentially a non combat mod used in combat, that itself is not indicative of anything. Again which why I can aim normally and then add precision aiming on top

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I always thought it was +8 from a combined TelA and AoA:D.
it's certainly not 'you hit it:

Those are both examples of hitting inanimate objects, not out of combat actions. (it only references out of combat when referring to the damage bonus).

I'd certainly count hitting a chair with a baseball bat in non combat situation as an "utterly trivial task" for anyone physically capable of holding bat and within human average hand to eye co-ordination.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

The category/out-category bit seems like going in circles, so I'm leaving it alone at least until we get more new data.
As for mêlée plinking/non-plinking: mêlée plinking seems to be AoA+TelA, judging from the quoted section plus the usual application of TelA (I'm not sure if MA calls it out specifically for inanimates).

No it doesn't your citing hitting inanimate objects non hitting inanimate object out of combat, and you referencing the section we are disagreeing on to support your argument, yeah that is circular.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Applying Speed/Range modifiers to mêlée weapons will result in some weapons always acting at a penalty, particularly for high-SM characters. It seems like neither solution will make everyone happy.

Why would it do that? (also it was a better solve the issue you cited regarding the difficulty of attacking at 3 yrds a second, than assuming all AoA's are at that speed, I'm happy not to use it)

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

The actual main question to Kromm and TKD was why TelA and Eval are mutually exclusive.

Cool

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Is there some reason why you seem to be making a connection between being rooted in place and lacking Acting Defences? The two are very different things.

I'm not, but both are needed for this set up to work, which goes to underline the point about what you consider to a an over powerful combination, is actually balanced by the reality of it taking place.

Seriously run some one on one duel between humans and see how well it works.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I'm building on the most unfavourable case where there is still no outright penalty for the attacker and no Active Defences for the defender. For Move 5 characters, that is - it could be made somewhat more unfavourable at higher Move, but no more than Move 10 after all mods.

And that not a reasonable thing to do when then broadening it out into the wider context of combat in general and abstract upper limits caps. (I also don't get what you mean by no overall penalty and the move rates)

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Seems like you swapped the specific and general. Liquid Projector is a skill, which covers at least the following:

• 'Flamethrower' - a Jet weapon.
• 'Sprayer' - includes a ranged weapon shooting ring-shaped projectiles (not Jet) called Vortex Ring Projector.
• 'Squirt Gun' - fires a single squirt per pull of the trigger.
• 'Water Cannon' - weapon that fires a continuous jet of liquid.

All of them are Liquid Projectors, not all of them are Jets..

But we're talking about flame throwers, a flamer thrower is used with the liquid projector skill. A flame thrower is jet (but not all jets are flamethrowers), flame throwers are sub category of jets, and use the specific liquid projector rules. The specific trumps the general.

Not sure what you're worried about either. You didn't like the idea of a novice picking up a flame thrower and having a 50% chance to hitting someone's nose (or nose sized flying target) and given my description they are extremely unlikely to be able to.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

On second look, the deeper I go into stackability examples, the messier it gets. Seems to be the case that one general and easily and safely drawn conclusion from those specific examples is:
GURPS includes a certain number of non-stacking modifiers, and they can be quite different.

Yep (there are also an awful lot of stackable mods as well).