Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-26-2011, 11:00 PM   #61
roguebfl
Dog of Lysdexics
 
roguebfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Melbourne FL, Formerly Wellington NZ
Default Re: First session -- Speed/Range Table questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix_Dragon View Post
Do you seriously suggest that plain iron sights should give more benefit than a 1.5x scope, or equal benefit to a 2x or 3x scope? And what would be the point of making those scopes, some of which were the standard for sniper rifles in their time, if iron sights were as good or better?
The same thing that Makes a Pentium 3 better than a Pentium 2 PC dispite the fat under the GURPS rules they are the same complexity. the differences falls below the system res lotion threshold.
__________________
Rogue the Bronze Firelizard
Gerald Grenier, Jr. Hail Eris!
Rogue's Weyr
roguebfl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2011, 11:02 PM   #62
lexington
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Default Re: First session -- Speed/Range Table questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by roguebfl View Post
The same thing that Makes a Pentium 3 better than a Pentium 2 PC dispite the fat under the GURPS rules they are the same complexity. the differences falls below the system res lotion threshold.
If the difference were below the resolution of the system then a 2x sight would be the same as a 1x sight, not worse. Also we know it isn't below the system resolution because the game already draws a difference, it says a 2x sight is better than a 1x sight, exactly the opposite of what you propose.
lexington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2011, 11:42 AM   #63
DouglasCole
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
 
DouglasCole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
Default Re: First session -- Speed/Range Table questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Langy View Post
'Actual size' refers to the fact that a field of vision is two dimensional, not linear. In other words, what matters is cross-sectional area, not linear dimensions.

You are correct that Douglas made a misstatement, though - 'width' implies linear dimension, and you are correct that you halving width gives +2 to hit.
Yeah, +1 is 50% bigger and -1 ~30% smaller. I should have said +/-1 is a factor of about 1.5 in the cone of fire, which is correct in both directions, more or less.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC
My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify
My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon
DouglasCole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2011, 03:13 AM   #64
Phoenix_Dragon
 
Phoenix_Dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: First session -- Speed/Range Table questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by roguebfl View Post
The same thing that Makes a Pentium 3 better than a Pentium 2 PC dispite the fat under the GURPS rules they are the same complexity. the differences falls below the system res lotion threshold.
...what? That makes even less sense.

What you are saying is:

Iron sights (No magnification): +1
1.5x scope: +0 (worse than iron sights!)
2x scope: +1
3x scope: +1

That's not like saying that a Pentium 2 and Pentium 3 are equal complexity. That's like saying a Pentium 1 is superior to a Pentium 2 and equal to a Pentium 3. Granularity does not explain why you would have iron sights giving more of a bonus than a 1.5x scope!
Phoenix_Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2011, 05:18 AM   #65
HANS
 
HANS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Berlin, Germany
Default Re: First session -- Speed/Range Table questions

Once more. No, iron sights don't give a +1 bonus. There's no way you can read this in any of the rule books, including Basic Set, or the later books (High-Tech and Tactical Shooting) written by me.

Per the Basic Set, you can only profit from Accuracy-enhancing accessories if you're Aiming. The "Accuracy and Aiming" only mentions "a scope" (p. B372), which is short for "telescopic sight" (if this somehow is in question, although I wouldn't know why, the term is explained on p. B412). Iron sights are nowhere mentioned. And no, simply claiming that iron sights are as good as a 2X scope is simply making stuff up.

This is what the rules say. I don't find this opaque or badly exaplained in the least.

This is also what simple logic should tell you. Most firearms have iron sights. This would mean that all these weapons get an extra +1, on top of their Acc. Why would anyone assume that the rules are written to accommodate the tiny minority of guns that lack iron sights rather than the majority of normal guns that have iron sights? Not to mention that the whole interpretation can't be reconciled at all with how telescopic sights work, which is explained in detail in High-Tech (pp. 155-156). Any magnification below 2X, including 1.9X, gives +0.

Cheers

HANS
__________________
I blog at Shooting Dice.

Last edited by HANS; 12-28-2011 at 07:26 AM.
HANS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
guns, high-tech

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.