Pyramid #3/77: Combat

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

It may be that the best way to handle being able to cast a "negation" spell on your foe is to lower the threat value of the foe rather than somehow account for it on the caster.

Got a spell that negates all the bad guys' ranged attacks? Remove those points for both skills and damage. Now he's less of a threat.

Got a bunch of spells that really don't impact the foe? No problem, value unchanged.

That could severely artificially inflate a given character's CER. The way I intended such things to be handled was to determine the maximum amount of damage a attacker could inflict with a given attack that the spell "negated." See my post here about Reverse Missiles. GURPS Magic is extremely tricky. If I ever did a follow-up - it would probably be nothing but information on character abilities and what they'd add to a delver's CER.

I suppose a box would probably have been nice in that regard...but again, word count. She's a harsh mistress. And Steven had already performed some form of Gallifreyan high sorcery to get those tables in like he did. I'm sure if I tried to put any more in it might have ruptured time and space leading to myself and all my playtesters (which includes you) ending up on an adventure fighting sleestaks in some far off time and place.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

That could severely artificially inflate a given character's CER.

How? It doesn't change the caster's value at all.

Example of what i'm thinking of:

Caster: totally average but has a bunch of spells that are "negation" spells.

Threat: a bowman with Skill-30 and does 2d imp. Otherwise totally average.

The threat rating of the Threat will reflect his skill and damage, but the availability of (say) Reverse Missiles or Utter Dome means that the threat's rating drops to basically "average guy with no weapons."

So spells like this are used as a direct modifier to the Threat's CER, not the character's.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

How? It doesn't change the caster's value at all.

Example of what i'm thinking of:

Caster: totally average but has a bunch of spells that are "negation" spells.

Threat: a bowman with Skill-30 and does 2d imp. Otherwise totally average.

The threat rating of the Threat will reflect his skill and damage, but the availability of (say) Reverse Missiles or Utter Dome means that the threat's rating drops to basically "average guy with no weapons."

So spells like this are used as a direct modifier to the Threat's CER, not the character's.

I get what you are saying, but there are a couple issues here: 1) that's asking the GM to rework one character's CER for every single encounter involving weapons based on what damage the foes do with them; 2) it means way less integration of CER (as above); 3) I've personally never seen a player stick with just a particular attack if that attack is doing no damage - they just switch to another attack form and carry on. GMs playing their NPCs intelligently will do the same most of the time after it's used once or twice. That sets it up so the GM slows the game down with extra work, the players or foes switch up their attacks which will usually make that recalculation useless, and it makes CER more wibbly than it can be. Not everyone is like use with the Excel spreadsheet at the table. :-)

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by jacobmuller

Reading in my lunch break and realised I'd forgotten to mention the Low-Tech Armor Loadouts. The Shoshone part fits great with my latest project.
TQ Meister Howard.

Heh. It is pretty easy to miss my article amongst all the awesomeness in this issue.

[Rasputin]

Sorry to thresurrect, but I just got an e-mail from W23 that said this was updated. Can someone let me know what was wrong?

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Rasputin

Sorry to thresurrect, but I just got an e-mail from W23 that said this was updated. Can someone let me know what was wrong?

A few small erratas - mostly number issues in the CER tables toward the end.

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

A few small erratas - mostly number issues in the CER tables toward the end.

Speaking of those, is there any reason you didn't include the monsters in the bestiary at the back of Mirror of the Fire Demon?

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Rasputin

Speaking of those, is there any reason you didn't include the monsters in the bestiary at the back of Mirror of the Fire Demon?

Yes. I didn't have enough room - I barely got it all to fit in anyways. I could have added the small bestiary in the back, but then I would be asked why I didn't add the NPCs... That said, if I ever write my theoretical "GURPS Dungeon Fantasy: Dungeoncraft" I'll update it fully there - along with everything else out.

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

Yes. I didn't have enough room - I barely got it all to fit in anyways. I could have added the small bestiary in the back, but then I would be asked why I didn't add the NPCs... That said, if I ever write my theoretical "GURPS Dungeon Fantasy: Dungeoncraft" I'll update it fully there - along with everything else out.

I'll be glad to read it, even if only to check my own shoddy work. (The NPCs are handy for benchmarking.)