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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-11-2018, 10:51 AM   #91
Daigoro
 
Daigoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Meifumado
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

While ST ratings can be objectively reality tested using BL, I wouldn't put too much weight on what ST means in terms of damage as the ST/damage table is purely arbitrary. Starting at Thr 1d-2 for ST 10 and going up in nice little increments, it's purely gamist. There's nothing wrong with that, it just doesn't make an argument for how to match ST to reality.

Damage is matched to reality in terms of steel and DR, but the ST table would have to be derived from that using first principles.
__________________
Collaborative Settings:
Cyberpunk: Duopoly Nation
Space Opera: Behind the King's Eclipse
And heaps of forum collabs, 30+ and counting!
Daigoro is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 11:52 AM   #92
Gollum
 
Gollum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alonsua View Post
It is neccesary for all the books to fit in together, otherwise some statements do not make sense when compared to others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gollum View Post
I don’t think so but, as I said above, I didn’t read that thread in detail. So, I will do it before bringing new (counter)arguments.
I read the whole thread attentively now and have no other argument than emphasizing that one:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl View Post
But all of the books do not fit together, we pick and choose what books we want to use in GURPS.
Indeed, in GURPS, some rules are harshly realistic, some others are just quite realistic, some others are heroic and some others are crazily cinematic or even clearly super-heroic.

So, the cap numbers you choose for basic attributes will depend on which genre you want to play, of course. But there is still no need to change what is written in How to be a GURPS GM: if you want to play a harshly realistic game, it is obvious that you won’t take (or allow, as GM) attributes above 14, because 15 is described as:
15-16: Amazing (highest you’ll likely see or hear about, strongly defines an adventurer).
So, no harshly realistic PC can be the highest everyone around is likely to see or hear about. Pretending to be the best of the world in a realistic campaign already begins to be unrealistic: why would your character be that powerful, while all others are supposed to be just ordinary people?

Now defining 15 as the mythic maximum is just a waste of time, in my humble opinion, because mythic characters are not supposed to fall in the harshly realistic genre. They are supposed to be far much higher than every real man will ever be. Conan can fight a gorilla barehanded. Walter O’Brien (in the Scorpion TV series) is supposed to have a so high IQ that he knows everything about everything, at a higher level than experts. A GURPS IQ of 18-20 allows that (with mental default skills ranging from 12 to 16). As a GURPS ST of 18-20 allows Conan to do what he is supposed to do in books and movies.

Just give them a harshly realistic score of 14-15 and they are not anymore able to do what they are supposed to do.

Alonsua, you said in your thread that you only wanted to discuss about realistic characters. That’s a good idea – and I do agree with most of what you said about that. But why do you suddenly want to reduce heroic characters (legendary, mythic ones) to realistic abilities only (cap of 14 and 15, respectively)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl View Post
I choose not to use a book that tells me how to be a GM in GURPS because I have been playing since '88 and running games since '92. I know how to run a GURPS game, I do not need any book to tell be how to do it, especially since I will likely have different opinions about what is balanced, plausible, or realistic than the author of the book.
That’s funny. I’m playing GURPS since ’90 but still bought How to be a GURPS GM with pleasure because it precisely helps to best understand how GURPS works "from inside" and, then, it improves my manner of handling it.
Gollum is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 02:58 PM   #93
Alonsua
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2017
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gollum View Post
I read the whole thread attentively now and have no other argument than emphasizing that one:


Indeed, in GURPS, some rules are harshly realistic, some others are just quite realistic, some others are heroic and some others are crazily cinematic or even clearly super-heroic.

So, the cap numbers you choose for basic attributes will depend on which genre you want to play, of course. But there is still no need to change what is written in How to be a GURPS GM: if you want to play a harshly realistic game, it is obvious that you won’t take (or allow, as GM) attributes above 14, because 15 is described as:
15-16: Amazing (highest you’ll likely see or hear about, strongly defines an adventurer).
So, no harshly realistic PC can be the highest everyone around is likely to see or hear about. Pretending to be the best of the world in a realistic campaign already begins to be unrealistic: why would your character be that powerful, while all others are supposed to be just ordinary people?

Now defining 15 as the mythic maximum is just a waste of time, in my humble opinion, because mythic characters are not supposed to fall in the harshly realistic genre. They are supposed to be far much higher than every real man will ever be. Conan can fight a gorilla barehanded. Walter O’Brien (in the Scorpion TV series) is supposed to have a so high IQ that he knows everything about everything, at a higher level than experts. A GURPS IQ of 18-20 allows that (with mental default skills ranging from 12 to 16). As a GURPS ST of 18-20 allows Conan to do what he is supposed to do in books and movies.

Just give them a harshly realistic score of 14-15 and they are not anymore able to do what they are supposed to do.

Alonsua, you said in your thread that you only wanted to discuss about realistic characters. That’s a good idea – and I do agree with most of what you said about that. But why do you suddenly want to reduce heroic characters (legendary, mythic ones) to realistic abilities only (cap of 14 and 15, respectively)?


That’s funny. I’m playing GURPS since ’90 but still bought How to be a GURPS GM with pleasure because it precisely helps to best understand how GURPS works "from inside" and, then, it improves my manner of handling it.
Hey Gollum! I just considered

14: Legendary (historical “bests” and remarkable fictional heroes).

To be realistic among historical bests and

15: Mythic (astounding even among great heroes in fiction and folklore).

To be the best among the historical bests.

Maybe I got it wrong?

Pd. Gorillas have ST 15 with lower intelligence and low skills, so Conan at the same ST with higher intelligence and better combat skills can put them down. He can even do it with ST 14 and still be stronger than them by undergoing some Lifting or Lifting Strength training :)

Last edited by Alonsua; 07-11-2018 at 03:01 PM.
Alonsua is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:09 PM   #94
mr beer
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edges View Post
Killing a fully grown man with a single punch to the face is not super human. I had a friend who would have done so had it not been for the miracle of modern surgery. My friend was only 17 at the time and not particularly big (slightly smaller than the victim). These sorts of things can be modeled with the critical hit table.
Conan did it reliably though, in his (what he considered) dotage he complained because he punched some guy in the face and only knocked them out cold instead of snapping their neck.
mr beer is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:15 PM   #95
weby
 
weby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hal View Post
Are we taking into account ALL Of the possible modifiers involved here, or only the negative ones? Remember, the -10 penalty is strictly for the final result, not the overall issues inherent to the situation.

For now, it may seem that I'm arguing both sides of the argument, but what I'm really saying is this: When someone says that the max penalty to a skill is set to 10, is that person really saying that the max usable penalty for a given skill is set to -10 and can even be attempted because it is too impossible? Ask that person instead. I can't put words in THEIR mouth other than to tell another "Hey, their position is not without merit".
Except that there is no indication anywhere in the rules that the total penalty cannot be higher than -10 on that one of the modifiers should likely not be more than -9 or -10.
__________________
--
GURPS spaceship unofficial errata and thoughts: https://gsuc.roto.nu/
weby is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:17 PM   #96
mr beer
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alonsua View Post
They are exactly 3.92× stronger at ST 14 plus Lifting 18 as soon as you start using the skill appropriately. And 4.5× stronger by ST 15.
When we attempt to model reality, to the extent that GURPS conflicts with the real world, then the real world takes precedence. Lifting skill doesn't confirm to the realities of weight lifting at all, so it's useless as written to model the real world. Whether that you means you choose to ignore it (as I do) or ignore the problem (as you do) is a matter of interpretation.

BTW it's entirely arbitrary to model a world class strength athlete by deciding they have a combination of ST and Lifting skill 18. It seems extremely likely to me that they have at least some level of Lifting ST for example.

Also I said that world class strength athletes are 4x stronger or more than an average healthy adult male. Assuming that our Joe Sixpack is ST 10, our world class athletes do in fact lift more than 4x that amount.

Of course the exact factor breaks down pretty quickly under examination, for example our average man might be able to bench 135lbs, squat 125lbs and deadlift 155lbs. Using my google-fu, our world class bench is over 700lbs (over 5x), squat over 1000lbs (over 8x) and deadlift over 1100lbs (over 7x).

Right away we can see a problem in that our multipliers vary radically between 5x and 8x, whereas in RAW GURPS the multipliers should be consistent. And powerlifting is merely one way to be a strength athlete. We could look at strongman instead or Olympic lifting. I bet the multipliers would be different there. Also, Olympic lifting is a very technical sport, so to the extent that a corrected version of Lifting skill should be used, Olympic lifters should have a higher Lifting skill than say powerlifters but it would be a specialised version. Strongmen who train a wide variety of feats would have a higher Lifting skill than powerlifters and it would not be specialised.

So anyway these facts and the discussion of them shows that reality does not conform to GURPS rules. But it also shows that the 'strongest possible' humans can lift significantly more than 4x an average man. So I mentally write off the excess as something other than ST, probably a combination of a fixed version of Lifting skill and Lifting ST, and say ST 20 is reasonable and realistic for a strongest possible human.

https://www.livestrong.com/article/3...rage-man-lift/

Last edited by mr beer; 07-11-2018 at 04:37 PM.
mr beer is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:30 PM   #97
weby
 
weby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daigoro View Post
While ST ratings can be objectively reality tested using BL, I wouldn't put too much weight on what ST means in terms of damage as the ST/damage table is purely arbitrary. Starting at Thr 1d-2 for ST 10 and going up in nice little increments, it's purely gamist. There's nothing wrong with that, it just doesn't make an argument for how to match ST to reality.

Damage is matched to reality in terms of steel and DR, but the ST table would have to be derived from that using first principles.
Indeed, at higher ST, the swing damage raises way too high for real armor penetration. And I do not mean 20 with high here, even 12/13 starts to feel questionable, specially with the smaller swing damage type weapons and then we have ST 16 where you do as much damage with a baton as with a 9mm pistol...
__________________
--
GURPS spaceship unofficial errata and thoughts: https://gsuc.roto.nu/
weby is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:31 PM   #98
Alonsua
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2017
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr beer View Post
When we attempt to model reality, to the extent that GURPS conflicts with the real world, then the real world takes precedence. Lifting skill doesn't confirm to the realities of weight lifting at all, so it's useless as written to model the real world. Whether that you means you choose to ignore it (as I do) or ignore the problem (as you do) is a matter of interpretation. Either approach is valid.

BTW it's entirely arbitrary to model a world class strength athlete by deciding they have a combination of ST and Lifting skill 18. It seems extremely likely to me that they have at least some level of Lifting ST for example.
Maybe and that is why I would lower your athelete ST to 13 and give her Lifting ST +1. Lifting confirms the realities of lifting very well, as I just covered in several of my previous posts. You can keep repeating that it does not because potato, without bringing any real proof to the table, but it is not going to become a true statement like that.
Alonsua is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 05:03 PM   #99
mr beer
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alonsua View Post
Lifting confirms the realities of lifting very well, as I just covered in several of my previous posts. You can keep repeating that it does not because potato, without bringing any real proof to the table, but it is not going to become a true statement like that.
I don't know what 'because potato' means, but I didn't see you support the Lifting skill with any facts. To be fair, I didn't bring any facts to support my position either, because I thought the shortcomings of the skill were self-evident.

So lets review the skill in question with a real world example:

On a success, increase your Basic Lift by 5% per point by which you made your roll.

Now, roughly 18% of the time we are going to roll either 3 to 6 or 15 to 18. Lets look at a man who goes to the gym and has some Lifting skill but he's just a part timer, so say skill 10. He can bench 200lbs from ST alone (probably a combination of ST and Lifting ST).

So 18% of the time he is going to succeed by 4 to 7 points and bench 240lbs to 270lbs or fail his roll and bench 200lbs.

That sort of variation simply doesn't exist. If I can reliably bench 200lbs (which I can), then on a great day I might bench 205lbs and on a bad day 195lbs, there's no 35% variation. There's not even a 10% variation. Do this 20 times on 20 different days, with 20 different "rolls" and you won't see more than 5% at the very most.

Scale this up to world class lifters with your Lifting skill 18, we should see variable bonii constantly ranging between 60% and 10%. There is no real world swinging 50% variation in what someone can lift. It's not even vaguely accurate.

So where does this leave us? Well if you want to model the 'real world' in GURPS, you need to make some interpretations. In my case, I'm observing that real humans are more than 4x stronger than an average man, the extra is whatever, therefore ST 20 is plausible.
mr beer is offline  
Old 07-11-2018, 06:05 PM   #100
Andrew Hackard
Munchkin Line Editor
 
Andrew Hackard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Default Re: Attribute levels and their meanings.

Locked until the GURPS team can take a look and sort out what the hell is going on here.
__________________
Andrew Hackard, Munchkin Line Editor
If you have a question that isn't getting answered, we have a thread for that.

Let people like what they like. Don't be a gamer hater.

#PlayMunchkin on social media: Twitter || Facebook || Instagram || YouTube
Follow us on Kickstarter: Steve Jackson Games and Warehouse 23
Andrew Hackard is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:21 AM.


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