04-02-2009, 11:36 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: London, Ontario
|
relative size modifier
the faq suggests that the attack modifier to hit should be based on the attacker's SM as well as the defender. Makes a lot of sense, otherwise giants would never ever miss one another and pixies would never ever hit each other. But that does make it so that a dwarf/really short character would get +1 to hit pretty much everyone. Does that seem right? I'm playing a short little girl right now so that would really help her, but it seems a little odd.
__________________
..my campaign.. |
04-02-2009, 11:40 PM | #2 |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: relative size modifier
Using relative SM is suggested somewhere outside the basic set. Powers, probably.
|
04-03-2009, 12:03 AM | #3 | |
☣
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southeast NC
|
Re: relative size modifier
Quote:
That's true whether the size difference is from a smaller than average attacker or a larger than average target.
__________________
RyanW - Actually one normal sized guy in three tiny trenchcoats. |
|
04-03-2009, 04:30 AM | #4 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
|
Re: relative size modifier
This thread sort of answers one I started. Hahahaha.
__________________
A man said to the universe: "Sir I exist!" "However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation." |
04-03-2009, 04:57 AM | #5 | |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Torino, Italy
|
Re: relative size modifier
Quote:
It's a pretty basic design choice, and it changes radically game balance... so I'd have expected GURPS to give just one, consistant ruling. Specifically, if you use relative SM, then being little becomes more advantageous, and being big (positive SM) becomes more disadvantageous. And not by a small margin... +1 to hit everything with any skills is easily worth 10-15 points. So a SM-2 race freely gets 40/60 points worth of advantages compared to a SM+2 race (if you use relative SM). SM is supposed to be a zero-point feature, because its ads and disads are supposed to cancel out, so I'm wondering... how can that be? How can be that Size Modifier is always worth 0 CP, whether you use relative or absolute modifiers in combat?
__________________
|
|
04-03-2009, 05:46 AM | #6 | |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Medford, MA
|
Re: relative size modifier
Quote:
Also, +1 == 10-15points assumes way more combat skills than I usually ever have. So...and those small people will be doing less damage. It is all balanced out for me. |
|
04-03-2009, 06:02 AM | #7 | ||
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Torino, Italy
|
Re: relative size modifier
Quote:
Quote:
In any case: I can't see how it can be all balanced out, with BOTH RULES. E.g. Basic Set claims that the effects of SM "balance out" even if smaller creatures a bonus to hit. Powers claims that the effects of SM balance out, when smaller creatures DO have a bonus to it. So, which one is right? They can't possibly be BOTH right :)
__________________
|
||
04-03-2009, 06:09 AM | #8 | |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Medford, MA
|
Re: relative size modifier
Quote:
SM-1 Halfling goes to stab a SM+1 Ogre. Absolute SM gives him a +1 to hit. Relative SM gives him a +2 to hit. SM+1 Ogre goes to grapple SM-1 Halfling. Absolute SM gives the Ogre +1 to grapple, Relative SM gives the Ogre a +2 to grapple. So, whichever option you go with, there is balance between big and small. |
|
04-03-2009, 07:35 AM | #9 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: London, Ontario
|
Re: relative size modifier
where's that grapple diffeerence mentioned? does a SM -1 character get -1 to grapple Sm 0 creatures? i don't see that in campaigns but maybe it's listed in a non-obvious place.. the faq claims it's p 402 but i don't see it there.
plus the relative rule does mean that a giant gets -1 to hit sm0 people in melee which is a pretty significnt drawback as well...
__________________
..my campaign.. |
04-03-2009, 08:36 AM | #10 | |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Medford, MA
|
Re: relative size modifier
Quote:
SM+1 Giant, vs. SM0 Human. Absolute: Giant has no penalty to attack the human in melee. Giant has a +1 to Grapple. Relative: Giant has -1 Penalty to attack the human in melee. Giant has a +1 to grapple. Relative seems more symmetrical...but I haven't thought it all through. |
|
Tags |
scaling rules, size modifier |
|
|