Advantages Are Not Utility Priced

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Comic books, or sci-fi (as opposed to science fiction; the difference being how hard the science is). That said, when I said "cyborg", I was thinking more in terms of bionics rather than cybernatic implants: replacing the skeleton with one made of steel, or replacing whole limbs with mechanical substitutes; that sort of thing. Frankly, I was picturing Ahnold.

Who would have been no match unarmed for a guy in a suit of TL 9 powered armour.

[dataweaver]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Who would have been no match unarmed for a guy in a suit of TL 9 powered armour.

His GURPS counterpart (a TL9 combat android) certainly would have been.

[Sunrunners_Fire]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

His GURPS counterpart (a TL9 combat android) certainly would have been.

Its' noteworthy that said Combat Android costs a tad (heh) bit more than 200 points.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

His GURPS counterpart (a TL9 combat android) certainly would have been.

No, it wouldn't. It has no weapons. It has 30 points of DR versus the armour's 70.

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Right. Really, what I've been arguing is that trying to use the same set of costs across genres is a fool's errand: if you're going to use character points at all, you need to customize according to the intended setting. And frankly, I'm more inclined to just ditch character points altogether; they're more hassle than they're worth.

But if you are going to count points, then you should be able to strip out the built-in UB costs which should only be setting specific.

After all, if we take as a base that 2d dmg has a cost value of [10], and if blocking 2d dmg takes 7 DR, then 7 DR should have a cost value of [10] as well.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

After all, if we take as a base that 2d dmg has a cost value of [10], and if blocking 2d dmg takes 7 DR, then 7 DR should have a cost value of [10] as well.

Why would you think that? No obvious reason for an attack and enough DR to negate the average damage of the attack should cost the same. TBH, you could make reasonable cases for the DR costing significantly more or significantly less.

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Why would you think that? No obvious reason for an attack and enough DR to negate the average damage of the attack should cost the same. TBH, you could make reasonable cases for the DR costing significantly more or significantly less.

Value wise, X plus -X should equal out, so doing 2d dmg and blocking 2d dmg should equal out.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Value wise, X plus -X should equal out, so doing 2d dmg and blocking 2d dmg should equal out.

First of all, not necessarily. Some things are easier to prevent than to do, others easier to do than prevent.

Second of all, doing 2d damage and resisting 2d damage do not really have an X and -X relationship. On one of many hands, resisting 2d damage doesn't negate doing 2d damage...it negates doing 2d damage to you. On another, resisting 2d damage acts to devalue other people's 'doing 2d damage' abilities, but the doing 2d damage ability makes other people's resistance to damage more valuable! And really both abilities main value is usually going to be in reference to situations where the counterpart ability is not present...

[Sunrunners_Fire]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Value wise, X plus -X should equal out, so doing 2d dmg and blocking 2d dmg should equal out.

Except GURPS is biased against defense for entirely rational reasons. Namely that if offense and defense are equal, combat takes forever to resolve. "1d [5] vs DR 3 [15]" is the current balance. Shifting the balance to "2d [10] vs DR 7 [10]" doesn't provide improved playability (and is rather implausible; its' much easier to damage something than it is to protect something from damage).

[Langy]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

You make some good points; although I'd quibble that in a Supers campaign where the cost of ST has been adjusted to enable super-strength, DR enough to protect against strength-based attacks is largely indistinguishable from Protection against firearms and up.

It really is more of a "setting" thing than a "TL" thing, overall.

True; I should have said 'protection against normal human ST-based attacks should cost the same regardless of TL/setting'. Superhumans get different breakdowns, and might be lumped into firearms or naval artillery or even higher, depending on the superhuman in question.