Questions about switching from 3rd edition to 4th

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Again I think this is an artifact created by the fact that unless you are suppressing GURPS assumes a point target. You aren't going to put all those rounds into a super-tight group regardless of whether your target is an aircraft carrier or not.

I don't think GURPS assumes a point target in the sense you mean. If it does that might account for this absurdity, but I really don't see any reason to think that's the case.

[Langy]

Again I think this is an artifact created by the fact that unless you are suppressing GURPS assumes a point target. You aren't going to put all those rounds into a super-tight group regardless of whether your target is an aircraft carrier or not.

He was referring to your proposed rule to help fix this issue, not just RAW GURPS.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by maxashe

I've played 3rd edition GURPS off and on for the last 10 years and I'm finally thinking about making the switch to 4th.

I think what you really need to ask yourself is why you want to switch. There are many reasons to switch (and not to switch) and most of them are subjective, not objective.

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by Langy

He was referring to your proposed rule to help fix this issue, not just RAW GURPS.

I have a couple suggestions along those lines, but shouldn't we start a new thread on this?

This tangent can't last long before lock...

[Nemi3e]

As you can probably tell from my name I'm mostly a 3e type of girl. But, well recently I've started in with 4e. No campaigns yet, alas.

I like the new set up for the stats, the support for the system, the imbuments, and all the little details that make sense.

That said, I have some reasons why I resisted the move.

One reason is that the systems are similar. This isn't a bad thing, but it does make it hard for me to pick up on the newer system. I go, "Oh, I know that," when I really don't. I have already sunk a great deal of time into 3e so I almost felt like I was wasting it to switch.

Second, I love IOU and Technomancer. I know, stuff is easily convertible, but still, it held me back.

Third, and this shall sound very silly; I hate the full color shiny paged books. Mostly it's the shiny pages. I can't write on them, sometimes the light reflects off funny and I have to shift it to read, they feel odd, etc. When I saw Prime Directive in Forbidden Planet, and that it was a paper back, I impulse bought it. Because it was paper.

I know the Basic Set replaces the compendiums, but I would really like a paper back book of just the advantages, disadvantages, and skills.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

I have a couple suggestions along those lines, but shouldn't we start a new thread on this?

This tangent can't last long before lock...

Agreed. I'll start a new thread and link it here.

Back OT: Even if the 4e autofire rules break down in edge cases the 3e rules broke down in engagements by small teams against point targets, i.e. most RPG combat.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Nemi3e

Second, I love IOU and Technomancer. I know, stuff is easily convertible, but still, it held me back.

IMO 4e supports the full spectrum of IoU types of characters a bit better.

Originally Posted by Nemi3e

Third, and this shall sound very silly; I hate the full color shiny paged books. Mostly it's the shiny pages. I can't write on them, sometimes the light reflects off funny and I have to shift it to read, they feel odd, etc. When I saw Prime Directive in Forbidden Planet, and that it was a paper back, I impulse bought it. Because it was paper.

I know the Basic Set replaces the compendiums, but I would really like a paper back book of just the advantages, disadvantages, and skills.

Not silly at all! I also like monochrome drawings. IMO a rulebook shouldn't focus too much on art anyway. Not always so with worldbooks, though.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I don't think GURPS assumes a point target in the sense you mean. If it does that might account for this absurdity, but I really don't see any reason to think that's the case.

Actually, the game does assume a point target. Shots at anything big enough to have "walls" are assumed to be at a 10-square-foot area; see p. B558. If you exceed the HP in that area, you cause a breach at that one point. For huge targets like buildings and aircraft carriers, the other hits simply don't contribute to the breach. They certainly still count as hits against the wrong target, which here can be crew on deck, protruding antennas, and anything else that isn't the primary 10-square-foot target. The rules don't say that if you fire a machine gun at a truck, all the bullets that "miss" magically bend around the truck; they just say that they don't contribute to chewing up the truck's HP. They can still hit people riding on the truck, pierce nonvital areas of the truck and come out the other side, etc.