Improving the Tonfa

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Brawling and Boxing typically don't make much use of open-handed parries (you typically use your arms) or strikes (you use your fists), yet don't have an attack or defense penalty (in fact, for equal investment, both of those get you better chance to hit and defend).

Which is why I didn't speak about Brawling... Here again, I try to avoid to speak about what I don't know. But if it is hard for a karateka, it logically must be hard for anybody...

Originally Posted by Varyon

I'd imagine there are several advanced styles (which would use GURPS Karate skill) that don't really make a lot of use out of open-handed bits. A character who has trained significantly in the karate style might become overly dependent on these and thus suffer a penalty when wielding a tonfa (or otherwise having a fistload in hand), but that's probably either a Quirk or below resolution.

You may be right here. And I am probably quibbling. But, as I said above, I am speaking about harsh realism. Martial Arts is full of harsh realism. There is even a clear split between Techniques and Cinematic techniques... So, why has the tonfa skill almost nothing else that every unarmed fighter can use it without any problem... I'm not good with tonkwa but still like this weapon very much, and hope to become good with it one day... In a few years. Which may explain why I am quibbling.

Originally Posted by Varyon

So go with a Perk. The 200 hours of training isn't set in stone - some people will take less time to get it, some will take more.

Yes, a perk would be good. I finally admit it above. As you say 200 hours is not in stone. It is just here to give an idea about what it requires in matter of training. But experience points gained during adventure are also here to reflect something realistic: you sometimes realize something important and suddenly improves one your skill immediately.

Originally Posted by Varyon

You keep coming back to this. The spinning attack should require a Technique, not an entire skill, which would require training to get up to skill.

Yes You're right. Sorry... I'm a bit tired these days and there is a lot to understand and to say... On this subject, if you find me to talkative and boring, tell it frankly. As I say to my wife (who begins to find that I spend a lot of time on these orange web pages!), I'm passionate. My favorite roleplaying game plus my favorite "hobby": martial arts.

Originally Posted by Varyon

This is something else you keep coming back to. Douglas Cole did indeed write up his version of the Technique using Karate, but I think that's because he mistakenly thought Karate was the general skill for using the tonfa (rather than just the skill to punch with it in Reverse Grip). I don't think anyone in this thread is now working under the assumption you can use Karate to spin the weapon - the debate is basically over if the spin should require a dedicated skill (Tonfa) or just a Technique based on Shortsword (or Sword, if you want to trim skills down further).

Yes. Sorry again.

Originally Posted by Varyon

Flails are a bad comparison here - they don't give a penalty because of speed, but rather because the chain allows it to wrap around a Parrying surface and hit you anyway.

Yes. I was not clear. I still wrote "just for another reason" precisely to mean that, but it was not clear enough. I just want to mean that it is possible to take speed of the attack into account in the defense, exactly as it is possible to take other factors into account (like flails specificity).

Originally Posted by Varyon

I'm not certain how this happens. "Karate represents advanced training at unarmed striking, not the actual Karate style, or any style for that matter. In fact, GURPS Karate is even usable with fistloads and the like, unlike the style."

Fistloads, brass knuckles or gloves, are not weapons in themselves: you have no other way to use them. Tonkwa is a weapon in itself: you have another way to use it. Fistloads, brass knuckles and gloves are only designed to improve punches. Tonkwa is not, even if it can. This is the main difference I see and, to me, it is a huge difference.

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Gollum

There was no such intention. I didn't quote it because I just didn't understand it. Really. I read it three times again and still don't understand the sentences, which are too complex for me. It's not your English. It's mine! My English is not as good as I would like too. I sometimes don't understand at all some sentences, despite understanding every word apart, and some fragment of sentences. So, I prefer not answering than saying something totally inadequate.

My apologies. To try to rephrase, I agree that eight hours is often going to be too little to realistically pick up a familiarity (though there are also weapons that should realistically take less than eight hours to pick up, look at the baton and dusack). It's important for the time it takes to gain familiarity with a weapon to take a realistic amount of hours. However it is also important for weapons that in reality take about the same amount of time to learn to take about the same amount of time to learn in game. If you take one weapon and make it take longer to gain familiarity but do nothing to a similarly difficult weapon you are sending a message through mechanics that isn't true even though technically you have improved the realism of one part of the rules. It's also difficult to come up with rules for gaining familiarity since how long it takes depends on what familiarities you already have.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. My little experience taught me that it is better to use what you really know that to use a tool that you don't know. Having said that, if I had to fight someone with a more dangerous weapon than a knife, I would just flee. Or use a weapon that I much better know: a bo.

If you can it's generally better to run away anyway : ).

Originally Posted by Gollum

Unlike you, I find the learning rules very useful to have a good idea of how long a training can be. Of course, nobody learns at exactly the same speed than someone else, and when someone learns, he sometimes improves fast, sometimes improves slower, sometimes not improves at all for a while, and then improves again... I'm a professional school teacher and I know that by heart. The learning rules don't take that into account. But they still give a good average and remains quite realistic as soon a the characters attributes remain realistic.

Part of that is intended to be handled by attributes. The rules function as a decent swing at a solution for people who want the answer to what improvement their PCs could get while doing such and such. The learning rules also run into difficulties from a simulation standpoint with their linear cost for improvement and habit of requiring too much time to learn techniques.

Originally Posted by Gollum

perfectly do agree with that. I just simply regret that some things are not simpler... It's a bit stange to know that you have to own Basic Set, Martial Arts and Low Tech Companion 2 just to know the right damage inflicted with a bo... Or to read a thread about Tonfas on this forum...

A lot of things take until the book they are written for to be developed. Hopefully a lot of clarifications will be moved into core for fifth edition.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. I can reverse grip and spin my tonkwa very fast too. And it impress my friends too. They wouldn't like to be hurt. But when an expert look at me, he immediately notice that my weapon sometimes moves unintentionally or that my hikite is not good, and that in a true combat, it would be very dangerous for me.

Well it's not like non-experts don't do that with everything.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Which is why I didn't speak about Brawling... Here again, I try to avoid to speak about what I don't know. But if it is hard for a karateka, it logically must be hard for anybody...

No, not necessarily. It's quite possible for particular stylists to rely on a presumption in their training that shouldn't be implicit in the general skill.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Fistloads, brass knuckles or gloves, are not weapons in themselves: you have no other way to use them. Tonkwa is a weapon in itself: you have another way to use it. Fistloads, brass knuckles and gloves are only designed to improve punches. Tonkwa is not, even if it can. This is the main difference I see and, to me, it is a huge difference.

Fistloads and the like includes striking with the hilt or pommel of the weapon. I'd just tell players that the tonfa statline under Karate is the tonfa equivalent of a hilt strike with a reversed grip weapon. The only mechanical difference is an effective +1 to parry compared to things like swords given the better ergonomics of a tonfa compared to a reversed grip sword.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Sindri

My apologies. To try to rephrase, I agree that eight hours is often going to be too little to realistically pick up a familiarity (though there are also weapons that should realistically take less than eight hours to pick up, look at the baton and dusack). It's important for the time it takes to gain familiarity with a weapon to take a realistic amount of hours. However it is also important for weapons that in reality take about the same amount of time to learn to take about the same amount of time to learn in game. If you take one weapon and make it take longer to gain familiarity but do nothing to a similarly difficult weapon you are sending a message through mechanics that isn't true even though technically you have improved the realism of one part of the rules. It's also difficult to come up with rules for gaining familiarity since how long it takes depends on what familiarities you already have.

OK. Tank you very much.

Do you think that, in reality, it is harder for a shortsword expert to become comfortable with a broadsword than for a karateka, kungfuka, etc., to become comfortable with a tonkwa? The difference between the two in GURPS rules is still awesome. -2 in one case. No penalty in the other (if you apply unfamiliarity to tonkwa, you logically have to apply it to broadsword too, since unfamiliarity also applies to two guns governed by the same skill).

And I was wrong about my calculation. A +2 in skill doesn't just cost 2 character points but 8. That makes an average of 1,600 hours of training with a master vs 8 hours without any master.

Originally Posted by Sindri

If you can it's generally better to run away anyway : ).

Yes. If only to avoid hurting your foe!
;-)

Originally Posted by Sindri

Part of that is intended to be handled by attributes. The rules function as a decent swing at a solution for people who want the answer to what improvement their PCs could get while doing such and such. The learning rules also run into difficulties from a simulation standpoint with their linear cost for improvement and habit of requiring too much time to learn techniques.

For the linearity, it is offset by character points earned during adventure. They allow to recreate the sudden boost in skills (you suddenly understand something very important that make you suddenly improve). So the Improvement through learning rules may sound wrong in themselves, they become more realistic when combined with the Improvement through adventure rules.

And for techniques, I don't think it requires too much time in GURPS rules. My karate master, who was in army (French Parachutists) once said that the problem of army is believing that techniques are quick to learn. Instructor shows it, make you try it one hour of two, and consider that you know how to do. But that is a mistake. A technique, to be really known, must be applicable in all possible situation, with foes of different size and weight. It requires to be repeated thousands of times.

Originally Posted by Sindri

A lot of things take until the book they are written for to be developed. Hopefully a lot of clarifications will be moved into core for fifth edition.

I read somewhere in this forum (a quite long while ago) that Steve Jackson didn't want to publish a fifth edition. Indeed, after a while, the problem would be exactly the same: supplements would be published, would add new interesting rules, and problems of this kind would inevitably come back again. So (at least at that time) Steve Jackson's choice was to go on with the fourth edition and let new books, Pyramid magazine, Errata, FAQ and this forum answer to the questions.

I think it is a very wise choice. Being enforced to regularly buy again the books you are supposed to own and to read them again (D&D policy, for instance) is not at all a good thing. That prevents to buy new interesting books that you don't have, and also prevents the authors team to write new interesting book because they have to rewrite all the old ones.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Well it's not like non-experts don't do that with everything.

Precisely. What kobudo teaches is that every new weapon is long to learn. Being able to pick any weapon you find and use it comfortably, like movie heroes do regularly is totally unrealistic.

Originally Posted by Sindri

No, not necessarily. It's quite possible for particular stylists to rely on a presumption in their training that shouldn't be implicit in the general skill.

Yes. You're right.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Fistloads and the like includes striking with the hilt or pommel of the weapon. I'd just tell players that the tonfa statline under Karate is the tonfa equivalent of a hilt strike with a reversed grip weapon. The only mechanical difference is an effective +1 to parry compared to things like swords given the better ergonomics of a tonfa compared to a reversed grip sword.

OK to be clearer, I just want to mean that fistloads, brass knuckles, hard gauntlets are tools specially design to improve punch. So, they perfectly fit for punching and are not too much hindering for parries. A tonkwa is not designed to punch. it is designed to be a weapon with its own specificities. Punching with it is possible. But this is a specific manner of punching. Likewise, it requires specific move to parry. They may sound like the karate ones for non experts, but if you really do it like karate ones you end up with hurting your own arms.

I'm not telling that using a tonkwa is impossible for someone who don't have the skill. I'm just telling that it realistically deserve a penalty. At least the same penalty that when a shortsword expert suddenly take a broadsword (about the same weapon but just more long and heavier; a tonkwa precisely makes your arm heavier and thicker). The penalty for the shortsword expert is -2 to attack (and, thus, -1 to parry). The penalty for the karateka using tonkwa doesn't exist at all.

To my mind this is an inconsistency.
Edit
Note that I also find unrealistic for a GURPS karateka to be able to use a sword in reverse grip to hit with the hilt at no penalty. And I find even more unrealistic for him to be able to cut someone with a shuriken at no penalty.

Edit
Note that I also find unrealistic for a GURPS karateka to be able to use a sword in reverse grip to hit with the hilt at no penalty. And I find even more unrealistic for him to be able to cut someone with a shuriken at no penalty.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Flails are a bad comparison here - they don't give a penalty because of speed, but rather because the chain allows it to wrap around a Parrying surface and hit you anyway.

Also note that this is pretty physically dubious. The realistic virtues of a flail seem to have to do with impact velocity (due to whip crack like actions -- which the arm can do, but not especially well) and with a tendency to foul parrying objects (it also fouls the flail, but if you're more ready than your opponent, that's probably okay).

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Also note that this is pretty physically dubious. The realistic virtues of a flail seem to have to do with impact velocity (due to whip crack like actions -- which the arm can do, but not especially well) and with a tendency to foul parrying objects (it also fouls the flail, but if you're more ready than your opponent, that's probably okay).

What Varyon wanted to mean is that what make flails harder to parry in GURPS rules is the fact that they can turn around the parrying weapon and still hurt the defender. That one is enforced to parry the very end of the weapon. He cannot parry the middle, like he could do with a sword of the same size. Hence the penalty.

The defender can parry the middle of a tonkwa. So there is a difference here. And I do agree. I just wanted to mean that the specific speed of the tonkwa could be handled with the same game mechanism (a penalty to parry), for a different reason, sure (the speed and not the fact that it can turn around the parrying weapon), but it would work without adding too much complexity.

Having said that, it is absolutely not an official GURPS rule, of course.

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Gollum

Do you think that, in reality, it is harder for a shortsword expert to become comfortable with a broadsword than for a karateka, kungfuka, etc., to become comfortable with a tonkwa? The difference between the two in GURPS rules is still awesome. -2 in one case. No penalty in the other (if you apply unfamiliarity to tonkwa, you logically have to apply it to broadsword too, since unfamiliarity also applies to two guns governed by the same skill).

Absolutely not harder. I'd say it's probably easier. No I'd look to things like the previously mentioned pata and it's relative the katar and large katar. Other things to consider are the slashing wheel, knife-wheel, deer antlers, quadrens and large quadrens, hook sword and urumi. Also consider how much ground the Polearm skill covers.

Originally Posted by Gollum

For the linearity, it is offset by character points earned during adventure. They allow to recreate the sudden boost in skills (you suddenly understand something very important that make you suddenly improve). So the Improvement through learning rules may sound wrong in themselves, they become more realistic when combined with the Improvement through adventure rules.

I didn't mean linearity in the sense that your progress is normally always at the same rate but in the sense that it takes the same time to get to skill 12 from skill 11 as it does to get from skill 20 from skill 19.

Originally Posted by Gollum

And for techniques, I don't think it requires too much time in GURPS rules. My karate master, who was in army (French Parachutists) once said that the problem of army is believing that techniques are quick to learn. Instructor shows it, make you try it one hour of two, and consider that you know how to do. But that is a mistake. A technique, to be really known, must be applicable in all possible situation, with foes of different size and weight. It requires to be repeated thousands of times.

That may be but in GURPS it takes at least a full forth of the time to improve the entire skill with everything even stuff not actually directly taught in the style to improve a technique. Point costs of techniques are set at an attempt at balance compared to buying skill when it reaches 4 points a level (as they should be) which means they only track with how difficult it is to teach in reality incidentally. Since techniques don't scale with the cost of your next skill level there are even points where it is totally pointless to try to teach a student a technique even if you had intended it to just be part of learning the next skill level instead of a permanent increase over their general skill level.

Originally Posted by Gollum

I read somewhere in this forum (a quite long while ago) that Steve Jackson didn't want to publish a fifth edition. Indeed, after a while, the problem would be exactly the same: supplements would be published, would add new interesting rules, and problems of this kind would inevitably come back again. So (at least at that time) Steve Jackson's choice was to go on with the fourth edition and let new books, Pyramid magazine, Errata, FAQ and this forum answer to the questions.

I'd be interested to see that, Steve Jackson posts rather infrequently. Most posts regarding fifth edition are by Kromm and (very broadly) can be described as "not even thinking about it, ask back in [insert many years here]". It is indeed important for RPGs to not edition cycle too often but it is also necessary for a RPG to get a new edition periodically if it is receiving continuous support. The alternative is precisely what we are seeing here, the state of the art rules become farther and farther away from someone looking at the basic books. Furthermore while Pyramid articles containing house rules, the Power-Ups series and an active forum community help a lot for a devoted fan it is very useful to be able to revisit old books for new readers if nothing else with what you have learned (and how the world may have changed since it's publishing). That can be accomplished by new editions within a game edition or waiting until a new game edition come along and frankly I am entirely in support of the implicit GURPS fourth edition policy of never doing two editions of one book in a single game edition. I believe that a new edition of GURPS isn't on the radar for the GURPS staff but I also believe that if it continues to receive support a new edition will arrive at some point.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Precisely. What kobudo teaches is that every new weapon is long to learn. Being able to pick any weapon you find and use it comfortably, like movie heroes do regularly is totally unrealistic.

I mean that if someone who has had a thorough introduction to the tonfa is doing things that would be dangerous in real combat with the tonfa they could easily also be doing things that would be dangerous with unarmed combat. Combat skills are hard, there are lots of dangerous things that someone can do. Just because someone isn't operating at an expert level doesn't mean that they are being substantially penalized.

Originally Posted by Gollum

OK to be clearer, I just want to mean that fistloads, brass knuckles, hard gauntlets are tools specially design to improve punch. So, they perfectly fit for punching and are not too much hindering for parries. A tonkwa is not designed to punch. it is designed to be a weapon with its own specificities. Punching with it is possible. But this is a specific manner of punching. Likewise, it requires specific move to parry. They may sound like the karate ones for non experts, but if you really do it like karate ones you end up with hurting your own arms.

You've skipped weapon hilts in that list and they're not specially designed to improve punching at all.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Sindri

Absolutely not harder. I'd say it's probably easier. No I'd look to things like the previously mentioned pata and it's relative the katar and large katar. Other things to consider are the slashing wheel, knife-wheel, deer antlers, quadrens and large quadrens, hook sword and urumi. Also consider how much ground the Polearm skill covers.

You are right about all that. To improve realism, the whole weapon list should certainly have to be rewritten... Which would eventually lead to other problems which would only appear afterward...

Originally Posted by Sindri

I didn't mean linearity in the sense that your progress is normally always at the same rate but in the sense that it takes the same time to get to skill 12 from skill 11 as it does to get from skill 20 from skill 19.

Oh, OK... But the problem don't really comes from the Improvement through study rules. GURPS rules don't use that principle in any kind of improvement. At least, they use it just a few for skills: 1 character point, then 2, then 4... But after that, it is always 4.

Roleplaying games which use that non linear kind of improvement usually use it for improvement through adventure as well as for improvement through study... Apart from the BRP system and maybe very few others.

Originally Posted by Sindri

That may be but in GURPS it takes at least a full forth of the time to improve the entire skill with everything even stuff not actually directly taught in the style to improve a technique. Point costs of techniques are set at an attempt at balance compared to buying skill when it reaches 4 points a level (as they should be) which means they only track with how difficult it is to teach in reality incidentally. Since techniques don't scale with the cost of your next skill level there are even points where it is totally pointless to try to teach a student a technique even if you had intended it to just be part of learning the next skill level instead of a permanent increase over their general skill level.

I don't know. As I said, game mastering especially Cthulhu adventures, I didn't use Martial Arts and Techniques. Especially Techniques. My players never wanted them, the full skill being detailed enough for what they wanted. Having said that, 1 point is sufficient to raise a technique by +1 while 4 points are necessary to raise the full skill by the same +1. So, if you want to raise more than 3 techniques, of course, the full skill is a better choice. But if you only want to raise one technique (circle tonkwa strike, for instance), learning the Technique is interesting in matter of point saving.

Originally Posted by Sindri

I'd be interested to see that, Steve Jackson posts rather infrequently.

It as not even a post of Steve Jackson. It was one of Kromm or of an other famous author. I don't remember very well. But he was speaking about what Steve Jackson directly told him.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Most posts regarding fifth edition are by Kromm and (very broadly) can be described as "not even thinking about it, ask back in [insert many years here]". It is indeed important for RPGs to not edition cycle too often but it is also necessary for a RPG to get a new edition periodically if it is receiving continuous support. The alternative is precisely what we are seeing here, the state of the art rules become farther and farther away from someone looking at the basic books. Furthermore while Pyramid articles containing house rules, the Power-Ups series and an active forum community help a lot for a devoted fan it is very useful to be able to revisit old books for new readers if nothing else with what you have learned (and how the world may have changed since it's publishing). That can be accomplished by new editions within a game edition or waiting until a new game edition come along and frankly I am entirely in support of the implicit GURPS fourth edition policy of never doing two editions of one book in a single game edition. I believe that a new edition of GURPS isn't on the radar for the GURPS staff but I also believe that if it continues to receive support a new edition will arrive at some point.

I'm not waiting for a new edition. So many things are inevitably lost between two editions, because it is impossible to rewrite all the books already published for the previous one. I've got at least 50 books for the third edition which will never have their equivalent in the fourth edition. And when I look at the time required to have the very basic ones (Low-Tech, High-Tech, Ultra-Tech, Magic, Martial Art, Horror), I'm really wondering: if a fifth edition come again in 2016, for instance, how many years to wait before having them again? And what about books like Vehicles, which didn't have the time to be rewritten for the fourth edition yet?

Contrary to D&D, GURPS authors are a little team. If they had to rewrite the game every 10 years, the largest part of their work would only be rewriting what has already been written...

Originally Posted by Sindri

I mean that if someone who has had a thorough introduction to the tonfa is doing things that would be dangerous in real combat with the tonfa they could easily also be doing things that would be dangerous with unarmed combat. Combat skills are hard, there are lots of dangerous things that someone can do. Just because someone isn't operating at an expert level doesn't mean that they are being substantially penalized.

And I perfectly do agree But there is a difference between being non-expert (which I am, in karate) and being clumsy (which I am with tonkwa). A totally new weapon don't only make you non-expert. It usually makes you clumsy... And for a much more longer time than just 8 hours.

Originally Posted by Sindri

You've skipped weapon hilts in that list and they're not specially designed to improve punching at all.

Yes. And as I said above (quite far above now), I also find unrealistic the fact that it could be used with karate without any other penalty than unfamiliarity.

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Gollum

You are right about all that. To improve realism, the whole weapon list should certainly have to be rewritten... Which would eventually lead to other problems which would only appear afterward...

Well the skill list, the weapon stats are fine. If a redesigned list of combat skills still includes Tonfa though it's going to have to end up including a lot of weapon skills.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Oh, OK... But the problem don't really comes from the Improvement through study rules. GURPS rules don't use that principle in any kind of improvement. At least, they use it just a few for skills: 1 character point, then 2, then 4... But after that, it is always 4.

Yes it does, because tying how long it takes to learn something directly to how much it costs in points was a decision. There are other options.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Having said that, 1 point is sufficient to raise a technique by +1 while 4 points are necessary to raise the full skill by the same +1. So, if you want to raise more than 3 techniques, of course, the full skill is a better choice. But if you only want to raise one technique (circle tonkwa strike, for instance), learning the Technique is interesting in matter of point saving.

Yes I know how techniques work. The point is that while there sometimes is a bad tendency in the real world to teach techniques to someone until they can successfully perform it once or so there is a middle ground with a realistic rate of technique learning between that and the excessive amount of time it takes in GURPS to learn a technique relative to learning the whole skill. Many, possibly most, techniques do not take very long to teach to the point of being able to reliably pull them off in combat (to completely eliminate the final bit of penalty probably should take a fair bit of time but not bringing the technique up to a reasonable chance of success).

Not that it much matters to me since I've given up on the whole mechanic of insert-time-get-points as fundamentally poisonous for the sorts of games I want to run.

Originally Posted by Gollum

I'm not waiting for a new edition. So many things are inevitably lost between two editions, because it is impossible to rewrite all the books already published for the previous one. I've got at least 50 books for the third edition which will never have their equivalent in the fourth edition. And when I look at the time required to have the very basic ones (Low-Tech, High-Tech, Ultra-Tech, Magic, Martial Art, Horror) that I'm really wondering: if a fifth edition come again in 2016, for instance, how many years to wait before having them again? And what about Vehicle, which didn't have yet the time to be rewritten for the fourth edition yet?

A fifth edition isn't coming in 2016. And it would be a great shame if VD never got a fourth edition version. However frequently fifth edition gets discussed as if it's not even going to be a thing as opposed to a thing many years in the future whereas the only way I see that as happening is if the GURPS line dies and stays dead.

Things aren't lost in edition changes either, GURPS isn't like D&D which has a history of being different games in different editions. Take a look at those at least 50 third edition books. For how many of them is it actually relevant that it's third edition? Mechanically nearly all of third edition has been repeated, converted, supplanted or something in fourth edition. Things like the historical books don't need to be updated. Sure in infinite resources world it would technically be nice for the historicals to be updated to fourth edition but the lack of that isn't very significant. When fifth edition comes out I'll probably take my mass of fourth edition rules and replace the improved sections. The lack of the edition current tech books doesn't remove my previous edition ones and there's a chance that the stars will align and they can be put out in the right order which would significantly increase their combined usefulness. It may take a long time for all of the extended core books to be published but the books should be improved versions not the fourth edition version with updated rules and it's an excuse to redo some of the ones that really need it (Magic, I'm looking at you).

Originally Posted by Gollum

Contrary to D&D, GURPS authors are a little team. If they had to rewrite the game every 10 to 15 years, the largest part of their work woud only be rewriting what has already been written... And they couldn't create anything new.

Well that depends on what you consider new. Martial Arts for example is far from just a fourth edition update of the third edition Martial Arts. It also depends on what the new stuff will be. Unlike things like tech books, genre books and expanded mechanical subsection books which are the sort of things that get repeated through the editions and which have a very broad applicability new stuff has a much more niche appeal.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Sindri

Well the skill list, the weapon stats are fine. If a redesigned list of combat skills still includes Tonfa though it's going to have to end up including a lot of weapon skills.

The skill list, yes... But it already includes the Tonfa skill. Martial Arts page 61 and Basic Set, page 209.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Yes it does, because tying how long it takes to learn something directly to how much it costs in points was a decision. There are other options.

Of course, there are other options. But GURPS authors chose to make an important link between the power of an ability, its point cost and the time it requires to be studied. This is good for game balance: more powerful things cost more and take more time to be learned. Just note that the time can still be reduced because there are also Improvement through adventure rules, which don't require any specific time. Improvement can be sudden.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Yes I know how techniques work. The point is that while there sometimes is a bad tendency in the real world to teach techniques to someone until they can successfully perform it once or so there is a middle ground with a realistic rate of technique learning between that and the excessive amount of time it takes in GURPS to learn a technique relative to learning the whole skill. Many, possibly most, techniques do not take very long to teach to the point of being able to reliably pull them off in combat (to completely eliminate the final bit of penalty probably should take a fair bit of time but not bringing the technique up to a reasonable chance of success).

Techniques, in reality, don't take a lot of time to be taught, I do agree. But they do require a lot of time to be learned, that is, to become a true reflex. At combat speed, you don't have anymore time to think (unlike in the dojo where the partner is friendly and wait as long as necessary to let you try it). So, every technique has to become as instinctive as breathing to become effective. And that require a lot of training.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Not that it much matters to me since I've given up on the whole mechanic of insert-time-get-points as fundamentally poisonous for the sorts of games I want to run.

Did you replace it by something else? A lot of my players love to spent some of their time to learn new things, especially between adventures.

Originally Posted by Sindri

A fifth edition isn't coming in 2016. And it would be a great shame if VD never got a fourth edition version. However frequently fifth edition gets discussed as if it's not even going to be a thing as opposed to a thing many years in the future whereas the only way I see that as happening is if the GURPS line dies and stays dead.

In a far future, why not. But I really prefer being offered to buy new books than being enforced to buy the one I already have got, in a new version...

In the web era, corrections of advantages, disadvantages, skills and weapon lists could be made without having to rewrite the whole Basic Set.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Things aren't lost in edition changes either, GURPS isn't like D&D which has a history of being different games in different editions. Take a look at those at least 50 third edition books. For how many of them is it actually relevant that it's third edition? Mechanically nearly all of third edition has been repeated, converted, supplanted or something in fourth edition. Things like the historical books don't need to be updated. Sure in infinite resources world it would technically be nice for the historicals to be updated to fourth edition but the lack of that isn't very significant. When fifth edition comes out I'll probably take my mass of fourth edition rules and replace the improved sections. The lack of the edition current tech books doesn't remove my previous edition ones and there's a chance that the stars will align and they can be put out in the right order which would significantly increase their combined usefulness. It may take a long time for all of the extended core books to be published but the books should be improved versions not the fourth edition version with updated rules and it's an excuse to redo some of the ones that really need it (Magic, I'm looking at you).

The technical part of most third edition books is still obsolete and has to be updated. Creatures, weapons, vehicles, etc. Some things are quite easy to do (characters, for instance, thanks to Update). But some other are not.

Originally Posted by Sindri

Well that depends on what you consider new. Martial Arts for example is far from just a fourth edition update of the third edition Martial Arts. It also depends on what the new stuff will be. Unlike things like tech books, genre books and expanded mechanical subsection books which are the sort of things that get repeated through the editions and which have a very broad applicability new stuff has a much more niche appeal.

That's right. I find Martial Arts for the fourth edition much better than Martial Arts for the third one (even if it was already brilliant). Ditto for Horror. But having to buy the new versions and to read them prevent me to buy and read some other books that I could have bought and buy... My money and even more my time are unfortunately limited...

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Gollum

The skill list, yes... But it already includes the Tonfa skill. Martial Arts page 61 and Basic Set, page 209.

I said a redesigned list.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Of course, there are other options. But GURPS authors chose to make an important link between the power of an ability, its point cost and the time it requires to be studied. This is good for game balance: more powerful things cost more and take more time to be learned. Just note that the time can still be reduced because there are also Improvement through adventure rules, which don't require any specific time. Improvement can be sudden.

The improvement through adventure rules are irrelevant. They don't discriminate between what you are improving or what you are doing so they just speed up things they don't chance anything about the fundamental character.

And yes, obviously there was a reason the GURPS authors chose to link in game learning speeds with out of game point costs. The consequence of that however is that you cannot derive anything from a combination of the learning mechanics and how long it takes to learn something in the real world because any link between how long it takes to learn something in the real world and in GURPS is incidental.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Did you replace it by something else? A lot of my players love to spent some of their time to learn new things, especially between adventures.

Practically anything I could replace it with would... also be insert-time-get-points. I'm not talking about a specific implementation here but the entire category of similar rules. Not that I won't have training rules but being able to convert time into points is something I've rejected.

Originally Posted by Gollum

In a far future, why not. But I really prefer being offered to buy new books than being enforced to buy the one I already have got, in a new version...

You aren't enforced to buy anything. It's not like new stuff isn't done while the old stuff is being redone either.

Originally Posted by Gollum

In the web era, corrections of advantages, disadvantages, skills and weapon lists could be made without having to rewrite the whole Basic Set.

SJGames has so far mostly stuck to using errata for actual errata rather than rules revisions which is something I appreciate. Even if they started doing more significant corrections, corrections do not an edition change make. Fourth edition is not third edition corrected, it's third edition with the things that require a rewrite to change. That's the entire point of edition change; being able to make significant rewrites at the core of a system that will be heavily tested and supported by default instead of hiding in a Pyramid article.

Originally Posted by Gollum

The technical part of most third edition books is still obsolete and has to be updated. Creatures, weapons, vehicles, etc. Some things are quite easy to do (characters, for instance, thanks to Update). But some other are not.

Creatures I'll give you even though they are easy to convert and lwcamp is doing good work on detailed fourth edition animals. Vehicles I'll partially give because VD isn't out yet even though much of their stats are easily convertible especially for vehicle use in the sort of game that isn't using VD and Spaceships is usable with many vehicles if you like it's approach. Weapons though? How many obscure guns are there in third edition that haven't been updated to fourth? Surely there can't be that many.

Originally Posted by Gollum

That's right. I find Martial Arts for the fourth edition much better than Martial Arts for the third one (even if it was already brilliant). Ditto for Horror. But having to buy the new versions and to read them prevent me to buy and read some other books that I could have bought and buy... My money and even more my time are unfortunately limited...

Well you know your monetary and temporal resources better than I obviously. However if there's an edition change you don't have to buy the new versions of books if fourth or third edition classic books or the new things for fifth edition coming out in parallel to the fifth edition versions of traditional GURPS books are a better use of resources.