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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-18-2017, 07:52 PM   #21
David Johansen
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

The problem with Altered Time Rate is that it's a force multiplier but isn't priced relative to the damage you can deal out.
David Johansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2017, 08:41 PM   #22
RyanW
 
RyanW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southeast NC
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Sandman View Post
I think for most of us there's a lean away from semantic rules-lawyering. I usually try to interpret the rules as meaning what they seem to intend in simple English, in the context they are presented in. I occasionally see people trying to parse specific word choices from different rules, well separated in the books, in a way to support an interpretation that allows what seems to me far-fetched or contrary to what appears the intent of one of the rules. This kind of approach feels more appropriate to seeking out exploits and synergies between Magic the Gathering cards or D&D-type feats and talents.
To take that a step further, I always assume that if there are two possible interpretations, which one makes the most sense is a far more important criteria than which one more closely matches the actual text.

For example, in the Mass Combat rules, fortresses seem to have a defense bonus that can never be claimed (they only give a defense bonus to a bunkered force, a force can only claim a defense bonus if it won initiative, a force that is bunkered cannot win initiative). Adding an unwritten "or" clause to who can claim a DB into the rules make it make sense, and is completely at odds with what the rules actually say.
__________________
RyanW
This year I'm taking part in a classic American Christmas tradition. I'm rowing across the Delaware and taking the Hessian troops quartered in Trenton by surprise.
RyanW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2017, 08:50 PM   #23
sir_pudding
Wielder of Smart Pants
 
sir_pudding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanW View Post
To take that a step further, I always assume that if there are two possible interpretations, which one makes the most sense is a far more important criteria than which one more closely matches the actual text.

For example, in the Mass Combat rules, fortresses seem to have a defense bonus that can never be claimed (they only give a defense bonus to a bunkered force, a force can only claim a defense bonus if it won initiative, a force that is bunkered cannot win initiative). Adding an unwritten "or" clause to who can claim a DB into the rules make it make sense, and is completely at odds with what the rules actually say.
That sounds like an actual erratum to me.
sir_pudding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2017, 12:54 AM   #24
Rupert
 
Rupert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl View Post
After a while, it makes you want to ban ATR, and it is one of the reasons why I tend to require people to buy Enhanced Defenses +1 per level of ATR.
I find it quite useful to be able to distinguish "acts a lot" from "has many actions, is hard to hit even when just standing there, and can move heaps while acting lots". Thus ATR is fine so far as I'm concerned. All ATR is, and all it pretends to be is "You get to have an extra 'turn' of actions on your turn per level, costing 100/level".
__________________
Rupert Boleyn

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
Rupert is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2017, 01:29 AM   #25
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Johansen View Post
The problem with Altered Time Rate is that it's a force multiplier but isn't priced relative to the damage you can deal out.
I think the thing with ATR is that a lot of depictions of what many think or assume ATR is is in GURPS terms actually ATR plus some other advantages. I.e. ATR is one building block in several, different builds involving moving and acting very quickly and enjoying an advantage in combat due to that.

Which if I think about it is kind of a thing in GURPS in general.

Last edited by Tomsdad; 12-19-2017 at 01:42 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2017, 10:51 AM   #26
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

I have an impression that the principle that the specific overrides the general, but that when a specific rule is written the assumption is that it doesn't apply to other areas/the general, is important in understanding some parts of the system's rules philosophy.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
The Eye of Eclipse Phase. A Discord server focusing on Roleplaying, Sci-Fi, Transhumanism, and discussion of other assorted topics, from tech to boardgames, from politics to philosophy.
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2017, 01:34 PM   #27
Kromm
GURPS Line Editor
 
Kromm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montréal, Québec
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post

I have an impression that the principle that the specific overrides the general, but that when a specific rule is written the assumption is that it doesn't apply to other areas/the general, is important in understanding some parts of the system's rules philosophy.
There are a few things like that:
  • The rules version in the most recent release takes precedence in the official interpretation, even if individual gamers won't all have it.
  • The specific overrides the general.
  • Changes and exceptions made for special cases aren't meant to taken back into the rest of the system, even if they look like they might work just fine there.
__________________
Sean "Dr. Kromm" Punch <kromm@sjgames.com>
GURPS Line Editor, Steve Jackson Games
My LiveJournal [Just GURPS News][Just The Company]
Kromm is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2017, 05:15 AM   #28
johndallman
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

Difficult things are difficult. It is assumed that the players, guided by the GM, will make reasonable efforts to make use of bonuses for extra time, equipment, and so on, when they're trying to do something hard.
johndallman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2017, 06:32 AM   #29
RogerBW
 
RogerBW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: near London, UK
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

Although this is less strictly a GURPS thing (and indeed doesn't apply to all GURPS games), I think it's correlated with GURPS: some challenges are simply too hard for the current PC group, and they don't necessarily have a sign on the door saying "you must be at least 300 points to enter".

By "challenges" I mean both whole adventures and individual combats. This is not the game where fights are tuned so that a standard party will just barely prevail. (Well, you can probably do that in DFRPG.)
RogerBW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2017, 06:55 AM   #30
Mailanka
 
Mailanka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Default Re: GURPS Hermeneutics

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalin View Post
The term "RAW" turns up on these forums, for example, but it has not been weaponized. Perhaps because GURPS is a toolkit and perforce every campaign must use a subset of rules, it's often assumed that every group will make different calls about how all the pieces fit together.
Yes. When I use "RAW" in the context of GURPS, I use it to mean something a long the lines of "You may run it this way, and I may run it that way, but for the sake of common ground and so everyone knows what we're talking about, technically, the rule-as-written works like this." I get a sense in some other RPGs that a game that does not adhere to the norm is considered the exception, while GURPS is the other way around. Likewise, I've seen other games where the expectation is that you can move from one group to another with the same character and nothing will change, while I think any GURPS GM would give a hearty guffaw at the thought of doing that (though Campaign Frameworks make that sort of thing easier, and you'll see people less reluctant to try this in GURPS DF, but even there, you get a lot of questions about "But what houserules do you use?")
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars.
If you want to support me, check out my Patreon!
Mailanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
gurps, hermeneutics

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 07:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.