07-27-2011, 03:15 PM | #11 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dobbstown Sane Asylum
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
Is that really any different than the disparity in such a damage roll?
The example being thrown around at the moment is 100 crushing damage vs 101 damage. So that's, what, probably something like a 28d attack? And it's being used against flexible DR 100 armor. First, consider that these are all likely example of how much injury that wrecking ball (or whatever) might do; I'll use a +/-30 spread off the DR 100, in steps of 5: 70 damage -> blunt trauma = 14 injury 75 damage -> blunt trauma = 15 injury 80 damage -> blunt trauma = 16 injury 85 damage -> blunt trauma = 17 injury 90 damage -> blunt trauma = 18 injury 95 damage -> blunt trauma = 19 injury 100 damage -> blunt trauma = 20 injury 105 damage - DR 100 = 5 injury 110 damage - DR 100 = 10 injury 115 damage - DR 100 = 15 injury 120 damage - DR 100 = 20 injury 125 damage - DR 100 = 25 injury 130 damage - DR 100 = 30 injury The jump at 105 damage may seem odd when viewed like that. But let's rearrange the spread to ask the important question: How hurt is the poor guy who got hit? Here are the possible results: 5 injury 10 injury 14 injury 15 injury (two ways) 16 injury 17 injury 18 injury 19 injury 20 injury (two ways) 25 injury 30 injury That's the actual spread of results, from an after-the-fact perspective. And in GURPS, combat really has to be described after the fact; it's not "real-time narrative." For example, look at the 15 injury up there. There are two ways it could happen -- either the damage roll is "low" and it does blunt trauma, or it's high and penetrates. But either way, the answer to, "How badly does it hurt?" is, "Ned loses 15 HP from the ball slamming into him."
__________________
Reverend Pee Kitty of the Order Malkavian-Dobbsian (Twitter) (LJ) MyGURPS: My house rules and GURPS resources.
#SJGamesLive: I answered questions about GURPS After the End and more! {Watch Video} - {Read Transcript} |
07-27-2011, 03:28 PM | #12 | |
"Gimme 18 minutes . . ."
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Albuquerque, NM
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
Quote:
Then I would make rules that mimic that. Personally the "only look at the end results of the rules" seems like a step down the slippery slope to D&D-esque six second rounds with some abstract numbers of attacks occurring and HP not actually being physical damage but also protagonist luck and who knows what else. One of the reasons I like GURPS is it's focus on actual concrete events. Sure, you can't get too myopic and focused on things, but at the same time you don't want TOO much abstraction. I don't see any real good reason to keep things the way they are with BFT disappearing once a weapon penetrates. There might be a way to justify it if you step back, squint, etc. But I don't see a good reason NOT to house-rule it. Especial due to the fact that a slightly less powerful ball that penetrates less might actually have a statistically higher chance of doing damage to someone, which seems weird. Last edited by Crakkerjakk; 07-27-2011 at 03:32 PM. |
|
07-27-2011, 03:28 PM | #13 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
Taken from here.
Quote:
__________________
In the Griffin World I play Agriana Trotter, here is the GURPS crunch. Darth Vader "Luke! I am your fathers second cousins sisters best friends brother!" Luke Skywalker "Nooo... eehh What?!" |
|
07-27-2011, 03:37 PM | #14 | |
"Gimme 18 minutes . . ."
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Albuquerque, NM
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
Quote:
I mean I KNOW it doesn't go entirely away. I don't know how fast it goes away, and whether a better gamable abstraction would be for it to all go away, or all stay, or what. My suspicion is stay, just because it seems simpler to have the same rule with no exceptions instead of "x happens unless y, then z happens." |
|
07-27-2011, 05:59 PM | #15 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
Quote:
|
|
07-27-2011, 08:45 PM | #17 |
Join Date: Oct 2004
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
Yeah, the first rule is not reality anyway -- the first rule is "how does this rule work?" From there you can have a discussion about reality: "what's it represent?" But far too often people assume the only possible reading of the rule is their own, and they want to change it as a result of their interpretation of reality. That's two screens through which a design change must pass; the other two are going back the other direction ("what really happens?" and "how should the rule be changed to interpret that?"). Obviously, there are multiple places for problems to creep up in the process.
|
07-27-2011, 08:49 PM | #18 |
"Gimme 18 minutes . . ."
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Albuquerque, NM
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
Kromm's response in that thread was that crushing damage that penetrates DR is supposed to represent the armor deforming enough to actually injure you. So if you take HP x 11 damage from a crushing attack through armor, that WOULD be you getting crushed like a grape.
|
07-27-2011, 08:54 PM | #19 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
Quote:
|
|
07-27-2011, 08:56 PM | #20 |
"Gimme 18 minutes . . ."
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Albuquerque, NM
|
Re: DR and Blunt Trauma..?
His explanation was that it was permanently deformed, rather than flexing enough to transmit the force to you, IIRC. Go read the thread. His arguments, not mine.
|
Tags |
blunt trauma |
|
|