Dungeon Fantasy GURPS dps (standards?)

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Finally, the enemy will likely run through the fire, meaning that they will only take 1d-3 burn damage, which is not enough to really hinder many enemies (though it is enough to drive off animals and vermin).

It is enough for minions, who are hors d'combat from one point of injury.

That same 5 FP will take out 28 close formation goblins and then have area denial for a 3 hex radius.

The invisible knight can spend a minute walking to the horde and then start slaughtering three targets a turn.

He's only an invisible knight for the first attack. The wizard would have to cast it again next turn (and it would only matter for one attack). It's a good spell for an alpha strike against a worthy or boss, but not especially useful against minion hordes. Great Haste is a better buff in this case.

[Anthony]

If the plan is to allow a knight to efficiently chop through a swarm of minion-class foes, it's often most efficient to just make the knight invulnerable so he can all-out attack at will; Armor and Blur tend to be good here.

[Þorkell]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

At least against targets using active defenses in the 10+ range.

Critters were describes as zombies. Looking at Monsters they'd have a defense of 9.

I did ask the GM if his dice had numbers higher than 3 on them.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

Critters were describes as zombies. Looking at Monsters they'd have a defense of 9.

Zombies using tactics would retreat on every dodge (increasing defense to 12), though this does usefully let you force them to back up. Mindless zombies will generally all-out attack making dodge irrelevant (hm. The zombie on Bestiary 62 has the option of flail skill. Zombies with morningstars seem like a very fine option for thumping on melee types).

[JoelSammallahti]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

DPS is, generally, a bad metric to use in GURPS.

Right. In some other system, doing 2d twice per turn is just as good as doing 4d once per turn. In Gurps, the latter is vastly better: with DR in the 2-10 range, you end up causing vastly more injury. And what's more, you usually don't take enemies out just by getting their HP to zero or negative multiples, you do it by crippling and causing Major Wounds, which lead to knockdown and stun. And those depend on hitting a threshold with one blow.

(That being said, two attacks for 2d each does have the advantage of the second blow likely facing a lower Active Defense, and of course you could take out two weak enemies in one turn. But I'd say it's a rare case in which those pros outweigh the cons.)

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by JoelSammallahti

(That being said, two attacks for 2d each does have the advantage of the second blow likely facing a lower Active Defense, and of course you could take out two weak enemies in one turn. But I'd say it's a rare case in which those pros outweigh the cons.)

Multiple attacks per turn will also be less "swingy" - statistical output will be closer to what you experience in play - more average hit rate, more average defense rate, more average rolls. Having reliable output matters a lot to some people.

You also can't forget to factor in critical hits (and misses!). Just by bypassing defenses, critical hits significantly increase your DPS.

Single target DPS should be factored entirely separately from Area DPS - MMO players already know to do this.

DPS based on DOT (damage over time) effects (acid, fire, poison) also needs to be adjusted for the fact that DOT effects generally bypass the to-hit-and-defense part of the attack, meaning the effective DPS is higher. DOTs also let you go off and attack someone else while the first DOT is still ticking, or still get your damage in if you can't attack (are running in terror, are dead at the time, etc). Individual DOTs may be marginal, but when you set all 40 horde zombies on fire, suddenly 1d-1 per turn is really big.

DPS numbers are useful, but ultimately you have to take into account that e.g. targeting hit locations on enemies can render them harmless without dealing large amounts of damage - and that's really the point of combat in GURPS. DPS to HP/HT ratio is a "time to KO" count, but if you cripple the guys weapon arm and they surrender, or if you Intimidate them into leaving you alone completely, or you petrify them (zero damage!), that's also a "kill".

Monsters in GURPS do things like run away, alerting other monsters, without having to be "special" chaining monsters.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by JoelSammallahti

Right. In some other system, doing 2d twice per turn is just as good as doing 4d once per turn. In Gurps, the latter is vastly better: with DR in the 2-10 range, you end up causing vastly more injury. And what's more, you usually don't take enemies out just by getting their HP to zero or negative multiples, you do it by crippling and causing Major Wounds, which lead to knockdown and stun. And those depend on hitting a threshold with one blow.

When that threshold is one, and there are a lot of targets the former is better, as long as DR is 6 or less. This situation describes a significant number of fights in my DF game.

(That being said, two attacks for 2d each does have the advantage of the second blow likely facing a lower Active Defense, and of course you could take out two weak enemies in one turn. But I'd say it's a rare case in which those pros outweigh the cons.)

Sure if you are playing Shadow of the Colossus style with nothing but boss fights, it's rare, but if you are doing that you aren't really making everyone useful and you aren't really using all the DF tropes, which definitely includes fighting hordes of minions.

[Colarmel]

I've found that in GURPS it's really best to think of these things more in terms of having niches covered.

A swashbuckler with a level of extra attack, who on each round puts out three well-aimed deceptive stabs at vitals or eyes for 1d+1 is infinitely more useful against the horde of Goblins than the barbarian who puts out 4d+5 with a maul each turn. But when you fight a DR6+ creature, especially one with nictitating membrane like a dragon, or a creature with homogeneous that barbarian gets a chance to shine, while the swashbuckler is basically useless.

You want to make sure that you have an effective way of dealing with large groups, and an effective way of dealing with strong individuals. All assuming your GM is actually mixing up what you're fighting.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Colarmel

I've found that in GURPS it's really best to think of these things more in terms of having niches covered.

A swashbuckler with a level of extra attack, who on each round puts out three well-aimed deceptive stabs at vitals or eyes for 1d+1 is infinitely more useful against the horde of Goblins than the barbarian who puts out 4d+5 with a maul each turn. But when you fight a DR6+ creature, especially one with nictitating membrane like a dragon, or a creature with homogeneous that barbarian gets a chance to shine, while the swashbuckler is basically useless.

You want to make sure that you have an effective way of dealing with large groups, and an effective way of dealing with strong individuals. All assuming your GM is actually mixing up what you're fighting.

It's not as nich-y as that. Sure, the Barbarian gets to shine against the tough target that needs mashing more than precision. A Swashbuckler with a well-chosen preferred weapon can switch to delivering cutting damage against homogeneous targets and targeting armor chinks against hard targets. And almost any swashbuckler is going to be good for more than 1d+1 on their thrust attacks!

[Colarmel]

I was deliberately highlighting a broad spectrum. I went into a dungeon with a group exceptionally well prepared to deal with fodder, but no one capable of 3d in a single attack. It's good to make sure both of those extremes are covered in a typical dungeon. But fair enough, I was a bit extreme. And armor chinks are only good if the DR comes from armor.