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 03-08-2009, 03:40 PM   #81
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: High-Tech issues, real-world equivalencies and questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by copeab
re Armor Weight:

Set it to whatever you want in your campaign. I really don't think a couple of pounds more or less will matter in the grand scheme of things anyway.
I do.

But the reason I buy GURPS books is so that paid authors can do the work of reality-checking for me. Generally, their work is excellent. In cases where the result is counter-intuitive or at odds with what little I know of the subject, though, I like to see their sources.

Hence my question about the manufacturer and model number of the TL 8 Concealable Vest in High-Tech that's Level IIIA and weights only 2 lbs.

It reminded me of the infamous Second Chance Standard in the 3e Basic Set, which at 2.5 lbs. and DR 14 over the entire torso provided far superior protection for weight than any other modern armor available in GURPS. This was especially galling because the excellent Modern Firepower included many real world bullet-resistant vests statted in more realistic terms and were utterly incompatible with the DR 14(!) vest in Basic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by copeab
re Armor Coverage:

The fewer rolls in combat, the better. If it wasn't for the fact that I don't like the simplification of fixed damage and still have a soft spot for defense rolls as "saving throws", I'd use one roll.
Compared to players deciding what to do and holding imromptu Chinese parliaments every second of game time, rolling dice is a trivial part of running combat. Increasing dice rolling, even by an order of magnitude, would not result in much longer combats or any reduction of my fun.

Besides, the way I play GURPS, people usually describe their intended actions in real-world terms, not game-mechanical terms. Thus, every time the game rules ignore a factor present in the real world, it actually makes my job more complex (as I then have to adjudicate on the fly, without the benefit of a pre-written rule), not less.

Aiming for the less likely to be protective side of body armour occurs to players frequently. Hence, I'd like the game rules to provide an answer for how to adjudicate that.

As it happens, that's with the Hitting 'em where it hurts rule from High-Tech. Which indeed does apply to some bullet-resistant body armour in the book. But not, unfortunately, the Concealable Vest, despite the excellent real world justification for such a ruling.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2009, 03:45 PM   #82
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: High-Tech issues, real-world equivalencies and questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk
Also, from what I've looked at online, the dragonskin failed military testing (but there was allegations of favoritism, with a bunch of retired generals on the board of the company that makes the Interceptors, etc) but regardless, a new dragonskin vest will repeatedly stop rounds that will fracture a SAPI plate into uselessness after a few hits.

Was this impression wrong?
After reviewing random sites on either side of the dispute*, it seems accurate enough.

The problem isn't with repeated hits, as I initially thought, but with the more rapid deterioation with age and use of the Dragonskin.

Although exactly how much of a problem that is is open to considerable doubt.

*I hadn't really paid attention to the Dragonskin before, just dismissed it as 'unlikely to be available to PCs in my game and probably not that superior to SAPI-inserts even if it was'.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2009, 07:13 PM   #83
copeab
 
copeab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: near Houston
Default Re: High-Tech issues, real-world equivalencies and questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward
Maybe for you. Plenty of players like to roll lots of dice. Plenty of players like a realistic treatment of combat. Plenty of players like realistic armour weights.
I know lots of players who want to get the combat over so they can get back to roleplaying ;)

(Okay, to be fair, they want to get past teh mooks without it taking forever. The fight with the head villain or his his henchmen can last longer)

As for realistic combat -- I prefer playable combat, even if it only reaches a level of "believable" rather than "realistic". I've found over the years that the added details in the quest for realism usually aren't worth it.

You are free to seek high level of detail in your campaigns, but don't expect others to be nearly as interested.
__________________
A generous and sadistic GM,
Brandon Cope

GURPS 3e stuff: http://copeab.tripod.com
copeab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2009, 07:25 PM   #84
copeab
 
copeab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: near Houston
Default Re: High-Tech issues, real-world equivalencies and questions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander
Compared to players deciding what to do and holding imromptu Chinese parliaments every second of game time, rolling dice is a trivial part of running combat. Increasing dice rolling, even by an order of magnitude, would not result in much longer combats or any reduction of my fun.
Then roll the extra dice. Just don't expect many other players to want to as a standard rule.

Quote:
Besides, the way I play GURPS, people usually describe their intended actions in real-world terms, not game-mechanical terms.
Same here.

Quote:
Thus, every time the game rules ignore a factor present in the real world, it actually makes my job more complex (as I then have to adjudicate on the fly, without the benefit of a pre-written rule), not less.
I come up with a reasonable ruling and move on.

Quote:
Aiming for the less likely to be protective side of body armour occurs to players frequently.
My players opt for (1) get a bigger gun or (2) use magic.
__________________
A generous and sadistic GM,
Brandon Cope

GURPS 3e stuff: http://copeab.tripod.com
copeab is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
body armour, guns, high-tech, modern firepower

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 02:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.