GURPS After the End 2: The New World

[chandley]

Originally Posted by PK

I will say that the Inventing/Modifying/Upgrading rules saw more hardcore playtesting than any other part of the book, and have been revised until they've consistently (for us, at least) produced reasonable* results with reasonable* demands. I'm very proud of them, not just personally but on behalf of my players who doggedly kept finding new ways to break the system. :)

* "Reasonable" includes the fact that Quick Gadgeteer makes all those tasks trivial . . . but that's the whole idea. If the GM allows it, that's presumably what he wants to see in the game.

In your opinion, would great violence be done to DF if I used these rules for Artificers? The current Quick Gadgeteer rules for them are limited to modifications and are thin even for that.

Having a little more framework for strange inventions worked up out of whole cloth might make those 50 points worth it.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by chandley

In your opinion, would great violence be done to DF if I used these rules for Artificers? The current Quick Gadgeteer rules for them are limited to modifications and are thin even for that.

Having a little more framework for strange inventions worked up out of whole cloth might make those 50 points worth it.

I also use 3e's Steamtech for ideas of what kind of fun stuff artificers should be able to build, if you're into a little steam/clock punk in your DF.

[Crakkerjakk]

Thoughts on unreliable equipment:

In most games I play, equipment is almost never making HT checks. It just never seems to show up. But I feel like it definitely SHOULD in a post-apoc game. On the other hand, I hate tracking equipment damage and such (except for vehicles, I guess).

So, proposed simplified gear breakage switch: anytime you fail a roll by more than 5, your most relevant peice of equipment has to roll vs HT (plus modifiers for quality/situation as appropriate). You can still have stuff break due to parrying heavy weapons or being specifically targeted, or immersed in gray goo, but this is "I failed my Navigation roll really badly and dropped my compass on a rock."

Thoughts?

[chandley]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

I also use 3e's Steamtech for ideas of what kind of fun stuff artificers should be able to build, if you're into a little steam/clock punk in your DF.

Good idea, thanks!

Related more to AtE (and thus still appropriate for this thread):

Can you use previously invented/upgraded stuff as parts for a new invention? At full value? This matters a lot for Gadgeteers and Quick Gadgeteers, who can bootstrap themselves from Junk and a flashlight through to a Heavy Laser Pistol in a few hours with some good rolls.

For example: (Quick Gadgeteer)
I start with a TL 9 Penlight: $96. Upgrading that to a Heavy Flashlight is straight forward: need $64, have $96x2=$192 worth of parts, which is 3x what I need for +1 to skill. Invention mod is +1, time is 1dx10 min. Rolling at 14 most likely (Skill 14, +1 versatile, +2 mods, -3 TL), taking extra time isnt unreasonable.

Now I have $640 worth of Heavy Flashlight. If I use that as parts for a TL 9 Dazzling Laser, I have $640x2=$1280 worth of parts to off set the $1600 I need. A bit of fabrication later, rolling at 12 plus time spent, and I have a TL9 Dazzle Laser Carbine worth $16,000, which is $32,000 in parts, more than enough to pay for the $15,360 in parts I need for a TL 10 Heavy Laser Pistol or Survival Laser (Skill roll is a 9 (with the +1 for 2x parts) here, so definitely want to spend a bit of time on it, but base time is 1dx30 min, but increasing that to 1dx15 hours isnt at all impossible, and is worth +5)... So a weeks worth of down time later, could reasonably have a buggy laser rifle out of a penlight.

Gadgeteer (not quick) can do this with rather more time taken (both because base time is higher and because penalties are higher, so needs to take extra time), though he needs more steps as the parts % is 40%. The Gadgeteer might need to "build the tools" first, to get tool bonuses, but the same theory would apply.

No?

[PK]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Some of the new rules look like they'd work well for living in the slums of a cyberpunk sprawl.

Intentionally so. See the box on p. 2 of ATE1 for my thoughts on cannibalizing the ATE series as a whole for use in other games. (TL;DR: it's a good idea.)

Originally Posted by chandley

In your opinion, would great violence be done to DF if I used these rules for Artificers? The current Quick Gadgeteer rules for them are limited to modifications and are thin even for that.

I honestly hadn't considered this. I think the basic concepts will work well, but for DF my gut is that you'd want to rework the specifics to be less TL-dependent.

Originally Posted by chandley

Can you use previously invented/upgraded stuff as parts for a new invention? At full value? This matters a lot for Gadgeteers and Quick Gadgeteers, who can bootstrap themselves from Junk and a flashlight through to a Heavy Laser Pistol in a few hours with some good rolls.

Yes and no. Be sure not to miss the box on p. 40 about the actual value of inventions. That $ value should apply to any use as parts as well.

For example: (Quick Gadgeteer)
I start with a TL 9 Penlight: $96. Upgrading that to a Heavy Flashlight is straight forward: need $64, have $96x2=$192 worth of parts, which is 3x what I need for +1 to skill. Invention mod is +1, time is 1dx10 min. Rolling at 14 most likely (Skill 14, +1 versatile, +2 mods, -3 TL), taking extra time isnt unreasonable.

Now I have $640 worth of Heavy Flashlight.

Close, but assuming zero bugs (which isn't necessarily a given!), you actually have 40% of that, or $256. Still, that's a definite step up from the original penlight.

It's worth noting that my original rule for value was "40% (or 20%, 10%, etc.) of the listed value or 100% of the value of the original parts used, whichever is less." Playtesting suggested that this was too harsh, so I changed it. However, if you want Quick Gadgeteers in your game, but don't want them to be able to bootstrap their way from flashlights to laser turrets, you might want to consider adapting this rule solely for the purpose of calculating parts value. (In other words, that gadgeteered TL9 heavy flashlight will never be worth more than $96 as parts, since that's what it started as.)

Gadgeteer (not quick) can do this with rather more time taken (both because base time is higher and because penalties are higher, so needs to take extra time), though he needs more steps as the parts % is 40%. The Gadgeteer might need to "build the tools" first, to get tool bonuses, but the same theory would apply.

Not quite. A Gadgeteer could still pull off the same tricks, but he needs 30% in parts and then his resale value is 40% of the new value -- so it's a small profit at best. And an inventor can't really do this (easily) at all. This is why Quick Gadgeteer is expressly optional in ATE games; including it is the GM's way of saying "build a bunch of crazy high-tech stuff out of nothing."

[PK]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

Thoughts on unreliable equipment:

In most games I play, equipment is almost never making HT checks. It just never seems to show up. But I feel like it definitely SHOULD in a post-apoc game. On the other hand, I hate tracking equipment damage and such (except for vehicles, I guess).

So, proposed simplified gear breakage switch: anytime you fail a roll by more than 5, your most relevant peice of equipment has to roll vs HT (plus modifiers for quality/situation as appropriate). You can still have stuff break due to parrying heavy weapons or being specifically targeted, or immersed in gray goo, but this is "I failed my Navigation roll really badly and dropped my compass on a rock."

Thoughts?

My only bit of confusion is that you started this with "Thoughts on unreliable equipment," and I'm not sure if you mean the modifier from ATE1, p. 29. If that modifier is applied to equipment, you have to roll against the gear's HT every time it's used!

Regarding gear without the Unreliable modifier, I think this is a very good optional rule -- a sort of "harsh realism for post-apoc equipment" that applies to everything.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by PK

My only bit of confusion is that you started this with "Thoughts on unreliable equipment," and I'm not sure if you mean the modifier from ATE1, p. 29. If that modifier is applied to equipment, you have to roll against the gear's HT every time it's used!

Regarding gear without the Unreliable modifier, I think this is a very good optional rule -- a sort of "harsh realism for post-apoc equipment" that applies to everything.

Yeah, sorry. Lower case unreliable, not upper case Unreliable. My bad.

I figure it probably gets you gear breaking unrealistically frequently (and in generally dramatic manners, given that stuff is more likely to break in high negative modifier situations), but 1) that kinda works for the source material, 2) a lot of gear is pretty old, and 3) it gives techs/repair guys more stuff to do in a way that feels PA-y to me.

I was also thinking that if you wanted a bit more nuance between "gear fine" and "gear broke" a failed HT roll (for just cases where you had failed by 5, actual damage that results in failed HT checks works per normal) drops equipment quality a level. Critfail on HT check goes straight to broken maybe?

So you have Fine(Rugged from HT?) -> normal -> cheap/fragile -> very fragile -> unreliable -> broken.

Gives a resource sink to put scavenged stuff into as well.

And since you already have quality levels listed for all your stuff, it's not like it's adding something new to track. Hrm.

[acrosome]

The hunting/gathering/survival/packing/camping expansion is a long-overdue and incredibly welcome addition to the GURPS ruleset, as well as having obvious utility in an AtE game. A bit odd that fishing is subsumed into gathering when Fishing is it's own skill, though. Incompatible with Low-Tech, too.

Still reading...

The intrusion/security rules are welcome, too! Until now GMs have basically just been left to make that up themselves with various sense or Perception rolls. The scrounging/searching/mishap things as well.

This book is just full of good stuff, really.

[chandley]

Originally Posted by PK

I honestly hadn't considered this. I think the basic concepts will work well, but for DF my gut is that you'd want to rework the specifics to be less TL-dependent.

Doable. Getting rid fo the TL mod box, and just putting in a paragraph on potential TL 5 stuff might be enough. Well, Ill see if I can get any takers.

Yes and no. Be sure not to miss the box on p. 40 about the actual value of inventions. That $ value should apply to any use as parts as well.

Ah good, so it really is going to be what you can sell it for is also what it is worth in parts. So getting pretty much any bugs at all is going to stop bootstrapping cold. I can live with that.

Machinist and Electrician are starting to look pretty tasty.

This is why Quick Gadgeteer is expressly optional in ATE games; including it is the GM's way of saying "build a bunch of crazy high-tech stuff out of nothing."

Fair point, definitely something to point out to any potential GM. Fallout inspired games though... time to go to town!

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by acrosome

The hunting/gathering/survival/packing/camping expansion...

Ahhhhh! So I wrote my own rules for all this years ago for nothing?!?!?!

I need this book so much now!