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 06-19-2019, 10:13 AM   #1
Mavelic
 
Mavelic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Amboise, France
Default Rules of : 14, 16 and 20

Hi,
I noticed an intriguing detail about the "rules of"!
For "rule of 20", an attribute of 20 is included in the rule (roll 20 or less), ditto for "rule of 16" where we roll 16 or less, BUT for "Rule of 14", this 14 is a failure!
Strange!
Why is this "rule of 14" not called "rule of 13" instead? This would avoid some confusion (which I did) and unify the rule of principle.
Thank you in advance for your comments.
Regards
Mavelic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2019, 10:22 AM   #2
JazzJedi
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Default Re: Rules of : 14, 16 and 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavelic View Post
Hi,
I noticed an intriguing detail about the "rules of"!
For "rule of 20", an attribute of 20 is included in the rule (roll 20 or less), ditto for "rule of 16" where we roll 16 or less, BUT for "Rule of 14", this 14 is a failure!
Strange!
Why is this "rule of 14" not called "rule of 13" instead? This would avoid some confusion (which I did) and unify the rule of principle.
Thank you in advance for your comments.
Regards
There are a lot of these kinds of problems that are leftover from earlier editions of GURPS, when the rules far less unified than 4th edition. While I can't speak for the designers, I think it was just an oversight, but once the Basic Set was published, they were stuck with it. I've already made that change in my games, as I'm sure many players have.
JazzJedi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2019, 03:56 PM   #3
Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Default Re: Rules of : 14, 16 and 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavelic View Post
Hi,
I noticed an intriguing detail about the "rules of"!
For "rule of 20", an attribute of 20 is included in the rule (roll 20 or less), ditto for "rule of 16" where we roll 16 or less, BUT for "Rule of 14", this 14 is a failure!
Strange!
Why is this "rule of 14" not called "rule of 13" instead? This would avoid some confusion (which I did) and unify the rule of principle.
Thank you in advance for your comments.
Regards
The Rules are named for the number limit, not for whether that number limit is a failure or not.

The Rule of 20 limits the Attribute for the purpose of figuring Default Skill levels. As such, the Rule of 20 doesn't involve a success/failure situation, i.e. you can't fail to have a Default Skill level by applying the Rule of 20.

The Rule of 16 limits your effective skill to the higher of 16 or your subject's resistance. While this does allow your resistance to be 16, that 16 is not a success. Your subject can roll a resistance of 16, or higher if his resistance is higher, tying your roll and that tie is a failure for you! [see Resisted Spells pp B241-B242, for example.]

The Rule of 14 does follow Rule of 20 and Rule of 16 in that the 14 is included in the numbers that are effective under the rule, but the Rule of 14 is explicitly about when you fail a Fright Check, not when you succeed.
Curmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.