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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-07-2014, 02:49 AM   #31
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ View Post
Yeah, but that problem is going to apply whenever a character goes into combat, which is much more common. There are entire settings where characters just won't care about the increased equipment weight at all. The sword and sorcery character is easy to hit and his armor weighs double.
Just to say this last issue will possible stand out less depending on if you run variable armour weight by Character weight (i,e the increase is smoother) also IME the Increase in BL that goes with the Increases ST which in general tends to go with Increased SM.

If however you increased your SM with increasing your ST then yes you'll have problem, but that's a pretty unrealistic thing to do (If only in terms of how animals do weight to ST)

Last edited by Tomsdad; 11-07-2014 at 05:27 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 03:14 AM   #32
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Yes, making a 1" hole in an object 12" across is less important than making a 1" hole in an object 6" across. No, brain and vitals just increase effective wound size.
Surely that's factor of the 12" object having more HP than the 6" one? i.e say its 1hp per inch, 1hp damage is 1/12th of total for the 12" object, but 1/6th of total for the 6" one.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 04:38 AM   #33
Sindri
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
That is a disadvantage but its a specific one to do with resources rather than say a combat one, and IME resources are either a problem for everything (PC's are skint) or it no problem at all (PC's are flush)*. However S&S to me infers less resource management and more loin clothes (but S&S varies, yours may not)

*although having to go without armour can quickly become a combat disadvantage!
Resources is a rather broad term and many games include resource management in one arena but not others. CP are resources but never really become fully flush without fundamental game alterations. Monetary cost is very often a meaningless variable except under unusual circumstances. Weight can be normally meaningless like that but it's common for money to be practically unlimited but encumbrance to remain at best only slightly improved for worn items and low tech characters can use up huge amounts of encumbrance on armour. If Sword and Sorcery here means a dominant strategy of loin cloths then encumbrance is indeed a niche utility but if there aren't any factors pushing absolutely no armour that the PCs could easily end up wearing armour at least as commonly as literary Conan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Fair enough, for me someone with the typical advantages that tend to go with being very big have little difficulty it meeting the extra upkeep cost, but different campaign types differ.
The "typical" advantages (and I don't think they are as typical as people assume. Thin and not particularly strong SM +1 elflike races aren't uncommon) cost points in their own right and only one of them is mildly discounted. I wouldn't actually imagine the typical advantages of SM +1 characters as including additional ability to pay upkeep costs either (are barbarians all rich? Actually an interesting idea now that I think about it)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
True but unless that Giant has ST10 they are still going to see some benefit. The thing is SM+ makes big strong builds easier that is one of it's advantages*. If however you don't want to take advantage of that that's your decision rather than a failing of the SM+ costing (IMO).

*especially when you factor in the Grappling advantages, (SM and ST value add to each other, and SM makes ST cheaper)
First of all the rules have to function in the case of a ST 10 giant instead of flipping out and giving up. Second, if a character is disadvantaged the same as another but is getting less points a problem exists even if both are getting some compensation. Finally this thread isn't people who took out the ST limitation from SM and are now finding it unbalanced. Remember an SM +1 character with 20 ST is getting only 10 points back. Positive SM does not work. If you are going to balance it anyway you just might as well replace the dubious preexisting balance measures.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Just to say this last issue will possible stand out less depending on if you run variable armour weight by Character weight (i,e the increase is smoother) also IME the Increase in Bl that goes with teh Increases ST which in genralk tends to go with Increased SM.
That could work out rather awkwardly. Mass in gurps is supposed to be a zero point feature and the system is built around that. As it stands everyone could choose whatever SM and just state that they weigh a pound.You can certainly build a working system around scaling armour weight by character size (being made of lead shouldn't make your armour weigh more) and there are significant advantages in doing so but it has serious downsides that need to be overcome.

Last edited by Sindri; 11-07-2014 at 04:45 AM.
Sindri is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 05:11 AM   #34
Flyndaran
Untagged
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
...

That could work out rather awkwardly. Mass in gurps is supposed to be a zero point feature and the system is built around that. As it stands everyone could choose whatever SM and just state that they weigh a pound.You can certainly build a working system around scaling armour weight by character size (being made of lead shouldn't make your armour weigh more) and there are significant advantages in doing so but it has serious downsides that need to be overcome.
I'm pretty sure that most GM's white hot glare would prevent that.
But the SM-2 PC gets a big boost, possibly literally, by human characters, while the poor SM+1 Ogre stays stuck in the pit, because no one can pull him out.
(Holy run on sentences, Batman!)

I do dislike how severely Gurps penalizes my bookish ogre/giant concept.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check.
Flyndaran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 05:19 AM   #35
Sindri
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
I'm pretty sure that most GM's white hot glare would prevent that.
And I rather prefer rules that don't call for me to turn on the white hot glare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
I do dislike how severely Gurps penalizes my bookish ogre/giant concept.
Poor ogre mages don't get a lot of love.
Sindri is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 05:26 AM   #36
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Resources is a rather broad term and many games include resource management in one arena but not others. CP are resources but never really become fully flush without fundamental game alterations. Monetary cost is very often a meaningless variable except under unusual circumstances. Weight can be normally meaningless like that but it's common for money to be practically unlimited but encumbrance to remain at best only slightly improved for worn items and low tech characters can use up huge amounts of encumbrance on armour. If Sword and Sorcery here means a dominant strategy of loin cloths then encumbrance is indeed a niche utility but if there aren't any factors pushing absolutely no armour that the PCs could easily end up wearing armour at least as commonly as literary Conan..
Sorry yes I was meaning resources in a more narrow term i.e money (and that SM+1 armour cost more and is presumably harder to obtain as well).

And while I agree Conan often wore armour, we never really see him paying for it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
The "typical" advantages (and I don't think they are as typical as people assume. Thin and not particularly strong SM +1 elflike races aren't uncommon) cost points in their own right and only one of them is mildly discounted.
I think you and I might adjudicate what's SM+1 differently, I tend to assume that it's overall build not just height. I.e for me a 7' 150lb elf would not be SM+1, but a 6' 9" 450lb man might well be.

You say only one advantage that is discounted but it's an advantage that gives more than one benefit extra ST allows me to hit harder, carry more and with stand more damage. Moreover it's one that has a synergistic relationship with the benefits given by SM+1 (reach and grappling)

More esoterically a stat normaliser like myself might be more accepting of increases to ST given a SM+1. (that's not a general point though)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
I wouldn't actually imagine the typical advantages of SM +1 characters as including additional ability to pay upkeep costs either (are barbarians all rich? Actually an interesting idea now that I think about it)
Assuming big and strong characters tend to leverage money by being big and strong, I'd suggest that the bigger and stronger they are the more money they will leverage



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
First of all the rules have to function in the case of a ST 10 giant instead of flipping out and giving up.
Only as much as they do for a ST7 human.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Second, if a character is disadvantaged the same as another but is getting less points a problem exists even if both are getting some compensation.
Only they are getting more points because they haven't spent them on ST?

A ST15 SM+1 costs 45 points more than ST10 SM+1, they will have more difficulty wearing armour that fits them since their BL will be 20lbs not 45lbs, but they have those extra points as compensation.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Finally this thread isn't people who took out the ST limitation from SM and are now finding it unbalanced. Remember an SM +1 character with 20 ST is getting only 10 points back.
Which means that SM+1 has effectively become a 10 point disadvantage for that character, even while giving him bonus in grappling while hitting him for the negatives as well etc. (Albeit one that requires a 90pt buy in)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Positive SM does not work. If you are going to balance it anyway you just might as well replace the dubious preexisting balance measures.
Well that's what we're discussing, not a established fact.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
That could work out rather awkwardly. Mass in gurps is supposed to be a zero point feature and the system is built around that. As it stands everyone could choose whatever SM and just state that they weigh a pound.
At some point common sense has to kick in though? The question about mass being a zero point feature is ultimately the same about SM being one. It's rather dependent on the usual side effects of being different masses (same as different SMs)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
You can certainly build a working system around scaling armour weight by character size (being made of lead shouldn't make your armour weigh more) and there are significant advantages in doing so but it has serious downsides that need to be overcome.

Not sure what you mean here there is already a system for adjusting armour weight by character weight, and it has nothing to do with lead armour not weighing more?

What are the disadvantages you mention.

Last edited by Tomsdad; 11-07-2014 at 05:44 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 05:34 AM   #37
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
I do dislike how severely Gurps penalizes my bookish ogre/giant concept.
What's the issue with bookish (I assume you mean weaker than race average) ogre/giants?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
And I rather prefer rules that don't call for me to turn on the white hot glare.
Well no rule is going to survive the equivalent of "yes I'm 12" tall with ST 20 and I weigh 1lb, woo my DR6 plate armour weighs almost nothing make it DR60"

Last edited by Tomsdad; 11-07-2014 at 05:57 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 06:05 AM   #38
Sindri
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Sorry yes I was meaning resources in a more narrow term i.e money (and that SM+1 armour cost more and is presumably harder to obtain as well).

And while I agree Conan often wore armour, we never really see him paying for it.
I would presume that he did in a number of instances. We don't see lots of things in the Conan stories.

Anyway ErhnamDJ was talking about encumbrance not money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
I think you and I might adjudicate what's SM+1 differently, I tend to assume that it's overall build not just height. I.e for me a 7' 150lb elf would not be SM+1, but a 6' 9" 450lb man might well be.
Well, fair enough but the normal rules are that SM is determined by longest dimension with a bonus for elongated boxes and spheres.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
You say only one advantage that is discounted but it's an advantage that gives more than one benefit extra ST allows me to hit harder, carry more and with stand more damage. Moreover it's one that has a synergistic relationship with the benefits given by SM+1 (reach and grappling)
It doesn't really matter. ST's flexibility is taken into account in it's point cost. It also has a synergistic relationship with the benefits of negative SMs. Other advantages commonly found next to an advantage don't improve that advantage itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
More esoterically a stat normaliser like myself might be more accepting of increases to ST given a SM+1. (that's not a general point though)
Unlike many RPGs, It's a principle of gurps design that privilege of purchasing other abilities is not worth points. A periodically disrespected principle but a principle nonetheless.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Assuming big and strong characters tend to leverage money by being bog and string, I 'd suggest that the bigger and stronger they are the more money they will leverage
They leverage more money by virtue of being higher point characters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Only as much as they do for a ST7 human.
I don't have complaints about a ST 7 human.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Only they are getting more points because they haven't spent them on ST?

A ST15 SM+1 costs 45 points more than ST10 SM+1, they have more difficulty wearing armour that fits them sicne their BL will be 20lbs not 45lbs, but they have those extra points as compensation.
No, they already had those points. They are merely assigning them elsewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Which means that SM+1 has effectively become a 10 point disadvantage for that character, even while giving him bonus in grappling while hitting him for the negatives as well etc. (Albeit one that requires a 90pt buy in)
No one is claiming that positive SMs don't have advantages. Those 10 points just aren't good enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Well that's what we're discussing, not a established fact.
Discussing in the sense of "talking about" yet. Discussing in the sense of "primary purpose of the thread" no. There has been a lot of electronic ink spilt on this subject already. I'm happy to engage in a side discussion about the necessity of the thread in the first place, but it's primary purpose is to discuss solutions under the assumption that the problems are valid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
At some point common sense has to kick in though? The question about mass being a zero point feature is ultimately the same about SM being one. It's rather dependent on the usual side effects of being different masses (same as different SMs)
The point of rules is reducing the situations where common sense has to kick in. Most rules should simply function without oversight and thus not require precious gm cognitive resources and allow players to walk away and come up with ideas without having to constantly ping the gm with questions about ambiguous rules. Making every increase in mass be a disadvantage to a character without adding houserules to make it a Disadvantage is an incentive nightmare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Not sure what you mean here there is already a system for adjusting armour weight by character weight, and it has nothing to do with lead armour not weighing more?

What are the disadvantages you mention.
Not lead armour, lead people. A person who weighs more will require more costly armour but because they are also larger not because they weigh more. If you increase a person's density (within reason) their armour doesn't cost more.

The downsides are that if you want to take the normal rules and switch weight scaling by SM to smooth weight scaling volume you need to come up with the price of larger or smaller volumes and establish minimums and maximums of volume for various other stats.If not wearing armour is a legitimate choice in other regards it is also difficult to balance the trait between people wearing armour for whom it matters a good deal and people who aren't for whom it's almost free points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
What's the issue with bookish (I assume you mean weaker than race average) ogre/giants?
The issue is that they suffer as much as their strong brethren but aren't compensated equally because some of their compensation is hidden in ST costs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Well no rule is going to survive the equivalent of "yes I'm 12" tall with ST 20 and I weigh 1lb, woo my DR6 plate armour weighs almost nothing make it DR60"
Rules frequently survive the equivalent by not allowing the situation to develop in the first place.

Last edited by Sindri; 11-07-2014 at 06:12 AM.
Sindri is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 07:15 AM   #39
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
I would presume that he did in a number of instances. We don't see lots of things in the Conan stories.
Only its not really a key part of the genre is my point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Anyway ErhnamDJ was talking about encumbrance not money.
Something that extra ST more than compensates for as per the other points.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Well, fair enough but the normal rules are that SM is determined by longest dimension with a bonus for elongated boxes and spheres.
Well by that definition anyone over 6' is SM+1, is that how you run it?

Either way there's also the point that if the other two dimensions are both much smaller than the longest you go down SM, which I think is where being skinny comes in.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
It doesn't really matter. ST's flexibility is taken into account in it's point cost. It also has a synergistic relationship with the benefits of negative SMs. Other advantages commonly found next to an advantage don't improve that advantage itself.
It kind of does that's what synergistic means, especially if your also reducing the cost of that advantage (which SM does)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Unlike many RPGs, It's a principle of gurps design that privilege of purchasing other abilities is not worth points. A periodically disrespected principle but a principle nonetheless.
"Unusual background" says otherwise

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
They leverage more money by virtue of being higher point characters.
Not in this instance, SM+1 doesn't cost points (it trades vs. other things though) moreover ST is cheaper, so they will actually be same ST for less, or more ST for same points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
I don't have complaints about a ST 7 human.
They would have the same issues as lower than average ST larger creature


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
No, they already had those points. They are merely assigning them elsewhere.
Yes but they have them to assign elsewhere. You point was they'd have less points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
No one is claiming that positive SMs don't have advantages. Those 10 points just aren't good enough.
OK, but in this instance your arguing that the net balance of advantages to advantages is more than 10 points in the disadvantage's favor? The problem we've got here is the that balance is going to be so dependent on campaign setting I'd say it going to be impossible to come up with a general equation here. (eve more so than some other advantages where this is an issue)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Discussing in the sense of "talking about" yet. Discussing in the sense of "primary purpose of the thread" no. There has been a lot of electronic ink spilt on this subject already. I'm happy to engage in a side discussion about the necessity of the thread in the first place, but it's primary purpose is to discuss solutions under the assumption that the problems are valid.
I'd argue that deciding weather or not a solution is needed is part and parcel of discussing what's a reasonable solution. i.e no solution could = the correct solution

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
The point of rules is reducing the situations where common sense has to kick in. Most rules should simply function without oversight and thus not require precious gm cognitive resources and allow players to walk away and come up with ideas without having to constantly ping the gm with questions about ambiguous rules. Making every increase in mass be a disadvantage to a character without adding houserules to make it a Disadvantage is an incentive nightmare.
I really don't think saying no to characters wanting to be SM+1 and 1lb as being that (well unless they are a magically animated balloon animal)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Not lead armour, lead people. A person who weighs more will require more costly armour but because they are also larger not because they weigh more. If you increase a person's density (within reason) their armour doesn't cost more.
If Lead people are truly going to be setting thing I could just factor in some density multiplier between flesh and lead, job done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
The downsides are that if you want to take the normal rules and switch weight scaling by SM to smooth weight scaling volume you need to come up with the price of larger or smaller volumes
Which are already in the rules


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
and establish minimums and maximums of volume for various other stats.
Why?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
If not wearing armour is a legitimate choice in other regards it is also difficult to balance the trait between people wearing armour for whom it matters a good deal and people who aren't for whom it's almost free points.
Only if not wearing armour is legitimate choice (presumably because of some specific effect that replaces/invalidates) then you will already have paid for that in other advantages. Take your lead person. Someone made of lead is not going to need armour in comparison to their flesh and blood counter part. But that will be modelling in the system by them paying for Innate DR, and quite likely homogeneous (he'll not spend points in swimming either)
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
The issue is that they suffer as much as their strong brethren but aren't compensated equally because some of their compensation is hidden in ST costs.
But that's the same as saying a weak ST7 SM0 human is penalised by missing out on the -1 to be hit , that a averagely strong ST7 SM-1 halfling gets.

I have to say ultimately I think in terms of absolute points values doesn't work for SM, because the ads/dis-ads are so wide ranging and dependent on setting.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Rules frequently survive the equivalent by not allowing the situation to develop in the first place.
Personally I don't value rules by their ability to tackle the incredibly unlikely or daft (I can do that myself without recourse to rules) rather I value rules by their ability to deal with issues that are are more likely and a lot less fringe.

Either way that particular dilemma can easily be tackled by the point about density made at the top.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2014, 07:21 AM   #40
NineDaysDead
 
NineDaysDead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: Balancing High Size Modifier

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Those 10 points just aren't good enough.
Off the top of my head, for positive SMs:

In addition to the SM discount, for 0 points Base ST = 10 + SM

If that isn't enough of a boost:

Base ST = 10 + [SM x 2]
__________________
Ebaying:
NineDaysDead is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
balance, brainstorm, house rules, size modifier, strength

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 12:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.