Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

Isn't there sample spaceships in the basic set and SF armor, lasers and blasters. Heck there is even a phaser like weapon. With Space and the Basic Set I can do a pretty good SF game without the VDS or Ultra-Tech.

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

You need aliens and planets to run most kinds of space SF games but for few other kinds of games, so rules for those things go in Space. On the other hand, ultra-tech gadgets, vehicular combat, and vehicle design are of use in many, many kinds of campaigns -- space SF games are but a small subset -- so those rules and stats don't go in Space, but in Ultra-Tech and Vehicle Design.

As a comparison . . . you need rules for chains of command and strategy to run most kinds of military games but for few other kinds of games, so rules for those things will go in Military. On the other hand, firearms and hand-to-hand combat systems are of use in many, many kinds of campaigns -- military games are but a small subset -- so those rules and stats won't be in Military, but in High-Tech and Martial Arts.

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

If I want custom designs with unique capabilities (such as being extraordinarily small), I probably do pay points. For generic vehicles, I don't expect to pay points for the vehicle either, but it won't do anything terribly exciting or exotic.

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

Yup, all 4 of them, only one of which is actually a starship. Really, not much there to use or build upon, to tell you the truth. The only thing the sample ships really do is show you an example of the table layout they'll be using in future books.

And see what a good job they did in Basic with only one or two pages of SF gear there! Imagine what they could have done had they taken 6 or 8 pages in Space...

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

I fail to see how the shape of the curve does or doesn't encourage thinking. The last time I looked, the thinking in character design was in coming up with a character concept, not playing with numbers. I also disagree with "unrealistic." Since when do point costs have anything to do with realism? Point costs exist to balance the game. They don't support a realistic statistical distribution and never did. A realistic statistical pricing would probably look something like 0-5-10-25-45-85-155-295.

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

There is likely to be some of this discussion in the upcoming GURPS Bio-Tech release... Stay tuned. GURPS Space, 4/e had some discussion in general about building Alien Races that fit to the environment, but my suspicion is that Bio-Tech may also have what you're looking for.

-Paraj Mandrekar

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

None whatsoever.

I suppose if you're a gearhead, or wargaming in space, those things might be handy. Personally I wouldn't have any issue with a page or two of stat-block ship/gear examples, but I really don't need somebody to tell me what the armor or weaponry of a ship is going to be in one of my campaigns.

I mean really, this is GURPS, unless I'm buying a setting book, I'm not going to give any author much input into what goes on in one of my own settings, space or otherwise, and I've been happily running a space campaign in 4e edition without needing someone to tell me what my spaceships stats should look like, thank you very much.

If I want inspiration for cool gadgets I'll pick up Ultratech. I may or may not even pick up the 4e Vehicle builder, regardless of spaceships, I never did pick up the 3e version which I deemed a waste of paper.

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

First off, I never said that concept-making isn't a serious part of (N)PC creation; I just don't ignore the second one either.

Second, points were supposedly used to represent time spent training. It takes more time to train from ST 12 to ST 13 than from ST 9 to ST 10. I'm a P.E. specialist, so you can trust me on that. :) Same goes for most other things. A realistic (more-or-less bell-curve, with some exceptions) distribution encourages RL-style thinking, as if you were indeed planning your training/study/etc. program for your soldier/scholar/etc. Linear costs make all this irrelevant. 3e made at least some nod to this distribution/curve, which was a good balance between realism and playability (though it indeed appears that IQ/DX were underpriced, and IQ! still is...).

BTW, if we apply (N)PC rules to vehicles as they are, we would get the 'Big is Beautiful' philosophy:

• it becomes increasingly cheaper to buy Basic Lift, as it is a squared function.
• it becomes increasingly cheaper to buy speed, because Enhanced Move doubles speed per level.
• larger things have a discount for ST/HP, despite having inferior structural integrity per unit of mass and an inferior Relative Power (rules of elastic similarity (spelling?) and the cube-square law).

Conclusion: as is, GURPS encourages building as big as possible; however, RW navies (and armies) actually prefer to optimize instead: ships didn't become too much bigger in the last TL change. In fact, space engineers are trying to make smaller craft.

I'm not ranting about S4e not including VE4e. But at least they should've made guidelines about relative mass, cost and volume of 'points' spent on different spaceshiply things. That would've been a good middle ground, and only take a few pages.

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

Me neither, look at us.Balance, I can understand--but no realism? I thought realism was the big niche of GURPS. Hmm...IQ 13 for 25 points...IQ 14 for 45 points...maybe we really are as smart as we claim. ;p

Re: Reviewer gives GURPS Space substance 3 out of 5
 

Cool! When I read BIO (probably my fav book), it was probably the only thing I thought lacking; and even then it felt like an impossible dream, not something to blame anyone etc. So, long live BIO4e!