Re: GURPS Dragons
 

That would make them suseptable to being knocked over and such things that are basic strenght checks though.

They might be good canidates for reduced striking strength.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Except that would nerf their Trample (B404). Reduced striking strength on their "arm" (trunk) comes in the form of it being weak.

Having done well over 200 3e -> 4e conversions I can say that the relationship between weight and ST is, most of the time, a good one. Certainly better than the 3e method (which is what I like to call "willy-nilly" when I'm feeling snarky). There are exceptions, like big worms or snakes that never lift more than 1/4 of their body and therefore only use 1/4 of their body for any kind of ST-related activities, but usually it works out pretty well. (An animal like that should be designed with low ST and high HP, since it neither attacks nor lifts with its whole body.)

As an aside, the only gap I've found (which may be because I'm dumb and can't find the answer) is that there is no simple way to reduce striking ST for non-bite attacks. To nerf a claw attack (for example) you'd have to start with low ST, then give Lifting ST and extra HP. There's no "Weak Arm" or "Reduced Striking ST" disad. (And if I'm wrong, PLEASE tell me!)

By the same token, Weak Bite should come in levels, not be a flat -2. I can easily imagine (and have had a dickens of a time trying to convert) a creature the size of a house with a very small beak. If it does thr 10d but has Weak Bite, that goes to 10d-20, which (yes, I know I'm fudging) is 6d or 7d. I can't make it anything lower than that unless I do the Lifting ST/extra HP trick.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Weak Arms are listed under the Extra Arm advantage. There is a 1/2 ST and 1/4 ST version. You can also take ST with the No Fine Manipulators limitation for body/leg ST.

JeffM

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

10d-20 is more like 4d or 5d, not 6d or 7d. 10d averages 35 points, and 35-20 = 15, which is what you'd expect from 4d+1. Using the adds -> dice rule (B269), -20 is -5d and -2, for 5d-2 (which could also be considered 4d+2).

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Actually, the average on 10d-20 is 16 2/3, not 15. No individual die can go below 0, so the average per die is 0+0+1+2+3+4=10, divided by 6 gives 1.667 per die, which gives 16 2/3 for 10 dice.

Sorry for the quibble; I know it's easier to just subtract 20 when rolling 10 dice together, but technically....it isn't right. :-)

This is more like 5d-1 (which averages 16.5). Still significantly less than the 6d or 7d of the previous poster, so your point stands.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Incorrect! 10d-20 MEANS "roll ten dice, subtract 20 from the total minimum 1 if it's not crushing, minimum 0 if it is crushing"

Not "roll 10 dice, subtract 2 from each die, minimum 1 on each die".

I have never ever ever seen that second meaning used in an RPG.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

I have, but not when it's worded the way Weak Bite is: "Calculate biting damage normally, then apply an extra -2 per die". If it said "to each die" it would be a different matter.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Look, a lot of people point out that the elephant is heavier, more massive than a monstrous dragon. In GURPS books, the elephant is actually heavier than the monstrous dragon. But the darn monstrous thing is supposed to be the largest one conceived on GURPS books, that's why I may upgrade a monstrous dragon ST, but I don't think I should have to. It's a great wyrm, it's supposed to be very very frightening and powerful. It shouldn't even measure only 14 yards in size, should be more like Godzilla.

Think less in D&D terms, but imagine the big dragon from movie Reign of fire. Not intelligent, not spellcaster, not speaking, all muscles, size and fire. Now picture an elephant biting harder, bashing harder, lifting more weight, actually, dragging the dragon itself down if it had the chance of pulling a rope tied to it.

So, even not if not Gygaxian, even if just a pterodactyl that spits fire, a dragon is supposed to be stronger than an elephant and not otherwise, lest the elephant has a chance of beating the monstrous dragon's ass good on a fist fight.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

Let me fix that for you:

There's no one right answer. Dragons don't really exist. Want one the size of Godzilla, give it Godzilla stats. But it seems pointless to complain that there are other concepts of dragons that wouldn't have such exaggerated stats.

Re: GURPS Dragons
 

I based the largest dragons I typically would use in a campaign off a T-Rex, myself. About 40 feet total length, about 10,000 pounds, about ST 40. And those are the big, ancient dragons. It's easy enough to modify the size/strength/mass of the templates in Dragons. (And actually, I should note that my prefered size for dragons actually ranges from roughly the size of a human or wolf, up through a large horse)

It's only when you start dealing with D&D-style enemies with frequency that some winged, fire-breathing, armor-plated beast that is "only" the size of a full-grown T-Rex seems small. In any other context, it's a terrifying monster that you don't want to be anywhere near.

And even that "weak" default monstrous dragon would shred an elephant without issue. The elephant would have to get lucky to even do much to the dragon, and it would seem near miraculous for it to win.

GURPS dragons generally seemed more interested in dragons that were closer to historical legends and realistic designs, rather than the more modern ones which are often treated with far too much hollywood-realism (Reign of Fire is actually a good example of this. Those things were absurdly strong and tough for their size, and even with what they showed in the movie, the idea of them taking out humanity was quite a stretch).

The problem with dragons, of course, is that everyone has different images of them. D&D just happens to be one of the more common reference points. However, considering the large number of varieties and interpretations, I think GURPS Dragons did the most sensible thing by keeping with GURPS tradition; go with a realistic base, and let the players add or subtract what they need for their exact tastes.