How balanced is GURPS?

[Wundt]

I have been playing 4ed for a few months and have been considering trying GURPS as a GM. However, I really don't have a good sense of how balanced GURPS is in terms of combat opponents. I know from experience what and how many opponents to throw at a party when I GM other games (you cannot rely on CR in DnD, its pretty variable), but I don't have that sense for GURPS.

• In GURPS, if I put a 100pt monster/opponent up against a 100pt character, will it be a fair fight?

• How likely is a 100 point character going to beat a 50pt monster/opponent? 75pt? 90pt? (all other things being equal).

• What sort of point differential between the characters and their opponents is best to walk that line between challenging and sure death?

• Do multiple opponents add linearly? E.g. will a 100pt character defeat three 30pt monsters?

I know that there are other factors that come into play, for example, monsters and opponents can be 'designed' just for combat or to capitalize on characters' weaknesses. Assume the monsters/opponents are 'rounded', with non-combat skills, advantages, and disadvantages.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Wundt

I have been playing 4ed for a few months and have been considering trying GURPS as a GM. However, I really don't have a good sense of how balanced GURPS is in terms of combat opponents. I know from experience what and how many opponents to throw at a party when I GM other games (you cannot rely on CR in DnD, its pretty variable), but I don't have that sense for GURPS.

• In GURPS, if I put a 100pt monster/opponent up against a 100pt character, will it be a fair fight?

• How likely is a 100 point character going to beat a 50pt monster/opponent? 75pt? 90pt? (all other things being equal).

• What sort of point differential between the characters and their opponents is best to walk that line between challenging and sure death?

• Do multiple opponents add linearly? E.g. will a 100pt character defeat three 30pt monsters?

Disclaimer: This is from 3e experience.

The answers to pretty much all of your questions is "highly variable." It all depends less on overall point total than skilll levels with the weapons to be used, damage of the weapons to be used, DR of the armor worn and HT of the combatants.

Oh, I'll add that three 30 point opponents are more dangerous than one 90 point opponent (in general).

Brandon

[Wonder Lemming]

point value isn't a very good measure of combat-effectiveness in GURPS, especially with the copious non-combat options available to spend points on.

I find a better way to scale encounters is to look at your characters defences and offensive skills and design enemies with a fair chance of beating them, but not too hard, paying scant attention to point value. For instance if there is a heavily armoured fighter have at least one enemy capable of doing him harm, it is however up to the fighter to stop this enemy from getting to the wizard dressed only in his silk robe and skivvies!

[vesper]

My experience is that it is balanced as you want to make it. There is enough flexiblity as a GM you can do what ever you wish to provide flexibility
vesper

[Extrarius]

One thing to do would be to run mock combats of the pcs vs whatever as part of your preparation so you could roughly gauge how they could fare. Of course you won't think of everything the players do, and they won't try everything you do, so you need to allow for some variation.

[Wundt]

Everyone's answer is about what I expected. Like I said, I pretty much have ingored things like "Challenge Rating" in the past because of how variable things can be. It sounds like a simple 'rule', or even general guideline, doesn't exist in GURPS either.

I thought I would just ask because I was designing a monster and it was coming in points-wise at twice what I am giving my characters. It was meant to be a tough monster, but the point differencial was surprising.

[NorthSaber]

Most of the time, there's no need to assign point-values to enemies at all. In 90% of adventures I've been in, the enemies simply have the basic stats assigned and equipment chosen, and the essential combat stats calculated beforehand. A 25-point NPC guard with a shield and decent armor can be much better in combat than a 150-point PC who has no combat focus and especially if he has no protection.

What you probably should do is start with low challenges, and add incrementally. For example, if the PCs easily defeat 5 guards, the 7 reinforcements might arrive immediately. Or, perhaps one of the guards is more skilled than the others, with 3 higher skill with his weapon and shield, and perhaps even 1 DR better armor. You can wing these things even in mid-combat (except for the armor part) if your story and situation needs a tougher challenge.

Nothing spoils the mood of a climactic battle at the end of a multi-session adventure than an easy fight, so feel free to fudge - the end justifies the means, at least in this case. ^_^

[KlausPrinceOfTheUndeads]

I'm curious...Can you post your monster's sheet?

[Balor Patch]

Originally Posted by Wundt

Everyone's answer is about what I expected. Like I said, I pretty much have ingored things like "Challenge Rating" in the past because of how variable things can be. It sounds like a simple 'rule', or even general guideline, doesn't exist in GURPS either.

I thought I would just ask because I was designing a monster and it was coming in points-wise at twice what I am giving my characters. It was meant to be a tough monster, but the point differencial was surprising.

I put a bunch of the DF2 & DFM1 monsters into GCS templates. The low scores belonged to the Corpse Golem at [-47] and Erupting Slime at [-27], the highs were the Peshkali at [740] and Mindwarper at [689], and the average was around [200].

Take it for what it's worth...