(Unofficial) FAQ of the GURPS Fora

[vicky_molokh]

Q: Why are Reaction Modifier advantages affecting almost everybody as cheap as 4-5 points per +1? They seem to be better than Talents when it comes to modifying Influence Skills (or so it seems).

A: No they aren't. Reaction Modifiers only add to Reaction Rolls and Influence Attempts; they do NOT add directly to Influence Skills. An Influence Attempt is specifically an attempt to roll an appropriate Skill to replace a Reaction Roll. Other uses of Influence Skills, such as predicting the outcome of a conversation (Diplomacy), distracting a mark with a deception (Fast-Talk), or deciding if an attire is appropriate for a person of high society (Savoire-Faire (High Society)), do not get such an automatic bonus (but the GM has the final say, as usual).

Q: Why don't you have a Social Combat system in Social Engineering (or elsewhere)? Is it really that hard? Or did nobody truly get this idea by now?

A:

Originally Posted by Kromm

[ . . . ] we didn't overlook "social combat," but consciously chose a different approach that fit better with the rest of the game. Other reviews have missed our intent . . . The fact is that we didn't want "social combat" because we didn't think it was good rules model. Our goal was to show the GM how to use the existing mechanics to shift the campaign focus onto social matters [ . . . ]

[vicky_molokh]

Q: Can I buy up Techniques and Skills from a Wildcard Skill?

A: Yes and yes. Skills covered by the Wildcard are treated as if they default to it, and can be raised at the appropriate cost. Techniques work as they always do.

Notice that raising more than two 'normal' skills per Wildcards, or raising more than 3 Techniques per 'normal' skill, is almost always a waste of points.

[vicky_molokh]

Q: Why are many write-ups of monsters and opponents left with no templates/point values/etc.?

Originally Posted by Kromm

With apologies to those who like it, point values on creatures expressly designed as evil NPC monsters represent too much work for too little gain.

It takes me perhaps five minutes to slap down the right attributes and traits to fit a monster description, and maybe another five minutes to calculate damage, Dodge, etc. so that they're consistent with those attributes and traits. It takes me at least an hour to work up a relatively complex monster on points if I must modify Affliction, Innate Attack, Leech, etc. for its special attacks; build unique techniques for its trademark combat moves; coin new perks for its minor-but-beneficial features; and so on. Indeed, a complex Innate Attack can take me 5-10 minutes all by itself. And if the creature uses Alternate Forms, or has a set of alternative abilities, or uses an actual structured power (with power modifier, power Talent, and abilities) . . . well, it can take hours to write up properly.

And that's me, one of the designers of GURPS Fourth Edition; coauthor of GURPS Martial Arts (for techniques) and GURPS Powers (for abilities and powers); author of GURPS Power-Ups 2 (for perks); and one of two people in the whole world paid to work on GURPS and only on GURPS as a full-time job. My freelancers assure me that things are tougher for them. This is why PK and I must double-check all of their math, which adds editorial overhead to the writing overhead.

Such expense is nevertheless entirely justified for a race that's intended for PCs, for Alternate Forms for PCs, and/or for NPC Allies. However, if the author intends his creation to be strictly monstrous – a race of foes – and if most gamers will likely use it that way, then this additional work is impossible to justify. Freelance writers simply do not get paid enough to do an order of magnitude more work on the off chance that somebody will need a point cost for some optional rule – and gamers wouldn't pay what the books would cost if we remedied that. The gamer who's interested in off-label use has the tools at his disposal if he wishes to work out points.

The point of GURPS is that it provides the means to transcend old-school concepts like "NPC races." This means that it provides the tools to do the math, not that it does all the math for you. The fact that one can work out point costs for monsters if one wishes is the promise that the game makes. There's no promise that it will do that every time. In a good many cases, the latter would be a rather perverse "Because it's there!" exercise.

[vicky_molokh]

Some notes on Will, inspired by a recent thread. Might come in handy some day.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Yes. That's pretty much self-evident, since Will = IQ and Per = IQ by default, so buying IQ down to 0 takes Will and Per down to 0, too. You don't get Will for free!

It seems applicable to all dumb machines. Note that rocks aren't machines, though . . . a robot body is inherently Unliving, not Homogenous.

If the attack in question would affect you at all, sure. Note that lots of things with Will 0 have no mind to affect, so mind-affecting abilities fail automatically. Things that have low IQ but a mind generally buy up Will to allow resistance. Those that have low IQ but no mind often have Immunity to Mind Control. And some power modifiers already assume "Only affects targets with minds."

Exactly what I was saying above, yes.

[vicky_molokh]

Q: Please resolve an ambiguity - do Side Effects work based on Injury, or on Penetrating Damage?
A: Penetrating Damage.

[vicky_molokh]

Q: Could you clarify the details of immediate HT checks for unconsciousness at 0 HP and the periodic checks that follow?
A:

Originally Posted by Kromm

The instant you're injured to 0 HP or less: No matter what maneuver you selected before being injured, you must roll vs. HT to avoid unconsciousness. Do Nothing – as a choice on that turn or as a consequence of something else – is beside the point.

Turns after you're injured to 0 HP or less: If you select any maneuver but Do Nothing, you must roll vs. HT to avoid unconsciousness before you take action. If you select Do Nothing – as a choice on that turn or as a consequence of something else – you do not have to roll but of course have no action to take.

That is, my clarification was of the two offending sentences. The Do Nothing exception isn't in either of them, and works as it always did: It lets you avoid a HT roll. But that's neither here nor there in what I was trying to clarify. The whole rule would be:

0 HP or less – You are in immediate danger of collapse. In addition to the above effects, make an immediate HT roll, at -1 per full multiple of HP below zero. Failure means you fall unconscious (or simply stop working, if you weren’t truly alive or conscious in the first place); see Recovering from Unconsciousness (p. 423). Success means you can act normally, but must roll again at the start of every turn to continue functioning. Exception: If you choose Do Nothing on your turn, and do not attempt any defense rolls, you can remain conscious without rolling. Roll only on turns during which you attempt a defense roll or choose a maneuver other than Do Nothing.

[vicky_molokh]

Q: Summonable Allies - how long do they last, can they be summoned/de-summoned repeatedly etc.?
A: Generally, there are two flavours of Summonable - the Classic (as intended by Basic Set) and Spell-Like (emulating spiritual predecessors of Dungeon Fantasy, computer games etc.) Here are some details:

Originally Posted by Kromm

I'll try to sum this up:

Common to All Interpretations

Ally can be summoned at the time and place of your choosing, and no social or practical considerations impinge on appearance. The place can be anywhere you can go, even if the Ally couldn't get there for reasons of size, lack of mobility or stealth, etc., and even if the GM imposes dramatic conditions that allow just one person (yourself) to be present. Until summoned, Ally occupies no space, consumes no food, requires no transportation, and cannot be detected.

If the appearance roll fails, the cooldown is one day, not one full adventure.

These things are what make a Summonable Ally worth the points.

Classic Ally Interpretation

Frequency of Summoning: Once per adventure.
Duration of Summoning: One adventure.

This is no change from a standard Ally, and is worth no points.

Spell-Like Interpretation

Frequency of Summoning: However often you like until you fail and hit the cooldown.
Duration of Summoning: One minute.

This is a big change from a standard Ally, but it's a tradeoff and worth no points.

Notes:
Spell-Like assumes a Concentrate manoeuvre is enough to summon an ally in combat, behinds someone's back etc.
Classic assumes that once you de-summon an Ally, you have to wait until the end of the Adventure. With Spell-Like, there is no such drawback.

More from Kromm:

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

[vicky_molokh]

Q: How do Alternative Abilities and Compartmentalised Mind interact?

A: While this may not be evident from the RAW, Kromm spoke thus:

Originally Posted by Kromm

No, Compartmentalized Mind (CM) does not grant multiple copies of abilities for the purposes of switching alternate abilities, consuming limited uses, triggering cooldowns, and so forth!

All mechanics that make abilities cheaper do so under the assumption that they'll actually limit the character. Making CM a one-stop shop for working around such things makes it a one-stop shop for cheesy abuse. It might seem fine when you're paying 50 points to get around innate usage limits on a cheap ability . . . but what happens when someone takes Ability 1 [1,000] and Ability 2 [1,000] as alternative abilities, pays 1,200 points, drops 50 points for CM 1, and enjoys 2,000 points of abilities – along with all the incidental benefits of CM – for just 1,250 points? That would be a crock.

Thus, the answer is a definitive "No way!" The main benefit of CM is extra actions. That's what 50 points fairly buys.