Rules you ignore/alter.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by Mark Skarr

Instead of working on “penetrating damage,” it will, instead, be “conditional injury.” Basically, if there is a wounding modifier, from the innate attack it is applied to the penetrating damage before the penalty is calculated. Yes, this is a change, but it will help balance the differing point costs. So, basically, a Small Piercing attack would get -1 / 4 pts of damage, a regular piercing attack would be -1 / 2 pts, a large piercing would be . . . -1 / 1.5 pts (or something, not doing the maths right now), and huge piercing is -1 / 1 pt. Unliving and other modifiers (like locational wounding) do not apply.

I love the idea, but I feel iffy about the exact details. Outside of Cutting, all injury multipliers have things like location, object make up, etc that affect what the actual modifier ends up being (Cutting has some but I think it generally does x1.5). What might be a simpler solution is to only apply it to pi- and have everything else be regular, namely to deal with small piercing's tiny price. I also just feel odd about letting pi++ work this way on, say, a tree.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

I love the idea, but I feel iffy about the exact details. Outside of Cutting, all injury multipliers have things like location, object make up, etc that affect what the actual modifier ends up being (Cutting has some but I think it generally does x1.5). What might be a simpler solution is to only apply it to pi- and have everything else be regular, namely to deal with small piercing's tiny price. I also just feel odd about letting pi++ work this way on, say, a tree.

Calculate as for a torso hit. If you're unsure, the innate attack advantage lists the values for a torso hit in the damage type descriptions: "Double penetrating damage in Flesh!"


I'd have thought that most of the time toxic is the thematically appropriate damage type for side effects.



On the main thread, I apparently "ignore" that Pi++ and impaling damage cost 8 each, because I was completely unaware until just now (I thought they were 10). I use a lot of crushing, burning, and toxic innate attacks in my games, but very little piercing.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Calculate as for a torso hit.

I thought so, it's why I thought it was weird.

Originally Posted by ericthered

I'd have thought that most of the time toxic is the thematically appropriate damage type for side effects.

If it weren't for the tremendous drop in price, I'd have made Afflictions just based on Toxic, but saving 60% on costs seems really good.

Originally Posted by ericthered

On the main thread, I apparently "ignore" that Pi++ and impaling damage cost 8 each, because I was completely unaware until just now (I thought they were 10). I use a lot of crushing, burning, and toxic innate attacks in my games, but very little piercing.

That's funny, I thought they were a bit overpriced at 8pts. Both only get the x2 multiplier in specific situations; torso, neck, and face but not vitals or skull and only on flesh bags. Cutting practically always gets the x1.5. Do you change Fatigue and Corrosion damage around?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by kirbwarrior

That's funny, I thought they were a bit overpriced at 8pts. Both only get the x2 multiplier in specific situations; torso, neck, and face but not vitals or skull and only on flesh bags. Cutting practically always gets the x1.5. Do you change Fatigue and Corrosion damage around?

I find all of Cut, Imp, Pi+, and Pi++ overpriced, because increasing wounding without increasing penetration tends to be a bad choice. Ignoring hit locations (which favor smaller piercing attacks):

1. 2d pi- [6] has the same expected wounding as 1d(2) pi [7.5]
2. 2d pi [10] has the same expected wounding as 1d(2) pi++ [12]

I would probably change pi- to [4], pi+ to [6], and pi++/imp to [7]. Or, honestly, just set them all to cost [5] with a wounding multiplier of 1, and if you really want to have high damage/low penetration attack, buy an attack with a (0.5) armor divisor.

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by Anthony

I find all of Cut, Imp, Pi+, and Pi++ overpriced, because increasing wounding without increasing penetration tends to be a bad choice. Ignoring hit locations (which favor smaller piercing attacks):

1. 2d pi- [6] has the same expected wounding as 1d(2) pi [7.5]
2. 2d pi [10] has the same expected wounding as 1d(2) pi++ [12]

I would probably change pi- to [4], pi+ to [6], and pi++/imp to [7]. Or, honestly, just set them all to cost [5] with a wounding multiplier of 1, and if you really want to have high damage/low penetration attack, buy an attack with a (0.5) armor divisor.

Small piercing in general seems like too good of a deal, especially when compared to Toxic which never gets injury multipliers. In fact, I'm going to simply change Small Piercing to 4pts/lvl, it generally seems better than Toxic but it's not superior. As for other types, I could see moving them to half costs for best balance but that's incredibly mathy.

Note, that those example attacks do get different with more modifiers. Not sure how much that affects things, but I find it important to remember, especially in regard to RoF.

[Captain Joy]

Forced Entry
Instead of it being a DX-based skill that adds to damage, it is a ST-based skill and rolls to force things are a simple contest.

[Alden Loveshade]

For Signature Gear and Trading Points for Money, I use a variation for characters who have a lot of wealth. The basic system I think works quite well for characters who don't have much money, but is not as useful for well-to-do PCs.

http://mygurps.com/pmwiki.php?n=Main.GURPSMoney

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

Forced Entry
Instead of it being a DX-based skill that adds to damage, it is a ST-based skill and rolls to force things are a simple contest.

Interesting variant. I've been thinking about making it an advantage. 2 pts/level. Level 1 gives +1 damage/die, Level 2 gives you +2 damage/die when breaking and entering.

[JulianLW]

Kromm's alternate version of Signature Gear seems to me to strike the best balance between points (i.e. investment of character) and money.

Originally Posted by Kromm

One could take this point of view:

Currently, at 1 point per 50% of average campaign starting money, Signature Gear 2 [2] gives stuff worth 100% of starting cash, on top of cash. In effect, then, for 1/5 the price of Comfortable [10], someone with Average wealth gets the same boost in stuff as if he had taken Comfortable, as long as he accepts the boost in the form of plot-protected gear. One could extend this thinking. A possible reinvention of Signature Gear would be:

1. Buy your wealth level normally and note its starting money. Example: Sig Sigson is a TL3 warrior with Struggling wealth. This costs him -10 points (a disadvantage) and gives him just $500 in cash.
2. Select a higher wealth level and note its point cost and starting money. Example: Sig wants cool gear commensurate with that of a knight, who would be a Status 2 individual with a wealth level of Wealthy. Wealthy costs 20 points and gives $5,000 in cash.
3. Find the point-cost difference between these wealth levels, divide that difference by 5, and pay that many points for Signature Gear. Example: The difference in cost is 20 - (-10) = 30 points, so Sig pays 30/5 = 6 points for Signature Gear.
4. Find the starting-money difference between the wealth levels, note that with your Signature Gear advantage, and take up to that many $ in plot-protected gear. Example: The difference in cash is $5,000 - $500 = $4,500, so Sig notes Signature Gear ($4,500) [6] and is glad his GM didn't charge him 9 points for this.

This way, some would-be elven bow owner who has Average wealth and wants a $15,300 bow could just get Signature Gear ($19,000) [6] – which would be Signature Gear ($19,500) [8] for Sig. Those who want to mess with intermediate levels could do so, too, I suppose.

I guess intermediate levels are crucial. Those who want $100,000,000 starships at TL10 could take either Signature Gear ($49,950,000) [15] or Signature Gear ($499,950,000) [20], but might want in-between levels. So extend the Wealth chart:

×1.5 for 5 points
×2 for 10 points
×3 for 15 points
×5 for 20 points
×10 for 25 points
×20 for 30 points
×40 for 35 points
×60 for 40 points
×80 for 45 points
×100 for 50 points
×200 for 55 points
×400 for 60 points
×600 for 65 points
×800 for 70 points
×1,000 for 75 points
×2,000 for 80 points
×4,000 for 85 points
×6,000 for 90 points
×8,000 for 95 points
×10,000 for 100 points

[kirbwarrior]

Originally Posted by Alden Loveshade

http://mygurps.com/pmwiki.php?n=Main.GURPSMoney

Originally Posted by JulianLW

Kromm's alternate version of Signature Gear seems to me to strike the best balance between points (i.e. investment of character) and money.

I used to use both of these but dropped the latter for the former. Signature Gear is just a simple point (I got that from DFRPG). Separate from it, you buy gear as per normal, but money costs half as much as Wealth. In fact, it's just Wealth (Money Only -50% with intermediate levels possible, but you right it on your sheet because you can buy the other half later.

Other slight rule; Certain specific traits are off-limits in RAW for Controllable Disadvantage (I think Berserk and Epilepsy?). Instead, you can still pick them, but you must follow the rules of the disad to turn it off. Berserk, namely, has it's own conditions both for turning off and on normally, so taking it as a perk just makes you immune to the disad turning on without you wanting it to. Even though it's based on SC12, I still see players prefer it over Berserk-15 just for the control aspect.

This isn't exactly a rules break, but I basically allow any Attribute Substitution and am far more willing to break verisimilitude for cinematic awesomeness; In a pokemon campaign a player took Throw: Pokeball based on Will to let 'sheer determination' help catch pokemon.

However, I do allow ST-based changes but with some caveats; Only one substitution, treat ST as 20 for any contests with this skill if ST is higher, the skill must absolutely make some amount of sense (for instance, already has ST-based possible rolls) and the skill can't directly use ST already. That last one is a bit fiddly, but namely no muscle-based weapons skills based on ST (guns are allowed!) or other skills that directly interact with thrust, swing, or basic lift. Uncontested skills are usually fine over 20 in my experience.