Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-06-2022, 12:14 PM   #51
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
I agree it's worth less since you can mitigate a combat loss if necessary. In my experience, though, being unable to take gear places or having it removed outside of combat (detention) occurs far, far more often than having it stolen during combat.
I wonder whether the design on Can Be Stolen takes into account the implication of Can Be Policed that you're focusing on.

I think how often PCs are likely to be subject to being coerced into surrendering their equipment is probably even more campaign-dependent than how often they're likely to have enemies try to disarm, pickpocket, or snatch-and-run their equipment.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2022, 01:29 PM   #52
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
2) Cleric gets to use healing, but then must pray (reload) his charge. Limited Use 1/slow reload.
For the traditional "I need to reload a bullet" form of this they don't really go into details of requirements (B112 says GM determines cost and weight, volume and scarcity are other things which come to mind) but since we'd be forgoing these in the case of prayer, should there be some other kind of substituted problems like it taking much longer than the 6 second minimum?

Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
4) Cleric has the ability to make rods that can cast healing. They tend to get damaged or taken so he makes a few at a time when doing the necessary rituals so he can have a spare handy. Gadget with limitations.
Even though non-Unique gadgets can be rebuilt if destroyed I wasn't aware you could rebuild spares ahead of time like this. I figured it was something like "if you build a spare that works it deactivates the original".

I can't remember any book examples in either direction though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varyon View Post
Can be Stolen isn't much of a Limitation if the item being stolen means "I pull out one of the dozen spares I have on hand," which was essentially the situation being discussed here. Only having one spare on hand, of course, would change things markedly.
I think it's something like "my advantage means one single item can channel my power, to make a new gadget that is the conduit means the old one is not"

But I realized that creates a problem w/ how Can Be Stolen works.

No matter which form of CBS the issue here is it is meant to be able to let others use your advantage.

Even if you take a half-discount "gadget will not immediately work for the thief" version, that still implies that EVENTUALLY (non-immediately) the thief will be able to use that gadget. Full-value CBS means they can use it right away.

Since "Normally, you can replace a broken or stolen gadget" this basically means (if you keep handing them off to passing thieves as fast as you can replace them) you're creating a situation where you can arm the world w/ the advantage linked to your gadget.

This makes gadget-Advantages somewhat similar to Infectious Attack: it's an advantage by which you are able to recreate your advantage in a theoretically unlimited number of people, though not necessarily to your benefit since it gives you no control over them (like w/ Dominance) so they might use the advantage against you.

Since this is possibly something that could break a game world (then again, so is Infectious Attack) the GM might want some controls over it, maybe create some kind of "diminishing returns" effect so it eventually cancels out.

Maybe something along the lines of forcing anyone who gets your advantage to pay the character point cost of the advantage (whether it be a vampire racial template, or your Staff of Healing) like by taking CP debt, certain disadvantages, etc.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2022, 01:53 PM   #53
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
I wonder whether the design on Can Be Stolen takes into account the implication of Can Be Policed that you're focusing on.
I wasn't intending to refer to a just a social aspect. My overwhelming experience - even just considering just pure combat encounters - is you're more likely to get beaten (such that you're KO'ed, disabled, or choose to surrender) than have items taken while you're still capable of using them.

Quote:
I think how often PCs are likely to be subject to being coerced into surrendering their equipment is probably even more campaign-dependent than how often they're likely to have enemies try to disarm, pickpocket, or snatch-and-run their equipment.
Policing like that would depend on the equipment as well as the society. A healing rod might be allowed where a blasting rod isn't.

Besides, I wouldn't call it coercion. The king's guards may ask you to check your obviously powerful items. At that point you can turn them over, turn around, or try to be clever and shame them into allowing an old man a walking stick. In other circumstances, it's often the PCs not taking a risk. Don't take your obviously powerful item to a seedy bar.
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2022, 02:20 PM   #54
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
For the traditional "I need to reload a bullet" form of this they don't really go into details of requirements (B112 says GM determines cost and weight, volume and scarcity are other things which come to mind) but since we'd be forgoing these in the case of prayer, should there be some other kind of substituted problems like it taking much longer than the 6 second minimum?
I would go the other direction. If you impose a cost, weight, or scarcity that's odious it becomes it own limitation. Let's say you have a ghostly cowboy with a ghostly six-shooter that chills the soul and ignores armor that can fire 5 times per day and refreshes each night when he rises anew. That's fairly simple to cost out:
Ghostly Shooter (IA: Fatigue; Cosmic: No DR; RoF 3; Limit 5/day)

Now let's say that he can reload instead of waiting until rising again. The limitation value drops to -5%, but it now takes 2-3 seconds to reload per shot.
- Is much better than Costs Fatigue? Using fatigue would likely give you more shots but a longer recovery time. Either way you still let lots of shots for a -5% limitation.
- Is it better than Takes Extra Time? You'd have to dedicate 2 seconds per use, effectively aiming then firing, but you could do it an unlimited number of times.
- Is better than Takes Recharge? Again, you can shoot all day just waiting 5 seconds between?
- Is it better than unreliable? That sort of simulates running out and needing to reload.
- Is it better than fickle? See unreliable.

Not that all of these are worth around the same value without the nuisance of having to actually have ammunition that can be taken away from you on your person.

Quote:
Even if you take a half-discount "gadget will not immediately work for the thief" version, that still implies that EVENTUALLY (non-immediately) the thief will be able to use that gadget. Full-value CBS means they can use it right away.
Nah, half value gives potential. In the MCU you need unrealistic power tech to make his armors work. In a fantasy game unlocking an item might involve a ritual that you simply can't perform. An AI might respond to the right password, but guessing it is nearly impossible. Besides, even if you don't get any discount - even if your powers are completely internal - the GM could make someone that duplicates or mimics your powers. I'd suggest the "used against you" is only meaningful in a combat time scenerio.

Quote:
Maybe something along the lines of forcing anyone who gets your advantage to pay the character point cost of the advantage (whether it be a vampire racial template, or your Staff of Healing) like by taking CP debt, certain disadvantages, etc.
Sure, though GMs tend to have an unlimited point budget for such things.
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2022, 03:02 PM   #55
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
If you impose a cost, weight, or scarcity that's odious it becomes it own limitation. Let's say you have a ghostly cowboy with a ghostly six-shooter that chills the soul and ignores armor that can fire 5 times per day and refreshes each night when he rises anew. That's fairly simple to cost out:
Ghostly Shooter (IA: Fatigue; Cosmic: No DR; RoF 3; Limit 5/day)

Now let's say that he can reload instead of waiting until rising again. The limitation value drops to -5%, but it now takes 2-3 seconds to reload per shot.
- Is much better than Costs Fatigue? Using fatigue would likely give you more shots but a longer recovery time. Either way you still let lots of shots for a -5% limitation.
- Is it better than Takes Extra Time? You'd have to dedicate 2 seconds per use, effectively aiming then firing, but you could do it an unlimited number of times.
- Is better than Takes Recharge? Again, you can shoot all day just waiting 5 seconds between?
- Is it better than unreliable? That sort of simulates running out and needing to reload.
- Is it better than fickle? See unreliable.

Not that all of these are worth around the same value without the nuisance of having to actually have ammunition that can be taken away from you on your person.
Takes Extra Time and Takes Recharge seem like good bases of comparison since they somewhat emulate aspects of Requires Reload (the reloading time and the time it would take you to procure more ammo from your stash when you run out of the amount on your person)

Fickle/Unreliable/requires (attribute) roll all sort of have a "Costs Fatigue" element whenever they do fail (just less frequently, in exchange for occasional malfunctions)

A major diff of course w/ Requires Reload is you know when your shots will work in key situations, whereas you don't know when you'll fail those activation rolls. So you can be tactical about your ammo usage and when you reload your gun, in ways you can't w/ those limitations.


Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
Nah, half value gives potential. In the MCU you need unrealistic power tech to make his armors work.
In a fantasy game unlocking an item might involve a ritual that you simply can't perform.
Would be interesting if we had some kind of sliding scale between the half-discount (long-time difficulty use of your gadget) vs full-value discount (short-type easy use of your gadget) and examples of those concepts being applied.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2022, 10:21 PM   #56
maximara
On Notice
 
maximara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sumter, SC
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
In 4e you make this Signature Gear.
For an item that provides powers this is the wrong tactic. Use Gadget rules instead. as it is far easier.
__________________
Help make a digital reference for GURPS by coming to the GURPS wiki and provide some information and links (such as to various Fanmade 4e Bestiaries) . Please, provide more then just a title and a page number.
maximara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2022, 05:43 AM   #57
Emerikol
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Eastern Kentucky
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

NOTE: This post is a response to the original post. I have not read every response.

Several things here.

1. It is a powered entity that even if something could pass through it would reappear afterwards.

2. Anything strong enough to break through a powered blade would be far past the power needed to just pull the person arms out of their sockets or push the blade back upon the person.

So I imagine they don't imagine a need to deal with a situation where the arms are strong enough to hold a blade steady to the point the blade "breaks". Breaking of course would be just allowing the attack through. The blade would immediately reform if an energy blade.

Even imagining strong enough arms how does the person stay on their feet? What stops them and their blade from being thrown across the room? The sort of power necessary to break such a blade might send a car or more flying through the air.
Emerikol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2022, 09:40 AM   #58
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
I wonder whether the design on Can Be Stolen takes into account the implication of Can Be Policed that you're focusing on.
"Can Be Policed" seems roughly comparable to Mundane Countermeasures (for building Power modifiers), which is -5% IIRC. That is, it's something to be expected if you're captured (and may be used in other cases where mundane characters are expected to disarm, like meeting a local ruler or whatever), and may be used against you in combat (mundane countermeasures are often a bit harder to setup, but have a more reliable and absolute effect than "I have to draw one of my backup wands").

Note in some cases, particularly if the GM is being realistic about society, Can Be Policed has advantageous aspects to it. The wizard who can turn you to goo with a thought, and who cannot be disarmed of this, doesn't get to meet the king, while his compatriot who can have his powers disabled by wearing leaden shackles or having his staff taken from him, does. Places that require you to check your weapons at the door may not allow an android with a built-in arm cannon to enter at all, but an android carrying a comparable rifle can simply drop it off and enter. And so forth. In a setting where this is the case, arguably a character who has a problematic power that lacks some form of Can Be Policed should have a Social Stigma of some flavor (or a Secret that will become said Social Stigma if revealed), to represent that the character is always considered to be armed (or otherwise dangerous, such as a person with mind reading powers).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
Since "Normally, you can replace a broken or stolen gadget" this basically means (if you keep handing them off to passing thieves as fast as you can replace them) you're creating a situation where you can arm the world w/ the advantage linked to your gadget.
I believe the way this is meant to be handled is as follows. For an item that is "initially useless to the thief," this means the thief can gain access to the power(s) contained within the Gadget - by spending the points necessary to have the Gadget be "theirs" (which is the same as the initial character paid for having the Gadget in the first place - although if there's no way for the thief to get a new one, say because the original character is dead and the thief doesn't know how to make new gadgets, then Unique can be added on). This can represent some sort of mystical reattuning, analyzing the device to see how it works, or whatever. For an item that is immediately usable, the thief will eventually lose access to it, Because Plot. It may break, be lost, stop working for unexplained reasons, or whatever. To avoid this, the thief needs to pay the points for it, as above (but note it will be less expensive, because it's immediately usable if another character steals it).

In other words:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
Maybe something along the lines of forcing anyone who gets your advantage to pay the character point cost of the advantage (whether it be a vampire racial template, or your Staff of Healing) like by taking CP debt, certain disadvantages, etc.
Except more "they have the option of spending points" than "they are forced to." Not spending the points can mean they end up losing the relevant trait(s), as above. Forcing them to spend the points for Infectious Attack may arguably be an Enhancement for that trait, but it depends on the particulars.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul
Varyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2022, 10:20 AM   #59
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varyon View Post
Except more "they have the option of spending points" than "they are forced to." Not spending the points can mean they end up losing the relevant trait(s), as above. Forcing them to spend the points for Infectious Attack may arguably be an Enhancement for that trait, but it depends on the particulars.
I think it's a question of when plot takes it away from them, which is why forcing some sort of purchase paid for w/ something else seems better.

I'd say something like "Enemy: inventor of the gadget who didn't give permission for thief to take it" but I don't know if we're supposed to give NPCs social traits like ally/enemy
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2022, 10:52 AM   #60
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
I think it's a question of when plot takes it away from them, which is why forcing some sort of purchase paid for w/ something else seems better.

I'd say something like "Enemy: inventor of the gadget who didn't give permission for thief to take it" but I don't know if we're supposed to give NPCs social traits like ally/enemy
For a PC, this would be between the GM and the player. For example, if the player swipes a really useful doohickey and wants to keep it long term, but the character doesn't have the points to spare, he may suggest to the GM (or the GM may suggest to him) that taking the foe as an Enemy (or a relative of the foe, or the foe and some of his/her friends, if the foe isn't powerful enough to offset the worth of the Gadget) would let him pay it off. Or there would be other options - maybe the Gadget isn't as reliable for the thief (add Unreliable, Fickle, etc), maybe the magical energies from it wreck the PC's luck (reduced Luck trait, or the Unluckiness Disadvantage), or whatever. There are plenty of options, here.

As for NPC's, if you're building them with points (as some GM's do), then in general you should build them just like PC's, with Enemy/Ally/etc (although letting them take a few characters they're almost always around as Allies for free, just as PC's don't have to take each other as Allies, may be appropriate). An exception would be for NPC's who are themselves Allies or Enemies of the PC's. For an Ally, either their Allies and Enemies matter when the character is available, in which case the PC should just take them as Allies and Enemies as well, or they don't, in which case it's not right for their value to influence how much the Ally is worth to the PC. For an Enemy, either their Allies matter when the character shows up to make problems, in which case the PC should just take them as an Enemy as well (or take the whole group as an Enemy Group), or they don't, in which case it's not right for their value to influence how much the Enemy is worth to the PC. The Enemy of an Enemy is more complicated. If this character is on good terms with the PC ("The enemy of my enemy is my friend"), they should be taken as an Ally (but with lower Frequency than the Enemy, if they don't always show up when the Enemy does). If they are also hostile to the PC (Maxim 29: "The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more. No less."), I'd be inclined to make them an Enemy to both the PC and the NPC Enemy. If they don't matter when the Enemy shows up, of course, no adjustment is appropriate.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul
Varyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
cannot be broken, cannot break, force sword, rapid fire, ultra-tech

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.