Math, GURPS, and its reputation for complexity

[mburr0003]

I think people are getting to hung up an "to hit", I used melee as an example because you should always know what penalties and bonuses you're facing in advance... it's rare a GURPS GM that should be springing penalties on you after you roll.

Inversely, in almost every D&D game I've ever played the GMs carefully tried to hide the enemies AC, for whatever reasons they had.


Thus, in my opinion, it's a bit simpler (thus less complex) to make tactical decisions in GURPS where "do I reduce my to hit or not" is a key factor.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

The only way -2 for an extra attack would be bad is if what you needed a 16 or better on the d20 to hit. Which, basically, you can safely assume is never the case if you're a class that has a feature like that.

Needing a 16 or higher (end result) is PDQ in my experience with D&D.

Originally Posted by Anthony

In GURPS you don't either. It just implements the difficulty differently.

False. In GURPS, unless the GM is hiding penalties, I always know if I succeeded my skill roll or not.

In fact baring Quick or Regular Contests, which are rarer in my experience than general skill rolls, "did I succeed my roll" is always important.

No you don't. You just have to know higher is better.

That is so wrong it's actually right.

There have been many times in the D&D games I've played where someone could take a penalty to their roll to aid another's roll. Knowing what the target numbers are makes those decisions easy. Not knowing makes those choices more vastly more difficult.

Let's say I have skill 18 and I don't know what my opponent's defense roll is.

Sure. Now why would you list a number of options where you do in fact know your opponent's defense levels?

If my opponent's active defense is 17+, I am best off making a single attack hoping to crit.

Only if you make Rapid Strikes at a -6 per attack. Otherwise, it's better to Rapid Strike and crit fish for 6s (either of Weapon Master or Trained by a Master and Flurry of Blows).

Which, again, to paint the point I'm making (that you just reinforced) means these choices are easier in GURPS where your 'target number' is (almost) always known to the Player.


That's literally the only point I'm making. The Player in GURPS knows what their skill level is, they know exactly how bonuses and penalties will effect it, they always know what they need to roll for a success (Active defenses and Contests aside). A Player in D&D (as I've experienced it) rarely knows what target numbers they need to hit*. And this extrapolates out into several other games as well, some games have very up front "this is what you need to roll to succeed", while others like to play silly buggers obfuscating that for "reasons".


* This may have been changed in the latest edition, don't know, never played it long enough to get a good feel for it, and I don't own the rules.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

Needing a 16 or higher (end result) is PDQ in my experience with D&D.

AC 16 isn't too unlikely once you're a few levels in, no, but that's not what I wrote. I said 16 or better on the d20. Not after modifiers, which are going to be significantly positive for a character with an attack ability like that.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

.

Inversely, in almost every D&D game I've ever played the GMs carefully tried to hide the enemies AC, for whatever reasons they had.

s.

That's not universal. In my group about half the time the DM comes right out and announces what AC the opfor has just t simplify the process. The rest of the time the AC is easily guessed after a round or two.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

I think people are getting to hung up an "to hit", I used melee as an example because you should always know what penalties and bonuses you're facing in advance... it's rare a GURPS GM that should be springing penalties on you after you roll.

DnD functionally rolls all of what in GURPS is threatening a hit (succeeding on the attack), getting past the foe's defense (target fails their defense roll), and getting through DR, into Armor Class (AC). Yes, in GURPS you know how likely you are to threaten a hit... but unless you know the foe's active defense scores (and which they'll be using) and DR, you'll have no idea if this will actually accomplish anything. So I don't see why you're convinced GURPS is somehow simpler in this regard.

Originally Posted by mburr0003

False. In GURPS, unless the GM is hiding penalties, I always know if I succeeded my skill roll or not.

Sure, but you have no idea if you've actually hit the foe until the GM tells you the results of their Active Defense roll, and when you roll your damage you have no idea if you've actually wounded the foe or your attack has been stopped by their DR until and unless the GM tells you as much. You seem to think a successful Attack roll in GURPS is the same as a successful attack in DnD, and that's simply not the case.

Originally Posted by mburr0003

Sure. Now why would you list a number of options where you do in fact know your opponent's defense levels?

I think the point there was to demonstrate why not knowing the target's defense mattered - the optimal option is dependent upon what the target's defense is. Without knowing that, you're in the same place as the DnD player who doesn't know how much attack to sacrifice for more damage via Power Attack.