A staff as a Gadget Limitation?

[Naryt]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

I am unconvinced of this.

Brekable suggests to me that you can have your Gadget destroyed while you're still holding it, i.e. in combat.

Having your Gadget Stolen, and then broken, is something different, and should constitute a smaller-magnitude Limitation.

It has to mean simply breakable as what about that spiffy glass thinga-ma-jig that does...well whatever it does...in or out of battle that's a breakable object and is most likely something kept in the locked and padded chest at all times to prevent such breakage.

[Kromm]

1. Breakable means exactly what it says -- breakable. It includes components for size and toughness, should somebody try to break the gadget in combat, but there are things other than combat that can cause breakage. Breakable is not merely shorthand for "breakable in combat." I'm sure of this because I wrote the rule.

2. Per Striking at Weapons (pp. 400-401), any weapon is vulnerable to breakage by deliberate attack using any other weapon in combat, provided the striking weapon has enough damage to overcome the DR and HP of the target weapon. Deliberate weapon-breaking strikes do exist, are taught, etc. Turning your weapon so that your arms dissipate the force of the blow is one possible interpretation of a successful parry vs. such an attack. If the parry fails, the attacking weapon strikes in such a way that damage occurs normally. No weapons but force swords are exempt -- certainly not staffs.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Kromm

2. Per Striking at Weapons (pp. 400-401), any weapon is vulnerable to breakage by deliberate attack using any other weapon in combat, provided the striking weapon has enough damage to overcome the DR and HP of the target weapon. Deliberate weapon-breaking strikes do exist, are taught, etc. Turning your weapon so that your arms dissipate the force of the blow is one possible interpretation of a successful parry vs. such an attack. If the parry fails, the attacking weapon strikes in such a way that damage occurs normally. No weapons but force swords are exempt -- certainly not staffs.

Even a force sword is breakable, IMO, though as you'd have to strike the mechanism in the grip it'd be a tricky target, and the hand wielding it would be an easier target (unless it's encased in heavy armour, of course, and in which case it'd also protect the weapon).

[Avoozel]

Will this all be addressed in GURPS: Myth Busters?

But, Breakable indicates that the gadget object has DR and HP, which means that anything that can hit/damage it in the rules does damage it. That means an axe weilding guy attacking it in combat or having it disarmed and fall under the wheels of a fast moving chariot.

Rules as written support that a suitably strong opponent with an axe can break the quarter staff your character is holding.

[Peter Knutsen]

Ignoring the debate about breakability in combat, I'm summing up Kromm's reply as follows (and based on my choice of Not Repairable and how I want Can Be Stolen to work):

DR 2 staff (counts as SM-3)
-20% breakable
-15% not repairable
-15% can be stolen (quick contest of ST, user can't benefit from it)
total -50%

DR 3-5 staff, metal-reinforced staff (counts as SM-3)
-15% brekable
-15% not repairable
-15% can be stolen (as above)
total -45%

Quite neat as a Gadget Limitation on Energy Reserve and some Magery, or even Detect (All Arcane Magic[1]) and Mana Enhancer.


[1] Greater than "Detect(Magic)" at 10 CP, but narrower than Detect (Supernatural Phenomena)" at 20 CP, I'd probably suggest a cost of 15 CPs for this (before pimping it with Enhancements).

[Dragyn]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

DR 2 staff (counts as SM-3)
-20% breakable
-15% not repairable
-15% can be stolen (quick contest of ST, user can't benefit from it)
total -50%

DR 3-5 staff, metal-reinforced staff (counts as SM-3)
-15% brekable
-15% not repairable
-15% can be stolen (as above)
total -45%

Just one thing, though.. in a magical setting, wouldn't the Repair spell be able to fix the damage? If it was actually broken and not just damaged, it would lose it's magic, but if it was only almost broken, wouldn't it be fixed?

[Gudiomen]

I'm assuming you're past breakage/non-breakage issue, but just to add me 2c: it's wood, wood can break. Rules don't specify how... you can use a light-saber to cut it. The only instance where a Gadget should not be breakable is when the genre or nature of the item is such that it would never break. ("The Eye of Odin has existed since the gods have and no power can destroy it." or in a toonie/cinematic contest that while it's possible for it to break in theory, it never will).

Ok, now the actual point of my post: don't forget that Gadgets are unique items, not just signature gear. So the "normal" limits for items kind of don't apply... only GM veto. Nothing stops you, for instance, declaring that you're staff is made of weirwood or dragonbone and it has a DR of 25, or that it's made from the fabric of magic and impossible to break. Offcourse it has to be setting appropriate and GM aproaved though.

Also note that Gadget will allow you to use any item as a power item. Such as a sword, for example. This gadget discount on FP reserves can be quite handy and one of the best ways to represent mage staffs and items from fiction. You can also work in those little trivial powers that te mage pulled off with little or no effort into the cost.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Fragwulf

Just one thing, though.. in a magical setting, wouldn't the Repair spell be able to fix the damage? If it was actually broken and not just damaged, it would lose it's magic, but if it was only almost broken, wouldn't it be fixed?

The reparable/not reparable decision rests on the question of whether the gadget, if reduced to the point where it no longer functions as a gadget, can be restored to its former capabilities. In this case, once a magic staff is broken to the point where it no longer functions as a quarterstaff, the Staff spell ends. However, Staff is a cheap spell, so I would argue that casting Repair and then recasting Staff would qualify as "making repairs" in a magical world.

The real question here isn't about the Staff spell but about other things stuck on the staff as advantages; e.g., Energy Reserve. If physical repairs and/or Repair, followed by recasting Staff, would restore those, then I think the gadget rates as reparable. Otherwise, it doesn't.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Kromm

The reparable/not reparable decision rests on the question of whether the gadget, if reduced to the point where it no longer functions as a gadget, can be restored to its former capabilities. In this case, once a magic staff is broken to the point where it no longer functions as a quarterstaff, the Staff spell ends. However, Staff is a cheap spell, so I would argue that casting Repair and then recasting Staff would qualify as "making repairs" in a magical world.

The real question here isn't about the Staff spell but about other things stuck on the staff as advantages; e.g., Energy Reserve. If physical repairs and/or Repair, followed by recasting Staff, would restore those, then I think the gadget rates as reparable. Otherwise, it doesn't.

But unless I put Unique on the Gadget staff, then my character should be able to get himself a replacement staff without extreme effort, right?

[RobKamm]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

And the thing that makes a quarterstaff pretty much impossible to break in combat is that I'm holding it in my hands, my hands attached to my arms, and if you swing your heavy axe at my staff, the staff, my hands, and my arms, will move. Only if I foolishly attempt to "brace" the staff, in effect cooperating with you, should you be able to break it.

Um, having sparred with quarterstaves (mine is 8' long and 2+" diameter hard wood) I can assure you that staves can and do break (very dynamically too) when used.

I've never used one against an ax-wielding assailant, but I don't imagine that the situation would be all that different just because one of the weapons is shorter but sharper.