01-26-2022, 06:23 PM | #81 | |
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
Quote:
I guess just looking for gadget complexity like the diff between "I wear a SM-4 backpack with 10 HP which allows me to create an indestructible Melee-Cutting weapon" vs "I'm carring an SM-4 sword with 10 HP which does a melee-cutting" |
|
01-26-2022, 06:44 PM | #82 | |
Custom User Title
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
Quote:
__________________
Joseph Paul |
|
01-27-2022, 08:30 AM | #83 |
Join Date: Nov 2015
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
|
01-27-2022, 09:30 AM | #84 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
Quote:
I actually considered something like this as a problem when thinking up the KN blades (force swords) of my Harpyias setting. Initially, my solution was that having them densely packed together meant any disruption of one (say, from deflecting a blaster bolt) would cause the others to get disrupted as well, and this would actually cause a cascade that rendered the whole thing increasingly unstable until one of more of the blades suffered a catastrophic failure (the emitter exploding), which could in turn result in further such failures, destroying the "shield" at a minimum and likely severely damaging whatever it was meant to protect. Thanks in part to this thread, I've instead decided that the nebulous shields used to protect vehicles and the KN blades are actually variations on the same technology (I always intended the blades to be destructible, in no small part because that's part of what makes the color choices different, although I haven't yet decided how I want this to work; probably something based on "The Broken Blade").
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
|
01-27-2022, 12:09 PM | #85 | |
Custom User Title
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
Quote:
Clever players therefore do not need an unbreakable blade to throw a wrench in things. So what is unfair about having such an item in a game?
__________________
Joseph Paul |
|
01-27-2022, 01:06 PM | #86 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
I do not believe any player is clever enough to exploit the distinction between "indestructible" and "indestructible by any available power but theoretically destroyable by Zeus."
Last edited by David Johnston2; 01-27-2022 at 01:46 PM. |
01-27-2022, 01:16 PM | #87 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
Quote:
More seriously, yeah, indestructible vs nearly-indestructible is generally a purely academic distinction.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
|
01-27-2022, 04:20 PM | #88 |
Custom User Title
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
"indestructable" only applies for as long as the emmiter is whole, the switch is on, and there is still juice in the battery. This seems to me to be a non-issue.
__________________
Joseph Paul |
01-27-2022, 05:38 PM | #89 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
Indestructible does not mean impenetrable, it just means that if an attack passed through the barrier, the barrier would still be intact afterward.
|
01-28-2022, 12:41 AM | #90 | ||
Join Date: Aug 2018
|
Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?
Quote:
Quote:
Though I've never liked ignores DR being cosmic since that's already the highest tier of Armor Divisor |
||
Tags |
cannot be broken, cannot break, force sword, rapid fire, ultra-tech |
|
|