05-23-2022, 11:08 AM | #71 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: What has high SM ever done for us?
Quote:
I feel the benefit of high SM isn't so much the weapons, but the armor - as I noted upthread, an SM+0 character at TL 6 can, at best, get to around DR 16 (on average; I'd double this for Chest and Skull, halve it for Neck and joints) with worn armor; going higher than this should be possible, but with a DX penalty that would jump up rapidly. An SM+2 character in the same TL can get to around DR 32 instead, which is a marked increase. Meanwhile, an SM-6 pixie in the same setting can only manage DR 1 or 2 (1.6 - how you round that is up to the GM). Of course, there's a massive premium - in terms of armor weight - to being larger - that DR 32 armor on the SM+2 character weighs 8x as much as the SM+0 character's DR 16 armor (x4 to weight per DR), while DR 1 armor on an SM-6 pixie would weigh 1/1,600x what the SM+0 character's DR 16 armor did (x1/100 to weight per DR). And keep in mind armor costs general scale linearly with weight - that SM+0 DR 16 plate armor costs $2,352 ($147 per DR), the SM+2 DR 32 plate armor costs $18,816 ($588 per DR), and the SM+6 DR 1 plate armor costs $1.47. Personally, I feel "armor weighs and costs far more" to outweigh "armor can be thicker," making positive SM a net Disadvantage there.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul Last edited by Varyon; 05-23-2022 at 11:20 AM. |
|
05-24-2022, 08:25 AM | #72 |
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Earth
|
Re: What has high SM ever done for us?
www.sjgames.com/gurps/faq/FAQ4-3.html#SS3.4.2.23
"4.2.23 Is large SM nothing but trouble"? Also, discussion here: https://gurps.fandom.com/wiki/Size_Modifier See the Weapon and armour scaling in GURPS Low-tech companion 2 Weapons/armour. As noted being big allows for larger weapons with higher max damage. (see ST reqiurement, p. B270). The weapons are inherantly more damaging plus let a user apply their ST sw / thr dice!
__________________
- "Knowledge Brings Fear" -- Motto of Mars University, Futurama |
05-24-2022, 08:26 AM | #73 |
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Earth
|
Re: What has high SM ever done for us?
Cue later seasons' plot devices of Attack on Titan...
__________________
- "Knowledge Brings Fear" -- Motto of Mars University, Futurama |
05-24-2022, 12:27 PM | #74 | |
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: What has high SM ever done for us?
Quote:
As much as I hate bundled traits, I'd rather SM was a 0 point trait that: - adjusts your effective ST 1 per level for everything but HP. This replaces all the grappling bonuses for SM difference. - adjusts your effective Base Move 1 per level (not speed) for all movement - adjusts your reach 1 per level (min 0). - leave obstacles, cover, bonuses to hit, equipment size, and intimidation the same way. A SM+1 Ogre starts off with a +1 ST and +1 Move bonus, and usually has a racial bonus to ST as well. Choosing to be a SM-1 Halfling or Dwarf is an effective ST-1 and Move-1, but you're also at -1 to be hit. Choosing to be a SM-4 fairy gives you an effective ST-4 and (base) Move -4 but you're also -4 to be hit. Note that because of the built-in ST penalties, racial profiles for small animals won't want as much -ST (essentially reducing the pool of "free" points since small animals usually aren't for carrying/attacking), which seems more balanced. You can also use these rules for Growth and Shrinking as well. For Growth you'll want to add other limited advantages to get your ST, DR, HP, and Enhanced Move to the right level but you'll start with a nice bonus to ST and Move. For Shrinking, it redefines what you get from SM-1 to SM-5 in terms of reasonable penalties. Beyond that you're taking enhancements to keep your regular stats anyway since the 1/10 at SM-6 is rarely ever used. Edit: adjusted ST effective bonus to keep things simpler. Arguably including HP would make things even easier unless you have an ability that lets you adjust your SM. Last edited by naloth; 05-24-2022 at 12:44 PM. |
|
05-24-2022, 12:53 PM | #75 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: What has high SM ever done for us?
Quote:
|
|
|
|