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 07-10-2011, 03:36 PM   #61
DanHoward
 
DanHoward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Default Re: Helmets with no padding

Quote:
Originally Posted by NineDaysDead View Post
(p.B420) doesn't say anything about "The penalty is equal to the number of HP that you lost".
I was under the impression that the HP penalty decribed on p. 419 applies to this roll as well. It specifically says that the injury has to be enough to cause a shock penalty (see Shock, p. 419). Why would you get a shock penalty if you get hit in other places but not the head?

Edit: Looks like I am confusing two things. The shock penalty is related to the penalty to your next action, not the HT roll.

Last edited by DanHoward; 07-10-2011 at 04:18 PM.
DanHoward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2011, 04:18 PM   #62
NineDaysDead
Banned
 
NineDaysDead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: Helmets with no padding

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward View Post
I was under the impression that the HP penalty decribed on p. 419 applies to this roll as well.
Why would it? Knockdown and Stunning requires a HT roll, but shock applies to DX and IQ:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shock
Whenever you suffer injury, reduce your DX and IQ by the number of HP you lost

...

Shock affects DX- and IQ-based skills, but not active defenses or other defensive reactions
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward View Post
It specifically says that the injury has to be enough to cause a shock penalty (see Shock, p. 419).
Yes, but all that means is an 8 point injury to the head isn't enough to cause a Knockdown and Stunning roll for a 90HP monster. See High HP and Shock, page 419.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward View Post
Why would you get a shock penalty if you get hit in other places but not the head?
Of course you take the shock penalty if you are hit in the head, but shock penalties don't apply to HT rolls.
NineDaysDead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2011, 04:21 PM   #63
DanHoward
 
DanHoward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Default Re: Helmets with no padding

Yeah I get it. Already appended last post.

Does the rule I proposed in the first post address the issue? I'm looking for a simple rule that models the increased capacity of unpadded helmets to incapacitate the wearer without inflicting additional damage to the wearer. The additional damage is already covered by not having DR 1 padding

If a DR 6 padded helmet is hit with 6 points of damage then the wearer suffers no harm.
Take out the padding (helmet now has DR 5) and that 6 damage will cause 1 HP of injury and cause a roll for stunning.
A 5 point hit will not cause HP loss but he still rolls for stunning.

Or should no paddding be worse than this? Should there be a roll for stunning every time the helmet is hit regardless of its DR? This means that the chances of a stun are the same as if he wasn't wearing a helmet at all. Or maybe you roll for stunning if the damage is more than half the total DR. It seems that the skull's DR should count since you only roll for stunning if the damage is enough to cause a shock penalty.

Last edited by DanHoward; 07-10-2011 at 04:48 PM.
DanHoward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2011, 05:24 PM   #64
Ze'Manel Cunha
 
Ze'Manel Cunha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Default Re: Helmets with no padding

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward View Post
Or should no paddding be worse than this? Should there be a roll for stunning every time the helmet is hit regardless of its DR? This means that the chances of a stun are the same as if he wasn't wearing a helmet at all. Or maybe you roll for stunning if the damage is more than half the total DR. It seems that the skull's DR should count since you only roll for stunning if the damage is enough to cause a shock penalty.
I don't think skull DR reduces concussion/stun, no padding means your skull won't crack but your brain will slosh just like with no armor.

Since skull has DR 2, you could say anything which would exceed it, would require a HT roll.


That's why I went with a HT roll and FP injury for each 4 dmg stopped by DR, including skull DR.
Ze'Manel Cunha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2011, 05:44 PM   #65
DanHoward
 
DanHoward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Default Re: Helmets with no padding

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha View Post
Since skull has DR 2, you could say anything which would exceed it, would require a HT roll.
Which means that wearing an unpadded helmet has no effect at all on reducing the likelihood of stunning. This doesn't seem reasonable.
DanHoward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2011, 05:58 PM   #66
Ze'Manel Cunha
 
Ze'Manel Cunha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Default Re: Helmets with no padding

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward View Post
Which means that wearing an unpadded helmet has no effect at all on reducing the likelihood of stunning. This doesn't seem reasonable.
1/4 DR, so if the helmet is 2 DR it prevents stunning on 3 dmg, since 2 helmet DR + 2 skull DR = 4 DR, so he takes no damage.

I must have explained this badly, I'll blame it not being on a keyboard. *grin*
Ze'Manel Cunha is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
armor, low-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 05:42 PM.


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