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 11-20-2020, 01:08 AM   #31
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Polydamas View Post
.....


They have too good armour penetration. I would not say they do an unreasonable amount of damage.
Yeah this is pretty much my take on it, ST based damage actually scales with ST based HP reasonably well.

The problem is unless you use a design system to make thicker and thicker armour to counter attacks of increasing ST, DR from armour tends to stay a lot more static and so yep is loses it effectiveness as ST goes up.

I.e if you want DR to keep up with ST based Damage that scales with ST you have to let DR also scale with ST in some way. and the system defaults to all hand held weapon damage scaling with ST but armour DR is pretty much a range of static options in the equipment lists.

I've messed with various house rules down the years but ultimately I use edge protection from LT, allow armour to be tailored to it's wearers ability to wear it and tend to truncate* the range of ST's for humans before they hit the levels of Gorillas and Bears. I personally don't have too much problem in my games.




*this is a specific game choice for several reasons and not a system wide solution.
__________________
Grand High* Poobah of the Cult of Stat Normalisation.
*not too high of course

Last edited by Tomsdad; 11-20-2020 at 02:05 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2020, 07:18 AM   #32
AlexanderHowl
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

I have often used the rule where relative skill level modifies effective ST for using weapons/techniques with that skill (if positive). So a character with ST 10 and Broadsword at (Attribute)+10 counts as having ST 20 for damage purposes, beats, etc.. I also have it gove DR against attacks of that skill equal to relative level (if positive). This makes unarmed combat skills very powerful though, as it is cumulative with the damage bonuses of unarmed combat.

Last edited by AlexanderHowl; 11-20-2020 at 07:22 AM.
AlexanderHowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2020, 12:52 PM   #33
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
The rules for bodkin points aren't terribly realistic (reducing impact area isn't useless, but it does have limited effect because the energy cost of creating the initial hole is larger than the cost of enlarging the hole, and a narrow head only avoids the enlarging part
I guess we could look for other precedents, like the difference in cost between various levels of piercing in Innate Attack, or the Ammo Options enhancement?
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2020, 01:04 PM   #34
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
I guess we could look for other precedents, like the difference in cost between various levels of piercing in Innate Attack, or the Ammo Options enhancement?
It's mostly a problem of "It should have an armor divisor, but the divisor should not be 2, it should be something like 1.3".
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2020, 04:42 PM   #35
Sorenant
 
Sorenant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
The problem is unless you use a design system to make thicker and thicker armour to counter attacks of increasing ST, DR from armour tends to stay a lot more static and so yep is loses it effectiveness as ST goes up.

I.e if you want DR to keep up with ST based Damage that scales with ST you have to let DR also scale with ST in some way. and the system defaults to all hand held weapon damage scaling with ST but armour DR is pretty much a range of static options in the equipment lists.
For games that features inhuman ST levels, Better Fantasy Armor can help bridge the gap between damage and DR.

I also recall a thread about "Armor Master" as a defensive counterpart of Weapon Master being created a while ago. Has anybody ever tried something similar in their game? I just had an idea of turning Armor Mastery from DF into a leveled trait, I think it would be good for the Knight-like characters but it makes me worry about DR disparity between the fighters and casters/supports.
Sorenant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2020, 05:07 PM   #36
Donny Brook
 
Donny Brook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Snoopy's basement
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

I use Lifting ST for armoires.
Donny Brook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2020, 03:41 AM   #37
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorenant View Post
For games that features inhuman ST levels, Better Fantasy Armor can help bridge the gap between damage and DR.

Nice!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorenant View Post
I also recall a thread about "Armor Master" as a defensive counterpart of Weapon Master being created a while ago. Has anybody ever tried something similar in their game? I just had an idea of turning Armor Mastery from DF into a leveled trait, I think it would be good for the Knight-like characters but it makes me worry about DR disparity between the fighters and casters/supports.
I've not tried it but it highlights another area where the same issue applies. The system allows a range of ways of increasing handheld damage over and above ST and weapon, weather it's cinematic traits like weapon master, skill bonuses to damage for unarmed skills, combat option like AoA or determined etc.

But on the other side a DR6 breastplate tends to be a DR6 breastplate all the live long day. Armour just acts as an inert wall of protection.

(I think there was 3rd ed. rule that had armour adding to defence more directly "PD" IIRC, but I don't really know 3rd ed.)

I shouldn't worry too much about DR disparity, just have your knights face harder hitting opponents than you supporting cast. Which they likely are doing anyway being knights.

Another possible way to go and to tie armour into a more active role in defence, is to have a kind of "graze" rule that adds to DR rather than reduces damage. For example say you miss an active defence by one MoF, the attack lands but you multiply your DR by 1.5 (rounded down), miss your defence by two MoF your DR by 1.25 (round down).

This would give the armour wearer more of a safety margin if the system is allowing their opponents to blast through their DR.

You could make this an optional rule that costs a perk to access

(this just thought I had in response etc your post this is in no way play tested etc)
__________________
Grand High* Poobah of the Cult of Stat Normalisation.
*not too high of course

Last edited by Tomsdad; 11-21-2020 at 05:40 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2020, 07:47 AM   #38
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post


(I think there was 3rd ed. rule that had armour adding to defence more directly "PD" IIRC, but I don't really know 3rd ed.)

)
"PD" was "Passive Defense". Even if you took no Active Defense you could roll agaisnt your Passive Defense to stop an attack. With PD3 or 4 from a shield and another 3 or 4 from armor (even without magic) it wasn't a huge chcne but it ws better than nothing.

The important bit was that when you did take an Active Defense you added your PD to your total defense and rolled v. that. There was no "add" to your Parry in the basic calculations so if you had Broadsword-16 and Combat Reflexes your total Parry was still only 9 or less if you had no armor or shield. With armor and shield you could easily hit 15 or less.

You will note from the above example that with combat normalized for users of both armor and shields, combat without these aids worked very, very poorly. 3e sprouted a lot of kludges over the years trying to mitigate these problems but gained more problems with the solutions. 4e came as close to jettisoning the concept of PD as it could retaining only DB you gain from a shield or magic.

If you wonder what you were suppsed to viaulize PD doing that was asomehat mysterious. When you got to UT it actually was Deflector Shields granting you or your spaceship a bonus to all active Defenses.

I don't miss PD and I doubt many others do either. Not having to deal with PD is a good reason to not go back to 3e.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2020, 08:19 AM   #39
Rupert
 
Rupert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
I don't miss PD and I doubt many others do either. Not having to deal with PD is a good reason to not go back to 3e.
One of my biggest issues with PD was that it could, and often did, vary by hit location, so your chances of parrying or dodging a blow had to be adjusted after the hit location was rolled. This slowed things down and added another layer of calculation to combat.

Then there were things like "how much DR does armour need for it to give PD vs bullets?". Yep, better without it.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
Rupert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2020, 08:47 AM   #40
johndallman
Night Watchman
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Cambridge, UK
Default Re: Which optional rules do you use for muscle-powered weapons and armors?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
You will note from the above example that with combat normalized for users of both armor and shields, combat without these aids worked very, very poorly.
It was a bit shaky, yes. Fencing combat worked very well, a bit too well.

4e combat works fine for unarmoured people with knives. Our information about people spending hours at a time fighting in underground passages wearing heavy armour is a bit limited.
johndallman is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
combat, optional rules

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 03:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.