Gaming Ballistic - GURPS Content Posts

[Ulzgoroth]

It's an old post, but I've been thinking about your melee rescaling scheme from back here lately and wondered whether, if using that or something like it, any changes to Technical Grappling would be indicated.

CP probably don't want to be subjected to that rescale, I would think.

[DouglasCole]

https://gamingballistic.com/2012/12/...theory-part-1/

I've cleaned that up for better compatibility with my current template, including a more-readable table.

The TG system is designed around having ST 13 be about 1d and ST 20 be in the neighborhood of 2d. Moving the control point system to ST/10 would accomplish this.

If one had moved to a "realistic" scale of thrust damage only as ST/10, just use double the base die roll, or double ST for grappling purposes, which gets you back to ST/10.

I don't think it would break too much, and having a ST 10 person with no special training or deficits roll 1d for control points wouldn't suck.

The thing about that progression is that it's really designed for "and then you add bonuses for weapons," so there might need to be some consideration not to the base grappling damage, but rather that (say) getting to DX+10 in a grappling skill should effectively double your damage, which if course would be doubling your ST.

From that perspective, each +1 to Trained ST would become +20% to ST, so +5 to Trained ST becomes +100% to ST.

[clu2415]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Throw down some links? I'd like to track some of this down.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...cussion-contd/

That's a link to part 2 of an interview with the program director for one of the military's development programs. Part 1 and 3 also have information, but I'm on my phone right now so links are hard.

Also check out the Wikipedia page for the LSAT program.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

https://gamingballistic.com/2012/12/...theory-part-1/

I've cleaned that up for better compatibility with my current template, including a more-readable table.

That looks a lot better now.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

The TG system is designed around having ST 13 be about 1d and ST 20 be in the neighborhood of 2d. Moving the control point system to ST/10 would accomplish this.

If one had moved to a "realistic" scale of thrust damage only as ST/10, just use double the base die roll, or double ST for grappling purposes, which gets you back to ST/10.

I don't think it would break too much, and having a ST 10 person with no special training or deficits roll 1d for control points wouldn't suck.

Sounds good.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

The thing about that progression is that it's really designed for "and then you add bonuses for weapons," so there might need to be some consideration not to the base grappling damage, but rather that (say) getting to DX+10 in a grappling skill should effectively double your damage, which if course would be doubling your ST.

From that perspective, each +1 to Trained ST would become +20% to ST, so +5 to Trained ST becomes +100% to ST.

Here I'm lost. Trained ST is already proportional to ST and already works on a mainly-linear damage scale. Why would the damage rescaling lead to doubling the scaling factor for Trained ST?

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

That looks a lot better now.

Sounds good.

Here I'm lost. Trained ST is already proportional to ST and already works on a mainly-linear damage scale. Why would the damage rescaling lead to doubling the scaling factor for Trained ST?

It might not be big enough. The upper scaling is, I believe, +50% . . . ah! I see there's a cinematic scale that is already the scaling I need, up to +100%. So use that, yeah.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

It might not be big enough. The upper scaling is, I believe, +50% . . . ah! I see there's a cinematic scale that is already the scaling I need, up to +100%. So use that, yeah.

But why would the way ST scales with skill need to be different at all?

(Also, the normal trained ST definition from p48 has no such upper scaling limit, and will increase without bound for arbitrarily high skill levels. That cap is unique to the box on p7.)

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

But why would the way ST scales with skill need to be different at all?

(Also, the normal trained ST definition from p48 has no such upper scaling limit, and will increase without bound for arbitrarily high skill levels. That cap is unique to the box on p7.)

Because the original scaling goes up faster than the slower re-scaled, and control points going up as slowly as the re-scaled damage might make it go up might be terribly unsatisfying in game.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Because the original scaling goes up faster than the slower re-scaled, and control points going up as slowly as the re-scaled damage might make it go up might be terribly unsatisfying in game.

Er.

The rescale goes up a little slower than RAW, at +1d/10 ST instead of +5/10 ST, although everybody gets a couple extra points so they're actually ahead of RAW until ST 29 or so. But why is doubling the Training Bonus an answer to that?

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Er.

The rescale goes up a little slower than RAW, at +1d/10 ST instead of +5/10 ST, although everybody gets a couple extra points so they're actually ahead of RAW until ST 29 or so. But why is doubling the Training Bonus an answer to that?

Because the current number of dice and control points works really well in play, and sticking close to that makes sense. Strong guys with no training CAN be taken out or fought on an equalish basis by trained guys. The entire system is calibrated to a certain balance, and that balance needs to be addressed and maintained to have the play feel right as ST and training change. The base damage should be kept consistent with striking; the training bonus going up is thus the sliding scale.

But I'm done arguing about that; the final answer for my system with my rescaling is that the training bonus progression would need to be calibrated, perhaps adjusted, and likely adjusted upwards if it needs adjusting at all.

[Kalzazz]

On the 10mm, you have a couple different Rcl and magazine weights listed, which is correct?