GURPS Meta-Tech

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

Perk: Basic Security The device has basic security measures appropriate to it's TL, from physical keys to passwords to biometrics. The security can be defeated by appropriate skills and tools with a 0 difficulty modifier. Good for preventing casual theft or misuse but not considered serious security.

When I wrote GURPS Template Toolkit 2: Races, I called that Accessory (Lock). It worked exactly as you describe. See p. 45 of that book.

[Tyneras]

Originally Posted by whswhs

When I wrote GURPS Template Toolkit 2: Races, I called that Accessory (Lock). It worked exactly as you describe. See p. 45 of that book.

Fantastic, thank you!

GURPS long ago exceeded my ability to remember all it's content, even in broad strokes.

[zoncxs]

Originally Posted by Tyneras

Limited/Loyal (p. 15) is a great modifier and iconic. But it is also rather expensive for what I sometimes want to do, which ultimately boils down to a simple password or fingerprint/retina scanner for high tech devices, or even a key like in a car. These things prevent casual theft, but won't stop anyone with the right skills.

To that end, I think a perk that can be added to the build would work nicely. Or maybe a really cheap CF.

Perk: Basic Security The device has basic security measures appropriate to it's TL, from physical keys to passwords to biometrics. The security can be defeated by appropriate skills and tools with a 0 difficulty modifier. Good for preventing casual theft or misuse but not considered serious security.

This occurred to me while I was converting various existing equipment to get a feel for Meta-tech and ran into Smartgun Electronics (Basic p.278) and realized it was resulting in some eye-watering outlier prices using Loyalty.


EDIT: Side note, I do love everyone's books, from the Basic Set to Ultra-Tech to Nordlond to Pyramid to Meta-Tech and beyond. I guess I always find giving positive feedback harder than negative. I should work on that.

That's a function of the underlying item isn't?

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

GURPS and its spin-offs are challenging to write for because of a lack of underlying shared cosmology, genre, and campaign assumptions. If you dare to establish some (like my Nordlond setting), you get slammed for "I don't want Vikings" despite what was designed to be a transparent effort to make the viking only skin deep - I've gotten the same "but why Viking monsters?" feedback on my "Nordlond" Bestiary, which is almost literally the D&D Monster Manual moved over to GURPS, with reskinned cosmology/origin.

It gets better - if you don't establish some sort of setting and give it flavour, your work will get panned for being 'bland'. It's a no-win situation.

I have the greatest respect for RPG authors. It's work that's generally low-paid, and is presented to a market full of picky customers who are more than willing to complain at length about anything and everything.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by zoncxs

That's a function of the underlying item isn't?

If the item has a function that is protected in this fashion, and if the Meta-Tech portion simply modifies that function, yeah, that would be a function of the underlying item. But if the Meta-Tech portion adds on some new function, the item didn't have such protection already, or it's actually a novel device rather than a modified mundane one (like my magic crystal Attachables from the example thread), you'd need some way to have the Meta-Tech bit have such protection. If you already have pricing for such in the campaign, the GM might just apply that, as well as have the existing protection be readily modified to apply to the Meta-Tech functions. If you do not, the Perk is a solid way to make it - and note that the GM may allow you to actually treat it as a [0.2] Advantage (if they're willing to deal with fractional points, but Meta-Tech lends itself well to that), considering the Perk applies to the item rather than the user (see "More Than A Sword," MT23).

EDIT: For example, let's say you have a smart gun that is enchanted for fighting ghosts. If what it does is simply adds Affects Insubstantial to the shots it fires, the smart gun electronics will prevent anyone else from making use of that function. If it also gives you the ability to See Invisible while it's on your person, that portion would work just fine for anyone who picked up the weapon. If you want that to only work for a verified user, the GM may decide that the enchantment can piggyback on the smart gun verification and thus only be accessible with that at no additional charge, or they may decide to require the Accessory (Lock) Perk, increasing the price a bit.

[Kage2020]

Originally Posted by Rupert

I have the greatest respect for RPG authors. It's work that's generally low-paid, and is presented to a market full of picky customers who are more than willing to complain at length about anything and everything.

No they won't.

<_<

>_>

Okay, maybe.

[Farmer]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

If you dare to establish some (like my Nordlond setting), you get slammed for "I don't want Vikings" despite what was designed to be a transparent effort to make the viking only skin deep - I've gotten the same "but why Viking monsters?" feedback on my "Nordlond" Bestiary, which is almost literally the D&D Monster Manual moved over to GURPS, with reskinned cosmology/origin.

It's a corker.

Which is just *so* crazy. I use all the Nordlond stuff, all the time. My fantasy campaign is not at all Viking. There's a small element that's "Viking adjacent", but I'm able to simply source all manner of things from the Nordlond content and reskin it (if needed, even on the fly) to suit any part of my campaign. Like, so simply it boggles my mind that anyone would think they are some how limited.

But, I suppose, it reflects the nitpickers.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Farmer

Which is just *so* crazy. I use all the Nordlond stuff, all the time. My fantasy campaign is not at all Viking. There's a small element that's "Viking adjacent", but I'm able to simply source all manner of things from the Nordlond content and reskin it (if needed, even on the fly) to suit any part of my campaign. Like, so simply it boggles my mind that anyone would think they are some how limited.

It's not something I would ever use, but that's primarily because I don't run dungeon fantasy, or anything like it. My last extended fantasy campaign was what I might call anthropological fantasy, focused on trade and navigation with some spirit magic added for flavor. So this just doesn't seem like the kind of resource I would have a use for.

But I have to say that if I were running a campaign with monsters, I would most likely go to a mythological or legendary source, and figure out how to represent it in terms of whatever game engine I was using (as I did, for example, with the illustrative monsters in GURPS Fantasy). It just wouldn't occur to me to reskin a monster based on Greek mythology for a campaign based on Scandinavia, India, or Japan. I always want to go to first principles. I might be interested to see a book that provided creatures and stats, as a set of worked examples of how to apply those principles.

[Farmer]

Originally Posted by whswhs

It's not something I would ever use, but that's primarily because I don't run dungeon fantasy, or anything like it. My last extended fantasy campaign was what I might call anthropological fantasy, focused on trade and navigation with some spirit magic added for flavor. So this just doesn't seem like the kind of resource I would have a use for.

But I have to say that if I were running a campaign with monsters, I would most likely go to a mythological or legendary source, and figure out how to represent it in terms of whatever game engine I was using (as I did, for example, with the illustrative monsters in GURPS Fantasy). It just wouldn't occur to me to reskin a monster based on Greek mythology for a campaign based on Scandinavia, India, or Japan. I always want to go to first principles. I might be interested to see a book that provided creatures and stats, as a set of worked examples of how to apply those principles.

Nordlond, despite being DFRPG, is far broader in scope than "dungeon fantasy", in my view. It has elements easily translated into other genres, let alone different versions of fantasy.

A lot of "monsters" have common threads between cultures, and depending on how common or specific they might be, will determine the degree to which you might find an existing example suitable with minimal change. If you have a focus on something, then it would certainly pay to consider changes, but you could still take inspiration (and a lot of pre-done work as a head start) from the likes of Nordlond.

Also, it's not just "monsters". There are plenty of normal "beasts" and animals and so on, that aren't culturally specific. Reinventing the wheel might be fun at times, but mostly it's pointless if all you need is a wheel.

And as a final note, make GURPS more accessible is a good thing. Having the likes of Nordlond with a bestiary, "modules", settings, and so on, along with other similar things in the main GURPS line (but, honestly, the Nordlond bestiary is just a stand out!) helps with that. First principles are nice if you have the time and the inclination, and it probably helps if you're an experienced writer. Most players and GMs aren't, and having things to help is really good.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Farmer

And as a final note, make GURPS more accessible is a good thing. Having the likes of Nordlond with a bestiary, "modules", settings, and so on, along with other similar things in the main GURPS line (but, honestly, the Nordlond bestiary is just a stand out!) helps with that. First principles are nice if you have the time and the inclination, and it probably helps if you're an experienced writer. Most players and GMs aren't, and having things to help is really good.

Sure. I don't dispute the utility of this type of product. I'm just not the target market. But publishers can't make a living by selling to fit my peculiar tastes.