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 04-10-2020, 12:14 PM   #1
Michael Thayne
 
Michael Thayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Default [Spaceships] Nuclear and antimatter warhead damage seems off (errata?)

I've been thinking of writing up some quick rules for using TL9 Ultra-Tech style mininukes with Spaceships, and I got curious if the damage scaling is consistent between the two sources. To my surprise, Spaceships doesn't even look consistent with itself.

25 kiloton 4dx1,000 burn ex rad sur + linked 3dx1,000 cr ex
100 kiloton 8dx1,000 burn ex rad sur + linked 6dx2,000 cr ex
2.5 megaton 8dx5,000 burn ex rad sur + linked 6dx5,000 cr ex
10 megaton 8dx10,000 burn ex rad sur + linked 6dx20,000 cr ex

The burning damage progression is sensible enough: straightforward square root of energy. It happens to be consistent with UT to boot. But the crushing damage progression looks mostly linear (contradicting every other 4e source) except the 100 kiloton to 2.5 megaton step is only a factor of 2.5 increase. Maybe that's supposed to somehow reflect the change between fission and fusion warheads? But UT's mini-nuke is supposed to be a pure-fission warhead, so that seems wrong. Straightforward extrapolation from the mini-nuke with square-root damage all around would have yielded this progression:

25 kiloton 4dx1,000 burn ex rad sur + linked 6dx1,000 cr ex
100 kiloton 8dx1,000 burn ex rad sur + linked 6dx2,000 cr ex
2.5 megaton 8dx5,000 burn ex rad sur + linked 6dx10,000 cr ex
10 megaton 8dx10,000 burn ex rad sur + linked 6dx20,000 cr ex

Thoughts?
Michael Thayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2020, 12:45 PM   #2
Rupert
 
Rupert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
Default Re: [Spaceships] Nuclear and antimatter warhead damage seems off (errata?)

It's clearly a mistake, and the should go as you've listed, which is consistent with both UT and HT.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn

"A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history."
Rupert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2020, 01:15 PM   #3
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: [Spaceships] Nuclear and antimatter warhead damage seems off (errata?)

Or given that shock wave propagation is based on having an atmosphere, the crushing damage should just be deleted.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2020, 01:34 PM   #4
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Spaceships] Nuclear and antimatter warhead damage seems off (errata?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Or given that shock wave propagation is based on having an atmosphere, the crushing damage should just be deleted.
Addressed in the text. Spaceships has issues, but they're not on the level of 'the author doesn't understand vacuum'.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:07 PM.


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