GURPS Grand Unified Hit Location Table

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

There is a formatting issue. The top of page two runs into the bottom of page 1.

Aaarg. V2.2b is up.

[Captain Joy]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Aaarg. V2.2b is up.

I'm unclear on the effects for chest and abdomen. You mentioned a sub-table for each, which is clearly indicated. Then later you say "Crushing, impaling, or piercing roll on sub-table". It's not clear if you intend only crushing, impaling, or piercing attacks to use the sub-table previously mentioned, or if you intend crushing, impaling, or piercing attacks to use a different sub-table.

If it's the former, shouldn't you add "tight beam burning" and "crushing, rear" to the chest effects; and "tight been burning" to the abdomen effects? If it's the latter, I'm not sure what sub-table you are referring to.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

I'm unclear on the effects for chest and abdomen. You mentioned a sub-table for each, which is clearly indicated. Then later you say "Crushing, impaling, or piercing roll on sub-table". It's not clear if you intend only crushing, impaling, or piercing attacks to use the sub-table previously mentioned, or if you intend crushing, impaling, or piercing attacks to use a different sub-table.

That's completely unclear, you are correct. I don't think I intended those damage types to use a different sub table, I think that is relic text from several edits... I'm pretty sure the max damage clause doesn't just modify those damage types. I'll have to pull the rules up together again and double check this.

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

If it's the former, shouldn't you add "tight beam burning" and "crushing, rear" to the chest effects; and "tight been burning" to the abdomen effects? If it's the latter, I'm not sure what sub-table you are referring to.

Definitely no extra subtable, so we're still looking at horridly confusing. (that's cutting, rear, not crushing, btw)

In the name of space, I'm considering rewriting them to

Chest
"Default location. Roll on sub table D; injury can't exceed 2xHP (1xHP if using bleeding); any excess is lost"

Abdomen
"Roll on sub-table E; Injury can't exceed 2xHP (1xHP if using bleeding); any excess is lost"

The subtables already cover the effects of different damage types. I just need to double check that the injury caps aren't related to damage type...

[Agent]

As far as I know, the Pelvis is -3 to hit not -2.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Agent

As far as I know, the Pelvis is -3 to hit not -2.

Correct! That's a typo. I'll get a corrected copy uploaded shortly.

[Bruno]

Version 2.3 is up, containing the following changes.

There's a new URL, the top post and my signature have both been updated.

Originally Posted by Bruno

That's completely unclear, you are correct. I don't think I intended those damage types to use a different sub table, I think that is relic text from several edits...

In the name of space, I'm considering rewriting them to

Chest
"Default location. Roll on sub table D; injury can't exceed 2xHP (1xHP if using bleeding); any excess is lost"

Abdomen
"Roll on sub-table E; Injury can't exceed 2xHP (1xHP if using bleeding); any excess is lost"

The subtables already cover the effects of different damage types. I just need to double check that the injury caps aren't related to damage type...

Originally Posted by Agent

As far as I know, the Pelvis is -3 to hit not -2.

[Mateus]

Thank you!

[phayman53]

Thank you, very useful. One possible error I noticed: on the face sub location, you have the jaw being coveredby cheek guards. In Loadouts: LT the jaw is never covered by cheek guards and usually needs something like a bevor to cover it.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by phayman53

Thank you, very useful. One possible error I noticed: on the face sub location, you have the jaw being coveredby cheek guards. In Loadouts: LT the jaw is never covered by cheek guards and usually needs something like a bevor to cover it.

The terms on the face table don't refer to specific items from Loadouts: LT, or I'd be citing things like Menpô and have a list as long as my arm :) It's specifically referring to the generic helmet pieces from the build-your-own-helmet stuff in Low Tech itself.

Low Tech p 112:
Cheek Guards
These pieces protect the cheeks and jaw.

[phayman53]

Originally Posted by Bruno

The terms on the face table don't refer to specific items from Loadouts: LT, or I'd be citing things like Menpô and have a list as long as my arm :) It's specifically referring to the generic helmet pieces from the build-your-own-helmet stuff in Low Tech itself.

Low Tech p 112:
Cheek Guards
These pieces protect the cheeks and jaw.

I see what you are saying and why you wrote it the way you did, but I think it ends-up giving inaccurate results even by LT, pg. 112's definition. The problem is that the rules in LT do not assign specific locations to the 1d6 roll, at this point in the rules one merely adds the total locations covered and then rolls to see if it beats the chance of coverage. It is later, I believe in Loadouts: LT, that specific locations on the face were given specific assigned values on that 1d6 roll.

But, according to LT 112, a simple cheek guard gives a protective chance of 2/6, which on your unified table is the 4-5 "cheek" location. To add the jaw to what is protected by a cheek guard gives it a total of a 3/6 chance (1, 4, and 5 on a 1d6), which is more than the protective chance on LT 112. Now LT 112 says there can be larger cheek guards that protect on a 3/6 chance, but these specifically are cheek guards that also cover the ears (I believe that is location 3 on the later table). I think what happened is that LT 112 losely defines jaw as essentially the same place as the cheek, but later, when each location had to be given a discrete value, the jaw got separated from the cheek.

Personally, I think the cheek and jaw should both be included in the cheek location (either a 4 or a 5, with the cheek being the other number) and the mouth/area under the nose be given the 1 place on the 1d6 roll to simulate the many helmets that seem to have covered the cheek and jaw line but left the mouth area open. But as I understand it, the latest compiled version of RAW separates the jaw from the cheeks in spite of what LT 112 seems to indicate.