Help with explaining why Superman can't get 300 DR for 5 points?

[Stormcrow]

Regardless of whether your player has a point (I don't think he does), if he's going to leave a game over whether or not you disagree with his interpretations of the rules means he's going to be trouble every time you disagree.

As for thinking you need native combat powers to scale with combat equipment available... okay, if that's the way you think a game should go. (There are other ways.) Give more character points. Tell them "You can spend X on exotic abilities and Y on everything else about your character." Make Y more or less what you were going to make your point total in the first place, and X is however much extra this player things they need to match technology with exotic abilities. Then give everybody this X + Y.

If this doesn't solve the problem, then the player is complaining about the principle of the thing, not the thing itself, and is never going to accept your game anyway.

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by Ragabash Moon

Well, yes but he seems to think that he should be able to have innate to his character high DR because DR itself should scale to the campaign, not be a set cost.

It's not a crazy idea. Kromm is on record stating that GURPS was originally designed, according to Steve Jackson, to charge point costs according to desired rarity not utility. Kromm gives Combat Reflexes as an example of something with higher utility than rarer, more expensive traits.

As GM of the setting, you can price DR according to how rare you want it to be. If you want DR 300 to be super common, make it cheap.

What your player essentially seems to be saying is that they would rather tank gunfire to the chest rather than dodge it (or prevent gunmen from seeing them in the first place).

If you don't want cheap DR in your setting, it's fine to just not play with them, but there's nothing fundamentally crazy about their perspective, at least by Steve Jackson's original design logic.

Edit:

Originally Posted by Ragabash Moon

Plus I feel like he thinks I as the GM (who as I said, have been playing GURPS since 1987) don't understand these things and am going to just TPK the first combat.

Never mind, you guys should clearly not be playing at the same table because you don't get along.

[Ragabash Moon]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

Never mind, you guys should clearly not be playing at the same table because you don't get along.

Well, that was more of a joke than anything.

[Varyon]

Given further information, I'm inclined to agree with those suggesting it may be a bad idea to play with this individual. You may want to make a final attempt - simply explain that you are using the pricing and rules in the book, not restructuring everything to match how he wants it to work, which is your prerogative as the GM. Further note that, with your experience as a GM, you're confident you will be able to make an enjoyable game. You may want to suggest alternatives to paying [1500] for DR 300, based on exactly what the player is going for - I mentioned IT:DR before as an option, and you can also manage pretty impressive stuff with Unkillable and Regeneration - or he may be able to get the kind of performance he wants cheaper with Hardened DR (if he's wanting to be able to reliably ignore 8d(5) burn attacks, DR 30 (Hardened 3 +60%) [240] will do the trick). It may not be exactly the character he wants, but sometimes it's simply the case that you cannot afford the character you want.

If he is willing to accept all that, even if he disagrees with the book's rules about the cost of DR (and everything else, really) not scaling with the campaign setting, you can probably manage a good game with him. If he isn't willing to accept that, it will be far better for him to be uninvolved, because that means he is unwilling to accept your rulings as GM (so even if you were to relent on this and let everyone have ridiculous DR for dirt cheap, you'll have serious problems while playing anytime he disagrees with the rules and/or your interpretation of them).

[RGTraynor]

Originally Posted by Ragabash Moon

"Then I am going to have to bow out. It doesn't make sense and I'm not going to play a game where there is only one specific way to do something."

Me, in a good mood: "You're the best judge of the gaming you prefer. Good luck in finding a campaign more to your taste."

Me, in a more snarky mood: "Don't let the door hit your a$$ on the way out."

I wouldn't lift a finger to placate the fellow. Stormcrow is exactly right: someone pulling this riff over wanting a character to be invulnerable for 5 pts (WTH?!?) is going to pull it early and often. At this stage in my gaming career, I'm just not interested.

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by RGTraynor

I wouldn't lift a finger to placate the fellow. Stormcrow is exactly right: someone pulling this riff over wanting a character to be invulnerable for 5 pts (WTH?!?) is going to pull it early and often. At this stage in my gaming career, I'm just not interested.

Nitpick: DR 300 for 5 points wasn't the player's request, it was the OP's attempt at reductio ad absurdum.

What you are describing never happened.

[RyanW]

I would just point out that, if you apply that logic to DR, you also need to apply it to Innate Attacks, ST, HP, and then to things that interact with ST and HP, then on down the line...

Instead of chasing that rabbit, GURPS assumes that any game where immunity to blaster fire might be expected (whether it's the 30th Century Legion of Super-Heroes or Captain Caveman) doesn't lower the price of Damage Resistance, but instead gives more points (and thus, more options).

[mlangsdorf]

Originally Posted by Ragabash Moon

Yes, that does sound reasonable, but he wanted it to be actual innate powers like Wolverine after the adamantium upgrade but without the adamantium upgrade being necessary? Does that make sense?

Plus I feel like he thinks I as the GM (who as I said, have been playing GURPS since 1987) don't understand these things and am going to just TPK the first combat.

I feel like 3 things are being conflated here:

1. The player wants to be able to purchase a large amount of DR, sufficient to handle ultra-tech weapon, very cheaply. It's not a crazy request.

2. The player wants his character to have a supernatural ability in a game that doesn't allow supernatural powers. That's often an unreasonable request. I'm willing to work with my players to expand a game's scope to improve their enjoyment, but there are limits. When I'm running a 1920s Untouchables themed Action game, I don't let people play mages or orcs.

3. The player has other mannerisms that make you think he'll be a poor fit for the game.

I think there's space to reduce the cost of innate abilities that can be easily duplicated by common equipment. How much of a cost reduction is debatable.

If you don't think characters in your game should have innate force fields and you feel strongly about that, you're not obligated to accommodate the player. I recommend resolving this before you talk about the CP costs. If the only way to have large amounts of DR is to play a robot or cyborg and the player doesn't want a PC like that, there's no point in figuring out the CP discount for having DR at TL11.

Finally, if you don't think the player is a good fit, you should probably resolve that before addressing the other two issues. I suggest running a separate, short game with pregen characters, something that can be done in 1 or 2 sessions. I like an investigation, a negotiation scene, and a small combat or two. Present it as a learning experience or a try-out. If the player doesn't work out or refuses to even play a pregen for a short game, then you don't have to resolve the other issues.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Instead of chasing that rabbit, GURPS assumes that any game where immunity to blaster fire might be expected... doesn't lower the price of Damage Resistance, but instead gives more points (and thus, more options).

The GM could also grant immunity to blaster fire (whatever the build for that turns out to be) as a campaign advantage to all PCs to keep them alive. No worries about players then repurposing those points for something that somehow breaks the game with unforeseen options.

(Or not shoot at PCs with blasters, or tone down the blaster damage so the immunity build is cheaper.)

In this case, it sounds like the player wants to be invulnerable while no one else is, while also retaining all the other abilities and options they can have by declaring that invulnerability should only cost 5 points. (Who wouldn't take it at that price?) So, yeah, probably not a good member in an cooperative RPG.

In general, people that want to play major comic book style characters like Wolverine should be prepared to pay thousands of points. It's just the way those high-end supers work out.

[Anthony]

The easiest way to balance things like innate DR vs advantages is to just use the same set of rules for everything -- for example, you could change accessory from

Your body incorporates a tool or other useful gadget (e.g., a siren or a vacuum cleaner) that provides minor, noncombat benefits not otherwise covered by a specific advantage.

to something like

Your body incorporates a tool or other useful gadget. You must buy it as Signature Gear, and buy enough Payload to hold its weight; this advantage merely lets it function as part of your body.

Then if you want an implanted tactical suit at TL 9, well, that's $3,000 (1 point of signature gear) and 15 pounds (8 points of payload at ST 10), +1 point for the accessory perk, 10 points.