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 01-04-2022, 11:39 AM   #31
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
That sounds more like a -5% nuisance, and presumably it can't be used against you.
PU8p5 has -10% for "Accessibility: requires material component" and I think I remember seeing elsewhere that "a wooden staff" might be considered specific enough to fulfill the specificity (agates not rocks) requirement.

I just forget where I saw the staff thing mentioned, maybe the forum?

On same page "requires (item)" is subset w/ same value and has "requires bow" in example.

Staves are probably a bit easier to find/buy (and maintain) than bows though, so I could see making it slightly rarer, like "requires an oak staff" so staves made of other types of wood wouldn't work.

Last edited by Plane; 01-04-2022 at 11:42 AM.
Plane is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2022, 02:33 PM   #32
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
PU8p5 has -10% for "Accessibility: requires material component" and I think I remember seeing elsewhere that "a wooden staff" might be considered specific enough to fulfill the specificity (agates not rocks) requirement.
That's if you need a specific material component.

This is more like "willing" your gadget back into existence with a Ready action if you somehow lose it (fumble, stolen, destroyed).
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2022, 08:19 PM   #33
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
That's if you need a specific material component.

This is more like "willing" your gadget back into existence with a Ready action if you somehow lose it (fumble, stolen, destroyed).
Then your "gadget" isn't a gadget. It's just a Power that happens to look like a gadget (which is valid but gives you no cp discount).
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2022, 08:35 PM   #34
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
Then your "gadget" isn't a gadget. It's just a Power that happens to look like a gadget (which is valid but gives you no cp discount).
Yes. That's exactly right.
__________________
Bill Stoddard

I don't think we're in Oz any more.
whswhs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2022, 09:06 PM   #35
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
Then your "gadget" isn't a gadget. It's just a Power that happens to look like a gadget (which is valid but gives you no cp discount).
Honestly, that's a rather useless distinction. You could have equally said it was a gadget that didn't qualify for a cp discount. Furthermore, have the relationship confused. Some powers look or act like gadgets, but all gadgets are powers. More specifically, they are advantages with gadget limitations.

In this case, we were discussing other hypothetical gadget limitations. Specifically, this was to cover the situation where you have a supply of identical gadgets. If they are small you can carry multiples (hence just needing to ready a new one if it's lost) or easily replace them with access to one of your stashes. You don't need to worry about repair time, recovery, or about them being used by others. You can run out of what you're carrying and be prevented from replenishing your stash of super equipment.

The canonical example of such as character was the Super Scum character Corsair, who in fact has gadgets without limitations that are work a point break.
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2022, 09:17 PM   #36
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
The canonical example of such as character was the Super Scum character Corsair, who in fact has gadgets without limitations that are work a point break.
You did say "was" and this is important as Super Scum was a 3e product. It may even have been superseded in 3e by a later edition of Supers.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2022, 12:09 AM   #37
David Johnston2
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
You did say "was" and this is important as Super Scum was a 3e product. It may even have been superseded in 3e by a later edition of Supers.
Not really important since it was the individual design choice of the person making the character. "This character is useless without his sword so attempts to deprive him of his word probably won't work and if they do work, they only work briefly". In his case this is represented by him having a second sword always available in his vehicle and ore at home and the GM being advised to do everything possible to frustrate attempts to steal it.

What that doesn't mean however is that "Can't be broken" always represents that particular special effect. If you are designing Captain America's shield or Halo's orbs, they just can't be broken by any amount of force. My character Lady Nemesis can't have her N-Weapon be broken because it's actually a shapeshifting mass of nanotechnology that will simply liquify and reform if it's current structure is damaged. It could be destroyed, but by means covered by its -10% Nanotechnology power source, not by being a breakable gadget.
David Johnston2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2022, 07:09 AM   #38
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
You did say "was" and this is important as Super Scum was a 3e product. It may even have been superseded in 3e by a later edition of Supers.
We were discussing how this would look in 4e, since while are neither indestructible nor immune to being taken away, they also do not qualify for "Breakable" or "Cannot Be Stolen" as written. My suggestion as a fraction of the usual value, though a power modifier could also work.*

Breakable implies that it takes time and materials to replace. Corsair always has a few spares stashed away, so he can just grab another.

Cannot Be Stolen could be used, but typically it requires a significant effort or recover or replace. Corsair usually carries one spare, and can grab another from one of his stash locations.

You could arguably say the Green Goblin's cache of weaponry is like this as well. Goblin gliders tend to get trashed and replaced, and if you steal his bag 'o bombs he can't throw pumpkin bombs. Regardless, the Green Goblin (and later Hobgobin) can replenish at home without repair downtime.

*I'd prefer to go 1/4 the usual value rather so the difficulty of breaking or stealing the items is taken into account. Assigning a flat -10% makes it worth potentially more than either of those limitations might normally be worth, say for an example like Iron Man's armors. At the very least the power modifier would need to incorporate more drawbacks to make it sensible.
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2022, 07:48 AM   #39
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Johnston2 View Post
N. "This character is useless without his sword so attempts to deprive him of his word probably won't work and if they do work, they only work briefly". et.
In 4e you make this Signature Gear.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2022, 08:02 AM   #40
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: should there actually be "indestructible" weapons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
In 4e you make this Signature Gear.
... and how are you pricing a sword that gives you super powers with Signature Gear?
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
cannot be broken, cannot break, force sword, rapid fire, ultra-tech

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 02:46 AM.


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