4E's hit point philosophy

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Icelander

The HP for the frigate is the RAW, not revised.

Note that cannon damage is more than 16 HPs, so even if you were using a rule which allowed for ignoring hits of less than 10%, the frigate wouldn't ignore hits from them.

If we coupled a system like this with giving warships DR in line with the actual thickness of their hulls, it could go a long way toward fixing things without introducing too much extra comlexity.

Ships of the line ought to have DR 24-30, with frigates at least having DR 12.

That's consistent with "some work" I happen to be doing at the moment as well.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

That's consistent with "some work" I happen to be doing at the moment as well.

I'd like to playtest that, or even assist if possible. Depending on what it is, I might even have relevant knowledge.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Ships of the line ought to have DR 24-30, with frigates at least having DR 12.

A two foot thickness of generic "wood" has DR 24 per Basic. It's not a stretch to have a little more for naval oak construction. Seems like the problem is more with the stat blocks for ships.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

A two foot thickness of generic "wood" has DR 24 per Basic. It's not a stretch to have a little more for naval oak construction. Seems like the problem is more with the stat blocks for ships.

Indeed, that is some of the problem. I have criticised the ship stats in Basic and Fantasy and in Low-Tech, some of my criticisms were addressed. However, DR there is retained at the low ranges, for consistency with earlier publications.

[sir_pudding]

I've said this before, but ships of the line had hundreds of crewmen. Isn't naval combat between ships of the line simply outside the playable scale of GURPS combat?

[apoc527]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I've said this before, but ships of the line had hundreds of crewmen. Isn't naval combat between ships of the line simply outside the playable scale of GURPS combat?

Not if you use GURPS Mass Combat! :-)

But yes, I kind of agree with you. Any GM who tries to roll out a 76 gun ship of the line's attacks should be keelhauled.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by apoc527

Not if you use GURPS Mass Combat! :-)

In which case all we care about is the TS. Right?

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I've said this before, but ships of the line had hundreds of crewmen. Isn't naval combat between ships of the line simply outside the playable scale of GURPS combat?

It might be, but with the RAW, it only takes a few shots to sink one. So instead of it taking hundreds of crewmen, one PC aiming a cannon can do it.

That's not something I especially want to game out, though. Because with a TL4 or TL5 cannon of 9-lb or 12-lb, it doesn't make sense to be sinking warships left and right, in just a couple of minutes of accurate shooting. But it's possible in the rules and while that's the case, players who know the rules will wonder why I keep getting a sad look when they formulate their naval tactics based on them.

[ErhnamDJ]

Originally Posted by apoc527

Any GM who tries to roll out a 76 gun ship of the line's attacks should be keelhauled.

Or you get a ST 20 guy with an axe to do it.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by apoc527

But, isn't it precisely true that Pulver, at least, tried to help us out with some of the ALternate GURPS articles? I recall the one with the reduced wounding for larger SMs and the increased HP. "Extreme Damage" from Pyramid #3/34 is the one. Does this help enough? He even specifically cites the problems with two 74 gun ships-of-the-line!

What if you used both the IT idea AND the square root of weight for HP of unliving things?

Not only has some of those articles shown a stance by the company and some authors that it is an issue that can be addressed but David Pulver said recently he was putting some of those as optional rules in his upcoming VDS.