Help bury my problems with GURPS?

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Venatius

#2, vehicles. My statement the VDS was "omitted" was more that it seems like such an essential concept it needed to be one of the earliest things out, not the latest.

I regard this as a matter of personal preference. I've been playing GURPS in a variety of genres from fantasy to space opera since the late 80s and have never once used GURPS Vehicles (3rd edition's predecessor to 4e's VDS) in anger.

[walkir]

Originally Posted by Venatius

#2, vehicles. My statement the VDS was "omitted" was more that it seems like such an essential concept it needed to be one of the earliest things out, not the latest. I hope it tackles the issue.

It's a book with lots of tables and statistics, and as such very difficult to edit. As I understood sicknesses and other problems delayed it further and by now Low, high and ultra tech are out, so there might be modifications to bring those books in line (the author got the draft of low tech to do just this).
So it was planned to come out earlier.
OTOH, there's a string opinion of "you don't need VDS" from non-gearheads, and the old vehicles book gave GURPS some bad press as it involves actual math.
It's a matter of taste, but I trust SJGames to use the delay to make VDS better.

Hearing spaceships has something I can hobble through on for now gives me hope, though. I'm not demanding a simulation down to the quantum level, just a way of putting price tags on things. I just hope it's applicable to more than JUST spaceships in at least kind of a pidgin capacity. I know one supplement in the series features mecha, but from what I've glimpsed it looks like it just provides examples rather than giving any kind of design method or rules.

Well, it includes a leg module, rules for ground performace and spome design switches.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Venatius

Anyway, thanks very much for the input! This is some serious headway in resolving my more serious concerns. Thaumatology and Spaceships are my next scheduled stops. Thank goodness for the advent of PDF publishing!

Small update: Amusingly, the magic issue seems reversed. Magic as powers seems to provide a solution to the finite systems dilemma while leaving the spells without advantages one unresolved. Kind of the opposite of what I was anticipating, but it's still nice to see that aspect cleared up a bit. This looks like a very good way to custom-tailor new systems with some kind of groundwork. It inclines me to ask; does Thaumatology cover any "bare-bones" system of no-strings-attached type magic? Thinking on it, it seems like such a thing might be workable for turning spells into natural abilities. You'd have to kind of judiciously avert your eyes from the character having the Magery advantage (probably?), but if it allows for spells that work like effortless natural abilities, it seems like it'd simulate that effect pretty well. I haven't yet seen such a thing (probably because it balances as gracefully as a hippo on pointe), but "Threshold-Limited" magic seems to approach it.

Powers really is my recommendation for what you talked about most in this.
Thaumatology is awesome for designing a new magic system using several different core frameworks and lots of options and examples for how to tweak them. But the assumption is its all "magic" However applying much of it to Chi or Biological powers is pretty easy. HERO did a genric magic system by modifying the powers system for magic and also for SciFi and it left me and others feeling flat. It was just too generic and not enough of a difference between the differnt things .
Though there are possibly more options to adjust GURPS Advantages and powers with I suspect any efforts to modify them for a one size fits all campaign will also leave the campaign feeling a little flat.
But as it is we have the following frameworks that I can think of.
Advantages as Powers (Power modifier and a Talent)
Alchemy/Herbalisim
Syntactic magic (Also Realm)
Standard or what I call College magic
Symbol Magic (Also Verb/Noun)
Path magic
Ritual Magic
Threshold magic

Using these you can have a campaign with several flavors of magic that are very distinctive and tactically dissimilar.
It will take a lot of work but then that is true of anything with so much variety.
And you can apply many of these to different backgrounds besides magic.

I used Symbol magic to simulate a book I read where the protagnist used math. Now I would redesign it with Path/Book Magic.
I also have used and seen others talk about using Path magic as a basis for Netrunning, Dreamweaving and Shamanism.

As for the defense rolls look at Deceptive attacks and High Skill level vs. High Skill options or rules.

For your vehicle stuff if your building it off a book or movie then use that for your framework.
If your looking for examples then Vehicles 3E is a good starting point but some things have been changed, mostly DR and HP and of course PD.
But still it gives you a good starting point and framework.
the core concept of Spaceships with all vehicles being built as a frame with modules coming in as 5% or multiples thereof chunks is something you can adapt to any other vehicle or building.
Just write up the modules.
It will be easy and your players can offer up module suggestions too and then just pick and choose what modules you want for the design concept.

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by Refplace

Powers really is my recommendation for what you talked about most in this.
Thaumatology is awesome for designing a new magic system using several different core frameworks and lots of options and examples for how to tweak them. But the assumption is its all "magic" However applying much of it to Chi or Biological powers is pretty easy. HERO did a genric magic system by modifying the powers system for magic and also for SciFi and it left me and others feeling flat. It was just too generic and not enough of a difference between the differnt things .
Though there are possibly more options to adjust GURPS Advantages and powers with I suspect any efforts to modify them for a one size fits all campaign will also leave the campaign feeling a little flat.
But as it is we have the following frameworks that I can think of.
Advantages as Powers (Power modifier and a Talent)
Alchemy/Herbalisim
Syntactic magic (Also Realm)
Standard or what I call College magic
Symbol Magic (Also Verb/Noun)
Path magic
Ritual Magic
Threshold magic

Book magic,
Power accumulation magic for both path and book.

[Athanbeli]

There's only one thing I had to adjust about combat defenses: I doubled the penalties to parry thrown weapons.
So it becomes -2 to parry spears and hatchets and -4 for knives and stones.

[Kage2020]

Originally Posted by Venatius

The problem of more specific systems that don't already have pre-written systems in a GURPS supplement still seems to remain, though.

If I'm understanding this correctly, it's that the solutions being suggested often have not been formalised in an official supplement or, perhaps, that there isn't a repository dedicated towards GURPS interpretations of specific settings using the most appropriate means (whether that Magic/Thaumatology or Powers)?

Originally Posted by Venatius

There are as many magic systems as there are possible magical settings, and any setup with a finite number thereof is insufficient.

On my behalf, it becomes a question of how many spells are enough. I barely used the system back in the day, but I remember with a certain amount of trepedition the 1,400-odd spells listed in Gary Gygax's Mythus: Dangerous Journeys game. It did, however, include a spell design system. Is that a part of what you're after?

If it is, then it's another nod of the head towards the use of Powers. With that said, I'm also getting the general gist that even Thaumatology wouldn't be too far from what you're after, and perhaps a little less daunting.

Originally Posted by Venatius

I'm hoping the "magic as powers" bit will help resolve the issue of spells without any analogs in advantages, though. While turning an advantage into magic is easy, the reverse doesn't yet appear to be true.

That last bit is certainly true, though it is often more that the selection of advantage and combination with enhancement/limitation is not necessarily obvious. For example, my aforementioned cobbling together of magic/psykers for the Warhammer 40,000 universe stumbled over my lack of familiarity with Powers, hence the kludge with Threshold-based magic from Thaumatology. Looking back on it, though, I feel that it will go to a more Powers-based approach in subsequent iterations.

Originally Posted by Venatius

#2, vehicles. My statement the VDS was "omitted" was more that it seems like such an essential concept it needed to be one of the earliest things out, not the latest.

I wish it were out already, as well. Yet other than a really masochistic desire to stat out a multi kilometer-long ship of the aforementioned Warhammer 40,000 universe, if I put hand on heart with all the other supplements that are out, I haven't gone too far awry.

Certainly, though, if I could speed up time, or possible compress it and good health to the authors, I would be inclined to do so.

Originally Posted by Venatius

I know one supplement in the series features mecha, but from what I've glimpsed it looks like it just provides examples rather than giving any kind of design method or rules.

To be fair, though, that would give you the starting point that you seem to have initially requested--the guidelines, as it were. Again, though, you couldn't go far wrong with checking out (finances willing) such 3e supplements as Mecha, Robots and Vehicles. Maybe even take a gander at the Vehicle Design program that used to be available (and might still be, at least in legacy).

Originally Posted by Venatius

My main concern here is for putting price tags on things not based on any kind of 'marketable' value. If your world is simulating (or gently satirizing) a traditional fantasy RPG, things like "+1 weapons" will generally have some kind of consistent pricing. What I overlooked at the time, though, is that Magic covers this, if a little limpwristedly, with its section on magical economies.

Well, it does give you a consistent way of generating a cost of a magical artefact such as a "+1 sword." Perhaps an example of why it is "limpwristed" would be useful?

Originally Posted by Venatius

Anyway, thanks very much for the input! This is some serious headway in resolving my more serious concerns. Thaumatology and Spaceships are my next scheduled stops.

I really would recommend Powers. It's been mentioned in another thread as some peoples' favourite, but I truly do feel that it is an essential component that enhances the "universal" part of the title. YMMV, of course, but there we have it.

Originally Posted by Venatius

Small update: Amusingly, the magic issue seems reversed. Magic as powers seems to provide a solution to the finite systems dilemma while leaving the spells without advantages one unresolved.

A number of these spells without advantages might be resolved with taking a gander at Powers, which introduces some new advantages, enhancements, and limitations. (For example, the aforementioned "Control" advantage to your question about Purify Air. "Create" would also work depending on quite how you saw it working in your individual campaign setting.)

Originally Posted by Venatius

Thinking on it, it seems like such a thing might be workable for turning spells into natural abilities.

Spells as Powers without enhancements or limitations are functionally "natural" abilities AFAIK.

Anyway, time for sleep...

Kage

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Venatius

#3: "Defense" doesn't defend AGAINST anything?

This seems to be a common problem with any "roll-under" system (a mechanic I find to be almost belligerently inefficient). All right. So the attacker rolls to see if their attack is even conceivably going to stab/swing/shoot/flamethrower where their target is standing. But after that, the attacker's input inexplicably ceases to matter. The defender rolls against their own defense. This is baffling, considering GURPS, unlike some roll-under systems (I'm looking fondly and shaking my head at you, Call of Cthulhu), actually does have mechanics for opposed rolls. But despite that, attack and defend in combat seem to occupy totally seperate rooms, and the only seriously relevant factor seems to be defense.

Ignoring the fact that critical hits bypass defense rolls, which is admittedly not quite what you're looking for, if you don't like the main rule, a published optional alternate rule (don't remember where it is these days; might be Martial Arts) is to run combats as a quick contest between attack and defense rather than separate rolls. The attacker, in that case, actually does have to directly outdo the defender.

ETA: I'll also note that at low-to-moderate skill levels and under trying circumstances (fighting while wounded or in poor visibility, firing missile weapons, etc.), the attacker's skill is sufficiently low that hitting isn't a foregone conclusion, while defense rolls can be sufficiently low that they're vastly unlikely to be successful in the event of a successful hit, making them a Hail-Mary sort of thing rather than the sole determinant of how the fight goes.

[Venatius]

Attack/defense as contests actually is a published variant? That sounds very promising. You raise a very good point about low skill levels, but once you get into the Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon stuff (or Equilibrium, if that's more your style), the core system as-is seems to rely entirely on defense skill and/or total blind luck in rolling crits. I had wondered about converting the rolls to quick contests as a way to avert this, but I wasn't at all sure if it'd play out well or crash into some unforeseen conflicts with existing rules.

[AmesJainchill]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

I like to think taxes are a part of the listed price, even if its not realistic to the listed price, just to make things flow better. Unless, of course, I'm trying to do a game with brutal realism and wanting to be a vindictive SOB on top of it ("You want that pistol? That's $500, plus 7% Indiana sales tax, $40 for a handgun license, $50 for a magazine. Of course the carrying case and lock are extra and I can't sell it to you without them...")

Well, you just have to get unlucky as to whose shop you walk into. Some gun shop owners aren't interested in making long-term customers. ;D

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Venatius

Attack/defense as contests actually is a published variant? That sounds very promising. You raise a very good point about low skill levels, but once you get into the Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon stuff (or Equilibrium, if that's more your style), the core system as-is seems to rely entirely on defense skill and/or total blind luck in rolling crits. I had wondered about converting the rolls to quick contests as a way to avert this, but I wasn't at all sure if it'd play out well or crash into some unforeseen conflicts with existing rules.

You are familiar with Deceptive Attack/Predictive Shot, yes? -2 to your effective skill for -1 to their defenses. Nicely brings attacks and defences down within the 3-18 scale for highly skilled combatants.