OP's PDF: https://anonymousfiles.org/files/f8805a595539/

Previous Thread: >>95760406

GURPS is a modular, adaptable system, capable of running a wide range of characters, settings, and play styles, with a level of detail varying from lightweight to completely autistic.
Optional rules allow you to emulate different genres with a single system, or even switch genres within a single game.

A nearly complete archive of GURPS books can be found by those who pay attention to file extensions.
Never post direct links to the archive anywhere.

If you're wondering where to start:
- The Basic Set covers everything, including a lot of optional rules you probably won't use.
- A genre guide can be found in the archive, under Unofficial/GURPSgen. It tells you what extra books and articles you may find useful for many common genres.
- How To Be a GURPS GM is a good read even for players.
- GCS (gurpscharactersheet.com) is an excellent character-builder software, with page references to all the books and the option to export to both Foundry and Fantasy Grounds.

>TQ: How often does Status play a role in your games?

>>95831980 (OP)
Can I aim an AoE spell (like an explosive fireball) so it hits somebody in the skull for the sweet x4 damage to the main target?
Also, in the case of an AoE attack, generally you don't use hit locations right? But is there a way to make an AoE attack that hits random hit locations instead of going for Wide-Area damage?

>>95831980 (OP)
>Status
Out of 2 campaigns I have played in GURPs, 1 has used Status.
So 50% of the time, clearly.

>>95832057
It's worth remembering the difference between area effects (and area spells) and explosions (like explosive fireball), but the rules are fairly similar.
An area effect can only target a hit location if the target is large enough that the entire area only covers a single hit location. An area effect can also attack random hit locations by adding the bombardment limitation (presumably spells like rain of stones and rain of ice daggers are similar, but this isn't explicit in their rules).
An explosion, on the other hand, 'affects' all exposed hit locations but doesn't use hit location rules unless only a single location is exposed. This seems unlikely to be the case unless you have a very weird body plan (e.g. an airship dealing with an explosion from above).
However, this seems completely inconsistent with the fact that shaped-charge warheads are generally explosive and obviously should be able to target specific hit locations. Likewise, common sense says that a grenade going off in your hand will cripple it.

>>95832298
>An explosion, on the other hand, 'affects' all exposed hit locations but doesn't use hit location rules unless only a single location is exposed. This seems unlikely to be the case unless you have a very weird body plan (e.g. an airship dealing with an explosion from above).
I see. Yeah that makes sense. Leaves a reason to keep using regular fireball I guess.
>n area effect can also attack random hit locations by adding the bombardment limitation (presumably spells like rain of stones and rain of ice daggers are similar, but this isn't explicit in their rules).
Aah, yeah that limitation is explicitly in the sorcerer spell I'm trying to use so it does hit random hit location, thanks for clarifying.

Since there isn't currently a Game Finder (and they're generally ignored anyway), do /gurpsgen/ readers have any interest in playing in a "Pathfinder Adventure Path" styled Dungeon Fantasy -esque game? Is low tech sword-and-sorcery too popular or is there room for a setting more in the "wacky sci-fi fantasy" region? Maybe like Barbarella or even more towards the pulp penny dreadfuls era? Don't make me clench my fist and exercise tyrannical oversight / class templates, because I'm not a super veteran GURPS GM so I do know (or care about) whatever metagame / min-max / munchkinry that plagues it.

I like adventures, but I'm kind of frustrated by and burnt out on various d20 systems because of how clunky and clumsy are their systems for character building and organizing player progression vis-a-vis specific monster difficulties and things like that.

What does concern me is that the economics of GURPS adventure-style settings seem absolutely wildly random. I don't get the feeling like I can reliably predict what something might be priced at, and enchanted equipment seems to go from basically free to infinity with two steps in between. Worse, I get this awkward feeling like I'm not sure why numbers seem so large in Dungeon Fantasy.

Like, I know they're 250 point templates, but how is it reasonable for a character to have a 22 in anything? How big are the ad hoc modifiers I'm supposed to be applying in order to give a reasonable risk of failure? Because at 22, you'd still only fail on a crit failure even at a -4 for some reason. Isn't it ok if I just chop those templates basic attributes down so that characters have a base of 12 or so, and then expect that they're gonna buy tools and enchantments to get another +4 to hit 16 or so? Which means they'd still only fail on a crit fail, which means they'd only fail about 30% of the time even at -4... Or am I asking noob questions...

>>95831980 (OP)
So, I'm gearing up to run my first GURPS session. Everyone seems to recommend starting with as few rules as possible and working your way up in complexity. With that in mind, thinking about doing the first session as a bunch of scenarios. What kind of stuff do you think is good to have in a one shot kind of thing just to have your players see what the system can do?

I figured I'd do a very simple tavern brawl (1v1 unarmed combat)
Then the most basic combat scenario with melee weapons. No shock, fight is over at 0 hp.

Do it again with shock.

And then finally a fight with shock and rolling HT to remain upright after going below 0 HP as normal.

And go with the "how to be a dungeon fantasy" advice of all maneuvers except change posture, evalute and feint from "Fewest options, fastest play, least detail," to start it all off.

Does that sound reasonable? Any other ideas/thoughts? I also want to test non combat stuff, ofcourse. What skills (showcased in appropriate scenarios) would you want to see in such a first test session to help the players learn the best/most important bits that are likely to crop up in an actual game?
Just negotiating with a potential "quest giver" with a social roll would be the most basic variant.

>>95831980 (OP)
>TQ: How often does Status play a role in your games?
Normally, not too often, but I tend to run modern games where Status isn't as important unless you're in the Status 3-4 range and my players don't generally go in for those.
For my current campaign, however, it's set in Edwardian England, and as the party are comprised of men-of-leisure ranging from "affluent artist" to "actual landed gentry", Status has actually been quite important. The gentry in question is something of a callous asshole, so it's a lot more "cowing the lower classes" than it is "awing the commoners with noblesse oblige", but it's impactful nonetheless.

>>95833042
I'd be interested. That said, some basic advice:
Dungeon Fantasy characters expect to fight dungeon fantasy monsters and dungeon fantasy situations.
This means monsters that will overwhelm you with numbers, be good enough to require you to do a deceptive strike of -6 to -8, or be so durable you'll want to try to go for the head or vitals at all times.
Traps, locks and stuff like that would be at -1 to -9 from complexity

Also if you're overwhelmed by the high level play, you can try the delvers to grow book that has templates for starting at 62 points.

>>95833102
Do not allow hit locations. Ever. Especially not in Dungeon Fantasy. A -7 to hit the head is trivial to overcome at those character point values and it basically means hit points don't matter and one attack kills each target... on both sides. Hit locations only make sense in ultra-realistic settings up to modern tech level and only for characters under 25 points in value. Anything past that, and they completely ruin combat.

It's an optional system, don't use it. Ever.

>>95833236
t. used enemies with low defenses and is confused why the PCs walked all over them.
You shouldn't be able to throw around -7 on your attacks because you are having to put -8 in order to have a chance to hit in the first place.
If the enemy doesn't require deceptive strike to hit in the first place, it's fodder and thus fine to splat their head.

If you're not gonna use hit locations, don't bother playing gurps, just keep playing D&D 5e.

>>95833225
>This means monsters that will overwhelm you with numbers, be good enough to require you to do a deceptive strike of -6 to -8, or be so durable you'll want to try to go for the head or vitals at all times.
I'm not gonna waste twelve hours resolving a single combat. There's no reason I should have to spend 3/4ths of the time resolving mooks' turns just to pose a threat to PCs, and not even just because it's not fair to players to not be able to play for most of the time. Deceptive Strike should not be mandatory just to make any attack, let alone at extreme modifiers like that. It completely defeats the purpose of having a roll-under system. Same thing for hit locations. It's incredibly toxic for gameplay.

So it seems like my gut instinct is completely correct. Those templates are batshit insane and characters should not have numbers larger than 12 on their sheets, at least to start out with.

>>95833272
Everyone's invincible without ten extra rolls to check various wonky mechanics that were supposed to be special case options... is not a good way to design combat. And not just because it takes too much fucking time.

It's nonsense. Why would you do so many extra checks just to produce an outcome that is identical to simply using smaller numbers in the first place? Just use smaller numbers and make fewer checks so you can resolve a combat in less than a billion years. It's fucking stupid.

>>95833273
Just use Delvers to grow if you're intimidated by big numbers.
That said:
>I'm not gonna waste twelve hours
The average DFRPG 250pt combat takes like 30 minutes at most
You should really look at the monster stats before you assume you understand the system. You know DFRPG has a monster handbook right?

>>95833298
Because hitting someone in the legs so they fall prone, or their arm so they can't use their weapon is 10x more interesting than.
>I roll to hit
over and over.

>>95833298
>ten extra rolls to check
>extra checks
>identical outcome
You don't know how to play GURPS, do you? It's still just one roll. And hitting the head, face, leg, all leads to different outcomes.
If you just want "I hit enemy for 10 damage" "ok he's dead" then why would you pick gurps in the first place?

PS: Yes I posted 2 times in a row. Don't bother calling samefag

>>95833042
>>95833042
> /gurpsgen/ readers have any interest in playing in a "Pathfinder Adventure Path" styled Dungeon Fantasy -esque game?
The only Pathfinder AP I've played in was a full run of Jade Regent. I do like dungeon fantasy, though I have no particular love for Pathfinder itself.
> Is low tech [...] "wacky sci-fi fantasy" region?
Yeah you could definitely add more sci-fi elements in. If you wanna go that route you could, are we talkin wacky just like pulpy or like, silly funhouse stuff?
>What does concern me [...] in between.
GURPS bucks are something of an abstraction meant to work across any tech level/relative economy, and the pricing of things generally reflect whatever TL they were designed for: a TL 8 cellphone is comparatively expensive next to a TL 9 cellphone. As for magic items, there're actual rules outlined for the costs of enchanting based on the magic system, so enchantments invoking higher-tier spells or traits are going to cost exponentially more, as you're getting trait-level benefits without spending XP. Things cost a lot in DF because the expectation of a DF game is that your dungeons will have gold and treasure and ways to get money fast compared to other settings/styles-of-play. And also because of the expense of magic items (see above), and the understanding that players will sell items they don't want/need to get items they DO want/need.
>Worse, I get this awkward feeling like I'm not sure why numbers seem so large in Dungeon Fantasy.
Dungeon Fantasy characters are explicitly Heroic, they're already assumed to be as competent as, say, a 5th-level DnD/PF character. DF has rules for 125-point or 62-point templates if you wanna do something more low-power to start with.
> but how is it reasonable [...]
Most of the DF templates have 15 in their main combat skill, with fightier ones like the Barb and Holy Warrior having 18 and only the Knight and Swashbuckler having a single 20. Where're you getting 22 from?

>>95833340
Eh, while I am on your side I can kind of see where he is coming. In addition to attack and (hopefully) damage roll, there is active defence roll and often an HT roll for shock, not to mension subtracting amror, multiplying for damage type, checking if the wound is major, etc.

Granted, ut can be done relatively quickly if you are used to that shit, but not everyone is, Especially if combat is something which occurs only occasionally.

And, well, there is a spectrum between ultralight and all the sourcebooks all the time approach.

Everyone is comfortable with whatever he is comfortable with.

>>95833273
Wow, that's a lot of bullshit extrapolation from a random (and IMO incorrect) anon post. Maybe stop getting your panties in a bunch long enough to look at the actual rules, and you'll see that none of the insane, unfounded bitching you done holds water.

>>95833706
No, actually, I've been reading the actual "rules". And the first and most important rule... is that all of those rules are strictly optional systems.

And since those optional systems are tedious, dysfunctional and disruptive, I'm opting to not use them. No one's gonna come over to your house and slap the dicks out of your mouth. You're not gonna starve. Don't get YOUR panties in a bunch just because someone else doesn't like the shit you're doing at your table. You're a terrible game designer, but fortunately you can't affect me or my table in any way.

Bye.

>>95833730
>Bye
Oh fuck yeah, the dipshit left.

>>95833389
I like Pathfinder... for what it does... but it's not the only system that can do what it does. The main problem with Pathfinder that it *only* does what it does, and can't really do anything else.
Wacky like pulpy. Like Jules Verne and John Carter Of Mars. Not really comedy for the sake of comedy, just maybe funny if you think it's adorable how unscientific the origins of sci-fi were. But that's why I'd describe it more as sci-fantasy. Because it's ... fantastical, really, not science-based. Just futuristic and science-adjacent, rather than mud huts and swords.
It does seem like Dungeon Fantasy is intended to be used for one-shots in an extremely "we're dungeon crawling only, and everything outside the dungeon takes place outside of session" quasi-old-school style, maybe even just for gaming conventions. Not really like a world simulation / narrative-driven kind of story. Maybe the Fantasy book might be better inspiration in some ways, but that's more like a fluffy genre book rather than about mechanics. Which, this being GURPS, mostly means that I'm constructing most of the *game* myself...
I think starting lower-power is probably a better idea, but I'm mildly worried that it might cause a bit more pressure on "mages" than it does on, say, thieves or warriors of various types. It just seems really cheap to chop a guy with an axe, by comparison. Unless I let players heavily customize their magic mechanics, which, again, I'm not sure I'm really comfortable with since I knoooooow munchkins could abuse that.
The main point about how high those templates have their numbers is that there isn't really any room for them gain points without just absolutely fucking BREAKING the mathematics of the entire system. It's a huuuuuuge and crippling problem with roll-under frameworks, as I see it.

>>95833790
>Like Jules Verne and John Carter Of Mars.
Yeah that'd be fun. Doesn't sound like you'd want Dungeon Fantasy for it, as like you've noted, Dungeon Fantasy is exactly what it says on the tin: A ruleset designed for old school dungeon-crawl style gameplay where the world outside of the dungeon(s) was mostly a matter of downtime activity, or providing reasons for WHY your character is a dungeon delver. That's what the rules for DF are oriented around, so if you're thinking more of a narrative Burroughs-esque grand adventure, DF may not be perfect. Doesn't mean you can't liberally rip off its templates and subsystems as you see fit, of course.
>Maybe the Fantasy book [...]
For mechanics, a majority of what you'd want in Pulp Sci-Fantasy can be covered by Basic Set, Powers, and probably Thaumatology depending on what kind of magic you want (or Psis, if you wanna go that route). Fantasy ain't bad for inspiration in that regard, but it IS mostly inspiration and guidance on what mechanics from *other* books to use.
>I think starting lower-power is probably a better idea [...]
Depends on the kinda Magic you use. Default magic is magic-as-skills, so if you want mages to be more competitive with martials in a low-power game, just reduce the cost of Magery (or remove it as a requisite, for which there are rules in Magic/Thaumatology). That way you're not spending way more XP to do magick as opposed to swinging an axe.
>there isn't really any room for them gain points without just absolutely fucking BREAKING the mathematics of the entire system. It's a huuuuuuge and crippling problem with roll-under frameworks, as I see it.
15 in your combat skill is far from overwhelming, I can say confidently as someone who's run a lot of GURPS combats at this point. Even an on-paper skill of 18 will rarely actually be rolled at 18-. Remember, in combat, almost all modifiers (other than Aiming for ranged) are going to REDUCE effective SL. The base SL assumes ideal conditions.

>>95834030
I was not super impressed by anything in Thaumatology. It seemed like all the alternative magic systems presented in it were either completely nonsensical, hopelessly tedious, vague to the point of uselessness or intentionally obstructive. The default magic system seems to work just fine to me really, it's just that the printed spells feel so... unimpressive. A lot of fairly useless spells just existing to tax / gate access to something useful, and some colleges are like three spells while Body Control has literally everything that might meaningfully impede an enemy creature. While divination and enchantment don't even really have anything in them other than "the GM makes shit up lol". (Though maybe they have a point about those types of magic being better suited as plot effects for the GM to invoke than to be used by players)
I just feel like needing to track a trillion numbers that all add up to -12 just to keep the die in a range that allows any risk of failure is a clumsy mathematical design - for the same reason that needing to track a trillion modifiers to keep the die in a range where there's a meaningful chance of success is, like you'd see in Pathfinder.

I like the bell curve. I do. I prefer it over a 1d20. I just think it's missing the point of using 3d6 to swamp it with a huge static modifier. It'd be faster to just get rid of all the fussy rules-hunting for obscure modifiers and just have a few smaller modifiers because the target skill is smaller. That way you can make tactical choices based on clear and obvious information, instead of min-maxing like a munchkin to squeeze out every +1 you can find ... *all for the purpose of bypassing all the mechanics that would otherwise protect a target*. What's even the point of tracking defenses? If you are gonna stack on such huge modifiers... that means the range is gonna expand: you're gonna either overshoot or undershoot the target number by such a huge amount that you lose meaningful agency.

No hostility here:
GURPS combats run perfectly well even at 20+ skill.
I've run fights where some combatants had 25 skill. That said, DFRPG will hardly ever go beyond 20 skill, and that's for like a combat focused swashbuckler.
All that skill is quickly used to do cool stuff, no one just rolls it unmodified, because it's pointless to do so.

Imagine that higher skill levels are your "power reserve" that you can use to make cool shit happen in other systems.
Like how in Genesys you can spend 3 advantages to disarm someone, in GURPS you instead remove like 4 or 6 points out of your skill to attempt to disarm the enemy.

>>95834218
Just play one session with the standard rules of DFRPG, using the monsters in the book. You will quickly understand how it all works. Right now you are theorycrafting over problems that don't really exist practice.
You could even just playtest solo combat between a standard knight using the basic template and a few orcs, to see how it goes. It will be much more productive than trying to go on as you are right now.

Guys
Do Magical constructs like the hand created by the Grasping Hand spell (Fantastic Dungeon Grappling page 6) take normal damage? Like x2 for impaling etc.
I feel like a hand of stone would be Homogenous, plus not have vitals/brain/etc.

>>95834263
The problem is that there isn't really a way to see how it all works. The situational modifiers are printed all over the place. Every page there's some new "oh, if you do this in this situation then you can do this which allows you to give your opponent -1 if they don't then win the contested roll, but only on a Thursday if there's a full moon". It's not reasonable and it's not functional. I'm trying to run a game, not memorize three thousand gotchas for the benefit of munchkins to be able to minmax as opponents against me. It's better to not set up that expectation of minmaxing in the first place - and relieve the burden of gotcha hunting from both of us. The problem already exists. I don't fucking CARE if you think you're used to it. It does not matter to me that YOU are comfortable with it.

I'm not gonna deal with it. And at this point I'm not even gonna use GURPS at all, because the playerbase seems to be exactly like what everyone warned me you were like.

>>95834292
Ok
I was just going to tell you to look at the GM screen where all the modifiers are compiled but feel free to leave. Thanks for bumping our thread bro! If you want to sperg out some more, keep posting, gurpsgen loves friendly bumps!

>>95834317
I've not seen even a single modifier so far which was included on the GM screen... Just so you know. The GM screen shows you maneuvers and the speed/range table and that's about it.

>>95834292
People were rude to you because you seemed adamant in your initial first-glance assumptions that GURPS was bad, and no arguments from people that actually know the system could dissuade you. You are, at best, arguing in bad faith and just wanted confirmation of your biases. So yeah, no shit people called you stupid. Go eat some more lead paint.

>>95834330
Page 2 in the official GUPRS GM screen. There's better gm screens made by fans online too.
I can't post the GM screen properly due to no longer able to post pdfs on 4chan.

Hello gurpers, sorry to bother, do any of you know if there's an English translated version for the Resident Evil GURPS fan supplement?

>>95834292
Bro you are literally complaining about a problem, ignoring people who point out why it isn't an issue, refusing to actually have it demonstrated to you, and now throwing your hands up and saying "It's just unsolvable there's no fixing it", having done nothing but wind yourself up over a self-created issue. Things like taking a penalty to try and disarm someone, or feinting, or the like are not terribly hard to grok nor have they got anything to do with "minmaxing". The idea that doing anything other than "I roll to hit" is minmaxing is just setting yourself up on the wrong foot to begin with. Like >>95834249 says, not only is the "22- skill level" thing something that's rare to begin with, AND something you can just negate outright by saying "No raising skills above Stat+4", for instance, but even were it to come up it isn't the game-destroying flaw you think it will be.

>>95834218
I'm not a big fan of Default Magic myself, personally Magic-as-Powers is my preferred way to do it. Nice an' simple, easy to balance for, though it does lend itself to going "deep" on a handful of magical abilities rather than "wide" on a whole spellbook of options. But that's sorta how I prefer magic to be anyways.

>>95834279
Magical Constructs should definitely have the appropriate Injury Tolerance modifiers - no Brain, No Blood, No Vitals, Homogenous... effectively treating them as Objects, with or without native DR depending on if the spell gives them any.

>>95834373
sorry, I've only seen it in some spic language.

>>95834372
Sloppy unreadable mess.

>>95834406
Well, that's the official one. There's better ones online, with pretty graphics and a doll showing where each location is and so one. Just google "gurps gm shield" or "gurps hit locations" and so on.

>>95834388
You have not pointed out why it's not an issue. You've only agreed that all the complaints are actually accurate. Your only disagreement is that you think the problems are perfectly fine because you are used to working around them. And you keep doubling down on that by emphasizing how the problem is even worse and even more Byzantine and opaque than it seemed at first. You're fulfilling every stereotype about the bullshit GURPS can inflict on users.

So many absolutely fucking stupid optional systems are in there that it's posing a serious problem. The correct thing for you to do is to present examples of how to streamline and simplify things. Not double down just because you think you're so superior. Stroking your ego is why no one wants to use GURPS.

Do you want to play GURPS? You like GURPS? Then make an effort to include people.

It's not gonna bother anyone who doesn't use GURPS if GURPS dies because no one wants to play with you... but you're gonna hate it.

Think about that a bit before you respond. It's gonna take you longer than a few hours for that to really sink in.

>>95834417
>there's mods that fix the game so you can sometimes play it in between bug hunting and crashes
I actually want to use my computer to do things. I don't want to just spend all my time trying to make my computer do something. So I'm gonna stick with Windows, instead of installing Linux.

>>95834441
>>95834453
No one cares if you don't play gurps
The vast majority of the thread doesn't give money to steve jackson games either.
If you don't wanna play, don't play.
I can offer help if you want, but you don't seem to want help.

>>95834441
Literally out of the gate, as soon as people responded to you, you said "My gut instinct is correct, these templates are insane and characters should not have numbers larger than 12 on their sheets", not to mention "Do not use hit locations ever, they completely ruin combat". You've been saying wild tripe that isn't true and, when people respond with things like
>angling for hit locations, even with high SL, is risky against enemies that can defend
you just say "I'M NOT GONNA WASTE HOURS RESOLVING A COMBAT, THIS IS SO TOXIC". Either completely missing the point that defenses (Dodging, Parrying, Blocking) are the means by which your targets, well, defend themselves from getting hit as just a baseline part of combat, or maliciously reinterpreting a single defense roll as "spending hours resolving mook turns". You seem to have some sorta hateboner from the system given how vitriolic and assholish you're being, but I'd still encourage you to give it a try with a calmer head, it's quite fun!

>>95834453
In what fucking world is using a fanmade supplement because the official sheet isn’t aesthetically pleasing equivalent to either modding a broken game or installing an OS? Neither of which are hard anyway?

You are such a colossally dumb motherfucker. My one solace is that you are so annoying and moronic that I can safely assume you are a lonely, bitter individual and will die by yourself.

>>95833790
>low power magic
If you're using the default magic system, specialists can make it work by limiting their Magery. It's the least generic of the multiple magic systems but it works out of the box.
If you can tell us what kind of adventure you were thinking of running, we can point you toward more helpful books. If you want bean counting mudcore fantasy, horde-slaying classical heroes, james bond in mars, etc.
>>95834218
yep you can only appreciate and use Thaumatology after getting comfortable and tired of magic systems in GURPS. And that's a god awful sales pitch!
>>95834218
>modifiers
you'll see in play, but no one ever rolls at higher than 15. It's not about adding to your skill, but trading difficulty for effect. GURPS combat is about stopping blows because of knockdown (p.B420) and injury multipliers to skull and vitals (p.B399). Or trading -2 to your roll to give -1 to enemy defenses (Deceptive Attack on p.B369).
>>95834330
most of that is on the three combat chapters on Campaigns. Each chapter adds more detail in case you want to add more to the game.
>>95834373
>>95834397
>spic language
I see a Portuguese pdf. What are you looking for? If there's one in Spanish I can translate segments for you.
I think there's like two Brazilians that lurk this general so you could ask them too.
>>95834406
yep it's not for reference at all, more like educational and "hope you remember it" tier.
>>95834292
oh lmao I wasted my time then goodbye dude

>>95834373
Not that I've seen, but at only 20 pages, the majority of which seem to just cover RE lore, it shouldn't be too much effort to get through the crunch of it with google translate and some educated guesses. I assume the lore bits are more or less covered by browsing a RE wiki.

>>95834549
I was looking for the complete supplement in either english or spanish, if that's not available it's no big problem.

>>95834521
>>95834549
Given how quickly and unsubtly the guy shifted from "I'm interested in running a GURPS game!" to immediately "this shit is toxic and broken and there's no fixing it", I'm starting to think I should've brought some torches and oil rags.

>>95834549
>I see a Portuguese pdf.
oops, it's portuguese, you're right. I got the two languages confused.

>>95833272
I dunno man. One of my players has a weapon skill of 40 and I haven't had any issue with hit locations. Although I'm not running Dungeon Fantasy, so maybe that's the difference.

>>95834549
>>95834565
There's a porto in a game I'm running that I could probably bribe with free XP if he'll translate it for me, if you have a link to it.

>>95834603
Meant for >>95833236.

>>95834580
the DFRPG format is so much better

>>95834603
>40
wew lad
Is he the god of archery?

>>95834611
you can find it by looking close at the Op, it's unofficial.

>>95834612
Oh yeah don't worry about that guy, apparently he's never actually played GURPS so he's just talking out of his ass.
>>95834617
Gotcha. I wasn't sure if it was in the trove since it's fan content and all. But then, I've not really looked at homebrew other than FDG.

>>95834617
>god of archery
He's the god of fighting with a normal wooden stick. Campaign is vaguely Shadowrun-esque at TL9. Everyone else is some cyberpunk wizard or a chromed-up super-soldier. Meanwhile, he's a Chi-power martial artist in a white t-shirt and jeans who wanted to see how far he could take his skill with a simple stick. Most impressive feat so far was using a mix of Blind Fighting, Precognitive Parry, Zen Marksmanship, absurd levels of Shortsword skill, and some unique techniques and special parrying rules to parry a gauss rifle slug from his blindspot then reflect it directly back into the skull of the shooter. He has an NPC rival who is a fellow martial artist who throws rocks at similar levels of skill. It's a very silly game, but it's been fun.

>>95834751
Thats very cool. sometimes I think about doing super high power campaigns instead of my usual mudcore 62pts dungeon crawling games.

>Why yes, I do have "On The Edge". How could you tell?

man gurps guns getting delayed to november when the previous mention was that it was 95% done editing last month kinda sucks

>>95831980 (OP)
I'd say status plays a major role in a good chunk of the games I've been in. Not all, but even in more fighting centric campaigns its come up alongside rank quite often.

>>95836175
Wonder what the cause was

>>95833236
Good to know, I wasn't inclined to use hit locations but nice to see some validation too.

Do to-hit penalties on ranged attacks for the target kneeling and being in cover stack? I ran it as stacking but in hindsight how low the target is shouldn't make a difference if everything that is exposed would be the same size, whether they're kneeling or standing.

>>95837066
Honestly the gurps rules for cover are very confusing.
I would appreciate some clarification about them in general.

>half the thread is people taking an obvious bait
wew lads

>>95837066
The way I run them, and mind you this is my GM fiat rather than an official ruling, is that cover only applies to partially obscured hit locations and stacks with posture modifiers which are general.
So, for example, if you're shooting at somebody standing behind a ubiquitous waist high wall, you can't target the legs, and if they'd be hit there as a result of a random, the cover is hit instead. It's still a man standing, you're aiming at the torso, you just can't see the legs.
Meanwhile, if a hit location is only partially obscured, such as by leaning around a wall, I apply a -2 to hit, because you can hit it, but the size of your target has been reduced by the cover. For random hits, I usually roll an extra dice and depending on how much coverage I judge is given, a roll equal or higher than 4 or 5 means the cover is hit instead.

>>95837066
Are you making an untargeted attack, trying to just hit whatever you can on a SM+0 target? Cover and posture apply and stack.

Are you specifically targeting an exposed hit location? Cover doesn’t apply, let alone stack, and depending on the location posture might not apply either (if you’re sticking your arms out to shoot over cover, crouching doesn’t really help keep them safe).

Cover is way more useful against covering fire, opportunity fire, and panicky or untrained foes than it is against sharpshooters.

>>95837086
It doesn’t help that the cover rules change depending on what other rules are being used, and they will even change based on what kind of attack you’re making, and when to use which version of the rules isn’t clearly delineated. Honestly, they’re best treated as guidelines with the GM applying cover as they feel is most appropriate in the specific situation.

>>95834629
I don't think you've ever played GURPS because I agree with him. You can't just say that everyone you disagree with is trolling or talking out their ass. That's not how any of this works. You seem like a fucking fool and now anything you might say in defense of your stance is at an almost insurmountable disadvantage. And so far, you haven't even said anything other than "nuh uh!"

>>95837964
Thanks for the bumps

Ahem.

Kill Realm Management. Behead Realm Management. Roundhouse kick Realm Management into the concrete. Slam dunk Realm Management into the trashcan. Crucify filthy Realm Management. Defecate in Realm Management's food. Launch Realm Management into the sun. Stir fry Realm Management in a wok. Toss Realm Management into active volcanoes. Urinate into Realm Management's gas tank. Judo throw Realm Management into a wood chipper. Twist Realm Management's head off. Report Realm Management to the IRS. Karate chop Realm Management in half. Curb stomp pregnant Realm Management. Trap Realm Management in quicksand. Crush Realm Management in the trash compactor. Liquefy Realm Management in a vat of acid. Eat Realm Management. Dissect Realm Management. Exterminate Realm Management in the gas chamber. Stomp Realm Management's skull with steel toed boots. Cremate Realm Management in the oven. Lobotomize Realm Management. Mandatory abortions for Realm Management. Grind Realm Management fetuses in the garbage disposal. Drown Realm Management in fried chicken grease. Vaporize Realm Management with a ray gun. Kick Realm Management down the stairs. Feed Realm Management to alligators. Slice Realm Management with a katana.

>>95831980 (OP)
Retard here, how do I get the the boks? I receive an insecure connection.

What would be the check to cum without showing any expression? Willpower?
Asking for my erotic gurps RP campaign.

>>95838251
>insecure connection.
no idea not good with computers either
it just werks for me.

>>95838257
I'd say Will-based Acting, so Will-5 if untrained.

>>95838332
Makes sense, and it's perfect for my stoic spy to keep her expression while being defiled by horrible monsters.

>>95838251
Are you using a VPN or proxy? What privacy / security settings have you got in your browser's settings? Which country are you in?

>>95838498
Europoor, tried disabling various security settings both on my pc and my browser. Nothing works.

>>95837066
Having just re-read the rules, I'm actually quite confused about the intent. Crawling or prone characters (unless attacked at short range or from above) have a -2 penalty to attack their torsos 'as if half exposed' which presumably doesn't stack with cover, because that's also the penalty for attacking a location in partial cover with the same justification. The obvious question is whether the -2 listed on the table is that penalty, or in addition to that.
If it is meant to be added to the -2 in the table, then normal shots at a lying man's torso (from a distance, without a height advantage) are at -4, which seems fairly reasonable as the top of the torso has barely more area than the face or a foot. On the other hand, this gives -2 to shoot down at a lying man's torso, groin, or legs, which seems like it should be more or less as easy as shooting the same locations on a standing man.
The -2 to target a kneeling, crouching, or sitting person's torso seems excessive, as the body is basically just as large from the front. On the other hand, the penalty against the legs and groin make a lot more sense.
If posture and partially exposed aren't meant to be stacking penalties, that means it is sometimes easier to hit a lying man's torso than a crouching one's. Not sure whether that makes sense (crouching guy is generally squashed up from all angles while lying one basically fully visible from above) or not.
Cover seems to apply on a per-location basis (presumably using the torso as the 'default location' when not using hit location rules) unless you choose to roll randomly for hit location. To me, this seems to suggest that it should stack with posture penalties, since you can obviously have your leg folded up and partially concealed behind something, presenting even less target area. This is especially obvious when you think about vertical cover such as building corners, trees, lampposts, and door frames.
Overall I think the intention was to have them stack.

>>95837769
>Are you making an untargeted attack, trying to just hit whatever you can on a SM+0 target? Cover and posture apply and stack.
I'm pretty sure this is wrong. The cover penalty applies only if (a) shooting at a partially exposed hit location (b) shooting through cover at a completely concealed hit location (Basic Set, p. 408).
I'm not entirely clear whether target posture penalties apply to random hit locations. Basic p. 551 says they apply to attacks against the torso, groin, or legs.

>>95839343
You're correct, my mistake. I defaulted to using mods for attacking the torso as a general "untargeted attack" penalty because they're the same 90% of the time and IMO would make sense here too, but those aren't actually the rules in the book. I also think I was mixing in the rules for cover from Tactical Shooting (p. 28), which do give a generic penalty to attacks.

Not any of the anons above but I gave up on gurps cover rules and I use
>heavy cover: -4
>light cover: -2
And done.
I have no idea if some random book does something similar but there's so much confusing info I stopped looking.

>>95839608
The tricky part was never what number to use, it is when does it apply and what does it apply to. Your simplification is valid but doesn’t address any of the things people are posting mini-essays about.

>>95840130
>it is when does it apply and what does it apply to
I use battlemaps, so I just mark certain areas as "heavy cover" or "light cover" and have the numbers apply to everything.
Not very realistic but eh
I don't understand the regular rules so what can I do.

>>95837066
Yes, if the hit location is partially behind cover. Posture modifies rolls because of your smaller silhouette while cover reduces your overall exposure. On p.B548 you get all modifiers for ranged attacks. If they didn't stack there'd be no difference between standing and kneeling behind cover (other than DR).
They also stack when immediately looking at an area to find targets (Situational Awareness from Tactical Shooting p.11) so logically an attack would add them too.
>>95837086
on Basic Set you have to expose your head and half of your torso (and vitals) to look. If you're attacking then also add any arms you use your weapon with. Anything behind cover benefits from DR and is obscured (-10 to hit). Partially exposed locations are at -2 to hit.
If the attacker uses random locations and the location is partially in cover, roll 1d. On a 4-6 cover DR protects you.
>>95838332
hilarious
>>95839608
there's only Campaigns and Tactical Shooting

If I want my PC to become competent with a large number of redundant skills, then what's the best way to do it? Say, I want skill 20 with all melee weapons, and only melee weapons. There has to be a better way to do this than spending 40 points per skill for over a couple dozen redundant skills, right? Preferably, I want to represent this with high relative skill level, and not Talent or attribute levels, to represent that this all came from training. My GM also isn't allowing wildcard skills.

>>95841108
Well, you just ruled out all your best options. That leaves only the Job Training advantage from Power Ups 3: Talents and the Melee Combat trunk from Power Ups 10: Skill Trees. Neither of these options are ideal, because:
>Job Training requires your GM to approve a character template with the exact skills you want. Not only that, but you must also be beholden to an organization that offers your Job Training, and be constantly working a job where your skills are constantly being put to use, which leaves little time for adventuring outside of work. So your GM will have to work your job into the plot, or else you lose your job (and Job Training) or you can't play your character.
>Skill Trees aren't meant to be used alongside normal skills in the same campaign. It's either one or the other. Your GM will have to change the way he does skills for everyone, or run into other problems.

>>95841108
So you want to be good at a broad class of skills, but you can't use Wildcards and you don't want to use the other means the game gives you to do it? That's like saying you wanna be able to Fly but without using the Flight Advantage or any kind of jumping or magic.
Well, the good news is, if you get Broadsword, Polearm and Axe/Mace to effective SLs of 24 each, you can use any melee weapon at a default SL of 20, other than exotic ones like Whips and Tonfas.

>>95840491
>Anything behind cover benefits from DR and is obscured (-10 to hit).
No, it's -2 to hit unless the entire target is obscured, since you can tell roughly where someone's legs should be even if you can only see them from the waist up (Tactical Shooting expands this to a variable penalty depending on how much of the overall target is hidden).

>>95841108
>>95841168
The other option is to make very careful use of defaults. This will still be inefficient compared to just buying loads of DX, 'Melee Talent', Wildcards, etc. but better than putting full points into every single skill.

>>95841108
Generally, redundant skills default to each other, so your best bet is to invest heavily in a few weapon skills that has a bunch of other weapon skills default to them. The most efficient choices are Force Sword, Rapier, Polearm, Kusari, and Flail. Getting those five skills to Skill-24 or so ensures you have every melee weapon skill (except Tonfa) at 20+. Still pricey, but at least this way you're spending fewer points. Similarly, basically every medical skill defaults to Physician, and Machinist grants defaults in a bunch of specialties of Armoury and every flavor of Mechanic.

I will point out that Talent can also represent focused training and isn't just explicit inborn capabilities. Power-Ups: Talents goes into this, and it even has a special variant of Talent called Job Training. While that advantage has some really dumb prerequisites that any GM should ignore (like it needing to be based off a template) it does have the benefit of being something you learn and must maintain. And it's super cheap, costing only a single point for every two skills it benefits (which is why a lot of the harsh requirements should stay, it's just the template bit I find really dumb).

>>95841168
>>95841291
>>95841297
>>95841394
You've all given me a lot to ponder. I'll see if my GM will allow Job Training. Otherwise, I'll invest into a handful of skills and have everything default to those. Thanks!

>>95841291
>Well, the good news is, if you get Broadsword, Polearm and Axe/Mace to effective SLs of 24 each, you can use any melee weapon at a default SL of 20, other than exotic ones like Whips and Tonfas.
Axe/Mace, Brawling, Broadsword, Kusari, Shield, Shortsword (bought up from Broadsword default), Knife (or Smallsword; bought up from Shortsword default) and Spear between them give a default to absolutely every melee skill, I believe. If you drop Brawling and Shield as not really 'melee weapon' skills, then you only really need to invest about fifty points in each of four skills and then a few more raising some defaults. That's comparable to the cost of getting DX 20 and putting a few points into each key skill. Obviously the Dexterity build comes with a lot of other good stuff, but skill investment can pay off for you too, especially if you have IQ at high levels (allowing superior Ruses instead of normal Feints).

Any advantage that allows you to parry weapons with a kick like an anime character?

>>95842323
Martial Arts p. 123 has rules for parrying with feet.

>>95842428
> you can try to ward off a blow to your lower body
Yeah, and they're specifically limited to lower blows
I want to be able to parry with a kick as if it was a hand.
Like an unrealistic cinematic character.

>>95842489
What's stopping you?

>>95842552
The rules say that I can only parry blows aimed at the lower body
Which is why I wanted to know if there was an advantage or perk that allowed one to use kicks to parry everything

>>95842489
Well, the default rules already allow you to aim a kick at an enemy's face with no extra penalty. So you could just rule that RAW is dumb and kicking parries are perfectly fine.

Alternatively, try looking at this rule that got cut from Technical Grappling.
>The generic penalty for kicking (−2) assumes a torso-level kick—presumably the lower torso. Instead, you may kick anything at SM −4 and lower at no penalty, and each SM higher at an additional −1. Kicking to the head is thus −4, while stomping a grounded foe is not penalized!
https://gamingballistic.com/2013/07/15/falling-down-head-kicking-for-fun-and/
So:
>Get rid of the separate Kicking technique on Martial Arts p. 123.
>Kicks are just a natural outgrowth of Brawling/Karate.
>To parry with your foot, recalculate your parry score, using unmodified Brawling/Karate if the attack is to your lower body, Brawling/Karate − 2 if the attack is to your torso, or Brawling/Karate − 4 if the attack is to your head.

Semi-related question: is there any rule to "grapple" via trampling? Say, I drop my foot on a guy on the ground hard enough to do damage. I then leave my foot on top of him to keep him pinned down. Would I treat that as a grapple using the foot? Is it possible to do this in one attack?

>>95842624
this seems pretty reasonable, thanks. I'll be using it.

>>95842489
Removing a limitation when making a technique worsens the default penalty by -1. You could just us that and parry at an extra -1 (unless you actually invest to buy it off).

>>95842323
>broke
make up a technique using Martial Arts since Trip already exists
>woke
Extra Arm (Missing Legs, -20%) [8].
>>95842744
>is it possible
Yes. You can mount opponents if you grapple with your legs. This is a one-legged move. See Using your Legs on Martial Arts p.79 and The Sound of One Hand Grappling on Martial Arts p.116
Technical Grappling, which uses a more detailed grappling system rather than the standard -4 DX on grapples, rules out that bracing against a grappled opponent does not grant stability, except on proper side mounts. You'd be unstable, which in Technical Grappling makes it easier to sweep an opponent. I suppose you could rule a generic -2 to resist sweeps and take downs if you're using Basic Set.
>Is it possible to do this in one attack?
Only through an All-Out Attack (Double) maneuver or if you have Extra Attack. A Stamp kick (Martial Arts pp.80-81) intends to do damage, not restrain so it doesn't lead naturally to a grapple. Only bites are explicitly allowed to a grapple.
If you meant trampling like on p.B404 then I think it would also rule that damage does not mean restraining.

>>95842610
Which rules? Where? Is it in the Basic Set where Parry is described?

>>95842744
If using the default grappling rules, the closest the books get to discussing it is the entry for sitting on a foe on p.MA117, which require that they're already pinned via a normal grapple and you're just repositioning to sit on them. Beyond that, the only grapples with legs the rules cover are true grapples where you wrap them around the target, which leaves you prone. You could theoretically handle the sort of maneuver you're envisioning by just adding your weight to the foe's encumbrance--people wearing armor and carrying gear might be enough to push another person over Extra Heavy encumbrance--but that's a sloppy solution because if you don't bring them over max encumbrance then standing on them only slows them down rather than have any chance of keeping them in place.

Conversely, in FDG, planting a foot on someone would be a Bind (a "grapple" that's just applied force and the target can simply retreat to escape) that the target can't easily escape because he can't retreat when held prone against the floor. Shaking someone off or forcing you way up despite the added difficulty is already covered in the rules for escapes and a niche use of Grab and Go. If you really wanted to, you could probably also add your weight to their encumbrance to worsen their likelihood of escape.

I really don't want to sound like a broken record by singing FDG's praises every time it comes up, but the fact that it simply covers something completely ignored by prior grappling systems so easily and without any specialized rules is another example of why I love it. FDG rocks, go use it.

>>95834751
Sounds like the highest stakes baseball at-bat in the history of the Sixth World.

>>95842323
Buy your leg as a striker. Now you can not only parry weapons without fear of being injured, you get extra damage on your kicks and can't be injured when they get parried by weapons.

so, determined attack prevents you from parrying with the same limb you used to attack right?
But what if you used determined attack to use a kusari to make a weapon grapple using fantastic dungeon rules to give the enemy a 3cp grapple
When the enemy tries to break the grapple, can you still defend the counter grapple with dodge to avoid them getting free?

>>95845369
oooh, that works out pretty well. No penalties either! Can't believe I didn't think of that.

>>95847358
You're thinking of committed, determined all out prevents all defense.

>>95847788
Right, I always get the two confused. Remaking the question then:
Committed attack - melee prevents you from parrying with the same limb/weapon you used to attack, and gives a -2 to other defenses.
But what if you used Committed attack to use a kusari to make a weapon grapple using fantastic dungeon rules to give the enemy a 3cp grapple:
When the enemy tries to break the grapple, can you still defend the counter grapple with dodge-2 to avoid them getting free? I imagine you can't "parry" their attempt.

>>95848037
If I understand the rules correctly:
>Your grapple is an attack using your weapon
>Assuming the target failed to defend, they become grappled until they reduce the control points on them to 0
>Their attempt to reduce control points is an attack, against which you can defend normally
>You can't parry with the weapon you used to attack, due to using committed attack
>If you hadn't used committed attack, it seems like you actually could parry by the rules as written as it only specifies that a limb has to release its hold to parry.
>Dodge does seem to be a valid defence, at the usual penalty for committed attack.
This seems weird to me, because a weapon shouldn't be able to parry strikes while it is grappling someone. On the other hand, defending against someone trying to break free from a grapple shouldn't cause you to release them (even with a limb), and dodging seems like a very strange way to handle someone wriggling loose.

>>95848438
Yeah, I'm not sure how to interpret that but RAW I'm just going to allow the dodge and just pretend it's like when jackie chan wraps a rope around him to keep it taut during a fight.

>>95848037
According to Technical Grappling, yes you can dodge.
>In Technical Grappling, breaking free is no longer a Quick Contest. It is an attack, directed at the grapple rather than the opponent. Breaking free is one of the basic responses to being grappled [...] Your foe may “defend” using Parry or Dodge.
Given than FDG has a lot of TG in its DNA, I think it's fair to assume that rule applies to FDG as well.

How do I make ship combat fun for a group?

>>95849175
I too, would like to know.

>>95849175
Take a hint from the mass combat and spaceships combat rules, and make sure there is something happening for everyone. Ideally, more than just a generic 'roll against skill to see what bonus you give the commander'. The exact details will vary depending on exactly what kind of ships combat it is and what roles the group have. If they are the deckhands on a 17th century pirate ship, there will probably be plenty of direct involvement in combat, whether it is getting hit by grapeshot, shooting from the rigging, or going cutlass-to-cutlass in boarding actions. If they are officers on the bridge of a 19th century battleship, it's quite a different proposition. If they are rowers on an Ancient Greek trireme, then it's a different situation again (and one which is much harder to make engaging).

>>95849175
While it obviously depends on the specifics, most naval combat offers a few classic scenarios which can work well:
Being trapped below the waterline when the ship takes damage. A cramped space, full of wounded men and suddenly loose equipment / supplies / body parts, probably fairly dark, with cold water pouring in, and you need to either get out or plug the leak before you drown. Fire can basically do the same thing above the waterline.
Being on the receiving end of artillery. Seeing the crew smashed / blown apart. Getting deafened, knocked down, and/or injured, and then having to recover as quickly as possible to get back to your duty. Having to do the job of someone that just got killed even if you aren't trained for it.
Handling the psychological impact of the battle on NPCs. Have a vital officer (maybe even the captain) 'crack' under fire and need to be talked down / incapacitated / replaced.
In all of these, good use of the usual horror GM toolkit can help really set the scene. Keep the players uncertain about what is happening, show NPCs freaking out, use fright checks (sparingly), be descriptive with details like the coldness of the water, the smokiness of the air, the deafening noise, the lack of visibility, etc.
Also: research is always the answer to 'how do I make this scenario great'. Read historical accounts of naval battles (especially for the time period in question), along with novels, films, etc. set at sea. Familiarise yourself with the structure of the ship so that you can describe every compartment.

>>95849906
chat gpt, the question was about making SHIP COMBAT fun, not about making COMBAT ON SHIPS fun.
That means controlling the ship directly. Nothing you said is relevant.

>>95849933
In that case the phrase you were looking for was "ship-to-ship" combat, and if you're going to be a little shit about people misunderstanding you I hope your 'ship combat' sucks forever and causes your game group to dissolve.

>>95849933
All of those things can happen to officers while commanding their ship.
If you want rules for ships attacking ships, there's a bunch of different ways to do it, including the basic combat system, mass combat, action chase rules, and adapting the spaceships system. Making it fun is a matter of engaging the whole group, shifting the action around so that there are unexpected twists (like springing any of the individual situations I described above on them as they are trying to command the ship), and most of all actually doing a lot of reading (both knowing the rules back-to-front so you don't struggle in a complex scenario and knowing what you are talking about in terms of the actual mechanics of the ship). Given your general attitude, I'm guessing you aren't one for actually doing the hard work, instead hoping for others to spoon-feed you while failing to even explain yourself. That isn't going to cut it here (or really, in life generally). You have to understand what you are taking about, and once you do it will be easy to make it engaging.

>>95850130
>>95850366
that wasn't me btw, don't blame me for some fuck being smarmy

>>95849175
fun is a buzzword

Where do I find transportation costs in gurps funbucks?

>>95852563
High tech has prices for rail transport so it probably also has pricing for other things

>>95852563
There are a lot of variables at play, from tech level to presence of the supernatural to whether the transporting is done along established lines and established schedules or if it's a "direct flight." Hopping on a caravan already heading east along a major shipping road in TL2 is going to have a radically different cost than having a TL10^ courier ship with FTL capabilities fly the party directly from one planet to a distant solar system. You could figure a very very VERY rough estimate, though, by finding the transportation's basic monthly costs, multiplying by (capacity used)/(total capacity), and then dividing by time taken. Not the most accurate, but good enough and very easy to do.

For simplicity's sake we'll pull from Spaceships 2 and assume all monthly operation costs come out to roughly 0.5% of the purchase price per month. This will include pay for crew, upkeep, fuel, miscellaneous incidental costs, and saving for a rainy day where you suddenly need to spring for major repairs (or even total replacement). This only really works for big expensive vehicles, though, so let's use the higher of that value and the monthly pay of any operator e.g. the guy driving the wagon. Capacity used vs total capacity is only relevant when the party isn't just hiring the transport outright; even if they aren't actually using up 100% of the transporter's space, the fact that the transporter will be carrying only them to a specific location means the carrier is losing out on other potential cargo/passengers and the party will need to cover that loss.

Under these rough guidelines, chartering a TL4 Status -1 riverfolk to pilot his raft the river for a week will cost ($400) x 1 x (1/4), or $100. A TL10^ party on a budget that needs to get from Earth to Jupiter can get four seats on an Empress-class liners (Spaceships 2, p. 12) for a 2-day long voyage, paying (0.5% of $391M) x (4/576) x (2/30) or about $900 per ticket.

>>95831980 (OP)
What kind of campaigns/stories have you run in GURPS that are medieval or fantasy? Trying to get an idea what people do compared to the combat oriented structure of say DND, which seems different from gurps.

I'm preparing to run my first GURPS game soon, and I could use some advice.

Has anyone here ever run a WWI game? I'm struggling to find the sweet spot between "gritty" and "fun". Given that most of the body armor PCs can reasonably get is around DR 6, and an Enfield does 7d pi+, there's about a 10% chance on any enemy turn that a PC gets taken to negative HP immediately. Is there any way to make things like this somewhat survivable in a "realistic" game?

>>95853323
Thanks, that really helps me figure things out

If you want to know if a DM is crap, ask them if they use hit locations. DM's worth their salt never use them, because they bloat up combat with too many unneccessary options and rolls. Real DMs go hitlocationless.

>>95854293
I tried once, but personally, I find it hard to make campaigns where the PCs are soldiers following orders, so the game died quickly.
That said you need to figure out if you want the PCs to be big damn heroes or just a cog in the war machine.
If they're just a cog than yeah, one shot is all it should take.
For big damn heroes stuff, you can run the cinematic rules for a more pulp style of game, making use of the various ways to mitigate damage that the cinematic rules give.

>>95854391
ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

>>95854293
Even a 10% chance of hitting is rather high in most WW1 conflicts. Trench raiders engage at close range, but usually in the dark, against drowsy enemies, who are often barely trained conscripts, likely fucked up by the initial volley of grenades, and struggling to bring their bulk -5 (or even -6) rifles to bear in close quarters.
Lighting levels (based on HT:E&E, the latest published book which addresses them):
1 lux: fire, candlelight, illumination rounds overhead, WW1 flashlights. -3 to ranged attacks. This is about the best possible scenario.
0.2 lux: nearly full moon on a clear night. -4. This would be considered an extremely risky scenario for a trench raid.
0.0001: overcast moonless night. -9! This would be considered ideal for a trench raid.
With penalties ranging from -9 to -14 when making move-and-attacks with rifles and -4 to -9 even with ordinary attacks, skill 12 soldiers are quite often going to be hitting only on a 4 or less, which is about 2%. Even that is quite dangerous, so canny trench raiders will reduce the enemy's chance of even having time to get a shot off by either grenading them without getting into line of sight or rushing into close combat where boots, knives, and pistols can be used far more effectively than rifles.
Of course, not all of WW1 was trench warfare, and most trench warfare wasn't close-range combat! You've got air combat, naval combat, long-range shooting, and all kinds of skirmishes, scouting missions, manoeuvre warfare, and even tank battles. Many of these involve extremely low odds of getting shot, or vehicles which are much better able to take hits than unarmoured men.
Nor does WW1 have to mean constant combat. Espionage, interpersonal drama, psychological horror... plenty of stories in wartime which don't require fighting.
Cinematic rules will also make things a lot more survivable, as they usually allow large amounts of damage to be converted to trivial ones.

>>95854391
I'm glad you said DM, so I know you mean D&D, and not the game of the thread you are on right now.
Every attempt I've seen to implement hit location rules in D&D has fucking sucked. It's just not built for it.
Hit locations in GURPS rock, though.

>>95854836
enjoy your eyestabbing wankfest where the only kind of armor that matters is eyeglasses lol

>>95854293
High-Tech has Body Hit rules. Basically, penetrating damage from Impaling, Piercing, and Tight-Beam Burning is capped at your HP; any more damage just overpenetrates, which makes sense. This cap applies before wounding modifiers, so a shot to the torso is generally survivable, but a shot to the skull or vitals is still very likely to kill.
Conditional Injury from Pyramid #120 lets you make an HT roll to shrug off any injury less than your current injury. But a single big hit or hit to the wrong place is still just as deadly. This is realistic because the lethal effects of multiple injuries in real life isn't really cumulative. There have been people who have survived dozens of shots or stab wounds because they were lucky to not get hit in something important. It's recommended to use Anon's simplified Conditional Injury handout in the archive.
I've heard some make the argument that Survivable Guns from Pyramid #44 is more realistic that the normal damage values for guns in GURPS. This rules basically cuts the damage of all guns in half, but gives them an Armor Divisor of (2) so they can still penetrate the same amount of armor. I'm no expert, so I don't know how realistic this is. But even at half damage, a rifle round through the vitals still stands a solid chance of killing a man.
This is about as far as you can go to nerf guns without dipping straight into cinematic rules.

>>95854393
>>95854703
>>95854930

Thanks a bunch anons. Maybe I shouldn't be trying to have my cake and eat it too, but I wanna sell the gritty vibe and danger without it being a complete coin toss whether a character gets iced on the first session or not, ya know? This is all very useful, looks like I still have some reading to do.

I'm playing DFRPG
If I just add some blackpowder weapons like the flintlock or the blunderbuss or the musket am I going to need to read any specific rules on GURPS basic? Or can I just grab the stats and be fine?

>>95853835
Sandbox viking historical, 3rd crusade action/horror one-shot, Spelljammer, and a published buccaneer swashbuckler one-shot called The Green Madonna (though that one isn't medieval, I grant you)

>>95855080
Consider allowing Impulse Buys only for the purpose of staying alive (Power-Ups 5), possibly with a limited pool of points which never refreshes (in effect, requiring every character to put aside points at creation to spend on effects).
Games like WFRP manage to combine similar effects (fate points) with extremely gritty and brutal (if not necessarily realistic) rules. The dwindling pool of second chances can actually emphasise the inevitability of death while keeping them alive for the first few sessions.
One variant of this is to have a pool of points available for buying survival for the group rather than individual characters. This can be more 'fair' in the sense that the unluckiest player doesn't run out of points sooner than the others, but can create some tension between players (which could be a good thing) as they see any risk-taking from others as endangering their character's long-term prospects.
Also, traits like Luck and the Destiny variant which gives additional impulse points can be highly beneficial.
You can justify this even in a realistic game by specifying that these traits only apply in retrospect. You're telling a story about lucky characters, because the unlucky ones died without achieving much! That doesn't mean that luck in the sense of being able to have predictably better outcomes from random events is real. Someone who won the lottery was lucky, but you can't know in advance which person would get lucky, or expect them to have better luck in the future.

>>95855084
DF Twists has guidance for adding gunpowder to DF/DFRPG.

>>95855084
I'd check out the rules for explosive damage by weight too; if you add blackpowder weapons, you're players will inevitably try to blow shit up via just lighting a bunch of loose powder on fire. That's also in Basic, but it's at the end of Chapter 13 in Campaigns.

Low-Tech has a lot more types of firearms, but IMO that's too much detail for DFRPG, Basic's "generic" options work better. However, I'd either allow the TL5 Black Powder Grenade from basic or the TL3 Paper Bomb from Low-Tech as throwable options.

Lastly, Pyramid #3/36 has two whole articles on adding blackpowder to DF. The Demolisher presents it as secretive dwarven alchemy and focuses mostly on blowing stuff up, and The Musketeer presents it as mundane chemistry that is employed by elite sharpshooters. Both come with a shortlist of gear and character templates focused around their style of blackpowder usage, so I recommend at least looking at both. Do note that they aren't really compatible; dwarven "shattersand" is both more expensive and more powerful than the musketeer's normal blackpowder, so I'd only use one in a campaign.

>>95855084
I think the only rules you need to add are rapid fire (Basic Set, 373-374) for multiple-projectile loads (and multiple-barrel guns) and (optional, but recommended for early firearms) malfunctions (ibid. 407).

>>95855608
...and the skills for using them, of course, which may mean modifying templates to include them.

>>95855080
Tactical Shooting has a few key pieces of advice for staying alive without having to dip into cinematic rules.
>Require everyone have some level of Luck to avoid losing their PC to a single poor roll; sheer dumb luck really does play a large part in shootouts, and a lot of famous gunfighters had tales of times that the only reason they survived was pure luck.
>Use Random Hit Locations when possible; getting shot in the arm sucks, but its less lethal than the torso
>The rules for Torso Hits in High-Tech cap direct injury at 1xHP and use the rest only for tracking bleeding penalties; this means you won't kill PCs unless it's a head or vitals shot, and bleeding is easier to deal with if there's a competent medic around
>Keep opponent skill low; there's a tendency to give enemy high skills to make them seem fierce and competent threats, but realistically draft soldiers won't go above Guns-11 and seasoned professionals aren't likely to exceed Guns-13. Remember that even an untrained person with a firearm is a serious threat, don't go overboard with enemy competency.
>Most enemy shooting should be Suppression Fire or even Firing Blind rather than precise aimed shots

Lastly, this reaches into the realm of Cinematic, but one rule I absolutely LOVE from Action is that any failed death save, even a critical failure, only results in mortal wounds. That means your character is out of the action and will die soon if not helped, but it's a far cry from instant death and it really highlights the usefulness of medics. Cannot recommend it enough.

>>95855552
>>95855554
>>95855608
>>95855620
Thanks for the advice, if it's just that then it's easy enough to add.

>>95831980 (OP)
How do I add notes on GCS sheet?

>>95855962
Should be in the same dropdown menu as adding new skills/traits/equipment.

Is it just me or if you're grappled when using FDG rules you're pretty much cooked fr fr?
You already start at -2, unless the enemy is vastly inferior you're not catching up

fantastic dungeon grappling question: when I spend CP to increase damage on an Kiss the Wall, is each additional die added subject any -penalty to my target's thr?
i currently have 12/13 CP on a character with 1d thr. Kiss The Wall deals damage equal to the targets thr-2 and I can spend 3CP/die to add additional damage die. if i spend 9CP to add 3 dice, is that 4d-2 damage or 4d-6 damage?

>>95857019
Pretty much the same as when you get grappled in the basic rules. It's a powerful result because it is difficult and risky to achieve. You need to get into close combat, land a hit, and then either have decent ST and skill or be reasonably lucky with your damage roll (how lucky depends on your target). If you get parried, there is a decent chance that your opponent will get a free attack on you which bypasses your active defences.

>>95857736
The -2 is not a per-die modifier, so even if you apply those after adding the extra dice (it seems unclear whether that is the case), it wouldn't matter. The per-die modifier for a move 2 collision is +0.

One of my players made a halfling character for my Dungeon Fantasy RPG campaign. I have two questions:
1: SM -2 means that he gets +2 to most attack rolls right? Since most enemies are SM+0. The rules for height and SM modifiers are a bit confusing.
2: He named the character "Kunny". I feel like I shouldn't allow this but how do I explain to the other plays why

>>95857019
Getting the first hit in GURPS is always an advantage, be it a grapple or a strike; it sucks to be on the receiving end and it puts you at a disadvantage but it's not insurmountable. Assuming equal stats between two combatants, the one that gets grappled first has a mild uphill battle ahead of them, but a -2 to your own attacks is not the end of the world.

>>95858272
1. Yes that's correct. Combat Writ Large (Pyramid #3/77) goes into more detail when discussing SM and helps clear up a lot of misconceptions. Players of tiny characters may want to read through it to learn how to best use their size to their advantage.
2. You can tell him in private that he can't name a character after a slang term for underage pussy and it's really weird that he even tried it.

>>95858749
>1. Yes that's correct. Combat Writ Large (Pyramid #3/77)
I'll take a look at that and pass it on, thanks
>2
I hate talking to people like a normal person but I guess it has to be done

>>95852563
If you're looking for cost of transportation in turn-of-the-century Europe, I happen to have already compiled this data for a game I'm running.

>>95853835
>Ansirdar: Throne of Kings
Fantasy game inspired by Central Asian/Turkic culture and mythology, but with some idiosyncratic elements like the Divine Machinery which govern creation and control things like weather and the flow of magic. Campaign revolved around a band of Reliquists, basically tomb-robbers who hunt for artifacts and pieces of said Machinery to sell for profit. Did have a fair bit of combat, but exploration and diplomacy were major elements as they had to work with locals to get information and to bargain for the right to plunder these old sites.
>Salt and Ashes
Post-apocalyptic fantasy game set in the above setting, after a race of foreign demigod-like beings invaded, introduced advanced new technology and immediately began launching wars against each other until the world was broken, the magic stopped working right and civilization was left in ruins. The game was pretty sandboxy at first with a lot of survival elements, but it became much more political oriented as the party decided they wanted to found their own settlement to try and fix their small corner of the world. Even got to use the Mass Combat rules once or twice!

>>95854391
Either a troll or a retard. Hit locations are great and have made my combats massively more interesting than just stabbing at nebulous blobs.
>>95854889
-9 to hit lmao

>>95859046
>If you're looking for cost of transportation in turn-of-the-century Europe, I happen to have already compiled this data for a game I'm running.
I'll take it pls

>>95852563
Lord of the Manor

>>95859087
TRANSPORTATION COSTS
----- Hansom Cab -----
2 seater, 1 horse light cab. Travels throughout but not outside of London. The fastest option - can be found in other large British cities as well.
> One person: 1s/2d ($7) per mile
> Two persons: 1s/6d ($9) per mile

----- Clarence Carriage -----
4 seater, 2 horse medium carriage. Like the Hansom, reserved for urban use. Called the "growler" for the noise it makes on the cobble streets. Found in nearly every modern city. Not as fast as a hansom, but more spacious and with room for luggage.
> One or Two persons: 2s ($12) per mile
> Three or Four persons: 2s/6d ($18) per mile

----- Tramcar -----
Often electric, but many still use horse-drawn busses even in 1904. Can seat up to twenty with room for luggage, but these are slow and only travel on specific tram routes around and through central London.
> 5d ($3) per passenger

----- Dogcart -----
Three-seater, two-wheeled, one-horse cart. Will travel many miles out of the city and is quite fast, but is far from comfortable and will surely get dirt or mud on your trousers.
> 2s ($12) per person for up to 2 hours

----- Trains -----
The only way to get between cities if one wishes any sort of speed, and certainly far more comfort.
> First-Class rate: 8d ($4) per mile
> Second-Class rate: 2d ($1) per mile
> Third-Class rate: 1d ($0.5) per mile
A train from London to Leeds, 206 miles away, would thus cost 17s/2d ($103).

----- Ships -----
The following serve as references, since the potential distances and liners are too many to calculate.
> Ferry from England to France: 4s/2d ($25)
> Passage from London to New York, Steerage: 8s/2d ($50) per person
> Passage from London to New York, 1st Class: 18s/4d ($110) per person

>>95859158
Forgot to say, the $ are gurpsbucks, not US Dollars.

>>95859158
thanks!

>>95831980 (OP)
>>TQ: How often does Status play a role in your games?
>>95833178
>>95836177
I played in a few Shadowrun campaigns where status was a major factor. Did an elite alpha runner campaign and an above street level one. Also, did a Pendragon campaign where we were all nights. I think it's important for limiting macro options for the party, which keeps things in a relativistic level to what options the campaign can handle. For example the richer you are in Shadowrun the easier you can get around. And, the easier you can bypass otherwise minor obstacles that would require charisma checks, hacking, or other impressive sub runs in and of themselves. Old school situations like a D&D campaign or more realistic status is more of an NPC thing that keeps you from being guarded 24/7 or having your own castle to wage war from upon your enemies.

i'm having fun in my vrmmorpg isekai pbp

>>95860051
Nice.

>>95859388
All very interesting, but uh, this is the GURPS general, and we're talking about the Status mechanic in GURPS.

How can we make gurps simple enough that evwn black and Brown folx can play it?

>>95861739
Why would i want that

>>95860654
It's the same thing in practice. Gurps and Shadowrun have direct mechanical systems supporting aspects of it, more looser rule systems it's simply implicit.

>>95833236
>It's an optional system, don't use it. Ever.
Dungeon Fantasy refers to targeting hit locations several times. It's INTENDED to be used in DF.

>>95855084
Check Pyramid 3/36. It has rules for two gunpowder-using templates and some weapons.

I need a reality check.
Would a living skeleton who's clean and dressed have monstrous appearance? Mentally he's a regular person and you'd be right to think he's an undead.
I feel like it's different from seeing anorexic or starving people, but maybe I'm not imagining it correctly.

>>95863109
Definitely depends on the setting. But if I, personally, saw a walking talking set of human remains, I'd be pretty horrified regardless of how clean it is. If this is a regular thing and people are used to it, that's another story.

>>95863109
GURPS 4th is very consistent in assigning Monstrous appearance (Universal) to both skeletal and rotting undead. This seems a bit odd, since a clean skeleton is a lot less disgusting than a bloated half-decayed corpse, even if you ignore smell. Possibly they assume that 'skeletal' undead still have some gristly parts covering the bones, or that rotting zombies semi-human appearance somewhat compensates for their general unpleasantness. Or maybe small details like that get lost in the general repulsion that the walking dead have.
Zombies does give the option for truly repellent zombies to have Horrific appearance, which might be suitable for one which has visible internal organs, sloughing flesh, maggots crawling over it, and so on.
It's worth noting that a moderately fresh zombie could take Supernatural Features (No Body Heat, No Pulse, and Pallor) [-20] and Unattractive appearance [-4] and be only one point away from the value of universal Monstrous appearance, so it's hard to argue for an actual skeleton having less than [-25] in reaction penalties. On the other hand, I consider [-5] for no pulse to be rather generous, since it is much, much less easy to notice than no body heat. I frequently have trouble finding a pulse on perfectly healthy living people, despite training and experience in doing so. I don't think it should be worth more than a quirk. On the other other hand, why isn't there a supernatural feature for not breathing? Is it built into Doesn't Breathe?

>>95860051
nice
I hope it's closer to log horizon than Sword Art Online

>>95863109
I think the "horror" aspect then would come from the fact that he's an animated skeleton. A person isn't screaming at him because he looks monstrous, they're screaming because he's a walking skeleton and probably afraid of the implications surrounding that.

>>95863109
Fancy clothing can give reaction bonuses to offset Appearance penalties, but no matter how much you gussy up a fleshless corpse, it's still a fleshless corpse. An anorexic person is just a skinny person. An animate skeleton is something unnatural, something that goes against the order of creation and, typically, the will of God/the gods. It's both viscerally and societally abhorrent.

>>95863109
Yes, unless it's a setting where walking skeletons are a normal thing.

I couldn't find an answer for this anywhere, so I'm asking here: What's the modifier to parry a Missile Spell or ranged Innate Attack ability for the Parry Missile Weapons skill?

>>95866158
I've honestly never seen an official ruling on this, so I'd like to know as well.
Power Parries have no modifier, so I'm inclined to believe that Parry Missile Weapons should be the same when used against spells or abilities.
Any modifier to Parry should be a modifier to Innate Attack, possibly worth +/-5% per +/-1 to Parry.

>>95866158
>Missile spell
That sounds like a "small thrown weapon" to me. Note, however, that whether Missile spells can be parried in the first place is up to the GM's discretion (Magic p. 12).

>ranged Innate Attack
I would say it depends on the specific attack. A ranged Innate Attack could be anything from a big launched spike to a laser beam.

>>95866158
Depends entirely on the size/type of spell or Innate Attack, like others have said. For Innate Attacks, I personally would rule that only those of the Projectile type can be parried, and would default to +0 at 1d or 2d, +2 at 3d or 4d, +4 at 5d+, in keeping with the "size" of the relative projectile. Gaze, Breath and Beam attacks would realistically not be parryable, unless the GM is generous and lets you "parry" a beam attack by reflecting it with a metal weapon.

>>95866189
>>95866206
>>95866221
Alright, thanks for the answers. A player last session wanted to use Parry Missile Weapons against a fireball spell. Fireball spells use the Innate Attack skill, and Innate Attacks are technically classified as Missile Weapon Attacks in the Basic Set, so I ruled that it was possible. I didn't see any modifier to Parry, though, and that's what bothered me. I ruled no modifier in the end. I'm inclined to be generous, so I'll probably rule that Gaze, Breath, and Beam attacks are parry-able as well, unless they have a modifier like Area Attack.

>>95866221
>>95866305
>Gaze, Breath and Beam attacks would realistically not be parryable
Martial Arts p. 58 says lasers are same as bullets, and additionally require Precognition. Applying that to gazes, breaths, and beams would make sense.

>>95864373
okasann online

>>95866628
what the fuck dude
based

>>95866158
The only official ruling I know its Magic p.12
>Your target may block or dodge, but cannot parry (Parry Missile Weapons skill may work on some Missile spells, at the GM’s discretion).

This is on the GURPS FAQ in case it helps you
>What exactly is a fireball?
>According to Steve, an orange-sized bolt of magical force that hits like a bullet and which quickly vanishes in a blast of fire on impact, detonating any flammables it actually strikes.
And
>What kinds of wounds does a Fireball cause?
>It is largely an impact weapon; a baseball-sized bolt of pure magical force. This is why it's damage is stopped by the DR of the location hit. It is hot, and it does vanish in a gout of flame when it hits the target, but that's more of a special effect than its primary mode of doing damage.

>>95859176
But.
There is a huge asterisk there.
The gurpsbucks $ value is calibrated to real USD values circa the year 2000.
And so all values you see printed for stuff like medieval tech levels is not representative of how their currencies would be denominated.
I don't know enough to be able to comment about whether they represent historically accurate values / prices for those things in the era for that tech level. Like how much did a sword cost to manufacture back in the Iron Age?

>>95862542
1. DF uses absolutely insane numbers because it's designed to "feel" right for D&D players they were trying to poach. There's absolutely no fucking way you should have an IQ of 20. No. Fucking NO. An entity that intelligent would have no common basis on which to relate to anything of human intelligence. It's literally superhuman.
2. It shouldn't be used in DF whether it was intended or presented as possible or not. The books are not scripture. The authors can be dumb. And they were dumb to present the optional system as desirable. The only thing mitigating the stupidity is that GURPS didn't come up with hit locations.

>>95868345
I think you just like mudcore games. That in and of itself is fine, people can like what they want, but the flip side is that you shouldn’t just write off games with competent PCs as outright bad because they don’t conform to your desired tastes.

The point of high power games is that, yeah, you can just sort of dispatch normal enemies with ease. That’s what protagonists do in a lot of different media: they carve a bloody path through the bad guy’s horde of disposable minions before finally coming across a foe that they have to actually try on. In GURPS terms, that usually means an enemy that is also competent enough to warrant tactics beyond “go for a high value hit location.”

>>95868345
>It's literally superhuman.
Yes, and?
GURPS is a GENERIC UNIVERSAL RPG
That means it is perfectly fine to play high powers games.
Your tastes are not Universal or Generic, you should stop thinking your opinion equals good game design.

Is anyone here familiar with Ritual Path Magic?
Would all healing spells need to account for the weight of the target (in this case probably adding +3 energy for the weight of an average human), even if you're only affecting a small wound?

>>95868345
>There's absolutely no fucking way you should have an IQ of 20.
Oh so you're just a little bitch, got it

>>95866345
Thank makes sense. Only doubt I have about that is when designing player abilities. Whether an Innate Attack is a Beam, Breath, Bolt, etc., is stated in Powers to be determined by its "Special Effects", which typically don't affect point value. What would be a minor benefit to having an Innate Attack be a Bolt, or a minor drawback to Gaze/Breath/Beam attacks, that would be equivalent to the minor benefit of requiring Precognition to Parry? This way, Gaze/Breath/Beams aren't just automatically the "best option" in any situation where a player is allowed to choose.

>>95869958
being able to be parried is usually a "nuisance effect" when done on sorcery spells, so I imagine most of the time you'll need precognition, and not needing it would be a minor limitation.

>>95870018
That seems fair. Thanks.

>>95869823
Yes, healing a hole in a 101-300lb human requires affecting the entire target. Targeting the damaged tissue by itself might work if you add a Lesser Sense Body effect and maybe a Lesser Control Magic, but I think adding +3 energy for weight is more optimal. Sense + Control would be better in a fantasy game when healing giants and whatnot where you'd be paying way more for total target weight.

>>95869431
>it's fine to play high power game
Funny thing. One of the reasons I switched over to GURPS was precisely because it handled high power games better than almost every other system I tried, despite high power games not being the focus of GURPS.

>>95868345
>There's absolutely no fucking way you should have an IQ of 20.
People here are always saying they make characters with a weapon skill of 25+, meaning "better than god"

>>95868335
Not a problem in this specific case, as I also provided the accurate 1904 England prices in Pounds, Shillings and/or Pence. But yes, gurpsbux are an abstraction.

>>95871441
This is true. I generally like lower-power parties in my campaigns, but I DO love high-power enemies, and GURPS delivers.

How are you supposed to roleplay the trickster disadvantage?

>>95877489
Sounds pretty straightforward to me. When you meet someone powerful or dangerous, you should feel driven to fuck with them. Perhaps to prove you're better than them maybe your character is the sort of person who cannot admit an intellectual equal. Maybe you just have a disdain for anyone higher up the social ladder than you. Maybe you want to repeatedly prove that you're above consequences.

That's just what I'd think to do first.

>>95877523
>When you meet someone powerful or dangerous, you should feel driven to fuck with them
Ah I see.
I think the problem I have is that we're stuck underground on a Dungeon fantasy campaign, so the only dangerous or strong people we meet are monsters.
I got the disadvantage due to a racial template.

>>95877584
For monsters that you can't peaceably interact with, I think the best way to handle Trickster would be to try and bait dangerous enemies. If you're a competent swordsman, you *could* just mop the floor with them, but it'd be more fun to, say, lure them into some slippery terrain and watch them fall on their ass, or maneuver them so that a blow you easily dodge hits another in the group instead.

However that might be a bit hard to pull off consistently, so you might want to just ask the GM if you can invoke the Ham Clause from Action: for a whole encounter, take -1 to all rolls for every -5 the disadvantage costs, as it distracts you or otherwise causes you to fight suboptimally. Fluff-wise, you're toying with your enemy because you want to prove how much better you are then them, purposefully leaving yourself open and attacking more slowly or flashily just to show that you do not take your opponent seriously.

>>95878415
>Ham Clause from Action: for a whole encounter, take -1 to all rolls for every -5 the disadvantage costs, as it distracts you or otherwise causes you to fight suboptimally. Fluff-wise, you're toying with your enemy because you want to prove how much better you are then them, purposefully leaving yourself open and attacking more slowly or flashily just to show that you do not take your opponent seriously.
Oh, I like that. This way it doesn't feel like I'm ignoring my disadvantage even when I'm not feeling creative enough to actually try to trick enemies.

There's a lot of stuff in the basic book, so maybe I missed it. Is there an advantage that is 100% guaranteed lie detection?
I want to make a holy judge that has the supernatural ability to always detect lies.
I know there is a detect lie skill but you can fail that one.

>>95833042
If you end up doing it, let the general know. I'd like to play.

>>95880158
>Detect (Lies and Falsehoods, Common, 20 points; Reflexive, +40%; Cosmic, No Die Roll, +100%; Sense-Based, Reversed, -20%; Accessibility, Only in forms you can understand, -10%; PM Divine, -10%) [40]

Whenever you personally hear or read a falsehood or lie, you *always* know. This ability activates automatically, but it only detects the presence or absence of lies in a statement; learning what truth they're hiding is harder and requires an IQ roll. Additionally, the ability is only useful when encountering lies in a language (spoken or written) that you personally understand. Lastly, the speaker of a spoken lie or the creator of a written lie must know they aren't telling the truth; if a lie is told to someone gullible, and that person repeats it, their statement will not register as a lie!

>Level 2: Add Analyzing (+100%) [+20] to automatically know what the lie is meant to hide without requiring an IQ roll.

Does a vow of never sleeping indoors count when sleeping in a natural cave?

>>95880715
It'd depend on the character in question I feel. Are they some kind of druid that refuses to sleep in manmade structures? Cave is fine. Are they some kind of greasy-haired hippy that only wants to sleep under the stars? Cave is a no-go. Conversely, some kind of open-air pavilion would be fine for the hippie but no good for the druid.

>>95880750
It is for a druid character, so I will rule sleeping in a cave as "outdoors" for them. Thanks for the help.

>>95880750
>>95880794
Got another question for this character I'm helping somebody build. They're making a druid using Dungeon Fantasy's druid template, and one of the skills it grants is "One of Innate Attack (any)". What exactly does this represent for them as a druid? Shouldn't there also be an Innate Attack advantage to go along with the skill describing what it does? Doesn't seem like one is listed in the advantages of the druid template. I'm sure I'm getting something wrong here.

>>95880994
Spells are also aimed with the Innate Attack skill. Use (Projectile) to hit with most missile spells, or (Beam) for jet spells. They default to each other at -2 so there's no reason to invest in both; just go with the one you think will be the "main" type.

>>95881044
So you need this Innate Attack skill to cast missile spells?

>>95881053
Not to cast, but to throw and hit with. The Fireball spell puts a flaming ball of magic in your hand, but you still need to lob it in the right direction to get it to do anything. Without the Innate Attack skill, you're trying to hit with DX-4, which isn't great. However, Explosive Fireballs can get away with targeting an area for +4, making it a flat roll against DX if untrained to let the explosive damage do it's thing,

>>95881167
I understand now, thanks a bunch!

>>95880361
Thanks! This is exactly what I wanted.

>>95881167
nta
huh I thought throwing a projectile spell defaulted to DX without penalties

Is there anything in the rules for bracing for a cavalry charge with pikes or bayonets?

>>95882430
Yes. I think it's in low tech, in the part about pikes.

>>95882339
That's a fair house rule if you want to reduce the amount of clutter wizards have to deal with, but yeah RAW Innate Attack's default is at -4 and you have to roll against it to hit. It's not like a punching or grappling situation where you get to use flat DX in the absence of a skill.

>>95882430
Stop Thrust, p. B366, is the basic version. There's a more detailed version in Low-Tech, p. 55, which is just taking a Ready before the Stop Thrust, and you use the better of Stop Thrust damage and couched lance damage.

>>95882430
Low-Tech p.55 'Pike and Shot and Bayonet - Using the Pike'.

>>95882457
>>95882575
>>95882995

Cheers lads. Would you still force a fright check from, say, a Great War-era conscript getting charged by a mounted foe even if said conscript is bracing for it?

>>95883027
(Estonian)

>>95883027
Against a single one? No.
Against a full cavalry regiment charging? yes. The sound alone of more than 10 horses at full speed is like a storm, I can't imagine the noise of dozens coming at you.

>>95883027
Really depends on how often fright checks are used in the game. It's a scary situation, but many games don't bother with fright checks for gunfights, explosions, or being attacked with bladed weapons, and horses don't add all that much terror to those situations, especially once they are essentially obsolete. However, the authors generally do recommend frequent fright checks for many kinds of violence; even if a cavalry charge isn't explicitly listed as one of them, I would include it, since it combines loud noise, sharp objects, and huge animals moving pretty fast, all of which are bad enough alone.

>>95831980 (OP)
Are there any digital tools or the like that let you select what skills exist in your game/campaign (since not all skills are applicable for all timeperiods) and then create a document or something with those?

>>95884520
yeah
I think the official site (made back when geocities was relevant) has one.

Question: How does Jumping in combat work? The Basic Set says I need to take two Concentrate maneuvers to get my full jump distance. But Concentrate doesn't allow for any movement beyond a step, so how am I supposed to get a running start, let alone jump at all? Am I supposed to Concentrate for two turns, then take a Move maneuver on my third turn to jump? Is that allowed?

>>95886889
Flying Attack (Martial Arts p. 107) has details.

>>95886945
Okay, I read the rules for Acrobatic Movement and Flying Attacks. I didn't see any mention of Concentrate maneuvers. I'm still just as confused.

>>95886889
Concentrate and then Move. The rules never clarify this, but if you look at this from an in-universe perspective it makes sense: you're taking a second to clear your mind and focus on the jump itself, with no distractions from the chaotic melee surrounding you. It's just you, the ground, and the air. You lower into position. You breathe. Then you sprint. And then you jump.

Honestly I think homebrewing an All-Out Move achieves that goal with less confusion, but that might just be me.

I've been assuming this whole time that you can just jump as part of your move lol

>>95887466
You can normally. Unless you're doing a specific technique that states otherwise like Flying Kick/Thrust/etc., jumping is just a part of a Move action (or the moving component of other actions like AOA).

What resources do GURPS players have for help with writing adventures?

>>95884520
Why would you need to? If your players can't tell whether the game they're making a character for has computers or not, that might be an error in the game pitch or setting doc more than anything.

>>95887918
Are you having trouble with inspiration, world building, or mapping out whats going to happen and who the party will meet and help?

>>95887423
Okay, I think I'll just go with that, since that makes most sense.

if anyone here has tried any of the japanese gurps books, how easy would they be to use with the american published ones?

>>95887918
I just grab maps from the internet or published modules and put them where they make sense in my campaign. I've never written anything other than character desires and objectives, and I let things go from there. Players just do whatever they want anyway, so there's no point in writing anything.

>>95893131
>Players just do whatever they want anyway, so there's no point in writing anything.
you have shit players bro

Does Flexibility stack with Slippery for things like breaking free?

>>95893226
I just don't encourage railroading, there's a 'main plot' to follow if they choose to do so, most of the times it changes cause it makes sense to change it. If they want a story than can go read a book.

>>95893287
>I just don't encourage railroading
no, anon, if your players purposefully avoid any and all quest hooks to the point where (your words) "there's no point in writing anything", they're shit players.
At the end of the day, you are together to play a game, not for you to be their entertainment monkey.

>>95893254
It does, yes. They don't explicitly exclude each other, so they stack. That's how bonuses generally work in GURPS.

>>95887918
the GURPS: Campaign book has extensive tips on that subject, both for GMing adventures generally but for making adventures in GURPS's setting(s) specifically. Like the other guy said, we can give you better advice if we know what it is you're struggling with!

I'm thinking of adapting the "Damage to Armor" rules from Low-Tech Companion 2 for battlesuits and exoskeletons in my Ultra-Tech campaign. Any advice on what I should change?
Battlesuits and Exoskeletons should probably count as Unliving and have less HP compared to normal body armor. At HP/3 or less, I imagine that their ST and Basic Move bonuses would be halved (round down), and any levels of Super Jump would be reduced by 1. A failed HT roll at 0 HP or less would probably mean that all of its systems fail.
The only thing I'm really not sure about is how much the armor's DR should protect itself. At the DR values of high TLs, "DR at -1" really isn't any different from just DR, so I'm wondering if that should scale at all. I also wonder if the rules for Targeting Armor should change at all, or remain the same.

Should "Big Penis" be a quirk or a -5 Disadvantage, possibly with minuses to carousing

>>95893903
0 point feature (situational bonuses to erotic art and sex appeal countered by penalties to Disguising as a woman). Unless, of course, it's big enough to count as a Striker.

>>95893936
> big enough to count as a Striker.

>>95893858
Last time this topic came up, I suggested using (suit's DR)-10% rather than -1, and that still sounds like a fair approach to me.

For targeting armor, I'm not sure if it should be ported forward. Severing straps just doesn't make much sense in an age of sci-fi materials that probably lack external straps. Denting articulations does make sense, but since it needs to be crushing I don't know how viable it'll be (a ST 14 space knight, in a Combat Walker that gives Striking ST +20, wielding a gada with a rocket striker, is hitting for 7d+5 cr, or 30 damage on average, which isn't enough to regularly dent articulations on even the DR 40 Zero-G Worksuit let alone actual powered armor) and so it might just be simpler to ignore that as well.

Both severing and denting make sense for exoskeletons, though. Exposed cables and lack of armor over joints make targeting either directly more viable, even for people without their own powered armor; punks making a counter-exoskeleton style to fight back against police departments that can afford to give beat cops Light or even Ranger Exoskeletons but not Commando Battlesuits would be pretty cool.

I don't want my character to have dead broke but I also don't want to start with gear.
Can I do a reverse of "points for cash" and get "cash for points"?
Since each point gives you 10% of your starting cash, than starting without any cash should give you 10 points right?

>>95894564
>starting without any cash should give you 10 points right?
No. You can ask your GM to give you your starting wealth later.
Now be a man and shut the fuck up.

>>95894943
>No
Why not?

>>95894564
Only issue with that is that you're able to turn a *very* temporary issue into a permanent power boost.

Why is your character financially well off enough to be considered Average but you don't have a single thing to your name? Like, in-universe, how did your character end up like that?

>>95895238
>Why is your character financially well off enough to be considered Average but you don't have a single thing to your name
Mostly because the campaign doesn't deal with all the other parts of wealth.
Basically, wealth only matters in the campaign as far as your starting gear, everything else implied by the disadvantage/advantage is irrelevant. There's no status either.
Which is why I want "wealth but only relevant to the starting character creation" as an advantage/disadvantage.
You can already spend points for money without buying wealth so I just went the opposite way.

>>95895256
Okay that makes some more sense, but still, giving points for something that has zero lasting consequences is generally a bad idea and I don't think a GM will (or should) allow it.

Other options are buying something useless with starting funds that you're unwilling to sell--like a piece of fancy jewelry with so much sentimental value that you'd rather starve than sell it--or asking your GM to just spread your starting funds amongst the rest of the party. The latter is probably ideal, since it preserves overall utility within the group.

Also if the world is in such of rough state that societal concepts of status and wealth don't exist, I really think you should have at least a backpack and some water bottles. Basic survival tools, sleeping furs, stuff like that.

>>95895355
>a piece of fancy jewelry with so much sentimental value that you'd rather starve than sell it
BTW that might actually warrant you a point, if your take the Token quirk targeting that bauble.

Is 5e ever going to be released. It's been more years between 4e and now than there were between 1e, 2e and 3e

>>95895754
After 4e Vehicles and Mecha books are released.

>>95895238
>>95895256
This whole discussion reminds me of how much I hate GURPS wealth rules
I like Shadowrun better, where you can start with a bajillion nuyen and still eat noodles and live in a hovel you share with other misfits if you want

>>95895355
>giving points for something that has zero lasting consequences
I find it just as weird that when you spend points to get $ your point total is literally reduced forever. You will be 245 points while everyone else is 250 for example.
Honestly GURPS wealth stuff makes no sense.

>>95897009
Being able to sacrifice long-term growth for short-term gain is a really bad deal, but it exists for players desperate enough to take that devil’s bargain. Same for buying successes, or turning serious hits into mere flesh wounds. And conversely, those options would also be busted if they were reversed and a player could just get free points by turning successes into failures or letting opponents reroll minimum damage.

>>95897009
The worst part is that the default assumption is that you have a day job that isn't adventuring/being a soldier/knight
Which is inappropriate for 99% of all games I have ever played

>>95897728
This is a fair complaint, but it does appeal to me, personally. I find it more novel when the PCs actually have ties in society instead of being homeless unemployed vagrants. Still, GURPS ought to be more flexible.

>>95896505
I don’t hate the default rules, but I do like that one house rule variant that someone posted a while back (I’ll try and find a link for it later if you’d like) where Status matters way more. If I recall correctly, your starting funds are equal to something like 15x your monthly cost of living, which makes Status the basis of wealth and the Wealth trait itself simply raises or lowers that multiplier within that social class and reflects whether you’re doing well or poorly *for someone of your given status*. So you could have a King of the Hobos with Status -2 and Filthy Rich, or a doctor that went into charity work rather than for-profit healthcare and is Status 1 and Struggling.

Status being decoupled from Wealth (aside from a token boost to Status for being rich) always struck me as really weird. The homebrew just feels more intuitive.

>>95897728
I’m sorry to hear that Anon. Hopefully one day you will graduate from playing boring murderhobos.

>>95897824
It makes no sense for any real adventure
>oh let me just take this year long vacation so I can go explore the center of the earth! It's fine tho I'll still receive my salary!
>oh let me just disappear for years as I go explore the fairy realm. I'll be perfectly able to return to the exact same job!
The more I learn about GURPS wealth system the more I dislike it.
It's neither generic NOR universal.

>>95897847
That second one’s just an isekai protagonist, so yeah I’ll reiterate my hope that one day you’ll outgrow playing boring murderhobos.

>>95897885
>I'll just ignore the other example to make one last epic clapback
back to xitter with you

How would I run something like Undertale / Deltarune in GURPS

>>95897847
Ya. Wealth is best viewed as a social advantage that can be safely ignored for any game where you're not "part time adventurers" like CoC or salaried like Delta Green. Even cost of living is tied to status, and when you use character points to buy money it's 10% of the average starting wealth no matter what your personal wealth level is. I don't use it when it's not applicable and so far have had no negative consequences in my games from it.

>>95898130
Read GRUPS Social Engineering and maybe boardroom and curia for detailed social mechanics and inspiration

>>95897772
That's not my problem, my problem is that for the average PC AdventuringClass is their job. Players will think it lame as fuck if their action heroes or whatever don't get any loot or bonuses but just get paid a salary as if they had made a job roll. Then there's the shit cost of living mechanic. Oh no I'm living at a safehouse in Nairobi while hiding from enemy superspies, now everyone will think I'm poor! It's just both too abstract and too constraining - mostly only tedious and irrelevant - to play RAW.
>>95897824
But Shadowrun does murderhobos with property just fine, in GURPS if you chance upon too much property the GM will just steal it. GURPS is in part developed by libertarians so not sure if sly commentary on taxation or just retarded game design.

>>95898515
Strip it out. It doesn't negatively impact things and costof living, standard of living, debt, and extra starting money in character creation are all already separate of wealth.

>>95898515
>no I'm living at a safehouse in Nairobi while hiding from enemy superspies, now everyone will think I'm poor!

You're applying the status penalty for a secret safehouse?

>>95898573
I already don't use pretty much any of it because it's boring as fuck.
>>95898775
I just hate the job system and Cost of Living, OK? It's generic and universal not in the "detailed examples for a multitude of game worlds oooh" way but in a "no you can't buy anything fun and be sure to make your job rolls" way. At least 3e books gave you example jobs (boring as fuck there too). If the day job is so important, we can game it out. If we're just making job rolls I'd rather just not.

>>95899225
>I just hate the job system and Cost of Living, OK?
Yeah dude that much is obvious, but your reasoning is inconsistent and you're doing a shit job of arguing why your position is reasonable.

>>95900164
>wow I can't wait to get home from work and make some job rolls

>>95900164
bro you realize there's at least two posters complaining about wealth right? His reasoning is not the same as mine, which is why you think it's "inconsistent".
I bet there's actually 3
>guy who wants to start with no cash and is confused by wealth (me)
>guy who hates job rolls
>guy who just stripped wealth out of his games entirely

>>95895754
There's really no need for a 5e. Unlike say, WotC, who just release new editions to make more money without substantively changing things, SJG seem to recognize that they've basically gotten GURPS to the point where it's complete and anything that isn't explicitly covered in some book or rule has all the context necessary to be invented by the GM. What would the point of a 5e be if there aren't going to be meaningful rules changes?

>>95897818
I do like this idea. I'm running a game ( >>95833178
) that's about as ideal a scenario as possible for flexing the whole Wealth-versus-Status thing that default Wealth advantage is meant to emphasize, and even there, it mostly just mattered in determining how much money you had to spend at chargen.

How do I go about making a game that mixes Wuxia with Post-humanism?
In particular, how to deal with changing body parts like its clothing and making characters nigh immune to firearms but competitive in melee combat against each other?
Transhuman Space has something about variable character points but it's more like a seed for a game mechanics than an actual one.

>>95902397
TS's approach is simply "don't charge points for things, use points to track changes." If a part can be bought with cash, or stolen, or looted from an enemy, then it can be used by a PC. In a typical GURPS game, the GM might be tempted to not let a player get or install that cool cybernetic upgrade until they can afford to pay the points for the traits gained from it, but TS says to just go "okay cool your total point value is now X points higher." Points are then used by the GM to gauge rough balance between PCs; if Tom's character is rocking a new cyberarm and that puts him consistently above Susan's PC's point value for multiple sessions, the GM might engineer a windfall for Susan that grants her PC a new Contact or an increase in Rank or whatever (or maybe Tom's haphazard approach to ops finally bites him in the ass and he gets a bad Reputation).

As for firearms resistance without nullifying melee, everyone being installed in Unliving (or even Homogeneous for blob-of-nanobots style robots) shells means that they enjoy reduced injury from pi damage but still suffer full injury from cut and cr. Additionally, if it's a high-power Wuxia game, you can also just run rules according to Basic Set and *not* allow Deceptive Attack for ranged attacks. This means that gunmen really don't have good options for reducing the defenses of cyberwushu--having Guns-30 or whatever doesn't meant squat if your targets Dodge on 18s--but swordsmen can use their excess skill to reduces defenses and actually land blows. Also do something to let parrying affect firearms in a way that's less dumb than RAW Parry Missile Weapon. Either make PMW a technique rather than a separate skill, or allow Precognitive Parry (ideally without the dumb weapon damage rules), or just let parries affect guns without issue, just do something.

>>95902397
Transhuman Space combat bots have DR 20 or something, that'll stop most guns well enough to reach melee

>>95897712
>Being able to sacrifice long-term growth for short-term gain is a really bad deal
It really depends on how long you expect to play the character for, and whether you are actually sacrificing long-term gain or instead investing in a different way. You might be a few points behind in terms of traits, but if the money you gained was spent on armour which prevents permanent crippling injury or death, you've probably come out ahead. Ditto for weapons which allowed you to kill enemies before they hurt you, or devices which let you get the drop on them rather than the other way round.

Going to run a Hârn campaign. Should I use the basic set magic rules for this and have a ritual magic specialization for each convocation?
There's a sjgames articles that state:
Own Convocation: +2 to skill
Secondary Convocation: +1 to skill
Tertiary Convocation: -1 to skill
Diametric Convocation: -2 to skill
But this seems kinda lenient. Implies that there's no specializations and players only chose their convocation.
What is the best way to deal with convocation schools of magic in gurps?

>>95898130
The first step would be putting your tranny neck into the noose

>>95904763
Unfathomably based.

>>95902853
>Either make PMW a technique rather than a separate skill, or allow Precognitive Parry (ideally without the dumb weapon damage rules)
Seconding this. I personally use a mix of the "Broken Blade" and "Dodge This!" to replace the normal parrying rules in my games.
It's kind of hilarious how Douglas Cole's "Dodge This!" article, which was supposed to make firearms more realistically difficult to defend against, actually made it easier to parry bullets than in the normal rules.

>>95904210
I’m actually running a Hârn gurps thing too. Sort of insane that anyone else would have this idea- one of my players thought you were me.
I’m doing magic by making the magery bonus only apply to primary convocation. Secondary convocation gets no bonus per level of magery. Tertiary is at base -2 and gets no bonus.
I’m also giving mages a power reserve of FP and of ‘AE’, aural energy, which I treat as an energy reserve derived from will.

>>95905259
>Sort of insane that anyone else would have this idea
Just discovered the setting when I was searching for a more toned down fantasy. Absolutely blown away by the quality of the published material and how unknown/niche it is.

>>95898130
What happened to the anon who was making a DeltaGURPS module back when Chapter 1 released?

So I'm running a Halo game, 1500 points. Made custom templates for IIs, III,s, and IVs, with a couple playable covenant races. Going good, players are excited, talking concepts. One player wants to be a II, one wants to be a sangheili. Other two want to be IIIs. Cool, little disappointed noone wanted to be a IV, but whatever.

One of the IIIs wants to be gamma company. Perfectly fine, already accounted for that when making the templates. Sends me a super cringe backstory, that was 100% written by an AI. Then we start making sheets, and he send me this.
https://files.catbox.moe/03ttp9.pdf

>>95908475
>Bladebreaker
Oh, to be fifteen again.

Sorry if this is off topic Anon, but I'm new to GURPS, are the Training and Glory Kills advantages specific to your campaign? If not, where might I find them?

>>95908538
This man is 35

Here's the character creation document. I use a lot of custom stuff in my games.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1snl26hW-2rfrsXPLd7cL0L6--Rp83nRiZ9EmLlTNkAU/edit?usp=sharing

>>95908566
>35

Sheesh. I have a similar player in my Cyberpunk game. He made a gruff Solo who's always trying to be the coolest, most intimidating guy in the room, and whines when every enemy doesn't grovel before him in fear. When we started, he sent me a bunch of AI generated stories about various cool black ops his character took part in in his backstory.

I didn't read any of it. He was expecting me to be impressed by shit he didn't even write.

>>95908596
I read it, forwarded it to the other players, and we have all been laughing at his expense. The AI part is a recent development, and he's okay at the table. He's just kind of stupid a lot of the time. Entertainingly stupid. Its why we keep him around.

>>95908566
>This man is 35
His body, maybe.

Is it worth it to buy the physical basic set? I think it would be nicer to learn with a physical book than with a pdf.

>>95910165
I have both, and use the PDF considerably more because it can be digitally searched.

>>95910165
It gives SJG money, which I think is bad.

>>95908641
He's a bladebreaker because he's a blunt instrument.

Which one is better, GCS or GCA?

>>95914256
GCS
gga (intentionally lower case) is fuck ugly

>>95914256
GCA is paid and still look like a XP application so GCS all the way

>>95914360
Thank you.

Anyone ever run a one on one campaign? How did you do it? Was it any fun?

Help, how could I stat this in GURPS???

>>95915759
just look for cat in the bestiary books nigga

>>95915759
Attraction/Repulsion Field (GURPS Powers p. 82)

Have you ever played a character with more than two arms? How did it go?

>>95915876
had four arms, was sick. let me literally pick up dudes and toss em. or do a lil punch tornado move

>>95915759
Isnt this a natrual phenomena? At most it would be worth a 1 point quirk (minor charge imbalance)

Made Trump to wet my toes a bit on how character creation works on this system. Would he actually be a good character?

>>95915983
I thought character creation would be hard but it seems it's actually pretty straight forward, from what i can tell.

>>95915983
I always forget that Trump's that tall.

>>95915983
The Office of President of the United States would grant Status 7, and Political Rank 7. Leader of the free world, and whatnot. Otherwise not bad for an NPC. PCs are a lot more detailed even at lower point totals.

>>95915759
I'd rule it as coming for free with the fur perk.

>>95915983
Donald Trump's net worth is $5.4 billion ($3.3 billion GURPS dollars). He has Multimillionaire 8. Technically 7.5 but we round up.

>>95915983
>one point unspent

>>95915925
>Isnt this a natrual phenomena?
no

>>95916927
FUCK. There's no one I can share this joke with.

>>95915983
I would improve Overconfidence to 9 or less but add Stubbornness.
Due to the amount of fanaticism he's cultivated I would give him Charisma 2, and Reputation +2 (MAGA; All the Time) and Reputation -3 (American Liberals; All the Time). For reference, Hitler's Reputation was -4. Charisma would also improve his Public Speaking, which can refund some points. Another anon pointed out the Rank, which would also make his Status cheaper.
If you were going to play him as a PC, I would add the following additions.
Trump has a business background. He'd probably have at least one point in Administration, Current Affairs (Business), Diplomacy, Economics, and Finances. He'd probably also have Administrative Rank 5 of his own corporations.
If you want to be cinematic, Trump could qualify for Wrestling, Dancing, Enhanced Dodge, and some forms of Enthrallment. Another anon beat me to the Flesh Wounds joke.
>pic related for comparison
Nancy doesn't have Politics at level 21, but she can come up with enough resources to effectively supply that skill.

>>95916927
lmao