Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.41498239 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

How do spears with large blades capable of cutting work in GURPS?

Are you supposed to just use Naginata's stats for that?

>> No.41498361

>>41498239
Or halberd.

>> No.41498484

>>41498239

You can use nagina for it or you can use tip slash (martial arts p.113).

If you use tip slashing and you want your spear to be more specialized at cutting (let's say the blade is broader to have more of a cutting edge), you could reduce some of the thrust imp damage and in exchange increase it's cut damage (this is fair).

In Low-Tech they say the following about spears "Other spears have a crescent-shaped or
semi-circular head instead of a pointed tip; damage becomes cutting, but other stats are unchanged."

Do remember that since spears are slightly low TL they tend to be slightly worse than higher TL polearms. They way to get past this is to improve the quality of the spear. Since spears are so cheap and quality improvements are a multiplier, getting a high quality spear is fairly cheap.

>> No.41498532

Also, warrior tip of the day.

Statistically speaking, if you are rolling against 16 on your attack, you will pretty much always be better of using a deceptive attack -4 (their defense -2) to decrease their defense than to roll against the full 16.

>> No.41498610

>>41498532

It still sounds awfully hard to get through that defense.

>> No.41498660

>>41498610

It depends on your definition of hard. Generally speaking it's hard to get better than 50% odds of scoring a damaging hit, and the norm is sub 50% chance of scoring a damaging hit. Having only a 20% success rate isn't unusual the least.

But in GURPS, you need one or two good hits to cripple or kill anyway (assuming you aren't hitting good armor), so it makes sense that active defenses are very good.

Of course, killing in GURPS is always unpredictable. Someone can get lucky on their HT rolls and stay alive for what feels forever (protip: auto-fail failing NPC HT checks is how you make expendable mooks)

>> No.41498761

>>41498610

Oh right, I think there was a misunderstanding. When I said "rolling against 16" I meant Target Number 16 (so your weapon skill is 16). The defense of your opponent can be whatever, most likely a deceptive attack of -4 is statistically more likely to hit than to attack with your full skill.

>> No.41498770

>>41498610
>>41498660

And remember that a round in GURPS is one second. A D&D round is six seconds, and encompasses many actions that in GURPS get rolled out separately.

So in GURPS you can hit once every six rounds and that would match the hit rate in D&D. Actually be slightly better.

>> No.41498831

>>41498770

I don't think that's a very fair comparison though. Usually you only need two turns in GURPS to accomplish as much as one turn can do in dnd. Different scales of measurement makes it rather pointless to compare the two anyway.

>> No.41498848

>>41498770
So what, evaluate three times, feint, deceptive attack?

>> No.41498871

Why would you ever want to do cutting damage when you can do impaling?

>> No.41498907

>>41498871
I don't play GURPS but this thread is highly relevant to my interests. Would you mind explaining the difference in how GURPS handles impaling vs cutting?

>> No.41498921

>>41498907
If you do enough damage to pass the damage resistance (ie, armor and the like), impaling damage does twice the damage and cutting does 1,5 times the damage, to the torso. The modifiers are different for different body parts. An impaling hit to the vitals is x4, IIRC. But I'm pretty sure arms and legs tone down all modifiers to a max of x1.

>> No.41498944

>>41498907

Impaling has a damage multipler of x2, meaning that the damage that goes to the target after damage reduction is multiplied by two. In comparison, the cutting modifier is x1,5.

Furthermore, different types of damage interacts with the target's body differently. For instance impaling damage can reach the target's vitals while cutting is very effective against the throat.

Impaling though tends to be thrusts while cutting tends to be swings. Your swing and thrust damage is decide by your strenght, and swing damage tends to be higher than thrust, making it ideal to get through damage reduction.

Of course, a few weapons have the god of damage attacks, swing impaling. You do NOT want to get hit by swing impaling from a halberd of pickaxe.

>> No.41499000

>>41498944
Ohh, nice. I've been crazy about pickaxes as weapons since noticing they're one of the most devastating weapons in DF, and disappointed that in most RPGs, pickaxes are nothing special. May have to check out gherps.

>> No.41499039

>>41498944
The pointy side of a war hammer is literally the worst thing that can happen to you.

>> No.41499920

>>41498239

Halberd
Dueling halberd
Glaive
Naginata
Light/Heavy horse cutter

Pick one.

Worth noting is that Spear skill is for thrusting attacks exclusively, you can make a tip-slash, but tip slashes usually aren't very effective. You'll want to train polearm skill which emphasizes swings.

>> No.41501467

>>41499000
GURPS is a pretty cool guy if you want a high lethality sword fight or shoot out. There's a really good supplement (Low Tech) for low tech equipment and Martial Arts is super great for campaigns involving much melee combat.

My single favorite part of Martial Arts is that it contains extensive rules for biting and grappling using a mouth, which is pretty much essential if you're trying to make a hostile NPC that is basically a zen crocodile.

>> No.41501476

>>41498944

How does the value of various damage types change if the target has no vitals?

>> No.41501611

>>41501476

The "No Vitals" advantage means vitals aren't targetable, simple as that.

This means an easy to hit target locations that gave a x3 damage modifier is gone, which yes, might mean that a weapon that used impaling damage might be comparatively worse against that opponent compared to another weapon.

Aiming at target locations is a tactical choice and not something you are "dependent" on usually. It's something you do since you think it's a good idea.

There's tons of them, all with different benefits and disadvantages. Just because one of them disappear it's usually not the end of the world for your weapon.

>> No.41501633

>>41501476


"No vitals" on it's own is just one form of Injury Tolerance. All vital (and groin? IIRC) attacks are treated as torso hits.

>> No.41501650

>>41501633

No groin is it's separate advantage and is treated as a torso hit if its missing yeah

>> No.41501728

>>41501650

Nope, >>41501633 is correct, no vitals includes no groin, and no groin does not exist as a separate advantage.

>> No.41501790

>>41501728

My bad

>> No.41501994

>>41501790
It would be pretty funny for "no groin" to be it's own thing.

>> No.41502063

>>41501994

It's not hard to make:

No Vitals (5p)
- Limitation: Accessibility: No Groin Only -40% or -60% if your GM is feeling generous.
Total 2p or 3p.

>> No.41502093

>>41501994

Well, I guess it would have a perks value since there are some benefits to not having a groin.

>> No.41504655

I recently dug up the odds tables for attacking and defending and did some simulations using them, and it turns out that evaluate is surprisingly useful.

Most people underrate evaluate, but it is a ranged option for a melee fighter since you can evaluate someone within your move range. This creates an interesting situation where increase the danger of approaching you the longer you evaluate someone.

I had two scenarios that play out for the duration of two turns. In one, the attacker move and attacks and then attacks while the defender (who has higher speed) either evaluates and then attacks or wait:attack and attack.

Striking twice has better odds of scoring at least one hit on the opponent until you reach a bonus of +3. Then the evaluate strategy has the better odds (though not by much).

In the other scenario the attacker simply walks up to the defender and then attacks. Here, evaluate seemed to be plain better than wait:attack then attack with a respectable margin.

Oh, and move and attacking and then attacking is terrible compared to being the defender

This implies two things about combat:
>If you need to approach, you should do so carefully because the defender has an advantage on you. Ideally you should be able to step in and attack on him before he can step in and attack you.
>Once the defender starts to evaluate you, you are put at a timer where the opponent's odds of hurting you increases for every turn you dally.

Interesting no? Evaluate actually works both as a defensive mechanic (since offensive threat acts to defend you) and as a taunt mechanic.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action