T20 Classes and Levels question
- Thread starter NDS
- Start date
Yes I'd say dropping the encounter levels is an absolute must.
Face it 2 3rd level marines in combat armor with gauss rifles are a whole lot more dangerous than 20 20th level academics with pointed sticks.
Because life blood hit points remain constant with regard to levels, and equipment has a gigantic effect on capabilities, using CR and EL based on character or animal "level" or "hit dice" will not work in T20
Face it 2 3rd level marines in combat armor with gauss rifles are a whole lot more dangerous than 20 20th level academics with pointed sticks.
Because life blood hit points remain constant with regard to levels, and equipment has a gigantic effect on capabilities, using CR and EL based on character or animal "level" or "hit dice" will not work in T20
GURPS Tip for GMs from phydaux, The Lonely GURPS Traveller GM:
The biggest, and in fact only, real "loophole" in GURPS is that GURPS uses a 3D6 game engine and skills are based on stats. So, if an unscrupulous player made a character with a Dex of 16, most of that character's physical skills, like Acrobatics and Stealth and Combat skills, will be around 16 too. Rolling 16 or less on 3D6 makes for a success rate greater that 95%. Any character who almost never fails anything he tries will only succeed in making the game fun for no one.
So how does a GURPS GM get around this? Simple! Don't allow player characters with stats greater than 14.
Problem solved.</font>[/QUOTE]Since SJ has repeatedly (and officially) linked his attribute mechanics to IQ scores (divide by 10), and the method for IQ scores is median= 100, StdDev = 10, this means that of the general populace, 50% should fall in the 9-11 range, 90% in the 8-12 range, ~99% within the 7-13 range, 99.9 within the 6-14 range, 14 seems a fairly reasonable limit. 14's should be about 0.45% of the population. 15's should be about 1/10th that. Etc. Now, SJ's later published gudielines expand the numbers a bit, but not terribly far.
For comparison, the breakpoints for D20 are much further apart. a D20 3 is roughly equivalent to a GURPS 6, and a D20 18 is roughly equivalent to a GURPS 14, at about 1 per 200. In essence, for converting D20 to GURPS, take the modifier, and add that to 10. For going the other way, double the distance from 10... not quite mathematically correct, but very close, in terms of the range.
Now, for T20, some fo the playtest characters pushed stats up to the 24 range... or about GURPS 17.
Also note: D20 assumes PC's are in fact different from "normals" in that PC's and Significant NPC's have their attributes intentionally and dramatically shoved at least +1 StdDev above the NPCs. (See discussion in 3E DMG.) (So that 3 is instead of being a 1/216 is now a 1/1296)
Tom Schoene
SOC-12
Actually, it's quite the contrary. GURPS specifically does not link the IQ attribute and Intelligence Quotient. Here's the relevant quote from GURPS Compendium I (p7).
"IQ: The IQ attribute in GURPS does not directly correspond to the character's score on a standardized intelligence test. Notably, it is not just his "IQ score" divided by 10. IQ is a composite attribute that represents a whole host of things: creativity, education, intuition, memory, perception, reason, sanity, willpower..."
VDS (in print as far as I know) is around a 4 or 5 on my complexity scale, ranking up there with Fire, Fusion and Steel or just below GURPS Vehicles. If your serious about doing VDS designs, you need to get the BTRC companion Guns,Guns,Guns (the weapon design system book) as well.
I have Slag and looked through it, but never played it. If you are interested in a more indepth review, let me know.
And yes, you would need to rebuild much of the kit for CORPS Traveller. You can get the More Guns book which will have all the guns you will ever need.
Actually, it's quite the contrary. GURPS specifically does not link the IQ attribute and Intelligence Quotient. Here's the relevant quote from GURPS Compendium I (p7).
"IQ: The IQ attribute in GURPS does not directly correspond to the character's score on a standardized intelligence test. Notably, it is not just his "IQ score" divided by 10. IQ is a composite attribute that represents a whole host of things: creativity, education, intuition, memory, perception, reason, sanity, willpower..."</font>[/QUOTE]This is a change from prior material; designers notes for MTM noted the IQ correlation; TFT also made the same correlation; GURPS is MTM+, and is a derivative of TFT (although not a direct lineal descendant). I note that it is a 3rd ed GURPS thing, not tieing it; likewise, SJ's prior game designs have also tied nicely to the same scales; that he's de-linked it doesn't refute the mathematics, which he hasn't changed significantly.
Note also, a GURPS 25 point normal will seldom have more that a 13 simply due to points available and the need to buy an employable set of skills.
a 14 should be about 1 in 200 normals.
a 16 should be heroic level charracters only; as a GM, I've never allowed a Human PC in GURPS with more than a 16 attribute; I've never allowed any to have more than one 16, either. I've seen many abuses of GURPS on that score. Many. And won't deal with them
Man! Go out of town for a few days and SEE what you miss?!?! People are ACTUALLY talking about GURPS!
aramis, what you're taking so many words to say is basicly this: a 3D6 game engine is based on a Bell curve, while a D20 game engine is linear. So, as skills aproach 18, in a linear system the PC still has a good chance of failure (never less that 1 in 20 or 5%) while in a bell curve system the PC DOESN'T have to fear failure (1 in 216 or <0.5 %).
SO, if a GURPS GM foolishly allowes players to have stats and skills greater than 14, he has handed control of the game to his players.
As long as the GM keeps this in mind and disallows degenerate characters, he's fine and the campaign is fine.
Tom Schoene
SOC-12
This is a change from prior material; designers notes for MTM noted the IQ correlation; TFT also made the same correlation; GURPS is MTM+, and is a derivative of TFT (although not a direct lineal descendant). I note that it is a 3rd ed GURPS thing, not tieing it;</font>[/QUOTE]It's not 3rd edition., AFAIK. I've been playing GURPS since the first or second printing of 1sdt edition and I don't recal ever seeing an explicit linkage.
I checked with Sean Punch, the GURPS line editor, on this (through the wonders of Pyramid). He says this linkage was never made in GURPS. Steve Jackson (indirectly) confirms that is was intended in MTM though it doen't actually appear in the text of the book. Yes, MTM is essentially the GURPS combat system, but the rest of the system did have some significant changes, including the treatment of IQ.
Differences in play styles. I've had a few games with stats like that, and had much fun in the process. Sure, the PCs can do routine stuff without challenge; you just don't give them routine stuff to worry about.
Hmmm.... (contemplates)
Well, I'll be the first to admit that I am solidly in that category. However, you can't so easily pidgeonhole users. I am also a pretty solid Traveller fan in general.
What would get ME interested in non-d20 Traveller products is what would get me interested in any new Traveller products -- a functional, easy to use product. IMNSHO, every edition since TNE (inclusive) has failed to meet that criteria. CT and MT, while they were great workhorses, are tired and outdated. (If you don't agree, then I wonder why you are in the market for a new system at all.) I seriously think that T20 has the potential to be the version of Traveller that returns it to its former glory. Whether or not it actually is is another matter. The proof is in the pudding.
And yes, I think d20, when handled correctly, is easy, well rounded, and user friendly.
* shrugs *
I doubt that Far Future Enterprises is dumping their system for d20. Which is why they license Traveller to QuikLink Interactive. If that was their objective, they would have done so themselves.
I believe that Far Future IS developing a new edition. But you are right, they need to update their rules system into something more appealing to the masses.
I doubt that Far Future Enterprises is dumping their system for d20. Which is why they license Traveller to QuikLink Interactive. If that was their objective, they would have done so themselves.
I believe that Far Future IS developing a new edition. But you are right, they need to update their rules system into something more appealing to the masses.
Man! Go out of town for a few days and SEE what you miss?!?! People are ACTUALLY talking about GURPS!
aramis, what you're taking so many words to say is basicly this: a 3D6 game engine is based on a Bell curve, while a D20 game engine is linear. So, as skills aproach 18, in a linear system the PC still has a good chance of failure (never less that 1 in 20 or 5%) while in a bell curve system the PC DOESN'T have to fear failure (1 in 216 or <0.5 %).
SO, if a GURPS GM foolishly allowes players to have stats and skills greater than 14, he has handed control of the game to his players.
As long as the GM keeps this in mind and disallows degenerate characters, he's fine and the campaign is fine.</font>[/QUOTE]Actually, pointing out the relative effectiveness; it's not so much the bell curve issue as the difference overall in both how often (yes a bell curve issue) as the nature of the attributes and how often they should appear.
And the MTM Designers notes were not in the MTM book, nor in pyramid (which did not exist yet); I forget where they were published (I have a photocopy of the article, but the page is cut off).
But in any case, the linkage is there in other ways. Both in how often one should occur, and in how effective they are.
THe problem with GURPS, for me, is not only the overlapping cost definitions, the massive over supplementation, but also the mindset of the typical local GURPS advocate: these weasely fellows have min-maxing down to a science, and argue that "If it wasn't intended to work that way, it wouldn't be in the rules!", while griping about any GM who "Dares to restrict my character choices".
My very favorite rule set is MT. CORPS is close second, WFRP is 3rd, and 3E D&D is fourth. T20 is right next, at 5th. GURPS has slid down well past 20th, having once been 1st. Each of my top 10 has their place in my gaming repetoire. MT for Gritty but Epic, bounce off the walls and shoot down starships with AMR's... CORPS for VERY realistic anything (unfortunately, as written, that includes advancement...) WFRP for Hack and Slash and/or beer and pretzels mid to high fantasy, 3E for rip-roaring high fantasy and swords and sorcery type stuff, T20 for Chandelier-Swinging Space Opera in the Traveller universe, especially for Tramp freighters. Prime Directive for CSSO in the Star Fleet. Hero for Supers and certain types of fantasy. Judge Dredd (GW version) for quick and abusive pick-up games.
GURPS Traveller appeals to a certain subset of GURPS players, and a Certain subset of Traveller Fans; they are not a 100% overlap. T20 will do likewise. Some Traveller fans will swear by it, some will use it to convert the D20 fans, some will play it simply because the D20 fans will do so; D20 players looking for a true Sci-Fi setting rather than Truly Sci Fi, will be able to find in in T20; what is fantastic in it is at least a reasonable extrapolation (or is there to avoid contradicting CT/MT/TNE/T4). It really maintains the feel below level 13 or so. I had the same problem in 3E D&D; about level 15, skills become too powerful.
It can, but it is a bit tedious. More so than MT's Striker-derived vehicle rules. I think it's more tedious that FFS, too.
I have not tried GURPS Vehicles to compare, so I can't comment. It is more complex that the vehicle rules in GURPS space (which seem to be about the level of High Guard.)
For me, it's not the mindset of the GURPS advocate (which I can say very little about, since I only seem to meet them on the internet, never in real life. I know ONE current GURPS fan personally -- the rest of the GURPS players I games with have pretty much sworn off it--and he is very much the obsessive smelly-geek stereotype.) It's more that I disagree with this mindset in the game itself. I don't think unrestricted character choice is a universally laudible attribute. I like characters to have skill sets that make sense together without bizarre sounding explanations, and appreciate systems that encourage this.
MT and D&D are pretty much my two favorites, though I like CORPS, Alternity, and Hero. GURPS has never really appealed to me as anything but a reference list when compiling skill and ability lists for my own games. I see the game in the same light as I see rolemaster: nice on paper, unplayable in reality.
T20, as I have not seen it yet, I will reserve judgement on until it arrives on my doorstep. Like any implementation of d20 (or BRP, or sundry other mutli-use systems) there are good implementations and bad implementations. GURPS I don't include in this, because GURPS never tries to really adapt itself to other settings... it just seems to assume if you have the right skills and advantages, you are golden. I can tell you that there is no GURPS game I will like with a fair degree of certainty.
GypsyComet
SOC-14 1K
Probably Space Gamer, then.
It can, but it is a bit tedious. More so than MT's Striker-derived vehicle rules. I think it's more tedious that FFS, too.
I have not tried GURPS Vehicles to compare, so I can't comment. It is more complex that the vehicle rules in GURPS space (which seem to be about the level of High Guard.)</font>[/QUOTE]GURPS Vehicles can do starship. Like everything else in GURPS, vehicles is a great huge dumping ground of every idea real and imagined for building vehicles. And if you think building vehicles in VDS is number-cruchy and tedious, Vehicles is another step beyond.
But yes, the starship construction system in G:Space and G:Traveller is supposed to be a simplifed system on the order of High Guard. And it mostly succeeds.
