On May 10, 2007, at 7:05 PM, Pauli Hakala wrote:
The screen is visible, like a transparent blur surrounding the
vehicle,
and is constantly dumping out waste energy in the infra-red spectrum.
Deflection works by very localised gravitational lensing, which
turns away energy beams and fast-moving projectiles. The closer to
dead
center of the target profile a beam hits, the less it gets turned
away by the deflector screen..
So the TH penalty makes sense, as the valid target is essentially
smaller (you have to aim for the center; shots at outer edges get
deflected). Sounds good.
Re large weapons vs small foes:
Against bugs, use a flyswatter instead of trying to pin them
with a needle or trying to catch them with chopsticks. Their small
size benefits can be canceled out by simply using a larger weapon
attack surface.. This could work by simply capping the dodge
modifier of a very small creature at the size modifier of
the attacking weapon. As the rationale goes; the larger
the flyswatter, the easier it is to hit a fly.
Right, I've worked that effect into my house rules since way back, as
a simple "use the higher of target or weapon size" as the target's SM
for TH purposes.
But that's separate from your implementation, SM as a Dodge mod. I
suppose SM as a Dodge mod works too, though to get technical about
it, Dodge should become a factor of how far you have to move (based
on larger of SM or weapon size), vs how far you *can* move in a
"defense instant" (whatever length of time that represents). If the
base Dodge stat ((DX+HT)/4) can be said to represent that latter
item, then I guess Dodge = base Dodge - (larger of SM or weapon size)
should be reasonable - though if you're using tactical maps, it also
implies that a large creature, moving a distance that represents his
own size, should move the appropriate number of hexes when Dodging
(not just staying in-hex or moving one hex).
I haven't played SM as a Dodge mod in GURPS, but have used similar
concepts in some non-GURPS geekery, and have no problem with the
concept.
In fact, most player characters did not end up spending more than
2 or 4 points in the Evasion skill.
I can't help but think that in large-scale playtesting, it would
prove extremely popular (8 points for +1 Dodge), and get labeled "too
cheap".
But if the cost isn't proving a problem in *your* game, then of
course, the old adage applies: if it's not broke, don't fix it!
I see no problems with using the Evasion skill with FEND. It works
just like Battlesuit and Driving:Mecha skills do. (Default 'untrained'
dodging still uses the usual HT+DX base.)
Hmm, using FEND and full Evasion skill, to make a Dodge? Now that's
getting down to an incredibly cheap 4 points per +1 Dodge... I myself
wouldn't price Dodge bonuses that cheap – but as above, if it works
fine in your games, all is well!
T Bone
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit the once-again NEW T Bone's Games Diner!
http://www.gamesdiner.com
_______________________________________________
GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
