It’s a small level-up. A GURPS-style level-up: a handful of character points, not a feats-and-hit-points dump. In short: My one-page melee weapon-building system for GURPS/DFRPG, reverse-engineered from the games’ weapon tables, improves its list of weapon mods. The list is now organized by type, not alphabetically, which I think makes quickly picking out the right mods much easier. It also gains color coding that instantly shows which mods are mutually incompatible. A bigger change is on the webpage. An Appendix now offers a small but growing armory of sample builds, notes on builds that don’t want to conform to published stats, a peek at potential new mods, and other commentary.…
-
-
Updated: GLAIVE Mini weapon builder system hits v2.0!
It’s out: v2.0 of GLAIVE Mini, my super-short, home-made system for building weapons in GURPS. (That’s “GLAIVE” as in “GURPS Light Arms Invention Expansion”.) GLAIVE Mini remains what it’s always been: A one-page system for generating GURPS damage and required ST for most any melee weapon. (There’s a bonus second page, too, with an option for semibalanced weapons falling between GURPS’ balanced and unbalanced weapons, along with system customization notes and a couple of odds and ends.) What’s new in GLAIVE Mini v2.0: Notes addressing new weapon stats and options in GURPS Low-Tech. (Spoiler: GLAIVE Mini works even better with Low-Tech’s revised stats!) A new mod: Poor Stabber, good for…
-
Minor update to GLAIVE Mini
Hear ye, hear ye. I’ve made a minor update to my GLAIVE Mini super-easy melee weapon design system for GURPS 4e, taking it from v1.0 to v1.1. The changes consist of minor clean-ups, plus a change to skill use for semibalanced weapons. The old rule specified the use of unbalanced weapon skills, or balanced skills at a -2 default. The new rule suggests either balanced or unbalanced skill as the natural skill (designer choice), with the other at a -2 default, depending on which is more natural for the weapon. Thus, a semibalanced weapon could be specified as using Axe/Mace or Broadsword skill normally, and the other at the -2…
-
GLAIVE Mini: Weapon Builder System for GURPS
Don’t settle for off-the-rack weapons from the local blacksmith. Build your own! T Bone’s Games Diner is proud to present GLAIVE Mini, your super simple, single page weapon builder system for GURPS – now updated to version 2.4! The old prototype The full (non-Mini) GLAIVE (GURPS Light Arms Invention Expansion) for GURPS 3e is a complete design system for low-tech melee and ranged weapons of any shape and size, generating unique thr and sw damage, readying time, reach, and more, based on the inputs you provide. As you’d expect, though, a universal system like that won’t fit into a short page or few. And while you can mostly use GLAIVE with GURPS…
-
GLAIVE: GURPS Light Arms Invention Expansion (GURPS 3e)
GLAIVE is an expansion for creating your own low-tech melee or ranged weapon for GURPS 3e, with detail like nothing ever built for the game (or any RPG??). Arm yourself with GLAIVE! Note: This is the original, detailed GLAIVE system designed for 3e. For a simpler, shorter, 4e-ready system, see GLAIVE Mini. Got some d20 gaming in mind instead? Head straight to this nifty reader-contributed conversion: GLAIVE Weapon Design System for the d20 System. History v1.0: Created 03/03/14 v1.4 update (2003/07/14): Dropped COSH from GLAIVE and gave it its own page at the Diner. v2.0 update (2004/04/12): Excised the Weapon Design System from GULLIVER and brought it to GLAIVE. Only…
-
GLAIVE weapon design system for the d20 System
d20 version and article by Tail Kinker ( http://tailkinker.batcave.net ) Based on GLAIVE, by Tbone. Call me a traitor. I don’t care. I’ve grown to really like the d20 system. Doesn’t mean I’ve given up on GURPS. Far from it; my GURPS library remains central to my gaming needs. Not just for running, but as a bridge to other systems – like d20. But the weapon system for Dungeons and Dragons is just plain dreadful. So here I go, trying to update it. This system will not faithfully reproduce the weapons from Dungeons and Dragons, but if used consistently, will give a good play-balance while fixing some of the more…
-
GLAIVE conversion notes
Simple first steps toward 4e compatibility Here are some comments made in the SJG GURPS forums, on updates required to bring the GLAIVE weapon creation system up to 4e speed: Treat any reference to “Load ST” as “BL/2”. The “unbalance modifier” should probably be changed, in light of the way 4e unbalanced weapons have become faster. Change from x1/x2/x3, to x1/x1.5/x2. Some missile weapons rules may need tweaking, if 4e weapon stats vary much from 3e. The bow rules state that they’d work better under “quad ST” — which 4e now provides. No, no plans yet to actually rewrite GLAIVE.
-
Miscellaneous question about Weapon Master damage: GLAIVE
What I did not see in the Weapon Designer rules which I would have like to have seen is some mention of dealing with weapon master bonuses. Currently 1/5 of Skill doesn’t really do anything once you get past size +3 or so. You mean adding Skill/5 to damage? No, it’s not mentioned in the Weapon Design System, but elsewhere in GULLIVER are notes that such absolute damage bonuses only scale properly when replaced with percentage bonuses. So if each Skill/5 added, say, 20% to damage, or if you used GULLIVER’s suggestion for Karate damage bonuses (each skill level over 10 adds 10% damage), that would get the effect I…
-
From the mail files: ESCARGO question
ESCARGO question. A message from a correspondent, re ESCARGO: ———- Instead of Ease:-1, Ease:+2, why not invert the sign and call it Difficulty. Excellent question! Very slow response! Sorry! So, a simple Ease +2 skill would become a Difficulty -2 skill. A difficult Ease -2 skill would become Difficulty +2. It’s much more understandable then! Well, I believe that your usage was the initial plan; “Difficulty” is, I agree, more natural as a label. But after some mental juggling, I thought the math was more intuitive with Ease. The reason: an easy skill will *raise* your final level, so “+2” is intuitive; “-2” is arguably counterintuitive. And since we’re talking…
