Jump to content

GURPS Conversions


Aycorn

Recommended Posts

Okay, as requested.

Basically, it's like this =

ST = STR

DX = DEX

IQ = INT

HT = CON

APP = APP or CHA

WILL = could be translated to POW. Or not.

That's really pretty much it. After that, just ignore GURPS ratings and plug in appropriate ones from BRP. If you understand BRP, that shouldn't be at all difficult.

Only potential tricky part is that GURPS allows well over 18. You'd just have to make a decision - over 18? Or stop at 18?

All in all, GURPS > BRP should be a piece of cake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racial maximums for some of the BRP games was highest roll plus the # of dice rolled I believe, which would take a 3d6 human to 21. That makes a 2d6+6 trait top out at 20 then.

For SIZ you could consult some of the different weight to SIZ charts that were part of different BRP games. Jason has written that there is a SIZ chart included in the new one. Weight in GURPS does not seem to come into play all that much but there is a table for rolling it. You may need to wing SIZ for the spear carriers and NPCs though.

In Superworld weight over SIZ 20 is found by wt(kilos)=2^(SIZ/8)*25. This does not work below SIZ 20, does anyone know what was used for that? Anyone want to take a stab at rearanging that formula so that you can input SIZ and it will spit out mass?

Joseph Paul

__________________

Joseph Paul

"Nothing partys like a rental" explains the enduring popularity of prostitution.:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racial maximums for some of the BRP games was highest roll plus the # of dice rolled I believe, which would take a 3d6 human to 21. That makes a 2d6+6 trait top out at 20 then.

For SIZ you could consult some of the different weight to SIZ charts that were part of different BRP games. Jason has written that there is a SIZ chart included in the new one. Weight in GURPS does not seem to come into play all that much but there is a table for rolling it. You may need to wing SIZ for the spear carriers and NPCs though.

In Superworld weight over SIZ 20 is found by wt(kilos)=2^(SIZ/8)*25. This does not work below SIZ 20, does anyone know what was used for that? Anyone want to take a stab at rearanging that formula so that you can input SIZ and it will spit out mass?

Joseph Paul

I am more for the SIZ table in RQ3. Its a detailed good table and I have already used it on the fly several times. I mean who can calculate in the middle of a game wt(kilos)=2^(SIZ/8)*25? (a very "gurpsy" formula IMO)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you determine SIZ?
Make a decision based on what you know. If there's information there that you can extrapolate from (you have some sense of how big/small the creature/person is), just choose what looks right and works for you. If there's no information - wing it!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess so. My question was in reference to the PCs, mostly. I am thinking about converting Dark Conspiracy, and I have been thinking about this myself. It's not as easy as Space 1889, for instance. I will probably scale the 1-10 stat scale to 1-6 and have them roll +2D6, just use 2D6+6 for SIZ. That is likely how I would do GURPS too (the SIZ, anyway). Critters, yes, guesstimation. GURPS is scaled differently, compared to BRP, I believe. A 12 ST is likely a lot stronger than a BRP STR 12, for instance. ST 18 in GURPS would likely be superhuman, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am more for the SIZ table in RQ3. Its a detailed good table and I have already used it on the fly several times. I mean who can calculate in the middle of a game wt(kilos)=2^(SIZ/8)*25? (a very "gurpsy" formula IMO)

But it comes in handy when you want to know what SIZ the Sun is. 768 SIZ by the way. Move that.:D

I included the info to show that they weren't pulling it out of their ...hats. And that formula does not work for things smaller than SIZ 20. I was wondering if anybody knew one that did?

Knowing the elegant formulas that underlay BRP is kind of neat for me. Which is why I find the firearm info so jarring. I have read here: http://www.hyperbear.com/cthulhu/cthulhu-writing-essay-baugh.html that BTRC did not include firearm info for CoC in Guns!Guns!Guns! because the numbers didn't jive well enough to do so.:(

Joseph Paul

__________________

Joseph Paul

"Nothing partys like a rental" explains the enduring popularity of prostitution.:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... A 12 ST is likely a lot stronger than a BRP STR 12, for instance. ST 18 in GURPS would likely be superhuman, right?

Actually ST 18 is a circus strongman. ST 20 is still human but Olympic class athlete. So the two systems are not that far apart in conception. How they play may be another thing all together. Compare what they can do in each system to test the conversion.

Joseph Paul

__________________

Joseph Paul

"Nothing partys like a rental" explains the enduring popularity of prostitution.:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it comes in handy when you want to know what SIZ the Sun is. 768 SIZ by the way. Move that.:D

No prob. I take two dozen elephants and consult the resistance table .... :)

I included the info to show that they weren't pulling it out of their ...hats. And that formula does not work for things smaller than SIZ 20. I was wondering if anybody knew one that did?

I dont, and I am not sure if I really want to know.

Which is why I find the firearm info so jarring. I have read here: http://www.hyperbear.com/cthulhu/cthulhu-writing-essay-baugh.html that BTRC did not include firearm info for CoC in Guns!Guns!Guns! because the numbers didn't jive well enough to do so.:(

Joseph Paul

Well I think that the problem of this BTRC. I read the blog you posted and I have to say that this Bruce Baugh seems to overestimate his own abilities as game designer. How can he dare to criticize BRP and CoC if his only questionable contributions to the hobby are some vampire (yuck) books, a D20 gamma world conversion (yuck) and Feng Shui (yuckyuck). Alone this unimpressive list of "rpg"-books he wrote is showing that the opinion about BRP of this guy should be not more interesting to a BRP player than that of Mary Poppins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, Joseph, not that interested in GURPS. It just looks harder to get the 18 in GURPS than in the SB5 form of BRP, and I was making a *casual* comment in relation to that. Not a big deal.

The question about over 18 in the conversion is what I had in mind, but if they scale that close maybe it wouldn't matter all that much. There is that damage chart in GURPS, though. How would that compare? Would the base damage with weapons not quickly outstrip the BRP damage bonus? That's more what I had in mind with the term 'superhuman'. Sorry if these are stupid questions, but I don't know GURPS well enough to have a good idea of how the factors would scale between games. Idol curiosity and making conversation, and trying to be sounding post for Aycorn...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say that this Bruce Baugh seems to overestimate his own abilities as game designer.

Bruce Baugh is a good designer... dunno what if anything he has against BRP and doubt I'd back him up on it, but he is (supposedly) writing the new version of Whispering Vault... that will come out, maybe, someday.

I've liked most of what I've seen him post on other forums...

EDIT: Now that I've read the linked article... it seems to me that Baugh is more of the RPG.net ilk who seem to like more cinematic games and lots of mechanics to support 'genre'. It should be left as a matter of taste but some people seem to have to make it an imperative. It also sounds like Baugh hasn't done a very close reading of COC or really explored the variety of supplements it has spawned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Well I think that the problem of this BTRC. I read the blog you posted and I have to say that this Bruce Baugh seems to overestimate his own abilities as game designer. How can he dare to criticize BRP and CoC if his only questionable contributions to the hobby are some vampire (yuck) books, a D20 gamma world conversion (yuck) and Feng Shui (yuckyuck). Alone this unimpressive list of "rpg"-books he wrote is showing that the opinion about BRP of this guy should be not more interesting to a BRP player than that of Mary Poppins.

I think you are right but it is the guy writing the rebuttal i.e. supporting CoC, that points out the combat system problems. Even as fans we should not be blind to things that don't work right in our games.

Joseph Paul

__________________

Joseph Paul

"Nothing partys like a rental" explains the enduring popularity of prostitution.:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are right but it is the guy writing the rebuttal i.e. supporting CoC, that points out the combat system problems. Even as fans we should not be blind to things that don't work right in our games.l

But is the gun-combat system really all that broken?

Most of the complaints against it seem to come from guys who want it to figure in all sorts of detailed ballistics minutia... arguments which seem to break down into lots of competing opinions over itty-bitty factors are the most important... and in the end it comes out sounding like the COC gun ratings are not so out of wack after all (and I don't necessarily disagree that certain martial arts attacks SHOULD potentially do more damage than some gun attacks).

Even if BTRC thought the ratings in COC were wrong I'm not sure I understand why they wouldn't do new ratings using the G3 rules... wouldn't that supposedly yield a new set of 'accurate' ratings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, here is an interesting bit. There have been studies done to determine the chance of one shot stops (not fatal, fight ending), and the ratio of average damage from the CoC damage ratings vs. average hit points is actually very close to the real life statistics. Average hit points in CoC, call it eleven, so a major wound is about six, a .45 does 1D10+2 or average seven-eight, with a 'stopping' percentage on a failed CON save of around seventy-ninety per cent...which is about the range of one shot stops for the .45 ACP in real life shooting incidents. It is a fair simulation of the results of real life gun combat, in other words. And it is playable, although it does not take everything into account your average gun hobbyist might like, like ballistics and recoil, etc. The hallmark of BRP, reasonable and playable without going into bean-counting mode. Oh, a rifle will most likely kill a human on a solid hit, and sure enough, a .308 does 2D6+4, or eleven average. So an average human is at zero hit points if he takes an average damage hit with a high powered rifle. That real life study shows 98-100% one shot stops with a high powered rifle cartridge, by the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a fair simulation of the results of real life gun combat, in other words. And it is playable, although it does not take everything into account your average gun hobbyist might like, like ballistics and recoil, etc. The hallmark of BRP, reasonable and playable without going into bean-counting mode.

So why all the grumbliness over COC's gun stats/rules from Mr. Baugh and others?

I've never had any big issues with them... accept, maybe, the automatic weapons rules... and that's just a maybe...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't say. But another tidbit that may be part of the puzzle...one of my players, a real life 'gun nut' and hell of a pistol shot, used to say one of the reasons he disliked CoC was that the firearms rules were TOO deadly. Take that as you may. Myself, I thought it enhanced the feeling of desparation and made the players somewhat hesitant to resort to their guns, so I was happy with the firearms rules for that reason alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I am not all that concerned with the minutia. What I am concerned with, and if that blog is correct it supports this, is that there is no rational system for the firearm damage figures in CoC. Which is a concern for me because I would like to see firearms expanded in scope in future supplements. I don't want to see future supplements making changes that contradict the core rules for something as ubiquitous as firearms. Or worse more than one supplement giving different views on it.

In 3G3 Greg Porter lays out a method for creating a conversion rule for any system. You need three data points, preferably of firearms that have large differences in their damage. You compare them to the same weapons in 3G3 or its big sister More 3G3. Do some math and you should start seeing some glimmering of a formula such as every doubling of 3G3 damage value equates to another D6 of damage in your system. Well it looks like CoC doesn't do that. Damage is all over the place and CoC may be one of those systems where the designers assigned values on a 'looks good' basis.

Badcat's example is a good one in that it shows that guns in CoC are lethal enough for humans. But there are things that don't make sense in CoC- the elephant rifle and the Barret .50 do the same avg damage. Other systems have the Barret at nearly double the damage of the elephant gun. In Superworld an M2 .50 cal machine gun does 5d6. In CoC a 75mm shell does 10d6. Is a 75 really only twice as powerful as a machine gun round?

If, as has been asserted, there is no rationale for the damages assigned to firearms in CoC then now would have been a good time to make a change, pick a base line, and bite the bullet on this.

Joseph Paul

__________________

Joseph Paul

"Nothing partys like a rental" explains the enduring popularity of prostitution.:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rationale is, simply, what effect does a firearm have? The original author of CoC did a very good job assigning those effects to various calibers, IMO.

In most cases. Nothing is perfect, but the numbers stack up better than some games in which guns are one of the primary elements. Check out Dark Conspiracy. I love the game, and the firearms rules are good overall, but the damages seem waaay off. As in, you could certainly kill an elephant with a Barrett .50, but not a hefty human with one shot.

Speaking of elephants, I agree that that does not make much sense. CoC elephants have 60-70 hit points as I remember, and an elephant gun with 3d6+4 or whatever just is unlikely to put one down, even with an impale. This is something I houseruled, but I don't consider it a deal breaker. I use an aiming rule of some sort. It still models OK, though, because elephant hunters usually went for brain shots and many successful elephant hunters used calibers such as the 7mm Mauser. Which no one in his right mind would use on an elephant, you'd think. Oh, and I find the same average damage from a .50 or an elephant cartridge like a modern .416 to .458 or an older elephant gun like a .600 or .700 to be about right...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racial maximums for some of the BRP games was highest roll plus the # of dice rolled I believe, which would take a 3d6 human to 21. That makes a 2d6+6 trait top out at 20 then.

RQ2 had 7 for every D6, with additions of 3 or more having + 1. So, 2D6+6 and 3D6 gave a max of 21, 3D6+3 gave a maximum of 25.

RQ3 made it even easier with max rollable + min rollable. So, 3D6 has a max of 21, 2D6+6 a max of 26, 3D6+3 a max of 27 and so on.

In Superworld weight over SIZ 20 is found by wt(kilos)=2^(SIZ/8)*25. This does not work below SIZ 20, does anyone know what was used for that? Anyone want to take a stab at rearanging that formula so that you can input SIZ and it will spit out mass?

I always thought that SIZ = weight in stones worked fairly well for most humans. Also, SIZ=dress size (UK) for females gives a rough idea of how big a woman is.

Simon Phipp - Caldmore Chameleon - Wallowing in my elitism since 1982. Many Systems, One Family. Just a fanboy. 

www.soltakss.com/index.html

Jonstown Compendium author. Find my contributions here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of elephants, I agree that that does not make much sense. CoC elephants have 60-70 hit points as I remember, and an elephant gun with 3d6+4 or whatever just is unlikely to put one down, even with an impale. This is something I houseruled, but I don't consider it a deal breaker. I use an aiming rule of some sort. It still models OK, though, because elephant hunters usually went for brain shots and many successful elephant hunters used calibers such as the 7mm Mauser. Which no one in his right mind would use on an elephant, you'd think. Oh, and I find the same average damage from a .50 or an elephant cartridge like a modern .416 to .458 or an older elephant gun like a .600 or .700 to be about right...

CoC has no hit locations, as I recall, so you have to kill an elephant on total hits.

RQ has hit locations and an elephant would have 1/3 of its hit points in its head, so a 60HP elephant has 20HP in the head. Add 6 point skin, or whatever, and an impale with 3D6+4 would do 3D6+26, which is more than enough to take an elephant down.

I play RQ and don't like CoC, so I am biased, but having hit locations makes combat more reasonable to me.

Simon Phipp - Caldmore Chameleon - Wallowing in my elitism since 1982. Many Systems, One Family. Just a fanboy. 

www.soltakss.com/index.html

Jonstown Compendium author. Find my contributions here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well CoC has hitlocations indeed, if you use those in the "Cthulhu Now" sourcebook. Everything is here, one have only to seek a little bit. :) We can hope that the new sourcebook will solve this problem.

Thanks to the Now rules the elephant problem is not anymore existent. According to the CoC 5ed. rules it has 45 HP. This is about 12 HP on its head. Average damage of an elephant gun is: 14,5, not counting special hits. Killing an elephant? No problem, but only if you use all CoC rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm.

1) I suspect that if the sole rationale was effect based then what we have is a system of firearm damage based on anecdote. Which is what seems to have actually happened. The designer wanted a certain amount of lethality (too much for pistols according to Badcat's friend and not enough for rifles and larger weapons according to others) What happens is that different rounds and different guns end up with the same damages when they shouldn't. The .458 and the .50 have very different muzzle energies mainly because the .50 is twice the size of the .458 and can pack significantly more powder into the case. Yet this is not modeled.

In CoC guns don't work well against the Mythos so after a certain point it doesn't matter if the modeling breaks down. We now have a different paradigm with BRP. Mostly this is a designer gripe- if the expectation is to use the new edition of BRP to create new games then it behooves us to have systems that model well for many aspects of firearm use and not just for the vision of one horror game that needed to downplay the effectiveness of guns.

2) Stopping power seems to be intimately linked with shot placement, the surest stop being one that disables the central nervous system. Delivered energy has quite a bit to do with it but there is still quite a bit of controversy over what -exactly- stops people but more E does seem to be better.

3) Basing gunstats on the reported effectiveness of shooting people gives us a very one dimensional view of the guns. It tells us nothing of the effectiveness against materiel for instance. And that boogers up any future development of firearms for other genres that await development. If we don't have a way to model energy/penetration and the effect on the target now what is a more milataristic (modeling WWI, special ops, future conflict with aliens/superdudes/mostali etc) game supposed to do? I would certainly like for there to be scalability built into this so that substantially the same system can be used to resolve pistols and tank shells.

4) The "elephant problem" is not that you can't drop an elephant it is that two guns with very different RW stats do the same damage. I find it unrealistic to have the .458 at ~5000 ft/lbs ME be the equal of the .50 at ~13000ft/lbs ME.

5) I really don't understand objections to making firearms, especialy long arms, model RW behavior better. If you like that they are deadly how does making the big ones deadlier hurt that?

6) I tried the 3G3 conversion last night and while not exhaustive I did find evidence of what the HyperBear blog spoke of. Compared to 3G3 stats CoC pistols are overpowered and the .50 cal is under powered while the elephant gun (taken as a .458 Mag) is overpowered. The numbers are all over the place and, in this small sample, defy finding a formula to base further expansion of firearms or any other projectile damage on.

Will this sort of stuff bother people? Well, yes it does bother many that have some idea of what guns do. The arguments about the effectiveness and modeling of firearms I have heard from the first time I played CoC.

If BRP is the new baseline then it should have looked to improving the modeling of things that have been known to be a problem.

Joseph Paul

__________________

Joseph Paul

"Nothing partys like a rental" explains the enduring popularity of prostitution.:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...