change your shell color:
change your font size: 60% 70% 80% 90%
Toys for GURPS and other Role Playing Games

Updating GLAIVE for 4e

Updating GLAIVE for 4e

EDIT 2008 07 12: Added second spreadsheet and notes.

I was recently contacted at the same time by two good souls asking about the possibilities of a GURPS 4e update for GLAIVE, my weapon design system.

Questions and concerns

I appreciate the inquiries, and gave it some eager thought. But my response to both included the following reservations:

 I like GLAIVE, and would like to see a 4e version... but I haven't been thinking much about it. Some reasons:

1) Among the various toys on my site, it really hasn't resulted in much feedback over the years. I have to take that as a sign of lukewarm interest among readers.

2) I think 4e makes the weapon design process more difficult, simply by increasing the number of weapons (esp. w/ MA) that would have to be "reverse engineered" into the system. (That is, there are more weapons now whose stats the system would have to at least roughly match.)

3) Some new 4e-related questions would have to be answered. Example: the "U" stat for some weapons - is that a factor of the skill used or of the weapon itself? If I'm not mistaken, that answer remains unclear.

4) Isn't Low-Tech already planning a weapon design system? If so, there's not much point to making another system, when most players will use the "official" one anyway.

5) I've been working on my own set of original game rules, which includes weapon design as well. And for a rules developer, making an original, fresh-start  system is more fun than trying to force a rules set to fit another game's legacy stats! : )

None of those concerns make an update impossible, but they're reasons why I haven't thought about it much.

On top of that, there's the big question of just what a GLAIVE for 4e would be. Should it be simply a way to arrive at fully RAW-compliant weapon stats through a design process? Or should it, like the 3e version, take some liberties with RAW (such as ditching the ST-based swing dam stat) so as to arguably arrive at better results?

Should there also be, like the 3e version, a super-simple quick-build system, and should there be, unlike the 3e version, a new system for "scaling" existing designs up and down?

Would the project call for a similar foray into armor design?

Plenty of questions await, and per the above, I don't even know that there's a great deal of interest out there. 

Spreadsheets

The old GLAIVE article includes a link to a spreadsheet by Ryan Williams. Both of my recent inquirers have updated that spreadsheet with some ideas, and have given me permission to include them here. They're great updates with good 4e tweaks and more.

Spreadsheet by Diomedes

Diomedes includes the following notes on his update:

1. Melee Weapons    
    a.    The only major change is that Effective Load ST is now based on BL; Recovery has been doubled to account for this.
    b.    I've added entries for skill penalties to the weapon for weight and, for two-handed use, length.
    c.    In addition to the Effective ST and Damage Add, there is a second Damage Add stat, giving the modifier to basic thrust damage, instead of Effective thrust damage.
    d.    Ready Penalties are no longer rounded, enabling use for all three sets of readiness rules in the GLAIVE document.

2.    Bows    ––    There are two sheets for bows.  The first is close to the original GLAIVE system, substituting one-half Basic Lift for Load ST in the original.  Since BL is proportional to the square of ST, this allows strong characters to use very strong bows.  The second sheet recalculates bow use from Striking ST, bringing the numbers back into line.
    a.    The Damage rules use the Advanced rules, computing range and velocity from Firing ST, and using that to find Damage ST, which, like for Melee Weapons, is backed up by a simple modifier to base ST.
    b.    The spreadsheet is designed to account for outsized arrows.  As per GLAIVE, apply the modifier to damage (not Damage ST).

3.    Thrown Weapons    ––  This page uses the thrown weapon rules from GULLIVER.  Note that range is heavily influenced by skill.

4.    Slings    ––    This page uses the GLAIVE suggestions on slings, using the bow rules for range, and otherwise treating them as swung weapons.
    a.    The spreadsheet does not incorporate the suggested +3 across-the-board damage bonus for slings, resulting in weapons that are underpowered compared to GURPS standard.
    b.    Damage, however, varies by projectile weight.
    c.    Range is affected more by skill than ST.
    
5.    Experimental Slings    ––    This is a thought experiment, an attempt to model slings with the throwing rules, declaring the sling to be an extension of the arm.
    a.    In this case both range and damage are affected by projectile mass, and skill still plays a role in range.
    b.    Sling weight is ignored for one handed use, and is only part of a staff sling for two-handed use.

Spreadsheet by Demi Benson

Notes on this spreadsheet include:

- The only user-entered fields are in yellow, everything else is generated data.
- "User's Combat ST" should be "Striking ST" in G4e terminology, and "User's Load ST" should be "Lifting ST".
- Arrow weights changed from 3rd edition to 4th edition, so depending on which you use, effective ranges change. I believe the "Damage Multiplier" value at E9 was based on 3rd ed weights, but the calculation  hasn't been updated since it wasn't in the 4th ed rules conversion notes.
- The B and E columns show the calculated values, and the integer amounts for game mechanical values that cannot be decimal. The C and F columns show the non-truncated values, for the sake of curiosity.
- Lines 22 and 23 show the GURPS ranges: column B shows calculated range in yards, column E shows range as a ST multiplier. e.g. "x9/x14".
- Lines 25 and 26 show the two alternate methods for determining effective Bow ST.
- There aren't any reality-checks on the user's data - you can make a tripod crossbow with ST 1000 and a 1 foot wide bow.

Next?

If there's interest out there in discussing the topic, great! Let's hear from you. 

If not, then at least visitors can benefit from the two spreadsheets, for use in play or further tinkering.

Thanks to all who ask about and have contributed to GLAIVE!

AttachmentSizeHitsLast download
GLAIVE-4eX 1_0_Diomedes.xls45.5 KB261 day 1 hour ago
GLAIVE_1_0_Benson.xls17 KB211 day 1 hour ago

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

Quote:

Should it be simply a way to arrive at fully RAW-compliant weapon stats through a design process? Or should it, like the 3e version, take some liberties with RAW (such as ditching the ST-based swing dam stat) so as to arguably arrive at better results?

It seems to me that the differing treatment of swing damage, relating it entirely to the weapon instead of having it partially intrinsic, is one of the core features on which GLAIVE is built.  As for RAW-compliant weapons, I'm skeptical of the utility of building a whole new system to duplicate the effects of the one it departs from in the first place.

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

I can see the point. Given GLAIVE's results of "thrust dam = thr+x, swing dam = thr+y", a GM who still hankered for a GURPS-style "sw+z" score could come up with a conversion rule for changing the above thr+y into a sw+z.

The main thing I question is the GLAIVE starting point of using ST x 4/5 for base damage. Yes, it works well, but I think is a bit off-putting. Might be best to use the thr column as is, and build in some other way to lower the final weapon damage adds.

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

Looking back at the spreadsheet, that shouldn't be too difficult. The fields for Damage Add already use Effective ST x2/3, so it would be trivial to change it to Striking ST x8/15. Two-handed use would just be Striking ST x2/3.

Bows might be a bit trickier, however (or at least a more complicated fix).

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

What I was thinking of was GLAIVE dropping such fractions altogether. That is, just start with listed RAW thr dam for the character's ST. Then work the system so a punch delivers an extra -1 dam, a shortsword thrust or kick a +0, etc.

I believe the reason that I didn't do so in the first place was that the ST mulipliers I used made it easier to deliver good results. But the multipliers are also a real break with RAW; it'd be nice if the system could be forced to work with a regular listed ST score and dam.  

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

It seems like GLAIVE already does this; this just consolidates the fractions into a single equation.

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

A single fraction for "effective ST", yes. What I'm thinking is that GMs likely don't want to figure punch dam from ST x  2/3, and weapon dam from ST x 4/5. The most comfortable solution for GMs would be simply taking thr dam from ST for all types of attack, same as RAW, and then adding damage mods from there.

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

Is that really a major inconvenience? It seems that it would only become an issue during character creation (for punch damage at least; weapon damage would have to be figured anew for each weapon, as is now the case).

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

Not a big inconvenience, no. As you point out, it's a one-time, character-creation calculation. (I'm a big proponent of the idea that "one time only" is rarely inconvenient.) You won't ever have to figure any base Dam during play; just write down Punch Dam (based on ST x 2/3), Base 1-h Wpn Dam (based on ST x 4/5), and Base 2-h Wpn Dam (based on ST), one time each. No need to look at the Strength Dam table again; from there, as you note, it's just a matter of adding a weapon's Dam Add to its Base Dam, same as we do now.

So, no real inconvenience; rather, it's the... hmm, there must be a good word for this... the "perception of non-standard rules for no good reason" factor. Whatever that should be called.

There is, of course, a good reason for "ST x 4/5": it's the intentional abolishing of negative Dam Adds (like "thr -2"), and instead decreeing that all Dam Adds will be 0 or higher, with ST-based Dam lessened to compensate. It works well enough, too, IMHO!

I only note that it looks a wee clunky. Nowhere else in the rules calls for looking at some Att multiplied by 2/3 or 4/5; some players won't be able to help but respond negatively at first glance: "Eww, I know it's just a small thing, but why this ugly, proprietary method?"

From that standpoint alone, it'd be nice to stick with plain, RAW "thr Dam". But then again, maybe it won't be possible to squeeze out good results doing so, in which case ST x 4/5 may be our friend after all.

(And I just thought of a solution that keeps the multiples, but better hides them. There's no reason the Dam table can't have three Dam columns [it already has two in RAW]. Just have a table listing ST on the left, and three Dam columns: Punch Dam, Base 1-h Wpn Dam, and Base 2-h Wpn Dam. The last column would simply mirror RAW's thr column, while the first two columns would incorporate the x2/3 and x4/5 ST multipliers, respectively – without the player even needing to know about such things. Hmm, off the top of my head, I like that!)

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

That could certainly work. It would also keep you from clawing back what you gain from having the multiples in the first place: a proportional difference in punching v. one-handed v. two-handed damage.

Re: Updating GLAIVE for 4e

And as long as one is creating a new ST Dam table like this, one could take one ambitious step further, and create a table in which Dam is proportional to ST (within the bounds of rounding). So that whether we're talking punch Dam or 2-hnd wpn Dam or whatever, ST 20 delivers 2x the Dam of ST 10, and so on.

Of course, that's getting even further way from simple "weapon creation system" and deeply into "yet another big revision of how ST works". : )

Powered by WebRing.