3rd edition gurps vehicals

GURPS falling rules and vehicular combat rules don't come up in every game. The main advantage I find in GURPS 4e over the prior edition is the rules are more tightly edited at the core and the templates make it easier to get a character started.

As for books, it really depends what you like playing. Converting characters isn't too hard if you use the conversion guides. Powers has a long list of powers and how to build them.

The 4e book is a bit more genre-oriented, as the 3e book spent some time developing a setting that is in the Space Atlas series. I had five psis for an online convention in about an hour after I made a couple of design choices. By basically getting rid of PD on armor, but increasing the parry base instead, the game seems to reality check a bit better in that situation. Ulzgoroth Mad Scientist Banned. Wart said:. Danger Ain't no high, like Johnny eatin' cake high Validated User.

Truth be told, I bailed on GURPS before it did the edition change, so I'm horribly biased toward early to mid 3rd edition and anything I say will be from that perspective, but have you considered the few "Powered by GURPS," games that are out there for having a combo system with extra genre specific bits under the same cover?

There were half a dozen or so made off the top of my head so that might be a place to start. As far as supplements went that are fairly self-contained, I'd lean toward the ones that happened before the Compendiums came along as it seemed that once they were out, the genre books opted for using the, "well, these game related bits are in Compendium I or II, so you probably should be using those books as well, shouldn't you," sort of tone that I didn't like. Don't think I'll ever use it, but you never know.

Sleeper Red-eyed dust bunny Validated User. The standard magic system though is largely unchanged. Martial Arts styles have also undergone a significant change. Robots and Vehicles are also out of date. Robots and vehicles are now essentially just characters using the same rules as biological characters with a few altered traits. Weapon and armour stats have also been changed a fair bit Passive Defence and Snapshot have been removed, and rapid fire is significantly streamlined Overall, they changed what warranted change and left well enough alone where change wasn't needed.

Knarf Registered User Validated User. Karl Registered User. It was five years in the making, and this Third Edition is the product of another two years of development and player comment after the initial release. I hope you like it.

The first edition was published in The first edition book includes new combat rules, 24 superpowers, bionic superlimbs, gadgets and equipment, and rules for creating new powers, sample heroes and villains, and a briefly described campaign world. A pod-borne powered propulsion system or power plant does not require access space Vehicles p.

Empty space or frame volume does not count as a component. The rotation space of a turret or the retraction space of a retractable motive subassembly does count as a component. Cargo space does count as a component, even when not containing cargo, due to the reinforcement that cargo spaces typically have. The blurriness of the line between short-occupancy and long-occupancy vehicles Vehicles p. A long-occupancy vehicle is not required to include quarters, but the GM should inflict FP penalties for sleeping elsewhere than in a bed Dungeon Fantasy: Wilderness Adventures p.

Generally, a component requires double access space Vehicles p. This usually is true if the vehicle's maintenance interval id. The interior of a superstructure is accessible from the interiors of subassemblies that are attached to it, but the interior of a pod is not Vehicles p.

Therefore, in order to conduct maintenance on a pod, a mechanic must be able to access the exterior of the vehicle and open up the pod's armor negating the vehicle's streamlining and potentially allowing attacks to ignore DR. For this reason, a designer should think carefully before adding a pod to a long-occupancy vehicle, as conducting maintenance on such a pod while the vehicle is in round-the-clock operation may be difficult or impossible.

Aerial propellers Vehicles p. This is meant to prevent the absurd situation of being forced to place a high-TL, electric-motor-powered propeller within a pod that has zero volume. Before approximately TL8, the complexities of transmitting mechanical energy over long distances and of converting energy between mechanical and electrical forms generally make placing a propeller or a rotor in a set of MMRs outside the subassembly that contains the power plant or energy bank that powers it or placing an energy bank outside the subassembly that contains the power plant that powers it very difficult.

The GM should decide whether or not such a design is feasible. No more than one propeller shaft can be located in the same subassembly, unless that subassembly is a wing. Up to two propellers may be installed on each shaft—either one at the front and one at the rear tandem , or both on either the front or the rear contra-rotating , like a set of coaxial rotors. Splitting a shaft into two halves and assigning a separate power plant or energy bank to each half-shaft does not enable the designer to put two contra-rotating propellers on each half-shaft.

Based on the considerations described in the previous paragraph, the GM should decide whether or not running tandem propellers from a single power plant on a large subassembly i. Passenger seats Vehicles p. For example, the three cramped seats in the family car on Vehicles p. Similarly, passenger seats that are in the same subassembly also can be temporarily split to form a larger number of less-comfortable seats.

For example, a roomy seat can be reconfigured for use as two cramped seats. However, this doubles the FP cost of using those seats over what it would normally be Vehicles p. This rule also is applicable to crew stations. However, the number of crew stations cannot be increased by splitting, since no new control interfaces e. For example, if a roomy crew station is split in two, the result is a cramped crew station and a cramped passenger seat, not two cramped crew stations.

The GM should adjudicate whether or not safety equipment Vehicles pp. The GM also may find it necessary to rule that certain combinations of seats are not possible, given the internal layout of the vehicle. For example, the roomy crew station and the roomy seat in the above-referenced family car realistically are separated by the center console. For example: The family car on Vehicles p. This yields a value of This is a bit higher than the estimate of ST 59 given by the formula on Basic Set p.

This method assumes that the Payload advantage Basic Set p. If any exposed facing of a subassembly has no armor or has only open-frame armor , that subassembly cannot provide aerial or aquatic lift or thrust, as it cannot redirect air or water without a smooth surface.

See also the note on mandatory rotor armor located at Vehicles p. Retractable wheels and retractable skids Vehicles p. Instead, any motive subassembly can be made retractable, starting at TL6. The retraction space of a retractable motive subassembly is represented, not as a multiplier to body or wing volume, but as a component with volume equal to 1. This may require recursion. If the retractable subassembly retracts into multiple other subassemblies e.

For example, a large airplane might have two wheels supporting the body and one supporting each wing, if the body is about as heavy as both wings combined when the airplane is fully loaded. If the Different Structures for Subassemblies optional rule Vehicles p. For example, if a pod is attached to the body of a car, and the body which obviously supports the pod has medium strength, the pod cannot be heavy—it must be medium, light, extra-light, or super-light.

The support of this rule is not necessarily the same support described on Vehicles p. Rather, it is a common-sense, physics-based relationship that may vary based on the vehicle's mode of operation. For example, in a flying car consisting of two wings and a set of wheels attached to the body: When the car is on the ground, the set of wheels supports the body and the body supports the wings.

When the car is in the air, however, the wings support the body and the body supports the set of wheels—both relationships are reversed.

Therefore, the entire vehicle must have a uniform frame strength. However, if a pod were attached to the body, it would be supported by the body regardless of the vehicle's current mode of operation.

In a vehicle whose chain of support is ambiguous—for example, an airplane with one wheel supporting the body and one wheel supporting each wing, where whether the body supports the wings or vice-versa while the plane is on the ground is uncertain—either direction can be chosen. This rule is meant to disallow designs in which large amounts of weight are borne indirectly by an impossibly flimsy subassembly— e.

In addition to the vehicle-wide HT score, calculate a separate Health score for each subassembly except the body , using the formula on Vehicles p. If any subassembly's HT is lower than the HT calculated for the entire vehicle, use the subassembly's HT score for the entire vehicle. Alternatively: Whenever the vehicle succeeds on a roll vs. HT, the roll counts as a failure for any subassembly for which vehicle HT minus subassembly HT is less than the roll's margin of success.

This may have catastrophic consequences for the vehicle! This rule is meant to disallow designs in which large amounts of weight are borne directly by an impossibly flimsy subassembly— e. Instead, for each subassembly that normally is included in structural surface area, choose the larger of that subassembly's area and volume, and include that number as part of the effective surface area for purposes of the calculation of structural weight and cost.

Volume is ft 3 for the body, Total structural volume is Area taking the inaccurately-calculated numbers as they are given is ft 2 for the body, ft 2 for each of the two wings, ft 2 for the set of wheels, and ft 2 for each of the two pods. Total structural area is ft 2. Under the default ruleset, structural weight and cost are calculated from a base value of —total structural area.

Under the original optional rule, structural weight and cost are calculated from a base value of The wings' large area almost perfectly cancels out the body's large volume, but does it actually make any sense that sturdy wings can help the structure of a flimsy body? Under this house rule, structural cost and volume are calculated from a base value of —the volume of the body plus the area of the other subassemblies.