Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 6959217" data-attributes="member: 85870">I've been looking over the GURPS 4e rules in more depth recently, and there's a chance I've unfairly assigned the game a poor reputation based on one of the GMs/players who was in my old group. Imagine the worst possible combination of system snob (in his opinion GURPS was the only system that was any good in the history of the world, ever), with a massive rules lawyer/power gamer, along with odious personal habits and personality----that was this guy. If I can ignore the entirely personal bias I've developed due to this, there's actually quite a bit I'm seeing in GURPS that's positive. Don't know that I'll switch, but I'm at least seeing it in a different light.That said, I also have come up with what I think would be a reasonable houserule for "shaken" in Savage Worlds --- A character shaken via combat damage in three consecutive rounds, without suffering a wound as a result, suffers a level of fatigue. These fatigue levels can cause unconsciousness/incapacitation. Fatigue in Savage Worlds is basically equivalent to taking a wound ---- it has the same general penalty (-1 to all checks per level of fatigue), and counts cumulatively towards incapacitation, but doesn't require healing checks to recover from. The other option would be to limit the number of consecutive rounds of "shaken but not wounded" to 2, but give the shaken character the chance to make a vigor roll to avoid the fatigue level.I'm actually really liking the way this sounds. It feels like a decent middle ground, it combines with the existing fatigue/wound/incapacitation paradigm, and the GM could easily tell players, "It's your job to track if this condition comes into play." It puts the onus on the player to track how many consecutive rounds a foe has become shaken.</blockquote>

Verification