Is there a meaningful distinction to be made between the system and the content?

[Quertus]

Edit: I wouldn't say that the models are bad. All models are wrong. Some models are useful. And some models are useful in certain circumstances but not others and for certain purposes but not others. Fit-for-purpose gives a lot of leeway, especially when the purpose involved is really broad.

TCP-IP has 7 layers. Doubtless, a look at how this *really* works would be… complex. But, as an abstraction, that admits it's an abstraction rather than pretending it's Truth, this seems pretty good.

Measuring how tightly coupled the two are, however… may be more difficult.

In part, as we've seen, because we're running into the fact that it *is* an abstraction, rather than formal and complete definition. So that complexity needs to slowly be imported to accommodate an adequate definition.

The other issue is a bit more subjective: who says? Who says X is or isn't suited to Y?

While I doubt we'll get completely accurate measurements for this abstraction… being an abstraction, perfect precision probably wasn't the point in the first place. Knowing to the micron where spherical cows in space will be isn't terribly useful here on the ground with real cattle.

Death isn't that easy in GURPS.

With regular/primitive attacks, it's not really that easy at all, death can only come at -HT HP (probably -ST in 4e, it's been a bit). If you're using hit locations, most hit locations have a maximum damage that can be done that kind of prevents that. It's fairly easy to get knocked out, but dying is a touch more rare.

If you're using high tech weapons, that's a different story, especially if you get a head shot, though.

Really? If I stab someone in the kidneys, or throw a sharpened cream cheese spreader and hit someone in the head, I can't kill them in GURPS?