GURPS and why you should be playing it!

[Tyndmyr]

I'm not a huge fan of Gurps, and I'll go into why for a bit. Keep in mind that I've only actually played a coupla times, and thus, am not an expert in it's rules.

1. It's kinda a meta-system. More of a D20 analog than a D&D comparison, if you get me. IMO, meta-systems are clumsy, require a *lot* more work to build a good setting from, and in general, making it harder to have a good, believable setting makes it harder to have a good game. On the flip side...it's not the worst meta-system I've played with. I had the misfortune to try Hero once, back before I finished post-calculus math.

2. I prefer blended systems rather than more consistent systems. I love than in D&D, the casting mechanics are interestingly different than psionics, truenaming, straight melee, or what have you. As you've probably guessed, Im referring to 3.5 and previous, as 4.0 is a departure from that. From what I've seen, Gurps doesn't have the same variety in mechanics. Now sure, this makes balancing the game easier, but frankly...I don't care.

3. As for customization...sure, there are a great deal of options, but who would really say that say, D&D 3.5 lacks options for characters? Most of the RPGs I play anyhow are great on customizability, so that's really not a big draw. It seemed like a generally slow game to play, too...but that may be because only one of us was familiar with the system. Hard to call on that one.

Eh, depends what you're after, I guess.

[Cybren]

What I would say GURPS biggest flaw is that it requires a GM who knows the game, a group patient enough to learn the game. It IS complex, but so are all game systems. It's just most of them introduce complexity gradually while GURPS presents you with all of it at once.

2. I prefer blended systems rather than more consistent systems. I love than in D&D, the casting mechanics are interestingly different than psionics, truenaming, straight melee, or what have you. As you've probably guessed, Im referring to 3.5 and previous, as 4.0 is a departure from that. From what I've seen, Gurps doesn't have the same variety in mechanics. Now sure, this makes balancing the game easier, but frankly...I don't care.

Well, taking 4th edition (of GURPS),

GURPS Magic has a system of skill-based spellcasting. It and Thaumatology also have several variants and alternative systems that resemble it to different levels. Magic also contains rules for alchemy that work on a different system as well.

Powers has another system of building any variety of power (from super powers to magic spells) using the advantages presented in the Basic Set.

Power-Ups 1 offers Imbuements, which are abilities that let you do crazy stuff with weapons (usually specialized to one weapon skill).

Martial Arts details ways to build martial art characters (as in, any kind of armed or unarmed fighting), and combining that with some advantages and skills makes for another deadly suite of abilities.

That's just off the top of my head, and other than Imbuements, even if they're found in other books, they're all expansions of or greater detail for the rules found in the Basic Set.

[Moff Chumley]

For anyone but hardcore gamers, GURPS just seems like altogether too much work... 4e is fun. I don't need anything out of a system aside from fun. I like it, my players like it, it lets me tell a story, and it lets them tell a story. Honestly, in those conditions, what does GURPS offer that 4e doesn't?

[Cybren]

For anyone but hardcore gamers, GURPS just seems like altogether too much work... 4e is fun. I don't need anything out of a system aside from fun. I like it, my players like it, it lets me tell a story, and it lets them tell a story. Honestly, in those conditions, what does GURPS offer that 4e doesn't?

GURPS offers lots that D&D doesn't, but it lacks plenty of things D&D has.

Generally I play GURPS for sci-fi or low fantasy (which isn't to be confused with low powered fantasy), while I choose D&D because, well, D&D is its own animal entirely.

[kyuubigan]

If you like GURPS, than might I suggest another system for you and your group to try: Tri-Stat. Tri-Stat is a lot like GURPS in its open-ended style of play. But it doesn't contain its flaws or its god like power levels.

[Tengu_temp]

Tri-Stat is a lot like GURPS in its open-ended style of play. But it doesn't contain its flaws or its god like power levels.

That's not true. Tri-Stat is ridiculously easy to break - you can have two characters built on the same amount of points, and one of them will be invincible and able to destroy a planet with a single attack, while the other one will be a total loser who can't really do anything.

The most balanced (which is to say, it still requires the DM to make sure one munchkin doesn't break the whole game) of open systems is Mutants & Masterminds, if you ask me. And seeing that its gameplay is fast, exciting and cinematic, and it's easy to build exactly the character you want once you know the system well, I see not reason why should I play GURPS.

[Starshade]

Limited flight, like being able to fly with small wings with wingspan half of char height, and being able to glide only (not gain height), would be 16 points, and the ability to fly would probably be mostly magical due to the size of the wings(but still needing them).
a burning attack cost 5 points per 1d of damage, if you want to hit anything but one target, well, you'd need to calculate the cost based on size of the desired cone or area.
One level of burning attack would be something like a small kid kryptonian toying with a weak heat vision (still potential lethal), and boosting it would be a dragon's fire.
claws and armor would be simple, a bigger issue would be how a half dragon would fit into the gameworld.

[Dienekes]

Well, you could theoretically have a magic item that gave you 300 pts of spell power, meaning you could cast Ress every couple of days or so. I don't recall exactly - it's a been a while.

Since Kiz has talked about the good points of GURPS, let me point out a few flaws:

1. 20th level (500 pts or so) characters can be killed in a single round by a single 1st level (20 pts) character with a high chance of success, given easily available equipment.

2. Even if you rule out sniper rifles and bazookas, a super-high level character can still be wounded and eventually killed by as little as 2 or 3 dozen 1st level characters.

3. One of my 3.5 players currently has a character that can auto-kill any number of creatures within 20 ft. Also, nothing can get closer than 20 ft. Nor can anything move out of his 20 ft range. And he flies. At 10th level. Tell me how you can do that in GURPS!

4. GURPS magic does not create an absolute need for a long list of abilities/magic items that every creature over CR 10 level has to have or just die instantly. (Non-detection, Mind Blank, Protection from possession, ability to hit non-corporeal creatures, Anticipate Teleport, etc.).

5. Even worse, GURPS Bestairy does not describe a huge collection of high-rank monsters which lack those required abilities, with no way to get them.

6. Monsters and NPCs in GURPS follow the same rules as players. This means that NPCs of equal level and equipment can actually defeat the players on a semi-regular basis. There is really no mechanism in GURPS for spoon-feeding parties a fixed series of encounters which are meant to consume a quarter of their "resources". In GURPS, all combats are dangerous for the players!

7. Feat selections rarely lead to insta-locks, where the PCs are unstoppable as long as they are allowed to perform their signature move over and over again, regardless of situation/environment/common sense.

I could go on, but I think you get the point. How is anybody supposed to have fun in a game like that?

Dude, you just sold me. Me and my group love the gritty realistic fantasy. I think I might have to look into this.

[warmachine]

I have to say, GURPS sounds quite fun. A simulationist, realistic system that tosses the "rule of cool" and "cinematic elements" where they belong, i.e. the trash is a system for me, and I've been trying to gear my own system towards just that.

Strictly, that's incorrect. Cinematic elements are not missing. GURPS is universal, after all. There are lots of them, ranging from re-rolling unlucky results to having the bad guys automatically miss their initial gunfire. However, they're all optional.

[Morty]

2. I prefer blended systems rather than more consistent systems. I love than in D&D, the casting mechanics are interestingly different than psionics, truenaming, straight melee, or what have you. As you've probably guessed, Im referring to 3.5 and previous, as 4.0 is a departure from that. From what I've seen, Gurps doesn't have the same variety in mechanics. Now sure, this makes balancing the game easier, but frankly...I don't care.

Hm, this is something that, admittedly, worries me a bit, as I too love the diversity of D&D 3.5.

Strictly, that's incorrect. Cinematic elements are not missing. GURPS is universal, after all. There are lots of them, ranging from re-rolling unlucky results to having the bad guys automatically miss their initial gunfire. However, they're all optional.

Still works. I can happily ignore cinematic elements of the game and have stuff happen because it makes sense, rather than because it's "cool", "cinematic" or what have you.

[Tyndmyr]

Strictly, that's incorrect. Cinematic elements are not missing. GURPS is universal, after all. There are lots of them, ranging from re-rolling unlucky results to having the bad guys automatically miss their initial gunfire. However, they're all optional.

Isn't that true of...pretty much any system? The rule of cool is great and all, but if you really wanted to play without it, you can.

The same goes for say...slower level progression. If you think D&D advances too quickly, dividing xp by the modifier of your choice is vastly easier than changing systems.

[Epinephrine]

Isn't that true of...pretty much any system? The rule of cool is great and all, but if you really wanted to play without it, you can.

The same goes for say...slower level progression. If you think D&D advances too quickly, dividing xp by the modifier of your choice is vastly easier than changing systems.

There's a difference between saying that any rules in any system are optional, and GURPS presenting several optional rules to tailor the system to different levels of cinematics.

[Jerthanis]

Thanks for this thread, it's taught me that I should stay away from GURPS as someone who hates simulationist gaming, even though I like classless, levelless games.

Also, I hate games that give significant points for taking disadvantages. A question was raised earlier that asked who would play a one-armed man if it just meant a huge disability? I would ask instead, who would play a two-armed, both-eyes-having man without insomnia if it meant his psychic powers weren't 10% better? It's never a system that evens out the playing field for those who want to play characters with mechanical disadvantages, it's always a system where the person who wants to play a normal looking guy with all his limbs and few significant mental traumas gets punished.

[PinkysBrain]

Both Invisibility and Fly are present in Advantages and spells. So, depending on how you see your character, you could be...

My point was that these are essentially win buttons against who lack the required abilities to deal with them (regardless of system).

So I have some doubts about the statement that :

GURPS Bestairy does not describe a huge collection of high-rank monsters which lack those required abilities

[Cybren]

My point was that these are essentially win buttons against who lack the required abilities to deal with them (regardless of system).

So I have some doubts about the statement that :

Except the GURPS Bestiary isn't a Monster Manual-like catalog of "these are the foes the GM sends at you". The capabilities of the monsters needs to be calibrated for the power level and abilities of the party. This is one of the reasons why GURPS is such a GM-taxing system.

Thanks for this thread, it's taught me that I should stay away from GURPS as someone who hates simulationist gaming, even though I like classless, levelless games.

GURPS isn't simulationist, it's universal. Thus it uses an approximate modeling of reality as a base to alter. GURPS can and does support many playstyles. Sean Punch, aka Kromm, the Line Editor and co-creator of GURPS 4th edition pretty much hates simulationist gaming.

Also, I hate games that give significant points for taking disadvantages. A question was raised earlier that asked who would play a one-armed man if it just meant a huge disability? I would ask instead, who would play a two-armed, both-eyes-having man without insomnia if it meant his psychic powers weren't 10% better? It's never a system that evens out the playing field for those who want to play characters with mechanical disadvantages, it's always a system where the person who wants to play a normal looking guy with all his limbs and few significant mental traumas gets punished.

Well, no. Taking disadvantages will give you more points. Taking no disadvantages means you have no disadvantages, which is a pretty hefty bonus in and of itself. Disadvantages are also useful for other reasons. What are the game effects of only having one eye? How many points is the disadvantage so I know how to price the affliction I have that gives it?

[Kurald Galain]

What I would say GURPS biggest flaw is that it requires a GM who knows the game, a group patient enough to learn the game. It IS complex, but so are all game systems.

...well, except for rules-light systems, and rules-moderate systems...

Both GURPS and D&D are easily in the top five most complex roleplaying games out there. Most other RPGs aren't even close, and as a result are really easy to learn.

[PinkysBrain]

Well, no. Taking disadvantages will give you more points. Taking no disadvantages means you have no disadvantages, which is a pretty hefty bonus in and of itself. Disadvantages are also useful for other reasons. What are the game effects of only having one eye? How many points is the disadvantage so I know how to price the affliction I have that gives it?

Lets say you are a munchkin optimizing for adventuring in a high fantasy setting ... can you honestly say a character without disadvantages/pacts will get anywhere close to one created with those tools? These systems are ideal for min/maxing AFAICS.

[Cybren]

...well, except for rules-light systems, and rules-moderate systems...

Both GURPS and D&D are easily in the top five most complex roleplaying games out there. Most other RPGs aren't even close, and as a result are really easy to learn.

Point, but I find rules-light systems to be inviting more arguments and bickering than they prevent.

Lets say you are a munchkin optimizing for adventuring in a high fantasy setting ... can you honestly say a character without disadvantages/pacts will get anywhere close to one created with those tools? These systems are ideal for min/maxing AFAICS.

Close? Sure. The character who took disadvantages will have an edge, but the disadvantages will be a burden. If he goes crazy with them they will also be a burden for the whole group (which is why the Basic Set urges GMs to set a hard limit on disadvantages).

The real "munchkin exploit" in GURPS is buying down attribute levels (which are counted as disadvantages), which is closer to just taking 8s on irrelevant stats in a point buy game. You'll see people on the Steve Jackson Games forums talk about IQ! or HT!

[Kizara]

(And I'm not too fond of Add Multiple Dice systems anyway, which as I recall GURPS is - and I might be wrong, sicne it's been a while since I looked at Discworld GURPS.)

If you mean a dice pool, no it doesn't use that (and I don't like those systems etheier). It uses 3d6 for its resolution mechanics, like 3/4e DnD uses 1d20 for it's. Circumstance modifiers are added to this roll depending on the situation, like in DnD.

From a mechanical standpoint, I don't want to be figuring out a half dozen+ different modifiers and calculate the most optimal way to debilitate my opponent on every single basic attack. While simulationism is a fun endeavor, with my current group, trying to do that would take forever (which I realize is not necessarily the issue with every group, so don't say "oh that's a group issue and not a system one"). Heck, sometimes it takes them a while to figure out what they're going to be doing on their turn in 4e, and that's "relatively simple" with the math written out for them.

This isn't really the case. One of the things that makes GURPS easier to run then DnD is that you don't have looks of + modifieres and bonuses from different sources to deal with. You start getting a bit more of this at higher points or when magic is involved, but its not the headache that 3e was. Is it as simple as 4e? Probably not.

Approximately how diverse can power levels along the same point buy become, assuming not necessarily uber-optimized, but say math majors who are unfamiliar with the system versus your average shiny-explosion loving teenager become? Let's assume average optimization for the MM and "rule of cool" for the latter. "Spike" vs "Timmy/Johnny" in MtG terms, if you understand those. One of the issues we had with Scion is that with some basic application of the value of exp vs bonus points in the beginning, certain players were able to create characters who were strictly better (ie, exactly identical, but with more exp left to spend) than another character. Note: this was a thought exercise and not just some player being a jerk to another.

This is a good question, and to an extent I have not played with the system long enough to honestly be able to answer it.

However, I can say that if you take the time to examine all options for your character, chose only what you really need, and seek ways to get discounts on points, you can do more with less. The difference isn't going to be close what it is in 3e DnD, but you can have two people make the same character, and have one who was better at specializing for his role and is more effective at it. The other character will have some 'cool' things which are perhaps not as helpful as his player thought they would be (but its NOWHERE the level of picking bad feats and classes in 3e). As far as your specific example of "experience points vs bonus points in the begining" I'm not familiar with that system to really know what you mean by it, but I don't believe GURPS has an 'exploit' like that.

Supplementary, how easy is it to create someone focused on social or mental aspects, but have decent secondary prowess in combat? Another problem we had in Scion is that our Mental character managed to create someone with minimal combat applications (neither command skills, nor combat skills, nor useful tricks, I realize that this is a build-fault and not a system fault per se, but I was curious how easy it was to say, create a "scientist" who is still half decent at defending herself.)

This, however, is not what you may want to hear. Being a point-based system, you have to pay for everything in GURPS. So, if you make a social character or a knowledge-based character, you will not also have as many points to make a combat master. However, you can at least contribute to combat by having just 1 weapon skill (they cost as much as normal skills), having some hp (which any character should buy, and its cheap comparitively, at 2 pts/HP) and playing intelligently. But, yes, if someone spends absolutely no effort at all towards combat, they will have no abilities in it, but its possible to make a social face or a knowledge master that has some combat ability on your point budget. For instance, you could have the scientist have Guns skill and use the guns he invents, thus making him a potent, if somewhat fragile warrior. You could have a medival bard that has magic (there's rules for bardic magic, they aren't fantastic but they are there), and magic can of course contribute in many ways.

With the myriad of immersion options that you're promoting as a good thing in GURPS, approximately how long does combat take, assuming battles between equivalent or near equivalent powers?

Ever use the ToB with 3e? While the rules are not similar to those much at all, its a good gauge for complexity. I would say that there's as much to learn of GURPS combat (assuming you don't use the crazy-detailed highly-optional Martial Arts rules) as there is of ToB mechanics and various Maneavuers. If people know what they are doing, and understand what's going on (battle map, good DM description), it depends on the players. If you have players that are decisive, it'll go pretty quick. If they diddly around about every possible option, then you are going to have to give them a bit of a boot in the pants. In general, if you are using the cool tactical options rules, it doesn't make for a 'quick and dirty' combat resolution, but a more tactically immersive one that yes does take a bit longer.

- long and complicated combat resolution (we were using blocks, dodges and parries), leading to long combat. This is actually more important for me now, as my typical session is around 4 hours. Actually the question is, how long does combat take for a typical group compared to 3.5?

- very slow character advancement, or the character gets more powerful very slowly. Has that been changed with the editions?

For the first, it depends on the kind of DnD you are running. If you have all splats open and have to worry about a myrid of different kinds of effects, circumstantial bonuses, unique abilities and so forth, then I'd say that GURPS combat is far less of a bookkeeping headache.

However, to address the issue, let me give an example:

Most people have a priority order for their defenses, they know if they are attacked they are going to try to use (say) parry first, then dodge (cause they have no shield). So when they are attacked, they already know what their parry is unless the attacker used Deceptive attack, which lowers it by a cooresponding amount.

So it goes like this:

GM: Bob, you are attacked by the gnoll. He's aiming for your left arm.
GM: *rolls attack roll* Ok its good, roll defense.
Bob: *rolls parry, his best defense* Ok I made it.
(next action)

GM: Ok Sue, you are attacked but *this* gnoll, he's going for a face shot.
GM: *rolls* Oh... well he crited, sorry Sue.
GM: *referes to his cheatsheet, sees that a face hit increases the wounding multiplier for the gnoll's weapon to 2x* *rolls damage, multipliers it by 2x*
GM: Ok Sue, the gnoll hits you in the face for (1d6+2 (5)x2=10) 10 damage, and since its a headshot roll vs stunning.
Sue: *rolls vs HT* Phew, I made it.
GM: Ok sue you are now staggard though, as you have less than 1/3 hp remaining, this cuts your basic move in half, which also effects your move speed and dodge.
Sue: :(

This should give you some idea.

For the second point, yes unless your GM wants to be liberal with points, your characters do not gain in power that quickly, but at a more realistic pace. Also, this is part of the reason the system is more inherently balanced, because you don't have 1 small dungeon and a few random encounters and (now being level 5) have a plethora of new abilities. Not only does this not really make much sense if you think about it, but I find that it gets out of hand quickly. I often used 1/2 xp progression to keep leveling more sane.

Truth be told, I found it a bit limiting at first as well, but in some ways you appreciate how your character grows and when you do get that new, 15-pt ability, its more meaningful for you.

But enough of the negativity. I have supportive questions for you.
1) I only have the Characters book. How important is Campaigns?
2) How can I learn to play GURPS? I'm estranged from a real gaming group, and use PbP for most everything.

1) This can be easily compared to 3e DnD. How important is it to have the DMG? Well, you can run the game without it, but you don't have as much to work with. I would actually say that Campaigns is more important then the 3e DMG, as it has many good and game-enhancing optional rules, and good explanations or expansions of existing ones. You don't need it, but its really nice to have.

2) Well, if you are patient there's always the read the books and learn method. Its not that hard really, if you have a bit of patience and stick with it. Alternately, get someone like me on an IM service and learn by pestering them with questions as you read. Finally, you can come to this (or the GURPS) forums if you have additional questions.

1. It's kinda a meta-system. More of a D20 analog than a D&D comparison, if you get me. IMO, meta-systems are clumsy, require a *lot* more work to build a good setting from, and in general, making it harder to have a good, believable setting makes it harder to have a good game. On the flip side...it's not the worst meta-system I've played with. I had the misfortune to try Hero once, back before I finished post-calculus math.

I'm not sure I get you here. Yes, GURPS is independant of any specific setting, but how does it make it harder for you to make your own? Most of the details about worlds and settings are independant of the gaming system, and GURPS is largely simulating sensible, realistic rules that should not get in the way of any believable setting.

For instance, the way that magic works makes more sense to have things like apprentice mages or mages that master 1 particular spell and become known for it, both staples of many fantasy worlds. The way combat works means that you don't have to just rely on 'DM description' to have, say, a PC cut off an opponent's arm in a shower of blood. To me this adds to immersion and a believable setting.

2. I prefer blended systems rather than more consistent systems. I love than in D&D, the casting mechanics are interestingly different than psionics, truenaming, straight melee, or what have you. As you've probably guessed, Im referring to 3.5 and previous, as 4.0 is a departure from that. From what I've seen, Gurps doesn't have the same variety in mechanics. Now sure, this makes balancing the game easier, but frankly...I don't care.

I understand where you are coming from. I have the same feelings myself, and there is a bit that's lost here with GURPS. I feel you gain far more then you lose, but I will admit that one of the things that makes it less of a headache is that it doesn't have a different system for everything, but that also makes all those other concepts a bit less unique.

I will say that magic works, feels and functions quite a bit differently then, say, melee combat or gun use. But its still tied into the normal system enough that its not a nightmare.

Is GURPS more homogonized then 3e? Maybe slightly, but nothing at all like 4e. Honestly though, one of the reasons that we stopped playing 3e (before we found GURPS, so we just didn't really play at all) is that we got so tired of all the millions of things you have to try to keep track of, or designing settings that include all of the oddball choices out there, or keeping track and balancing 30 different styles of mechanics. I will however say that its good to come to GURPS with a 3e background, as you have all the cool ideas from it in your mind and you can make them with GURPS (more or less).

3. As for customization...sure, there are a great deal of options, but who would really say that say, D&D 3.5 lacks options for characters? Most of the RPGs I play anyhow are great on customizability, so that's really not a big draw. It seemed like a generally slow game to play, too...but that may be because only one of us was familiar with the system. Hard to call on that one.

GURPS has less options then all of 3e's splat, but it has more customizability by far. You see, in DnD you have a limited amount of character reasources during the course of your character's career, and how you use them is where optimizing comes in (and yes this is fun, I enjoyed it too). You will go to level 20, and the path you get there is what matters, and what feats and skills you pick.

But your feats and skills are dependant on your class, which is a pre-defined trope that focuses you into a role. In GURPS, you can pick whatever skills and advantages (sorta like feats) that fit your character concept, and are not bound by a class. Also, when you gain more points during adventuring, you can spend them on things your character has actually learned and improved upon in his time. But that's not really what makes it so customizable, and to explain this is a bit hard without you having the character book because the material that shows the customization options is like 20 pages.

You see, when you take an advantage, lets say an Innate Attack breath weapon. Currently, its a line of fire (cause you chose fire out of 6 other options) that does 1d6 damage usable at will for 5 pts/level. Now, you go over to the Enhancements and Limitations part of the book, and apply:

Cone (10 yard width) +100%
Limited Use (1 per-day usage) -40%
Jet (continous beam like a flamethrower) +0%
Costs Fatigue (2 FPs) -10%
Cyclic (fire clings like a Napalm effect for 1 second, but is resistable) +50%

So, while you can do some of this with a metabreath feat and such, here it's just how you define the ability. Also, you can increase the damage by buying that attack at higher level (the 1d6 is base 1 level ability). Now, bare in mind that this is options I have chosen out of many others and you can see what I begin to mean by customizability.

EDIT: If anyone feels they have raised a question that has not adequately been addressed by myself or another, please repeat yourself. I cannot monitor this thread 24/7 and there's a lot to go through and people have similar questions. But I don't want anyone to feel they are being ignored.

However, for those trying to drag up stuff from a previously locked thread (and debatably attacking me), please stop doing it, as I do not want this thread to get locked and will not address your concerns of things that were not said in this thread. If you have a personal issue with me I invite you to PM me.

[Kizara]

Point, but I find rules-light systems to be inviting more arguments and bickering than they prevent.

Close? Sure. The character who took disadvantages will have an edge, but the disadvantages will be a burden. If he goes crazy with them they will also be a burden for the whole group (which is why the Basic Set urges GMs to set a hard limit on disadvantages).

The real "munchkin exploit" in GURPS is buying down attribute levels (which are counted as disadvantages), which is closer to just taking 8s on irrelevant stats in a point buy game. You'll see people on the Steve Jackson Games forums talk about IQ! or HT!

Indeed. GURPS is not rules-light, although you could play it that way. If you want a fast and loose rules light system you probably should look elsewhere, as other systems do fast and loose cinematic games that use description for resolutions instead of actual simulation better. I find GURPS to be more managable, intuitive and providing of a far better simulation then 3e, but its not Wushu and I'm not trying to advertise it as such.

It is not really easy to learn, pick up and play. Its not as assininely hard as people seem to feel it is, as most of it is intuitive and sensible and well-explained. But no, you can't just scim over the books in 5 minutes, throw together a character in another 5 and start playing and only have 1 resolution mechanic (like some kind of dice pool descriptive combat thing) to work with. I personally hate systems like that, and I would never try to pass GURPS off as one of them.

Also, as for min/maxing. Yes, you can do that. You can play a dumb-as-nails, ugly as crap fighter that smashes really good. In a well run campaign that isn't just a settingless, mindless dungeon crawl, that character has its own problems. and will find that all the other challenges that life presents him he is ill-equiped for. He makes a darn good bodyguard to the intelligent mage that runs his life and makes all his decisions though, and that mage is happy to have him and his big bag of slothering HP raging in front of him whenever unpleasant men try to attack him.

[Morty]

Hm. So, how does magic in GURPS work? So far, I understand that it uses "talent trees" and a character has rather few spells, which I'm not fond of. I can play with something like that, I just prefer a lot of specific spells.

[Sebastian]

No.

They would work in a WuShu cinematic game, where the heroes are absurd constructs that have no relation to the world they live in, and wield powers so removed from the NPCs that they might as well be invading kindergarden classes.

You're still thinking in D&D terms. Half-dragon? What the *&*^ does that even mean? How the hell do you walk around with wings and not get instantly attacked for being a demon? Only in D&D can an obviously extra-planar professional murderer expect to be allowed free access to a city until he decides to start eating peoples' faces.

Now you are just exaggerating, all he need to do is picking the right disadvantages like (not the exact names) obvious feature (wings), or similiar then depending how rare are half dragons in the world game and how the general population see them, take things thing like social stigma, unusual background or ugly, for example. It is a perfectly playable character if the Gm allow it, and that is the the key of the questin, in every point based game there is no a thing like "everything is allowed" that seems to be the standard in 3.x and DND4, but the gm decide what you can pick and what you can't and in which combination, maybe you must take magery together with social stigma because in his world wizards are shunned, or maybe you must buy magery together with some kind of Status because people see them as gifted from the gods, or maybe something else altogether. Someone mentioned before than someone with 10 DR would be invulnerable in a typical medieval world, that's why a GM shouldn't allow DR so high if he plan to play a typical medieval world, unless there is a really good reason for it.

[T.G. Oskar]

Oh! Oh! I just thought of another flaw! Mages in GURPS don't render all other character classes redundant by the end-game. And Clerics don't even exist - you can't be a Fighter and Mage with virtually no penalty to either class. Also, combats take way to long. In any good D&D game over 10th level, combat is reduced to rolling initiative. In GURPS you actually have to play it out, and it might take more than 3 rounds!

Odd, since Kizara and I were talking about Power Investiture. Limited spell pool, but you can get them technically faster. And through a different mechanic.

But yeah, it's usually "strengthen my weapon skillz" or "strengthen my magics", with each point. It's not like "a spell replaces my BAB, hence I can treat my BAB like crud since I have the spell that fixes that! And while that, I have this other spell that replaces the Rogue entirely!"

And there are ways to work both (decent DX, spending points on one or two skills plus Shield, and going for Religious Rank/Power Investiture, then make your own god so that you get the spells you like)

You say it's easier to play than D&D because you don't need to have an absurd number of modifiers... but I've looked at character sheets, and they have a list of skills longer than my post up to this point. Not only that, but I can't see character creation being the only long point. From what you've said, a typical attack would be: "Pick a body part, attack, roll 3d6, roll for something to limit the opponent, opponent picks a type of way to not get hit and rolls against you, then you have a few more rolls if you get hit." That seems more complicated than D&Ds "Roll a d20. Huh, you beat his AC. He's hit."

Funny you say that. Actually, the bare mechanic is "Roll 3d6. Hunh, you beat the target number. Let's see if it defends".

The bunch of skills would be the equivalent of Storytelling's advantages, except a bit more simplified. You can do your stuff without those skills, but they impose a penalty to the roll. So, it's more like "3d6 - (or +) skill penalty (or bonus)" roll, than "1d20 + modifiers". The difference comes when you add the load of stuff.

GURPS has a bit more of active defense, which is shown with the dodge, block or parry abilities. D&D only has AC, which is a bit more abstract.

GURPS doesn't need you to strike a body part, you can just say "I strike X", and you strike X. D&D is similar in that regard.

The complexity of D&D enters when you add the modifiers, and that's something that you as a player can't evade. So I have over 11 Strength? That's extra points to my attack and damage. The Bard went with Inspire Courage? Extra points. My sword is magical? More points. Feat bonus? Even more points. To a newbie, GURPS will eventually be easier to understand than D&D's monstrous scaling modifiers, since eventually you'll be forgetting what modifiers you have on. 4th Edition lessened the application of those modifiers, but it still suffers a similar problem. From those modifiers, you have BAB, Str bonus, feat bonus, quite probably later enhancement bonus to weapon to worry about. In GURPS, you only have the skill modifier to worry about; the GM determines if there's other circumstances to apply.

Striking a different body part is like using grapple, or trip, or disarm. It has it's own little set of rules, but you don't have to use them. Except, striking a different body part (D&D technically has that, but it's usually unofficial and known as "called shots") is less of a hassle; it just adds a circumstancial modifier to the whole roll.

If I see myself defending GURPS a bit, it's because I find it a bit simpler and enjoyable. That doesn't mean I hate D&D (quite the contrary, I'm a junkie for class-based systems, even though I need to go for 3rd party sources for one thing I simply can't apply to 3.5 with the Core + supplements); I just say it's a bit easier and a bit more flexible than D&D, even though both have the same learning curves. And believe me, you can spend years playing D&D and you always learn something new. Usually, clarifying one rule.
For the record: IMO, Aberrant >> Mutants & Masterminds
The idea is to invite people to try it, since no amount of words can drive people to try new stuff. I can be sure those who are convinced that GURPS is not their game will find it enjoyable despite their initial attitudes, given that they're not munchkins. Not 100% sure, but pretty sure nonetheless.

[Cybren]

Hm. So, how does magic in GURPS work? So far, I understand that it uses "talent trees" and a character has rather few spells, which I'm not fond of. I can play with something like that, I just prefer a lot of specific spells.

Magic, as detailed in the Basic Set and GURPS Magic supplement is skill based, and generally requires access to an advantage to use.

Standard GURPS Magic defines locations (game worlds, buildings, planets, etc. it's up to the GM) in terms of mana levels. Normal Mana means that you need the magery advantage to cast spells. Low mana imposes a skill penalty, no mana means no one can cast spells. On the other side, high mana allows everyone to cast spells, and very high mana gives mages a bonus to skill (but is dangerous, all failures are critical failures).

Thus, anyone can learn spells, but barring situations relating to the mana levels, only people with Magery can cast them. The spells themselves are thematically divided into colleges. There are colleges like fire, air, mind control, plants, necromancy, etc. Some spells belong to more than one colleges. Most spells with have some kind of prerequisite. Sometimes they're just certain levels of magery, others it's you need certain spells, either a specific spell, or x number of spells from that college.

The spell colleges are mostly thematic though, and the GM is encouraged to make his own spell colleges or prerequisite lists, as this isn't part of balance so much as flavor. This is one of the largest criticisms of the core GURPS Magic system, in that it isn't very generic.

Spells require fatigue points to cast. So more powerful spells have higher FP costs. Extremely powerful spells have very high fatigue point costs, so they are usually cast with a group of mages pooling their FP. This slows them down and makes them easier to foil but provides deeper resources of energy.

GURPS Mages actually will pick up large amounts of spells over their lifetime, because they can spend lots of points on attributes and magery, and then only one or two points on spells each to learn them at high levels. This is the major balance complaint, not that they become ultra super powerful and make "fighters" irrelevant, but because with the number of spells available to them they could easily get break into other peoples niches. Like D&D though, going for pure damage isn't usually their best bet in a fight.

On top of this though, there's plenty of other magic systems, such as Ritual Magic (which uses the same system but altered so magic is more versatile but weaker), Path/book magic, syntactic magic, or Powers (which is building spells as advantages like Flight (Costs Fatigue, Requires Rituals & gestures) )

[mikeejimbo]

Hm. So, how does magic in GURPS work? So far, I understand that it uses "talent trees" and a character has rather few spells, which I'm not fond of. I can play with something like that, I just prefer a lot of specific spells.

How do you want it to work?

That's how it works in GURPS. Yes, with a little work. But you get what you want. That's why I like GURPS.

Actually, I like GURPS for two very obvious and boring reasons. One is that I like the work. Doing the work of setting up "OK, how does *this* work in this campaign setting?" is the fun part for me. That and creating characters, when I'm not GMing.

The other obvious reason is that SJ Games has paid me more money than Wizards of the Coast.

[Morty]

Magic, as detailed in the Basic Set and GURPS Magic supplement is skill based, and generally requires access to an advantage to use.

Standard GURPS Magic defines locations (game worlds, buildings, planets, etc. it's up to the GM) in terms of mana levels. Normal Mana means that you need the magery advantage to cast spells. Low mana imposes a skill penalty, no mana means no one can cast spells. On the other side, high mana allows everyone to cast spells, and very high mana gives mages a bonus to skill (but is dangerous, all failures are critical failures).

Thus, anyone can learn spells, but barring situations relating to the mana levels, only people with Magery can cast them. The spells themselves are thematically divided into colleges. There are colleges like fire, air, mind control, plants, necromancy, etc. Some spells belong to more than one colleges. Most spells with have some kind of prerequisite. Sometimes they're just certain levels of magery, others it's you need certain spells, either a specific spell, or x number of spells from that college.

The spell colleges are mostly thematic though, and the GM is encouraged to make his own spell colleges or prerequisite lists, as this isn't part of balance so much as flavor. This is one of the largest criticisms of the core GURPS Magic system, in that it isn't very generic.

Spells require fatigue points to cast. So more powerful spells have higher FP costs. Extremely powerful spells have very high fatigue point costs, so they are usually cast with a group of mages pooling their FP. This slows them down and makes them easier to foil but provides deeper resources of energy.

GURPS Mages actually will pick up large amounts of spells over their lifetime, because they can spend lots of points on attributes and magery, and then only one or two points on spells each to learn them at high levels. This is the major balance complaint, not that they become ultra super powerful and make "fighters" irrelevant, but because with the number of spells available to them they could easily get break into other peoples niches. Like D&D though, going for pure damage isn't usually their best bet in a fight.

On top of this though, there's plenty of other magic systems, such as Ritual Magic (which uses the same system but altered so magic is more versatile but weaker), Path/book magic, syntactic magic, or Powers (which is building spells as advantages like Flight (Costs Fatigue, Requires Rituals & gestures) )

Hm, interesting. I don't mind it that it's not generic, quite the opposite in fact; and quite I like what I see here. And if it's indeed possible to houserule just about anything in GURPS, then it gets even better.

[Shademan]

I have read abit in the campaign and character books and I must say GURPS look interesting. I would like to try it out, but I find the books abit hard to read, that might just be my pdf. files tho'. the letters are sorta weak and hard to read.
that, and I can't seem to find the bloody head-injury table!

[Unwitting Pawn]

I have read abit in the campaign and character books and I must say GURPS look interesting. I would like to try it out, but I find the books abit hard to read, that might just be my pdf. files tho'. the letters are sorta weak and hard to read.
that, and I can't seem to find the bloody head-injury table!

I have some GURPS stuff in dead tree form and some in pdf, and yes I would say that the physical print is easier to read than on a monitor, like most text really IMO.

When you say "head-injury table", I guess you prob mean the Critical Head Blow Table, which is on p.B556

[Unwitting Pawn]

And if it's indeed possible to houserule just about anything in GURPS, then it gets even better.

Yes I would say it is possible to houserule just about anything. Really in any RPG, the GM/DM/referee/whatever can houserule to get the feel/effect they want - who can stop us?

But my own feeling so far is that it doesn't feel like I have to houserule, at least not as much anyway. Now TBH, this may be a misconception in part by me, due to the fact that GURPS is so customisable by design. This "customisation" doesn't feel like "houseruling", more like tweaking by choice than like fixing by necessity. However, that may just be my non-impartial feelings getting in the way

[Shademan]

I have some GURPS stuff in dead tree form and some in pdf, and yes I would say that the physical print is easier to read than on a monitor, like most text really IMO.

When you say "head-injury table", I guess you prob mean the Critical Head Blow Table, which is on p.B556

ah, thanks a bunch