Gurps

[Egiam]

For a long time Gurps has intrigued me, partly for its genre freedom. I play DND (3.5 and 4.0), and would like to know more about it in relation. Also I would apreciate any other roleplaying game recomendations.

For some of my previous thoughts on this please check this thread: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94577
Thanks!

[Knaight]

Gurps is a remarkable system which works really well, is more dangerous, and has incredible genre freedom. If you like a lot of attention to detail and don't mind spending a long time doing simple things, Gurps is for you. If you like a system that fades to the background, allowing for the story to move forward and become the focus, and don't mind losing a little detail, then go with Fudge, which is kind of like a rules light Gurps, with some other cool features.

[Ulzgoroth]

It's really a little hard to talk about Gurps in comparison to D&D, because they do pretty much everything differently.

Gurps more or less tries to physically model just about everything (detail is scalable depending on your optional rules choices). Abstractions are very limited indeed. There are no inflating 'not really wounded' hit points, no handwaved all-purpose AC, no automatic attacks of opportunity. Hit points are used, but they're limited and side effects quickly accumulate if you lose them. Defenses against attacks are actively rolled...you can dodge, parry, or block, if conditions allow. Shields are useful here, while armor serves as damage reduction (but much more effectively than it could ind D&D). Combat rounds are one second long and very concrete, and close fighting should be over in a handful of seconds in most cases. It's a very different picture.

Skills get a lot of support in the central books, and more elsewhere. Of course, pretty much everything is skill-dependent, there being no such notion as a 'base attack bonus', but the non-combat skills cover a great deal of territory as well, and in vastly more detail than in D&D. Quite a bit of it doesn't apply at a D&D type tech level, but a fair amount does.

Gurps doesn't really provide you with direct setting support, unless you obtain that specifically. The Characters book can model an enormous range of characters, but other than indicating what options are appropriate for more-or-less realistic human characters, deciding what makes sense is left to the user. Only the most extremely kitchen-sink settings would make the full flexibility of the advantages list available to the players. As a GM you need to bring your own ideas.

One thing that might be missed is D&D's efforts to clarify combat balance. Certainly they're flaky and fallible, but ECL and CR do have some meaning. Figuring out a fair fight in Gurps doesn't offer any such accommodations, though the Dungeon Fantasy and Action supplements give pointers. Character balance in general is probably even fuzzier, but with the huge range of possibilities it's going to be comparing apples to horseshoes most of the time. Though building skill definitely does matter (albeit in less of a 'piece together 5 prestige classes from 4 books' way).

Do you have any particular idea what you want to do with Gurps?

[valadil]

It took me a while but I've finally come to appreciate GURPs. The trick is having a good GM who is willing to take a subset of the rules and genres to play a specific game. My first experience with the game was with a GM who tried too hard to incorporate everything and we ended with a bland, diluted game that interested nobody but the GM.

[Egiam]

If you like a lot of attention to detail and don't mind spending a long time doing simple things, Gurps is for you.

What do you mean by that?

[elliott20]

Knaight is saying that GURPS requires a lot of front-loaded work before you can really run it. Because GURPS is so universal, there is no setting that comes with it. As a result, you can't run it out of the box. You pretty much have to either buy a settings book or spend a lot of time putting together the setting yourself.

and because GURPS is such a detail oriented game, you can be spending a lot of time putting together adventures. Perhaps even more so than D&D.

Also, GURPS is far more reliant on your players cooperation since there are far less restrictions as to how the characters are built. you pretty much have to give them guidelines prior to character creation. (In fact, I would suggest that you spend the first session fine tuning your campaign concept with your players before you get them to create the characters)

In short, D&D is more gamist while GURPS is more simulationist.

Me? I like the fate system. (A derivative of the fudge dice) It's far easier to put together and it has a nice narrative component added into the mix.

[Cybren]

In short, D&D is more gamist while GURPS is more simulationist.

This is not true. By nature of being generic and universal it can be played in any sort of campaign style. (let's not get into the usefulness of using GNS theory itself)

[elliott20]

I speak not from the genre sense, but from the level of detail sense. Of course, if you want, you can adapt it for just about any genre. But my point is that the game itself focuses a great deal on the details of things. perhaps it is not the best use of the term "simulationist", but you see where I'm going with this.

[Goblin Music]

Generic Role Playing Game System
Gurps is a game that allows more diverse PCs, you do not have classes, just Positive and negative qualities that you spend points on to create a good diverse person, for you to RP. you get very little stereotypical dumb fighters with the amount of diversity Gurps gives you, but that comes at the price of a longer of prep time.

[Knaight]

What I was saying is that Gurps simulates lots of tiny things that are abstracted in things like D&D, and if you like that, Gurps will be your game. But it slows down the game, and if you prefer a quicker game where some detail is lost you will much prefer Fudge, which basically fills in the same niche, just rules light. Both classless, fit most all genres, skill based, heck the guy who wrote Fudge wrote a bunch of stuff for Gurps before writing it. Then Fate ripped it off, screwed it up, and became more famous.

[elliott20]

really? I actually LIKED the fate system better than fudge dice...

[fusilier]

I've a run a few Gurps campaigns, in 3.0. I haven't played much of 4.0, but they are very similar. While GURPS is certainly more dangerous, I've actually found it difficult to kill characters (an artillery shell will do the trick, but it has to land close enough to them!) However, it's very easy to seriously wound characters, to the point where it may take weeks or even months to recover.

In 3.0, I found it useful to make my own cheat sheets, for things like wounds and treatment, reloading times of particular weapons, etc. That way I had already researched which rules I was expecting to use. It was very useful in combat. One of the times combat bogged down was when the party had to deal with some dagger wielding assassins. There was a lot of "close combat" (and in GURPS they mean "close"!), and grappling. I wasn't prepared for those rules and the players were certainly unfamiliar with them, which didn't help. It would probably be a good idea in early games to explain what options are available to the players, until they get used to them.

If any of the players find something in the rule books I didn't know about, but it makes sense, I'll let them do it.

[fusilier]

So answering your original question . . . I think GURPS is good for certain genres. I like to run historical based games in it, and gritty sci-fi games work well. There's nothing to prevent you from running fantasy games, although magic at first glance appears a bit awkward, especially if you are used to D&D. (Unfortunately, I don't know anybody who has taken a "second" glance at GURPS magic) There are cinematic rules, but I've never used them.

For cinematic sci-fi, I always liked West End Games Star Wars. Unfortunately West End Games lost the licensing for Star Wars, but they are still around with a system called the D6 system. Which I assume is the same system as Star Wars. It's very easy to learn, and I have very fond memories of it.

[Satyr]

What I was saying is that Gurps simulates lots of tiny things that are abstracted in things like D&D, and if you like that, Gurps will be your game. But it slows down the game, and if you prefer a quicker game where some detail is lost you will much prefer Fudge, which basically fills in the same niche, just rules light.

That is entirley true. You can pretty much determine how detailed you want to play in a Gurps game and easily leave out many of the fine adjustment rules, use the splat skills and similar broader approaches to the game, etc. You can easily simplify the game, but you can also use the more complex rules or any combination of those rules you like.
And due to the very simple basic mechanic concept that is sed in any situation, the game might be complex, but it is not difficult.

Gurps is a game that is all about the freedom of choice, both for the layers which have an unreached spectrum of possibilities to crearte and develop their characters and the gamemaster who can pretty much do everything he ever wanted with the game. Gurps is one of the few exceptional games that actually treat you like a sentienet and mature individual instead of a child that needs to be guided and has to follow a clear prescriptive way.

[warmachine]

I'll add a few points.

• GURPS emphasises realism and roleplaying. This may bore Slayers, who prefer the combat focus of D&D. Also, players avoid combat because it's risky and usually plan a fight to get favourable terms.
• GURPS is a munchkin's wet dream, much more than D&D. D&D requires clever combinations from lots of books. GURPS just needs receiving bonus points for roleplaying disadvantages, not roleplaying them and arguing with the GM when he threatens to take your points away.
• GURPS expansion books are superb genre explanation and equipment lists and are useful even if you don't play GURPS.

[amanamana]

About the previous statement, I have to say I disagree. Any system that uses flaws or disadvantages may be abused. It's the GM fault if he can't enforce the RP of disadvantages. Not only this, but anything can be ignored by a player, like the BG requirements for Prestige Classes.

And about genres in GURPS: I've GMed games for my D&D-fanatics players using something they thought was exclusive to D&D, epic playing, using GURPS and they had a pretty good time. Most of them said it was way funnier than in D&D itself.

Really! For me, there's not a single genre that I've already tried in GURPS that did not worked out, and I play GURPS for more than 12 years now.

I'm not saying it's a perfect system, without flaws. But it's the best system I know for anyone who do not want to play the same kind of game over and over again. It can be used in almost any kind of game complexity (check GURPS Lite) and every genre I've ever tried, usually without more than 2 books.

Wow... maybe I should ask them for some money now...

[amanamana]

By the way, I think the 4e of GURPS is really something...

[Salz]

You said other games so;

I highly recommend Harnmaster. It is great for the same genre as D&D, but a much better game in my opinion.

It depends what your looking for, Wild Wild West would be Aces & Eights, the most realistic game I have played. You get shot, your probably dead. Infection bites.

Modern, I would highly recommend Twilight: 2000. You can still buy the reprint from Far Future Enterprises (1st Ed, only one I play). It has a great system, gunshots hurt, knives hurt, mines hurt a lot. The setting is great if you can get past the fact it didn't happen that way. The system also transplants well. The only thing is the occupations list has been added to, and guns were redone for more realism.

Really anything non d20 is better in my book.

Salz

[valadil]

I'll add a few points.

• GURPS is a munchkin's wet dream, much more than D&D. D&D requires clever combinations from lots of books. GURPS just needs receiving bonus points for roleplaying disadvantages, not roleplaying them and arguing with the GM when he threatens to take your points away.

I disagree with this. Our biggest munchkin in GURPs is the one player willing to go through all the books to find several different ways to achieve the same effect and only buying the cheapest option. You can cheese out disadvantages too, but I see that as a GM problem rather than a system one. And any system with disadvantages will have that issue.

[warmachine]

All systems can be abused by munchkins but GURPS gives points for non-mechanically enforced disadvantages and there are plenty to choose from in the Basic Set. That's a honeypot for game abusers that D&D doesn't really have. If one of the players is a known game abuser (that you don't want to kick out), GURPS inevitably leads to a confrontation. I know someone who'd try that. This is, of course, a social problem, not a design problem, but when comparing GURPS with D&D, comparative problems with abusive players should be noted. If a group doesn't have someone like that, there isn't a problem.

[Ulzgoroth]

All systems can be abused by munchkins but GURPS gives points for non-mechanically enforced disadvantages and there are plenty to choose from in the Basic Set. That's a honeypot for game abusers that D&D doesn't really have. If one of the players is a known game abuser (that you don't want to kick out), GURPS inevitably leads to a confrontation. I know someone who'd try that. This is, of course, a social problem, not a design problem, but when comparing GURPS with D&D, comparative problems with abusive players should be noted. If a group doesn't have someone like that, there isn't a problem.

Erm, Code of Honor, Cursed (but it's clearly described as 'Murphy hates your guts'), Destiny, Jealousy, Sense of duty, Stubbornness, Vow (debatable), and Weirdness magnet. 8 entries out of 41 pages of disadvantages. There are also a few more that have (vicious) mechanical implications but often shouldn't be allowed because those implications are irrelevant to the game, like Self destruct, Short lifespan, and Terminally ill. Of the above, only Jealousy and Stubbornness don't specify enforceable effects...the rest just don't involve any die rolls, numerical modifiers, and such.

If the GM doesn't use reaction rolls and lets you get away with not roleplaying, that takes quite a few more out of play, but that's not really the game's fault.

About half the quirks do nothing except provide a roleplay constraint, but that's why they're only quirks.

[Satyr]

Disadvantage like Cursed, a negative Destiny or Weirdness Magic are much worse than most mechanical disadvantages, since they effectively turn the character into the Universe's chew toys. Esspecially Weirdness Magnet is a dangerous trap for those who believe that this is a cheap source of points.

[valadil]

Like I said, we haven't had much trouble with disadvantage abuse. It may be because we play with a set maximum of quirks and disadvantages per character and our GMs ensure that each quick or flaw will come up at least once. If you see these as a potential area of abuse, cut them from the game. You already have to cut out quite a bit of the game to make GURPs work for you, why not just exclude the flaws too?

[Robz_defheadz]

Personally my favourite game is Call of Cthulu.

Sure its dark and dangerous as hell, hideous fast moving monsters wander round, causing San Checks and more often than not death. Total party kills are very frequent in our games but we have a great time. And nothing can quite compare to finnally firing at the blue pus covered dog with a shotgun at less than 2 feet and doing 16D6 of damage.

Sanity checks... nuff said

[Klaz Eidron]

I think GURPS is a really good system. My group has played almost exclusively GURPS campaigns ever since I showed the two main books to them. But your mileage may vary, since what my group likes is to have a different bizarre settings each session, so if you like stablished worlds you might not like it.

[dariathalon]

There's nothing to prevent you from running fantasy games, although magic at first glance appears a bit awkward, especially if you are used to D&D. (Unfortunately, I don't know anybody who has taken a "second" glance at GURPS magic)

I have actually used GURPS magic several times, and rather like most of it. There are some things I don't like, for example, the fatigue system tends to lend itself to much more frequent cast/rest cycles than in D&D. However, the skill-based spells and organization of magic into trees makes a lot of sense to me. Each spell is its own skill, and you have to know the more basic spells within a school before learning the more advanced ones. You need to know how to create and shape fire before being able to sling fireball spells around, for example. Once you know a spell, you can choose how good you are with that particular spell, by investing more points in it.

I've also seen people use the powers rules to build magic. Creating worlds where all spells are learned as advantages has its own benefits and drawbacks, but is also a completely viable option. Characters created this way tend to be able to cast fewer spells, but are able to cast those spells with more reliability.

[Calanais]

I've had many years of good roleplaying experiences from GURPS (3rd ed), but it can cause problems for GMs and players. From my experience, picking up the book and trying to run a generic fantasy game the same night is asking for trouble. As other people have said, GURPS is intended to be universal, so a genre and setting have to be provided (either by the GM or from a sourcebook etc), whereas D&D has its default generic setting. A GM who decides on a genre/gameworld, familiarises themselves with the rules appropriate to that genre, and approves all characters for suitability in the campaign before the first game, will have a much easier time.
My longest and most enjoyable campaign as a player was a (homebrewed) GURPS 3rd ed game which I was involved with for about ten years, although it had been going on for several years before I started playing It was a high fantasy campaign, inspired by (among many other things) the political structures in Dune, and run by the best GM in Edinburgh. So GURPS can certainly work with fantasy, powerful magic (if not at the highest D&D level), and sustained campaigns, at least with the right GM and players.

Also, from what I've seen of 4th ed, its sorted many of the problems I had with 3rd ed.

[Fax Celestis]

Haven't played GURPS, though I have heard many many things about it, both good and bad. Mostly I've been too lazy to pick up a copy and learn it.

However, if you're intrinsically opposed to ZOMGRules systems, my understanding is that GURPS is not for you--and I would take a moment here to recommend a little game called Everway, put out by Gaslight Press. Four stats--Earth, Air, Fire, and Water. No dice--everything is resolved by tarot deck. Very straightforward, very story centric, and incredibly light on the rules in every sort of the term.

[Yahzi]

I love GURPS. But it's too realistic for most players. So now I'm running D&D. Apparently my players want to be able to stab giant iron statues to death with a rapier.

[fusilier]

Calanais and dariathalon:

Good to hear about magic in GURPS. I've never run a campaign with magic before, and never looked too closely at it. A friend once tried but gave up and reverted to D&D -- however he always does that, much to my chagrin.

All systems can be abused by munchkins but GURPS gives points for non-mechanically enforced disadvantages and there are plenty to choose from in the Basic Set. That's a honeypot for game abusers that D&D doesn't really have. If one of the players is a known game abuser (that you don't want to kick out), GURPS inevitably leads to a confrontation. I know someone who'd try that. This is, of course, a social problem, not a design problem, but when comparing GURPS with D&D, comparative problems with abusive players should be noted. If a group doesn't have someone like that, there isn't a problem.

I think other people have addressed the question well, but let me add my two cents:

1. Read the rules! There is a limit to how many disadvantages a character can have. Now admittedly some of them aren't very disadvantageous. Like one-eye (although if you needed to drive anywhere you might be in for some trouble).

2. Characters who aren't being affected by their disadvantages should have those disads cut. I've done this before . . . I was really reluctant to allow the disadvantage in the first place, and warned the player that if it is not coming into play I will have to remove it. Also there are times when certain disadvantages (and advantages) can disappear, simply through travel. (A protestant may have social stigma in 16th century Spain, but if he/she travels to England . . .)

You don't get many experience points in a GURPS campaign. The characters are essentially complete when the game begins. Lots of points must be saved if you want to increase a stat, otherwise you can only stick them into skills (and even then you are supposed to justify how you became better at that skill). Now if your GM doesn't impose any limits, and doesn't confront characters with their disadvantages, you can end up with some pretty silly characters. I find characters like that tend to be "broken" and it will be really obvious -- they just don't seem to work with the game.