[/B]

So here's the thing about GURPS unarmed damage: In the grand scheme of things, raw strength doesn't matter all that much when weapons are involved. Swords, axes, daggers, and spears are all pretty damn efficient. If you have the strength to move them around, the weapons do most of the work.
Oddly, the notable exception is Archery. It's the reverse of most games since D&D, but in order to do damage with the an arrow, you have to be able to draw the bow, and a powerful warbow can have a draw weight of upwards of 100 lbs.

So, there arise two options: Either have damage scale with the same logarithmic rate that lifting strength does, or have it scale at a different rate. I will say that scaling at a different rate is acceptable, provided that it is linked with how HP's scale.

Hit Points-- I have a love/hate relationship with them. On the one hand, they can be far more unforgiving than real world damage is, on the other, they can be far too forgiving. However, on the average, if you've set up damage and HP's right, they can be roughly accurate, so again, go for ease of use over teensy tiny accuracy.

So, that being the case, and an average human of about 100-150 lbs has 10 HP (I have another fancy function for mass by HP, but I'll just roll that into the table later), what does that mean for damage capacity?

So, if we look at some emergency medicine figures, knife wounds have a mortality rate of 0-4%, because about 85% of stab wounds would be qualified as 'scratches' only effecting subcutaneous tissue. Of the other 15% that require immediate medical attention, the mortality rate is 15%, so that puts the 'Instant Kill' chance at 2.25%, on average. This is, thankfully, right in the zone of the critical hit chance of 3-4 on 3d6, with a decent damage roll of a knife does 1d6-2 damage. (Let's assume that penetrating damage gets doubled after armor, and Lethal damage always does at least 1 point if there's no DR to stop it.)

So where does Strength enter into this?  Well, while the actual act of say, stabbing requires very little strength, breaking through an opponent's defenses DOES require strength. Most stabbings are more like wrestling matches, where the bigger, stronger enemy controls the smaller one and stabs the shit out of him.

This makes a good case for close combat being strength based (Brawling/Grappling) , but anything that works off of longer ranges to require more coordination (Melee). And in a fight between a man with a spear and a man with a knife, bet on the man with the spear.

Okay, enough beating around the bush. So how much damage do things do? Well, I'll set the base damage a STR 10 character can do to, say 1d6, and the upper bounds by STR 20 to 2d6.  The possible steps between are 1d6+1, 1d6+2, and 2d6-1. You'll note that I removed the 2d6-2.  That completely throws the average progression. With the above progression, the mean damage is 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 6, 7.

STR        DMG
9            1d6
10          1d6
11          1d6
12          1d6+1
13          1d6+1
14          1d6+1
15          1d6+2
16          1d6+2
17          1d6+2
18          2d6-1
19          2d6-1
20          2d6-1
21          2d6

Quote from: David Johansen;778256The term Strength covers the broadest generic effect so it's the stat.

The substats or advantages that it includes are size, build, and musculature.  But for a super hero you'd just buy Strength.

I'd lean towards fewer stats, one of the appeals of GURPS is the small stat blocks for cannon fodder.  More detail can be applied with advantages if needed.  But Thief: ST 5, DX 6, IQ 6, Athletics +1, Stealth +1, Throwing +1 should be a fully viable npc stat block.

I'd go full TFT.  Strength, Coordination, Intelligence and possibly Perception.  I like Perception as a stat because sometimes you need a generalized Perception and stacking sense modifiers feels wrong somehow.  Also, Perception as a stat lets rangers with average Intelligence still be fantastic woodsmen.

Health doesn't really need to be a stat if Strength = Hit Points.  But you could have a health stat and make Hit Points = Strength + Health.

I'm not a huge fan of having Advantages and Disadvantages making adjustments to derived stats. I think it just obfuscates complexity. GURPS stats look simple until you start adding Charisma, Status, Perception, Will, Lifting Strength, and so on. I'd rather have a few more stats.

I see what you're saying with Health-- it's sort of a one-note stat.  What if Health became Fitness, measuring a combination of Agility and Endurance that marks a fit person. Then Strength can become Body, and it's easy to see at a glance what a character looks like.
So the Stats are more like:
Body- Size and Strength
Fitness- Agility, Speed, Endurance
Coordination - Hand-Eye coordination, fine motor control, 3d spatial reasoning
Reason- Logical, Abstract reasoning, speed of reaction
Focus- Ability to narrow or broaden attention at will, mental resilience.
Presence- Verbal and interpersonal intelligence, functional empathy.

I think with these stats you can pretty quickly describe a broad range of characters.  For example, take two Firefly Characters: Kaylee and Simon Tam

Body 8; Fitness 10; Coordination 12; Reason 14; Focus 13; Presence 8
Body 8; Fitness 9; Coordination 10; Reason 14; Focus 12; Presence 14

At a glance you can tell which character is which. Start dropping stats and you lose that clarity. Start adding stats and you get the same problem, the character becomes a sea of numbers.

I guess it depends on what you feel qualifies for a stat.  Is it that skills are based on it?  GURPS could be better with a social stat on that count.  Is it a fundamental ability that's used in combat?  I think that's the metric GURPS uses.

I don't think you can escape having some advantages that relate to stats.  Perception, sight and hearing for example.  Really, I always want eyesight as a major factor in missile combat.  Because it really is and it's almost never done in rpgs.

You could look at all the in game uses of stats and treat those as advantages and then combine them to make stats.  For instance Strength is made up of Hit Points, Lifting Strength, and Striking Strength (which is unfairly unbalanced against innate attack)

As far as the relation of strength and weapons, I think you have to look at it as there being a base line strength to use a weapon and the weapon gets faster or slower beyond that (penalty to hit and defend?) whereas the damage is fairly fixed.  So the Strength Requirement to damage table would reflect the size of the weapon.  Even so, there should probably be an All Out Attack (Strong) where a higher Strength does add a damage bonus.  

The question is where does it just become another generic game and not a GURPS like and is being a GURPS like and pursuing GURPS fans who want a medium in which to publish their own stuff the goal.

If you are wanting to create an open GURPS alternative, it needs to map closely to GURPS.  In that case I'd suggest the 3-18 attribute and skill scale but I'd really strongly suggest basing defaults on 1/2 stat and making broad skills the main tier.

For stats I think it would have to be Strength, Coordination (not only more correct but also more people know what it is), Intelligence, Health, Perception, and Willpower for compatibility reasons.

It does need to be somewhat different than GURPS, for legal purposes.  I don't think the point system can totally be copied but most stuff is done in fives.  So I'd suggest dividing all the costs by five.  IRRC BANG! Skills are 4 x regular skills so that's close enough as they're a pretty good deal already.

God, another response written and mistakenly deleted. I have to have my hands checked from hand gremlins.

I was thinking about the issue of cross compatibility. I think it's a good idea to steer away from direct compatibility. Aside from dodging the possible litigation issues with SJ Games, trying to maintain compatibility in anything more than basis assumptions is doomed to headaches. You run into the Pathfinder problem, where it's ostensibly compatible with 3.0, but god help the sucker who tries to convert an older edition into Pathfinder. You *can* do it, but you'll constantly run into little corner cases that will eat up your time and leave you none the richer.

It's better to break the law and save the spirit, if you get my drift.

Well, that leans towards my roll over, 1-10 stats, and flat bonus skill concept.

So what about this as a directive?


1. A system that only uses d6s.

2. An open source universal roll playing system with open character creation by application of a fixed number of units such as could be printed on cards.

3. A tiered approach to abilities wherein it is better to buy the general ability than half a dozen instances of the specialties within that ability.

4. A "realistic / gritty" core system that can be scaled up to cinematic and super levels of without play without undue levels of additional complexity.

5. A modular support system that is cross compatible.  General support for multiple play styles tactical play and maples, hack and slash and narrativist.

6. Traits for supplying detail and special abilities but not for social and psychological effects.  These should be supported otherwise, being a sadist is in no way a qualification for law enforcement powers.

7. Supernatural powers separated out from mundane abilities.  Spells as powers bought as skills but with a more modular, structured form to constrain the size of the spell book.

8.  Technology levels and attack powers balanced.  Technology levels cost as much as an omnipower of maximum effect for a personal weapon.

9. Core rules under 32 pages.  Keep it simple stupid.

10.  Core genre supplements 16 pages, Fantasy, Super Heroes, Space Opera, Horror and the ubiquitous how to role play and GM information.  This would allow for fast development of fixed parts of the game and keep the interactions small enough to integrate and crosscheck easily.  Puts the complete core at 200 pages which could be kickstarted when ready.

Quote from: David Johansen;778555Well, that leans towards my roll over, 1-10 stats, and flat bonus skill concept.

So what about this as a directive?


1. A system that only uses d6s.

2. An open source universal roll playing system with open character creation by application of a fixed number of units such as could be printed on cards.

3. A tiered approach to abilities wherein it is better to buy the general ability than half a dozen instances of the specialties within that ability.

4. A "realistic / gritty" core system that can be scaled up to cinematic and super levels of without play without undue levels of additional complexity.

5. A modular support system that is cross compatible.  General support for multiple play styles tactical play and maples, hack and slash and narrativist.

6. Traits for supplying detail and special abilities but not for social and psychological effects.  These should be supported otherwise, being a sadist is in no way a qualification for law enforcement powers.

7. Supernatural powers separated out from mundane abilities.  Spells as powers bought as skills but with a more modular, structured form to constrain the size of the spell book.

8.  Technology levels and attack powers balanced.  Technology levels cost as much as an omnipower of maximum effect for a personal weapon.

9. Core rules under 32 pages.  Keep it simple stupid.

10.  Core genre supplements 16 pages, Fantasy, Super Heroes, Space Opera, Horror and the ubiquitous how to role play and GM information.  This would allow for fast development of fixed parts of the game and keep the interactions small enough to integrate and crosscheck easily.  Puts the complete core at 200 pages which could be kickstarted when ready.

You've got a real knack for getting to the guts of the thing!  I like all of these.  When I've had more than three hours of sleep in 100 degree weather, I'm gonna work on the core elements.

Okay so I've been thinking about powers and magic.

The enabling ability for magic needs to scale directly to damage, area, range potential.  I'd suggest simply calling it Magic Level and making it link directly to spell level.  I don't know why but spell levels just make sense to me.  Like technology level I suppose.

Oh, and the name of the game shouldn't be a silly five letter acronym that puts people off from ever trying it.

Dedicated
Eccentric
Role
Playing
System

So you're selling out to the cult of stat normalization already are you?

Has either of you looked at JAGS or EABA? JAGS seems pretty close to GURPS, and I think EABA has similar design goals.

Yeah, I've taken a look at them. They sort of have the scent of the early 2000's on 'em, don't they? Very over designed. It was a different age then. We all were experimenting with long division at the table and clever dice mechanics. Why, I still have the scars from Godlike.  Good times, good times.

There is much to commend JAGS and Marco is a swell dude.  However, the 4d6-4 mechanic is really annoying and there are other issues I have with it.  I don't know if I'd complain of over design but it's more of a closed structure that can do anything than an open one that can have anything added onto it.

Corps has scaling issues when it comes to doing superheroes and giant monsters, just like GURPS.  It's good at what it does and Greg Porter is the past master of technically detailed systems.  But such systems often are too restrictively realistic and rigid at times.  I'm aware of the exhaustvvelocity issues but if I want to do The Mote In Gods Eye I need fuel driven ships that can do 3 gs for days on end and have force shields that coruscate through the spectrum.  DERPS will have a physics based design system that derives real statistics from game statistics rather than the other way around.  You'll say I want a ship that can do 3gs for days and you'll find out how big it is or what tech level you need to get it down to a given size.

EABA uses dice pools and such must die by fire.

I do really like Chaosium's Basic Roleplaying big gold book.  However, it is a game that eschews any balance beyond the general tendency of people aiming for the most powerful guy first and is more truly and gleefully unstructured and old school than Palladium is in Kevin Siembiada's darkest nightmares.  

DERPS will be a small, tight structure designed to have modules installed.  It will have an implicit combat balance built into character design, something GURPS has always eschewed in favor of a somewhat wishy-washy guestimate of how much an ability can be abused in play.  GURPS advantages scale poorly in high level play and DERPS will scale cleanly without resorting to a whole book of equivocation on the matter.  GURPS Supers serves no other purpose that I can discern.

In the end we're talking about a hyper-staturated niche market where everyone in the market believes they're qualified to break into the market and make a fortune.  I really don't have a big problem with GURPS as a system.  I love GURPS warts and all.  I have a problem with GURPS as an absence of supporting products and a sand box I'd like to play in that is well guarded and walled off.  So, I want to create what I believe GURPS could be to show that it can be done and that the ideas I have put forward have merit.  The proof is in the pudding as they say.

For me at least, the key value is in proving a marketing model and product design path that I've advocated for GURPS for a long, long time, as much as it is about providing a superior replacement for GURPS.  Which isn't to say that I won't take any money if it makes a million dollars.  I'm not made of stone you know?

God, we really need a better name than DERPS. I keep giggling whenever I see it written in earnest.

Yeah, I have to agree with David. That 4d6-4 mechanic is a solution in search of a problem, which is frankly something I see a lot of in those early 2000's games.

On to actual design issues.

It seems that there are two possible dice mechanics issue on the table at the moment: 2d6+Stat (where stats, for humans, range from 1-10) vs. a Target Number (where 10 is Predictability easy, 12 is Challenging and 14 is Hard), or 3d6 vs. Stat, where stats range from 3-18 in a human. Both have their benefits and drawbacks.

2d6+Stat

Benefits
There's no obscuring how easy it is to resolve. Simply have the players roll off and the highest result wins. Additionally, the results scale linearly.There's no question that 10 in a stat is better than 5 in a stat.

Drawbacks
The problem of huge numbers: When players are rolling 2d6+35 vs a Target number of 40, players lose all sense of scale. It becomes incredibly easy to get on a stat treadmill: higher stats necessitate higher TNs, which drive higher stats. Dungeons and Dragons 5e had to institute a full armistice on stat bloat and call it 'bounded accuracy'. The problem is true in pretty much every Roll+mod system. This can be ameliorated by instituting a similar 'bounded accuracy' system.

There's also a psychological variable at play here. Give players a chance to increase a result by +1, and they will move heaven and earth to get that +1 bonus. Look at the absurdities that D&D players will go through to get that +5% bonus to hit.

Roll 3d6 Under Skill
Benefits and drawbacks: It's quick. Calculations can be made before a roll is made, or figured into the roll itself.
High skills are qualitatively different than low or middling skill. As your skill increases, you become immune to more and more penalties. Eventually, there's just no point in rolling, or you're spending more time figuring out penalties than actually playing. (Okay, I'm moving, 10,000 meters from the target, it's raining, and my right hand is crippled-- that's -25 to hit from my score of 36, so that's 11 or lower.)

This is mathematically identical to rolling 3d6+Stats and having a base TN of 20. But in practice, the two different methods create different attitudes at the table.

So let's look at the statistical differences
(When I get home from work.)

I meant 3d6 + 1-10 Stat.  As I noted it's really no different than the GURPS all stats in the 10 - 15 range.  The functional range is actually the same.  It's just that the top end 16 -18 has been reserved for things that are better than humans.  You just lower the target number to reflect it.  Also, with skills starting at 0 instead of -5, it actually duplicates the GURPS skill roll range pretty well.

I'm not married to it, but it's in the class of things that can be 100% GURPS compatible while looking nothing like GURPS.