GURPS is as much a "failure" as The Hero system.

Quote from: TristramEvans;661005GURPS is as much a "failure" as The Hero system.

Gliechman is nitpicking how GURPS doesn't handle well the very small or very large. Which the Hero System does do better to a point.

My view is that with GURPS 4e/Hero 5e it is a moot point which is a better generic RPG. In end both can handle pretty much any genre.

Quote from: gleichman;660966GURPs is a failed design. I recall people saying that GURPs has dropped below critical mass and is now only published due to the fact that SJ Games have more popular offerings (true or not, I really can't say).

HERO would have been an excellent choice, but with 6th edition it is now also a failed design that I won't support or buy anymore. And as I noted- has dropped below critical mass.

Harn simulates a genre I'm not interested in. And it also seems to have fallen below critical mass for I never see it in the local gaming store (which has an otherwise excellent selection). It seems to be on par with HERO at least in my neck of the woods.

Seriously? You factor in critical mass when you play a system of your own design as one of your main games?

My view that beyond the top 3 RPGs a referee or player is always facing an uphill batle to assemble a group to play a system. I always gamed in a rural area and if I wanted to play something other than White Wolf, Pathfinder, or the current D&D, I had to recruit my own players.

And with the Internet and VTTs that is even less of. a problem. VTTs allow fans of even the most obscure systems to ge together and game.

Quote from: gleichman;660966That sad, I'm willing to stand back and let this section of the hobby die. I can maintain and recreate personal groups for playing in the style and its loss is just one more example of how modern culture is destroying tradition values IMO. And it's an unimportant example.

to be blunt you are not taking advantage of the Internet enough. Get a Roll20 account and advertise a game here once a month or whatever time you can spare. Despite annoying people constantly who like other styles and system, your blog has a good reputation. And you know how to publish things. Maybe put  up a low cost PDF so more people can see what you preach looks like in practice.

Otherwise you are going to wind up as that guy on his front porch yelling at kids to get the hell off his lawn every five minutes.

Quote from: gleichman;660966One might consider my posting here an attempt to awaken interest, as would providing my homegrown rules in PoD. It's not much, but as a single person it's basically the limits of what can be done at least with my time and income restraints.

That sad, I'm willing to stand back and let this section of the hobby die. I can maintain and recreate personal groups for playing in the style and its loss is just one more example of how modern culture is destroying tradition values IMO. And it's an unimportant example.

I think there are more people who want this style than may seem to be the case at first. Provided I understand the nature of the approach you are describing I know I have encountered many players who, when I consider their comments and criticisms, seemed to be asking for a game like you describe. I've also seen this expressed online. Because it is something of a middle position you can probably can attract plenty of people from either extreme as well. Now that you are starting to define what you are after, that will give folks who agree with you something to handle (sort of how immersion, genre emulation, sandbox, and verisimilitude help many of the posters here describe their style and preferences). When you say genre simulation, then explain what it means, it actually clarified your position tremendously for me (it also seems to fit a lot of the early games I participated in when I first started). Like Estar said, OSR showed that you can rekindle the hobby's past.

Quote from: gleichman;660966GURPs is a failed design. I recall people saying that GURPs has dropped below critical mass and is now only published due to the fact that SJ Games have more popular offerings (true or not, I really can't say).

I would - cordially! - disagree on GURPS Being failed design. 4e specifically might be, as several GURPS fans I know refuse to play it for Being too fussy basically and I kinda agree to a point; it's more HERO-esque than earlier editions making character creation somewhat more involved and gives a more difficult impression.

Earlier eds were certainly not difficult to Get people into.

I Think you're sadly correct re: below critical mass.

Quote from: estar;661097Gliechman is nitpicking how GURPS doesn't handle well the very small or very large. Which the Hero System does do better to a point.

My view is that with GURPS 4e/Hero 5e it is a moot point which is a better generic RPG. In end both can handle pretty much any genre.

I agree pretty much completely!:)

I'd say GURPS 4e handles extremes on the very large bit of the scale better than earlier eds mind, especially powers-vise, but at the cost of looking way more daunting, and Being more difficult.

Not as into HERO but got 5ed and think it's pretty awesome.

Quote from: The Ent;661102I agree pretty much completely!:)

I'd say GURPS 4e handles extremes on the very large bit of the scale better than earlier eds mind, especially powers-vise, but at the cost of looking way more daunting, and Being more difficult.

Not as into HERO but got 5ed and think it's pretty awesome.

Crating powers is more difficult with 4e than any edition of Hero. However the core of GURPS 4e is virtually the same as it ever was. More so with the universal use of templates. The presentation on the other hand, the presentation has much to be desired for a novice.

Really though, most dice range failures come from looking at the dice range too much and not enough at the modifiers.  In a perfect world you'd be multiplying percentages to reflect such modifiers.  Extra rolls can achieve essentially the same result and dice pools actually do this better than single die systems because you can work with a fixed target and vary the number of dice.

But the real issue is that a thirtieth level thief shouldn't be worrying about climbing the ivy covered back wall of the manor house any more than the first level character should be worried about climbing a burning-hot, sheer obsidian cliff while magma and ash rain from the sky and the earth violently shakes.  There should be modifiers that run right out of the dice range at times because there are things that are simply impossible and there should be bonuses that run right out of the dice range at times because there are characters that can do the impossible.

As for GURPS, I don't think it's a failed design at all.  I think Brian is overly generous with his definition of failure, as I've been saying.  What GURPS is, however, is a game that increasingly depends on the players to build characters in the spirit of the setting as the points totals increase.  It is a game that overwhelmingly depends on player maturity and good intent in combination with clarity from the Game Master.  I don't see that as a failure but I do see it as something that an individual wouldn't want in a system.  I mostly run GURPS with pre-generated characters.  It's the combat system I love much more than the character creation.

Fourth edition is actually simpler than third but the presentation is terrible for a newbie.  Even GURPS Lite 4e is pretty dense and intimidating if quite complete for mundane purposes.

Quote from: beejazz;660994I don't just mean that tropes are good or bad, I'm also saying that some translate better or worse. If I ran a game in the Cowboy Bebop setting, I might prefer a relatively lethal system for a number of reasons. But that doesn't mean I'd want more of a body count in the show.

Now, I could argue that Cowboy Bebop would run in a lethal system and the characters just played it smart, but there's no guarantee (using that approach) that the results match the source material. Because the players won't necessarily act the same way as the characters.

This may or may not prove to be a poor example, but hopefully you understand what I'm getting at.

I understand it, and it's a good example because it's a common one when talking about genre simulation.

One of the solutions I've seen offered for problem is a term called script immunity (for some reason). Basically it says that PCs don't die but it can include other types of immunities as well. Like you I never considered it acceptable.

Instead I go back to what the purpose of the game is for my solution.

Just about any genre work I'd care to simulate includes a interesting world and a fair number of characters major and minor. Those characters run the range of unimportant to major hero and generally speaking bad things can easily happy to unimportant background characters even in a series with the strongest 'the hero always wins' trope.

So to me, the question that is to be resolved in game play is simple: Are the PCs minor characters or are they Heroes of the tale? And I do mean resolved in play- if they die or fail, they are but background for the real heroes of the tale. If they succeed, they are the actual real heroes.

This is basically what they are playing for, the determination of what part they've played in a genre simulation. To the overall 'story', it doesn't matter how they end up- the simulation is successful if they die, fail, win or manage just about anything else for that matter.

Quote from: estar;661098Seriously? You factor in critical mass when you play a system of your own design as one of your main games?

No, I ignore it in my own play. I even ignore it when seeking new players. IME I can convert most gamers to my style of play in a single session.

It's only important when considering the hobby outside myself and what it has to offer. It basically sucks, here for example I can count on a single hand those who even come close to understanding my gaming style out of it's entire list of poster and most don't post much. It makes it difficult to have interesting conversations online.

Quote from: estar;661098to be blunt you are not taking advantage of the Internet enough. Get a Roll20 account and advertise a game here once a month or whatever time you can spare.

Considered it as my son has played and run games there, one of which I watched as we're considering it as a method of hooking up with some old gaming friends out of state.

Three problems I noted-

First it's driven by the same lack of interest in new and older game system as say this place. D&D grabs lots of interest, and an attempt to get a HERO game started fails completely.

Second, a non-standard system like mine would be basically invisible to the players. One needs to know it upon entry, or it will in effective not exist and the gaming session becomes very OSR like with only the GM engaging the rules(or even not engaging) in place of the players engaging the rules.

And lastly, I'd actually have to want to spend my time with whoever showed up. I wasn't impressed with quality I saw while I was observing.



I think your OSR focus has blinded you to the what faces any other gamer attempting what you suggest. It's easy when the game is D&D, so you must thing everything else is easy.

Quote from: The Ent;661100I would - cordially! - disagree on GURPS Being failed design.

You (and the others who have voiced this) are free to so, at least when it's based upon a informed view where the features and results of the mechanics are actually known.

At that point the matter does become subjective in a simple way. Does the GURP simulate those genre elements you wanted to simulate or does it stand in the way?

For myself, GURPs never simulated what I wanted and worked actively against what I did. So I judge it a 'failed' design. Since it has fallen below critical mass, the wider market reached the same opinion if for different reason.

In contrast HERO was almost a perfect game. However changes in 6th edition also turned it into a failed design for me and I've abandoned it sticking to my 5th edition books. The wider market has also agreed, and HERO has fallen below critical mass (again likely for different reasons).

Not that I'm really in agreement with or able to predict the wider market. It likes a lot of games I don't and I think HERO 5th would have also fallen below critical mass in today's world.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;661099I think there are more people who want this style than may seem to be the case at first. Provided I understand the nature of the approach you are describing I know I have encountered many players who, when I consider their comments and criticisms, seemed to be asking for a game like you describe.

I think there are as well. As I've said before, I've always had excellent success in turning D&D players away from that gaming style to mine.

Not so much with WoD gamers however.

But I have to set them down at my table for a session to do it. I've never managed it online in exchanges like this, at least to my knowledge. So that would indicate that Cons would be an excellent choice, but I seriously doubt anyone would sign up for the session.

Here's the thing-

When seeking new players I typically start by going to their games and playing and noting where they are unhappy with the game which tends to be the same places as I am. After talking about those problems for a while over the course of a few sessions I offer to run a game without those issues. It works very well.

But I don't think it's usable online or at a Con as those posters and players represent the most committed of gamers.

Quote from: gleichman;661120So to me, the question that is to be resolved in game play is simple: Are the PCs minor characters or are they Heroes of the tale? And I do mean resolved in play- if they die or fail, they are but background for the real heroes of the tale. If they succeed, they are the actual real heroes.

Well, exactly.  It's not whether you're telling a story or not, it's who's story you're telling.  It's where the focus is.

But it's also real risks, real rewards, and real tension.  Plot immunity undermines all three of those.

I always laugh at the pissing match between the OSR guys and the story game crowd because  D&D is a story game with a strong narrative structure and genre conciets built into it.  Sure a PC dies here and there but how often do the hero's companions die in sword and sorcery fiction?  All the time, character death just sorts out who the protagonist is.

GURPS is the Glaive-Guisarme of the gaming industry.  It's flexible and effective in skilled hands but it might as well be a lawn roller in other hands.

If you want to simulate genre conventions you have to throw the right switches.  Dungeon Fantasy is an example of how to do this though, sadly it doesn't do it for a genre that interests me.  Supers on the other hand just plain out gets it wrong.

Quote from: David Johansen;661126All the time, character death just sorts out who the protagonist is.

Exactly.

Are you Aragorn or Boromir, Taran or Ellidyr, Ripley or Dallas, the Enterprise or the Constellation? Let's play the game and find out.