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 have a hard time considering any game a failure that has provided some of the best resources for roleplayers over the last twenty years. I wouldn't use GURPs for Supers, or games about animals as PCs, but then I also think the whole "one system to rule them all" approach is ultimately flawed. GURPs does what it does exceptionally well.

Quote from: estar;661097Gliechman is nitpicking how GURPS doesn't handle well the very small or very large.

So, nothing new on the Western front, huh?

Quote from: TristramEvans;660784Genre-mechanics are a mistake. I dont play RPGs so I'm forced to act contrivedly or stupidly so my character "feels" like one of the characters in the highly-contrived stories I've read or seen. I play a character so
I can play that character and make the decisions I would have made, as succinctly summed up by the Dragon's Lair 80s cartoon show's tagline "what would YOU do?".




There is nothing objective about any of this.

It's a gross oversimplification of genre mechanics.

Quote from: Rincewind1;661153It's a gross oversimplification of genre mechanics.

Well, its a Gleichman thread. Regardless, there's a difference between "genre mechanics" that simply allow a person to accomplish something that would be verimilitudinous to the genre vs. game mechanics that "enforce genre". The biggest problem of course being that people seem to think that genres are defined by a collection of tropes. They aren't. Tropes are thinsg that arise in genres as more and more imitators come along and try to "do the same sort of thing". Tropes are not something to be emulated, they are things to be reversed, avoided, or played with.

Quote from: gleichman;661122Considered 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.

I run GURPS online and I don't have issues attracting players to my game. I focus on older edition D&D for my publishing efforts and also run campaigns, eating my own dogwood so to speak. But my favorites are games like GURPS, Hero System, Harnmaster, etc.


I believe you are referring to the  listings that Roll20 and similar system offer. Using them can be useful but mostly it is a crap shot especially if you list something outside of the more popular system.

The trick is to be friendly and most of all be an active participant in a gaming community. It is ones personal reputation that gets the contacts to assemble a game.

I am willing to bet $10 payable via paypal  if you posted an online game here that you get at least four to signup. Why? Despite your abrasive style of posting you have written some excellent stuff on gaming. And I feel that there are those here that are interested in experiencing your style and have the time for a game.

Quote from: Rincewind1;661153So, nothing new on the Western front, huh?

What makes his complaint ironic to me that the scaling issue is one of those flame bait topics every system has. (like piracy in Traveller). That this very issue spawned Fudge which lead to Fate......

Quote from: TristramEvans;661152I have a hard time considering any game a failure that has provided some of the best resources for roleplayers over the last twenty years. I wouldn't use GURPs for Supers, or games about animals as PCs, but then I also think the whole "one system to rule them all" approach is ultimately flawed. GURPs does what it does exceptionally well.

4e even fixes the Supers issue although it isn't straightforward like it is in Hero. But yes I agree wholeheartedly that as a line GURPS has the best resources for any roleplaying game.

Quote from: gleichman;661123For 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).

So what were the exact differences between Hero and GURPS that caused you not to like GURPS? I am very familiar with both and like them both but I would like to hear your take on it.

Oh well interesting - I had never considered how much overlap there is between 'genre' tropes/cliches and 'story' expectations. (Or how HERO-type customizeable systems can be used to duplicate specific tropes, for that matter).

This puzzled me initially:

Quote from: gleichman;660145I think simulation of genre is desirable and also achievable by a mix of game mechanics and what could be called meta-mechanics (more commonly called play style). This puts me at odds with everyone who identifies as Simulationist.

The thread is useful in clarifying where you're coming from.

While TORG or HERO or the like are hardly perfectly realistic, there's little sympathy for Phoenix-Command-type systems around currently, to the point where I think many would count you as a 'simulationist', at least by today's standards.
I thought GNS/threefold model people at least usually consider simulation to about 'genre simulation' rather than pure 'realism' which makes the term more muddled, not to mention lack of distinction between those wanting detailed modelling and the immersion guys.

Probably when you say you want a mix of story elements that gets taken the wrong way as well, given how far some games have moved in that direction by now  - plot point economies and  games with plot-powered aspects (FATE), games where a majority of the mechanics operate at the metagame level (Marvel Heroic), GMless games (Fiasco), heavily abstracted systems with significant player input (Dungeon World), systems where PCs can't involuntarily die (TBZ, Trollbabe), systems with extreme protagonism (Apocalypse World - e.g. NPCs never roll or have stats), time measurements in 'scenes' or 'panels' (With Great Power), mechanics extremely tightly focussed on generating a particular story (My Life With Master), etc.

Quote from: estar;661164What makes his complaint ironic to me that the scaling issue is one of those flame bait topics every system has. (like piracy in Traveller). That this very issue spawned Fudge which lead to Fate......

Nearly every games *does* have serious scaling problems. Few work outside a very narrow range.

Quote from: estar;661166So what were the exact differences between Hero and GURPS that caused you not to like GURPS? I am very familiar with both and like them both but I would like to hear your take on it.

I've only ever looked at 1st edition and it's previous incarnations (Melee, etc).

The primary problem I encountered is that Stats matter more than Skill and the inability for attackers to affect the defense rolls. Complete deal breaker for me as I consider both features highly unrealistic, and worse- totally unsuited for any genre I'd want to play.

Beyond that, I don't like 1 second rounds, the weapon damage balance (be it against a person, armor, or object), and the effects of shields in battle. Add in that it's more exception based and no where near as easy to customize as HERO.

In constrast, there's nothing I specifically like about GURPs to offset any of the above.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;661177Oh well interesting - I had never considered how much overlap there is between 'genre' tropes/cliches and 'story' expectations. (Or how HERO-type customizeable systems can be used to duplicate specific tropes, for that matter).

It's one of HERO's best features.

That's it's not widely known is a serious flaw of how it was marketed and how how the example settings and supplements were written. The ability to vastly change the feel should have be strongly pushed and good examples given.

Instead the actual support material was uninspired and weak and has always held it back. This along with abandoning the grid destroyed the game in the long haul.

Not that HERO is perfect, I was never able to make it do fantasy the way I wanted it done.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;661177While TORG or HERO or the like are hardly perfectly realistic, there's little sympathy for Phoenix-Command-type systems around currently, to the point where I think many would count you as a 'simulationist', at least by today's standards.

Likely true, and that was certainly the case originally for those who read 'Age of Heroes' when it was a free download.

But my writings on how I played generally ended up getting me lumped in to the Gamist camp, and outside of combat I use a lot of meta-game level story methods. I'm a mix, but considering that I want my rules to strongly carry the combat sides of things caused me to come up with this definition as mechanically "Simulation" is primary.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;661177I thought GNS/threefold model people at least usually consider simulation to about 'genre simulation' rather than pure 'realism' which makes the term more muddled, not to mention lack of distinction between those wanting detailed modelling and the immersion guys.

The Threefold crowd considered genre simulation impossible for people playing with strong immersion, and thus not part of the Simulation mindset. I've always disagreed, and consider any immersion failure while simulating a genre to be a failure of role-playing.

It difficult to say what view GNS held. But they tend to lump anything that wasn't their special cause of Narration into Simulation if it fit or not. It was their dumping ground.

Just to explain GURPS.

Quote from: gleichman;661535The primary problem I encountered is that Stats matter more than Skill

Yes GURPS is a system where stats are the foundation of skills. Skill add or subtract from one attribute. This is a different approach than other systems like BRP or Harnmaster where attributes are a starting point and skills are raised separately.

Quote from: gleichman;661535and the inability for attackers to affect the defense rolls.

An attack can Feint which can result in a negative modifier to one's defense roll. There are other manuevuers. And conditions that an attacker can force his opponent into, like knockdown, that result in negative modifier. It is far more sophiscated than in Melee/or GURPS 1e.

Quote from: gleichman;661535Complete deal breaker for me as I consider both features highly unrealistic, and worse- totally unsuited for any genre I'd want to play.

I seen it be a point of debate. In actual play it has little practical effect for either GURPS 3e or GURPS 4e compared to HERO, Harnmaster, and BRP. (All of which I played). GURPS has also has rules for learning skills through study and time which can take the place of a experience point system. If you use that for XP the issue largely goes away due to the length of time required to raise an attribute and realism of attempting to improve an inborn trait beyond a certain level.

Quote from: gleichman;661535The effects of shields in battle.

What wrong with GURPS shields. Both GURPS and Hero System provide a similar defense bonus. Granted HERO uses the 9+ OCV-DCV system and GURPS uses a To-Hit Roll/Defense Roll.

Quote from: gleichman;661535Beyond that, I don't like 1 second rounds, the weapon damage balance (be it against a person, armor, or object), and the effects of shields in battle. Add in that it's more exception based and no where near as easy to customize as HERO.

In constrast, there's nothing I specifically like about GURPs to offset any of the above.

For me 1st through 3rd Edition Hero System particularly 1 edition Fantasy Hero had issues with overly heroic character. Characters that could be thrown through a brick wall and survive. With Hero 4e the issue were partly fixed and it seems with 5e fully fixed. However by that point I had several years with GURPS and lost the desire to return back expect for a Champions campaign.

Your issues are understandable and our respective issues with the various system caused us to wind up on opposites side of HERO vs GURPS.

I think with Hero 5e vs GURPS 4e it is pretty much a wash. Both system fixed their original issues to the point where one's history with a system counts more than which one is actually "better". A novice would be equally well-served by either.

Quote from: estar;661551An attack can Feint which can result in a negative modifier to one's defense roll.

I'm familar with that option, I thought it was in first edition (if not, it seems I saw a later edition at some point). Not only were these not effective enough in my opinion, they are examples of the stronger 'exception based' focus that I objected to.

The effective of skilled offensive on the defense should be contained in the core mechanic, not in exceptons that must be actively learned in addition and specifically called out.

Quote from: estar;661551If you use that for XP the issue largely goes away due to the length of time required to raise an attribute and realism of attempting to improve an inborn trait beyond a certain level.

Unless you run a generation campaign spanning decades of real time with long lived and even immortal characters like I do. In that case, this option makes things even worse.

Quote from: estar;661551What wrong with GURPS shields.

Too significant, and it stacked directly on top of the defensive ability I already noted.

Quote from: estar;661551For me 1st through 3rd Edition Hero System particularly 1 edition Fantasy Hero had issues with overly heroic character.

The default for supplements and examples HERO have published (especially those for fantasy) followed a strong 'D&D' model that basically turned Stun into HP. This however wasn't due to the rules, but to the example builds and example limits. All of which could be adjusted to suit individual campaigns.

I was running very realistic and deadly games from the beginning in 1980 just by changing the approach for building characters and objects- with not a single actual mechanical rule being changed.

As I noted to Bloodly Stupid Johnston, the fact that HERO didn't do more to point out this feature and use it in its own publication was a major failure on their part.

I know that at least the original designers were aware of it, as we were one of their official playtest groups and they saw the differences (they got copies of every build from our campaigns). They even approved of the Superheroes ones, but refused to consider the suggestions for fantasy.

Quote from: gleichman;661554I'm familar with that option, I thought it was in first edition (if not, it seems I saw a later edition at some point). Not only were these not effective enough in my opinion, they are examples of the stronger 'exception based' focus that I objected to.

The effective of skilled offensive on the defense should be contained in the core mechanic, not in exceptons that must be actively learned in addition and specifically called out.

I don't see the difference between Hero System Maneuvers and GURPS Maneuvers.

Hero System
[B]Block[/B] ½ +0 +0 Block HTH attacks, Abort
[B]Brace[/B] 0 +2 ½ +2 OCV only to off set the Range Modifi er
[B]Disarm[/B] ½ -2 +0 Disarm target, requires STR vs. STR Roll
[B]Dodge[/B] ½ — +3 Dodge all attacks, Abort


GURPS

[B]All-Out Attack[/B] - Melee
[I]Determined [/I]None 1/2 forward +4 to hit
[I]Double[/I] None 1/2 forward 2 attacks on same foe with ready weapon (-4 to off-hand without Ambidexterity)
[I]Feint[/I] None 1/2 forward Make one feint and one attack on the same foe
[I]Long[/I] None 1/2 forward Increase reach by 1 yard (Swing attacks at -2 dmg or -1 per die), may end in crouch (MA87)
[I]Strong[/I] None 1/2 forward +2 to damage (or +1 per damage die)
[B]Attack[/B] Any Step Attack unarmed or with a ready weapon, you make take a step before or after you attack
[B]Change Posture[/B] Any None Standing, sitting, kneeling, crawling, prone, lying face up (see B364/MA98). Prone to standing takes two turns (Exception Acrobatic Stand)


Quote from: gleichman;661554Unless you run a generation campaign spanning decades of real time with long lived and even immortal characters like I do. In that case, this option makes things even worse.

Then you are ignoring realism because the GURPS Training rules are grounded in real world research on how many hours it takes a person to learn a skill. In fact GURPS skill system is designed around the fact that a point represents a specific number of hours of training. Where Hero System skills are clearly a mechanical design that happens to feel realistic.

Finally if you going for hard core realism GURPS has a variety of options to cap the number of skill points in a skills (like 20 to 24) and total number of skills (a factor of age).

Quote from: gleichman;661554Too significant, and it stacked directly on top of the defensive ability I already noted.

It seems to me that the real issues here is 9+OCV-DCV vs To Hit Roll and Defense Roll. Because the defense bonus for shield are nearly identical for both systems.

Quote from: gleichman;661554I was running very realistic and deadly games from the beginning in 1980 just by changing the approach for building characters and objects- with not a single actual mechanical rule being changed.

As I noted to Bloodly Stupid Johnston, the fact that HERO didn't do more to point out this feature and use it in its own publication was a major failure on their part.

So you put a lower MAX on the number of Stun Points or something else?

Quote from: gleichman;661554I know that at least the original designers were aware of it, as we were one of their official playtest groups and they saw the differences (they got copies of every build from our campaigns). They even approved of the Superheroes ones, but refused to consider the suggestions for fantasy.

That too bad. 1st Edition Fantasy HERO was the system I used when I moved away from AD&D 1st as my primary system. If they fixed the numbers so the various "brick wall incidents" never occurred then likely it would have remained the system I would be using today.

If you are willing to put the work into nothing beats the flexibility of HERO to craft the exact type of game you want for your campaign.

For example in my Majestic Wilderlands clerical magic differed from arcane magic by the fact that clerical spells all tapped into a common piety pool (endurance pool) that could only be replenished by acts of piety or divine intervention (of a minor sort).

You should post up your HERO notes it would be both interesting to read and useful.

Quote from: estar;661558I don't see the difference between Hero System Maneuvers and GURPS Maneuvers.

It should be easy to see. It's not the Maneuvers themsleves here that are important, it's the core mechanic they are add to.

In HERO they modify a skill vs. skill resolution. In GURPs they are flat bonuses to a system that isn't skill vs. skill based. This makes their impact completely different during play. Example below.

Quote from: estar;661558Then you are ignoring realism because the GURPS Training rules are grounded in real world research on how many hours it takes a person to learn a skill.

Real world research on this matter has little use in Middle Earth, a place where a skilled human can match a Elf hundreds of years old. Or even between men whose life span can be half or less than of another. Just try and build the Fellowship using GURPs time training- and they will be nothing like the fellowship that appears in the book.

Here genre is more important than realism, and GURPs inability to adapt is nothing but an additional failure.

Quote from: estar;661558It seems to me that the real issues here is 9+OCV-DCV vs To Hit Roll and Defense Roll. Because the defense bonus for shield are nearly identical for both systems.

Always has been, it's one of the two major failures I noted for GURPS. Things that are just modifiers for HERO makes the problem in GURPs worse.

OCV 9 vs. DCV 9 plus 2 for Shield is 9 vs. 11 or a 9-, which is acceptable. Meanwhile a GURPS Defense roll of 15 becomes 17 which is silly.

GURPS is fine in a narrow range, but fails at the edges and is limited at the top. HERO continues without issue for as high as you need to go.

Quote from: estar;661558So you put a lower MAX on the number of Stun Points or something else?

BODY for humans was limited to the 8-12 range range, STUN Max wasn't touched, but tended to be figured +10 or so. Weapon damage was increased in very specific ways.

You can see most of the differences on my website here.

Good grief, where did those ads come from! I'll being dealing with those tonight. There's also a few typos.. it's Mass not STR that determines base BODY... oh well. Time for some editing

Quote from: estar;661558For example in my Majestic Wilderlands clerical magic differed from arcane magic by the fact that clerical spells all tapped into a common piety pool (endurance pool) that could only be replenished by acts of piety or divine intervention (of a minor sort).

Cool.

END Reserve is great for a lot of things. In a build of Godzilla for example I wanted to reflect the fact that he generally doesn't just stand there blasting things with his flame attack after attack (instead he mixes it up with mostly punches and the like).

So I bought his breath weapon with an END reserve large enough for one full power blast, and gave it a REC that recharges completely at the end of each turn. So (in general) he can fire once out of his four actions per turn.

That works well to limit any attack ability that logically a character would use all the time if he could...