Quote from: Spinachcat;508429GURPS was the king of modularity and SJ Games' RPG side is essentially defunct so I am unsure if modularity is the answer to financial woes.

GURPS died? When did this happen?

The core will need to be very small and very tight but I think you can at least get four or five tents if you can't go back to the single tent.

The stats and bonuses go in the core, with fighters, magic-users, clerics, theives, halfings, humans, elves, and dwarves.  Attack roll vs armor class, damage by weapon type (or better still size), and hit points by hit die* go in the core.  I think I'd leave initiative to I go u go with PC side going first in any case other than an ambush.

The trick would be supporting the various play styles in the monster books without needing four stat blocks.  I think using templates would be the way to go.  A skulker in the stripped down core playstyle is counted as a theif of equal level.  In 3e style it gets a specific skill and feat block and in 4e style it gets a power set and hit points by encounter role.  The templates are in the style books so all you need to add to the monster book is the template title.

* 4e style option is HP = Con + Level x Class Amount for PCs only.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;508432GURPS died? When did this happen?

It's not dead, but its become a PDF/POD supported game because SJ Games wasn't getting the deadtree book sales in the FLGS.

Probably because GURPS sucks.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;508432GURPS died? When did this happen?

It's technically not dead. It just gets maybe 10% of the support it used to get. SJG is all about Munchkin, these days.

Quote from: Spinachcat;508434It's not dead, but its become a PDF/POD supported game because SJ Games wasn't getting the deadtree book sales in the FLGS.

Well, they sure churn out the page count in .pdf's anyhow.

Quote from: B.T.;508435Probably because GURPS sucks.

Actually I'm a couple sessions into a GURPS 4e campaign and I haven't gotten a blowjob out of it yet.

Still it does remind me of some of the strengths and weaknesses of the system.  GURPS is a great system and it's a horrible system in a single breath.  I think part of the problem is that GURPS 4e is great for the GURPS fans and horrible for a new player.  Though I've complained about that before.

Yes GURPS is a lousy game if you want a balanced game with niche protection that favors fast character creation over flexability and isn't focussed on simulating details.

Side topic, but GURPS like (Hero) has the problem that it's a very complete game. It's been done, and refined. So there isn't much more to sell, given a fan base which is not growing. And the reason the fan base is not growing is not something that can be fixed by refining the game more or even by putting out truly awesome but niche supplements. The particular style of game just isn't going to grab legions of new fans these days.

So maybe it's not a side topic, because it's what has happened to the whole hobby. Maturity of the product, and lack of growth because the zeitgeist has simply moved on. It's just more pronounced in something like GURPS because of the comprehensiveness of the back catalogue and the unfashionable nature of the sub-niche (rules-heavy simulationism).

I really believe the product model is a bigger part of the GURPS problem.  The thing is that leaving vital parts of the game to various supplements approach is very much in evidence in 4e.

Take my current fantasy campaign's book requirements.

Basic Set Characters - character creation and basic combat
Basic Set Campaigns - healing, advanced map based combat
Magic - magic
Banestorm - fantasy races and monsters

Yes you could build your own races and monsters.  Yes you could use powers as magic though you'd need GURPS Powers as much as you need GURPS Magic.  Yes you could cut combat back and simplify healing.

I've said for a long time that they needed to roll the races and monsters from Banestorm and the magic rules from the Basic Set into a single GURPS Lite fantasy book.  But then of course there'd be little reason for anyone to buy Banestorm.  That may be taken as a value judgement of the setting.  I'm running it but that's more because it's there and requires little work from me than because it's wonderful.

I see SJG's failure to have a single book generic fantasy point of entry for GURPS as absolutely foolish.  And no, I'm sorry GURPS Myth and GURPS Discworld don't count.  But as they've got a new Discworld book Steve won't consider D&D 5e as a chance to pick up refugees from D&D 4e anymore than he saw D&D 4e as an opportunity to pick up refugees from D&D 3.5.

But really I don't think it's got anything to do with GURPS failing.  It's all about Munchkin being a huge success that takes a lot less work to put out.

Quote from: Rincewind1;508426

Well, with the disbelief expressed by some posters to the idea, I thought it was saying despite being obvious.

Quote from: tzunder;508415Oddly I seem to know quite a few people who play 3.5/Pathfinder and 4e and S&W and Lab Lord and C&C and like them all for different reasons. Oh, and FATE and Exalted and RuneQuest and Savage Worlds and a whole bunch of other rpgs, with and without minis.

:eek:

What a bunch of weirdos!

Quote from: Akrasia;508593:eek:

What a bunch of weirdos!

:huhsign:
I know, right? Haven't they found the One True Way yet?

Quote from: David Johansen;508442Actually I'm a couple sessions into a GURPS 4e campaign and I haven't gotten a blowjob out of it yet.

Play GURPS Vampire.

Quote from: Rincewind1;508426

Holy shit, is that John Turturro?

Quote from: The Butcher;508655Holy shit, is that John Turturro?

LOL No. It's Basil Rathbone.

Quote from: Benoist;508673LOL No. It's Basil Rathbone.

Oh well. There goes the only interesting thing on this thread...