I want smaller, leaner core books.

[nevin]

Most RPG players are D&D players, and thus are not playing a "rules lite" game.

I don't know if we can say that most of those players don't like rules lite games in reality, since most have probably never encountered or played in one.

I don't think this is a good example of a lite game. It's still not that lite, and it's not intended by its designers to be a complete game.

I'm sure it's playable, but I think its replayability is probably less than a system that is genuinely light in its rules and also flexible in its fiction - Story Bones would be one example.

but that's the dirty nasty secret of role playing games. Nobody really needs the developers or their games. Once you have the framework figured out you can do everthing else by imagination.

 

[nevin]

Nevin, I made a statement about my own friend. You corrected me as if I didn't know why he was doing something but you did. You were not commenting on some general topic open to debate, there is in fact a specific objective answer, and you had no means of knowing the answer because YOU DON'T KNOW MY FRIEND OR MY GROUP. So yeah, I can tell you what is up for debate when it comes to a topic you cannot possibly know the answer to and which is personal to me. Unless you are claiming to be a psychic? Is that what you're claiming Nevin? Or maybe you're claiming you do know my friend? Which is it?

then your reply was very poorly worded.

 

[GMMichael]

SJ Games was able to distill GURPS 4th Edition into a 32-Page Book of "GURPS Lite."

I had to look. Morbid curiosity. And I'll be damned if the guts of GURPS aren't in there. But the fat that's been trimmed isn't so much the fluff as it is the additional and/or optional rules, from the sound of it. Interestingly, the document recommends picking up the "Basic Set" once you've digested the Lite portion, at which point you can "jump into the action."

Is a smaller, leaner core rulebook not sufficient for jumping into the action?

 

[Mistwell]

then your reply was very poorly worded.

OK Nevin here is what I wrote which you replied to. You tell me how this is unclear:

Usually in our board game groups there's only one person who is willing to read the boardgame rules and then they explain it to the rest of us, because none of the rest of us want to deal with that text unless we really get stuck.

So what did you not understand about that wording which led you to believe it was a generalized statement as opposed to one my board game groups specifically? I'd love to hear where you thought something was inferred there different than that?

 

[Neonchameleon]

But it's fairly obvious that there are RPGs that can't be presented in a complete fashion in 64 pages.

Some examples: Burning Wheel; Classic Traveller; AD&D; probably Apocalypse World (I haven't done the count on this last one, but the superfluity isn't that extensive).

Apocalypse World could be cut down to 64 pages however as you run it in a very different way from D&D there are good reasons it isn't.

but that's the dirty nasty secret of role playing games. Nobody really needs the developers or their games. Once you have the framework figured out you can do everthing else by imagination.

But some games (like Apocalypse World) come up with good frameworks that I wouldn't have.

 

[Umbran]

then your reply was very poorly worded.

Mod Note:

With all due respect, Nevin, he said, "Usually in our board game groups...," a pretty clear statement about specific personal experience. You apparently lost that in the exchanges.

Part of being respectful and kind is not trying to push the entire responsibility for misunderstanding on the other person. Next time, got back and reread, and make sure you got it before digging in, hm?

And now, the both of you can stand down a bit on the loggerheads.

 

[Reynard]

but that's the dirty nasty secret of role playing games. Nobody really needs the developers or their games. Once you have the framework figured out you can do everthing else by imagination.

And yet the success of an RPG is nearly always measured by the number of supplements it has.

Is that real irony, or Morrissette irony?

 

[Argyle King]

I had to look. Morbid curiosity. And I'll be damned if the guts of GURPS aren't in there. But the fat that's been trimmed isn't so much the fluff as it is the additional and/or optional rules, from the sound of it. Interestingly, the document recommends picking up the "Basic Set" once you've digested the Lite portion, at which point you can "jump into the action."

Is a smaller, leaner core rulebook not sufficient for jumping into the action?

You probably could. I know a few folks who run the majority of their games with Lite - using the Basic Set mostly to supplement the equipment list or to have fuller text for a specific part of the game for which the group desired more detail.

That's the crux of how GURPS works in general. Most of the optional rules are for when someone wants more detail/granularity (or a different way of doing things) for a specific part of the game. For example(s), Martial Arts offers extra optional detail (on top of even more-optional more-extra options if wanted) for combat. Overall, the game works well as a (honestly) modular game.

Personally, my route for learning/teaching the game to my home group was to use Lite as a player handout. At the time, I was unsure how much I wanted to invest in a new game, so I bought 1 copy of Basic Set and used the free Lite as a player resource. SJ Games also provides a free adventure and a few other free products which are helpful for learning.

At this point, I'm familiar with the game, so I am somebody who wants extra options and has bought more books. A lot of the older GURPS material is easy to update, so the world/fluff books from 3rd Edition are nice (and very cheap).

Funny enough, increased familiarity with GURPS prompts me to buy monster/creature books for other games because I've gotten to the point where I can comfortably convert most things. I'm slowing making my way through my old D&D 3E library.

Going the other way, I'm curious if anybody has updated the Munchkin Monster Manual (published for D&D 3rd Edition) to D&D 5th Edition.

I haven't tried The Fantasy Trip yet.

 

[nevin]

And yet the success of an RPG is nearly always measured by the number of supplements it has.

Is that real irony, or Morrissette irony?

no argument it is pure Irony

 

[nevin]

OK Nevin here is what I wrote which you replied to. You tell me how this is unclear:

So what did you not understand about that wording which led you to believe it was a generalized statement as opposed to one my board game groups specifically? I'd love to hear where you thought something was inferred there different than that?

I can only assume I skimmed and missed it. My apologies.