Search results

I’m steadily acquiring a range of games in this space, for multi- or solo-play, and filling different time demands. Recently I picked up Pauper’s Ladder which is a fairly light-weight and fun adventure game that we can play easily in an evening. I also just got Vantage which is a coop...

Coming back to this, it was Power ups 11 I was remembering discussion of. Kromm mentioned it again in the latest GURPS News.

GURPS Dungeon Fantasy hits points 1 and 2 really strongly. Could be worth checking out.

How does it compare / contrast to the original TV series?

Depends on the nature of the spell. If both effects were separate and came from the caster, I would allow this (e.g. like Magic Missile). If the line of effect went from the caster, to target 1 then to target 2 (e.g. chain lightning) they would need line of effect between the two targets and...

Dungeon’s and Dragons is kind of reaching the point of being a generic name for fantasy gaming. I see it that way, or perhaps more specifically as combat spelunking if I’m really focussed on the dungeon aspect. There are an embarrassment of riches in the the fantasy RPG space, and some I enjoy...

Anyone familiar enough to know the implications of this?

IIRC Dr Kromm (GURPS line editor) is currently working on a supplement with guidance on how to re-jink the GURPS skills system so there are a smaller number in use. There is a whole series of supplements (Power Ups series) on making more or less extensive changes to the system.

This has been in development for a couple of years, and Douglas makes good stuff. So I will be checking this out.

For the final time: that is a player’s choice to make. The system supports this by actually making it a choice available to them.

The incentive is an automatic crit success for the characters final action. The player decides if that is worth it or not, based on the context. You can argue that it is a poor incentive, you can’t say it doesn’t exist. I think it is a fine incentive personally.

That’s the answer to your question. The player decides, not the rules.

I disagree; if you pick the death option you get to act and that is an automatic critical success. Sounds like an incentive to me. The factor X you are missing here is that Matt made it clear that, if the characters dies, they won’t get a replacement character as it was just a short campaign...

I totally agree with this premise, and think it extends well beyond meeting management. Making plans, adapting to changing circumstances, understanding individual skill sets and capitalising on them. All skills for both GMing and ‘leadership’. My group are pretty demanding when it comes to...

I didn’t say when the backstory is generated… :)

I think you can separate players into two broad groups: those who give their characters backstories for the GM to put story hooks on those who have a blank backstory in case the GM tries to put story hooks on it The former typically see plot twists as a good thing, the later typically want...

Looking at the survey, it seems both mechanics and world are potentially up for changing specifics.

I would suggest those are not core books in WotC’s opinion and so unlikely to ever be reproduced as a 2024-based book.

This being the key part. Until replaced, not ‘forever’. This book is the replacement for all the stuff they think has lasting value.

I doubt their strategy is to encourage people to use old books, if only because they won’t be keeping those in print. So anything key to the setting should be included in the new book. What is considered ‘key’ could vary by person of course..,