Dark Sun: What System would you use?

[pawsplay]

Unless there's some great set of 2e Psionics that I don't know about? There could possibly be a hack out there. Really, I never had too many problems with psionics "back in the day", but I have a feeling this is because I used to be a very heavy-handed GM and would just ignore flagrant abuses.

.... well.... Mayfair put out some products under the Role-Aids brand a while back. One of them was a very decent set of Psionics rules.

I've never played GURPS, but from what I understand, it's a very "buildy" game. And while I don't mind buildy games, I want my non-buildy players to be able to make PCs and go and still be able to play the same game as the build-oriented players.

I'm not sure what you mean by "buildy." It's possible to spend a lot of time fiddling with advantages and such, but the SOP for building a GURPS character is to use a template, or set some key values for skills and Attributes, then use your remaining points to grab some secondary skills and fill out your background and unique traits.

How does the game actually play out? I've never really heard too many play experiences of the game... sort of like Traveller, to be honest. What is GURPS like in play? And how much could I reasonably expect to pay to get started?

The play really depends. How many points? What are the players expected to spend the points on? What optional rules? Basic combat system, or Advanced options? map or no map? etc. The default game would probably use the Advanced options, a map (hexes), and ignore most of the sidebarry information.

To get started... I would start here, to see if you like anything of what you see. Free GURPS! To do it "for real" would take two $29.99 core books for the GM or somebody (players could probably skate by on GURPS lite and passing around the books). If you use someone else's GURPS conversion, that's probably all you need. To kitbash it yourself, you would probably add GURPS Psionics (softback or PDF).

3e is only an option if it's an e6 Variant. I'd love to hear some opinions on how the game would work out in actual play. How does e6 work in slightly longer-term campaigns? And really, how would e6 work with, you know, sorcerer kings? I have no desire to play full on d20 or pathfinder. Sorry to the 3e guys, but I don't want to go back. And sorry to the 4e crowd, but that game isn't for me, either.

I've never used E6 "out of the lab" so to speak, so I can't speak on play experiences. In principle, the sorcerer kings would probably sit in at about CR 12, theoretically beatable in the right circumstances.

If you want to keep it low down and gritty, don't want to go full d20, and don't feel like learning GURPS, I think True20 is a very solid (and cheap!) option. And you wouldn't be completely on your own: people have thrown True20 toward nearly every possible conversion at some point or another. Ex:

True20 Adventure Roleplaying • View topic - Dark Sun

 

[Argyle King]

The main thing which might throw you for a loop with GURPS is that there are no levels in the sense that D&D has levels. Yes, you do have character points, but CP aren't always a good measure of strength. For example, the 100 point man-at-arms is going to (probably) mop the floor with the 300 point investment banker.

Also, GURPS combat tends to be a little more gritty than D&D. This is mainly because HP is less abstract in GURPS. Unlike D&D where my character fights exactly the same at full HP as he does at 1 HP, GURPS HP does measure damage... what I mean is that a GURPS character is at different levels of vitality at full HP, 1/3 HP, and etc.

However, this is mitigated by the fact that GURPS doesn't assume you will get hit. In D&D, I roll my attack; if I beat your defense number, you get hit. In GURPS, I roll my attack, and then you may choose to defend with a parry, dodge out of the way, or block with a shield.

As for your players, what I've found is that character creation goes far far smoother if the players come up with the concept and match the mechanics to the fluff rather than trying to go through the book, pick out cool sounding advantages, and then try to tie the fluff to the already chosen mechanics. Just because you're not playing D&D doesn't mean you still can't sit everyone down and decide upon filling a role within a party. As mentioned, if it's the first time playing, what GURPS calls templates is a good idea... while they are not classes per se, templates are probably the closest thing GURPS has to what D&D defines as a class.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

So, no BECMI huh? I still think it's a great choice...oh, and yes. You can have a "long" campaign with BECMI (I've had several multi-year campaigns I've ran or played in over the last 30 years; actually, we just played BECMI two weeks ago, and will probably play it this Sunday).

If you want something a little different, perhaps using an earlier GammaWorld rules set? I have a little pet project on the side that I call "Gamma Sun"; basically mashing the Dark Sun setting with the GammaWorld 3rd Edition rules set. I like 3rd edition GammaWorld best (a unique feel and flow to it, with some personal house rules, as is the norm with me ). I've basically 'converted' mutations into spells, radiation into various "defiling magic areas", and all that other stuff. It's actually turning out surprisingly well suited for Dark Sun (go figure!).

Another game(s) I thought about...but it's not very "fast and loose"; Either Rolemaster or HARP (which is kinda like a "Rolemaster Basic"). The thing with Rolemaster is that it already has 'built in' psionics as one of the three realms of magic (Essense, Chanelling, and Mentalism...which is 'psionic', basically). And the number of options they have in that game...I'm sure you could find some that would fit DarkSun perfectly. I'm pretty sure you can get the PDF rules for cheap of either syetem from the main ICE web site ( Iron Crown Enterprises ).

Someone mentioned Runequest II rules. Those would definitly be "gritty" with ease. Locational hit points always make combats deadly. The game is also fairly straight forward, with it basically being a d100 system. I also liked how they handle their magic in that version...pretty sweet. Again, a PDF of their system is available from them ( Mongoose Publishing : For All Your Gaming Needs ... ).

 

[Psion]

I see Dark Sun as more like the Conan stories, or the old Zothique short stories. Dark, gritty, but tales of heroes.

I've been using Fantasy Craft for my Zothique/Conan/Dying Earth inspired game, and it has been working well. It has some of the depth and combat competency that Iron Heroes has, but is better for exploration type games.

The downside: psionics is not well modeled in FC as is, and you'd have to make some tweaks to make psionics, defiling, and preserving work for Dark Sun.

Of your choices, I think 2e would probably be your best bet. It'd be easier to tweak the stuff in 2e that doesn't work so well that hammer all the rest of the systems to fit Dark Sun.

 

[Greg K]

I chose Savage Worlds.
My second choice would be either
a. True20
b. 3e . For myself, I found that core 3e with Green Ronin's Psychic's Handbook, and the incorporations of a few options/variants from both the 3.0e DMG and Unearthed Arcana can give a pretty close 2e feel if you control the WOTC splat options. It is a litle more work than many DMs want to do, but I think it is worth it.

 

[Wik]

I'm not sure what you mean by "buildy." It's possible to spend a lot of time fiddling with advantages and such, but the SOP for building a GURPS character is to use a template, or set some key values for skills and Attributes, then use your remaining points to grab some secondary skills and fill out your background and unique traits.

What I mean by "buildy" is, you take options out of the book to create a character. And some players will basically start using those options to create characters towards mechanical goals - "I want a character that can be the world's best healer, so I take all the options that lead towards that goal, and take all the disadvantages that my character will never suffer from". When I play games without that "building" impulse in there, the players have just as much fun, and the players that aren't build oriented can participate without feeling constricted by the rules.

If you want to keep it low down and gritty, don't want to go full d20, and don't feel like learning GURPS, I think True20 is a very solid (and cheap!) option. And you wouldn't be completely on your own: people have thrown True20 toward nearly every possible conversion at some point or another. Ex:

True20 Adventure Roleplaying • View topic - Dark Sun

Hm. I'm going to have to check this out. What I've seen of True20 does seem like a good game. And I do like GM Kitbuilding projects.

As for your players, what I've found is that character creation goes far far smoother if the players come up with the concept and match the mechanics to the fluff rather than trying to go through the book, pick out cool sounding advantages, and then try to tie the fluff to the already chosen mechanics. Just because you're not playing D&D doesn't mean you still can't sit everyone down and decide upon filling a role within a party. As mentioned, if it's the first time playing, what GURPS calls templates is a good idea... while they are not classes per se, templates are probably the closest thing GURPS has to what D&D defines as a class.

And that, primarily, is my problem. I have two players that essentially look at the options, and use those options to build a highly effective character, and then try to think of some archetype afterwards.... and then I have two players that try to think of a cool character type, and bend the mechanics to fit that.

The problem is that the first tier is awesome in play, and can overshadow the other tier. This has caused one player in the second group to start trying to "optimize" his character more so he can compete, and he particularly wants a game system where there isn't as much building detail in CharGen.

While I don't really have much of a problem with all of that, I definitely fall in the second camp, myself. And when there's a difference in playstyle like that, I should probably go for the one that the entire group will enjoy, which in this case is the second option.

So, no BECMI huh? I still think it's a great choice...oh, and yes. You can have a "long" campaign with BECMI (I've had several multi-year campaigns I've ran or played in over the last 30 years; actually, we just played BECMI two weeks ago, and will probably play it this Sunday).

I actually agree with you. I love BECMI, and I do believe it's suited for long-term play. My players, however, aren't convinced, and I'd hate to spend a year playing a game they're really not into. NOt to mention that it would take a lot of work to flip BECMI into Dark Sun... and my players REALLY want to play Dark Sun. So, that long-term BECMI campaign of mine will have to wait.

 

[pawsplay]

What I mean by "buildy" is, you take options out of the book to create a character. And some players will basically start using those options to create characters towards mechanical goals - "I want a character that can be the world's best healer, so I take all the options that lead towards that goal, and take all the disadvantages that my character will never suffer from". When I play games without that "building" impulse in there, the players have just as much fun, and the players that aren't build oriented can participate without feeling constricted by the rules.

I don't think that describes GURPS. It would be difficult to build a melee fighter, for instance, who is the absolute best in all situations, even with decadent point budgets. You could be a master fencer, and find yourself up against a mediocore greataxe-wielding goon... whose All-Out Attack forces you to defend, which results in a parry, that results in a broken weapon. Disadvantages grants points because they are Disadvantages; there really aren't any that would never come up, although it's possible for a player to scam the GM in some way by concealing the nature of their Disadvantages.

GURPS is very friendly to players who want to build to a concept. It's very obvious in most cases what to do. Want to build a cunning cad? Obviously, a mid to high IQ and DX, the Fast-Talk skill, and a decent weapon skill of some sort are going to be the backbone of your character. Former gladiator? High ST and hit points, High Pain Threshold, high weapon skills, Intimidate skill. As long as the players clue in to 12+ being a useful level of a skill, 14+ being an expert, and 16+ being superior, no one has to feel like they're being left behind. If everyone wants to contribute meaningfully in every combat, then everyone needs a weapon skill of 12 to 14, very simple.

I would consider GURPS considerably less "buildy" than any d20-based game. I suppose there are people who would look at GURPS as only a mechanical challenge, but I've never had to deal with that. GURPS I think GURPS is a really good system if you want characters to have well-developed backgrounds and personalities, without writing long and elaborate histories, and for creating a group of PCs that "cover" a wide variety of skill areas. will let you build just about any concept you want. It's kind of hard to min-max with the net down. You could build Mr. Eye-Stab, who spends basically all his points on being able to stab two people per round in the eye, but it's not going to be overwhelmingly effective. Even Mr. Eye-Stab can have someone get the drop on him.

 

[Aus_Snow]

If the RuneQuest alternative doesn't look all that unappealing, you might also consider BRP (the Basic Roleplaying "gold book") - it's a familiar enough system to many gamers, and this particular version is a mish-mash of lots of variations that have come before. So it has Magic, Sorcery, Psionics, Mutations and Superpowers, all in the core book, as well as options for Sanity (as per CoC), Character Traits (a la Pendragon) and so forth. Combat is less elaborate than, say, in MRQII, but there are optional rules to tweak it this way or that.

One optional rule for Power Points (which every character has), is to allow non-casters to use them as kinda Action Points (-ish). Neat idea, ensures PP are always useful, and shifts emphasis/strength a little away from casters. You can also, further, set magic (etc.) to be more or less accessible/costly/whatever. The idea, generally (depending on campaign), is to use only one or maybe two of the supernatural power types, and restrict each PC to one, if any.

Remarkably simple to flick switches and adjust dials, even without any of your own house rules, should you need any.

Plus, there's Classic Fantasy, which emulates D&D, right down to familiar races and classes - and presumably spells, etc. - but I can't vouch for it, as I don't own a copy.

Just another option to consider.

 

[evildmguy]

As I read this, I got this idea.

What about 2E with 3E psionics? Then it's a bit better than the 2E version and is a bit more comparable to the magic. In fact, with 2E, you could probably rip out the 2E magic system as well and have 3E, which evened the clerics and mages for their spells and spell levels.

Heck, 2E would let you frankenstein a lot.

Bring in the warlord, or a warlord like characters, to offset no cleric.
Bring in Primal ideas for working for the land.
Bring in healing as a "minor" or some such action to let healers do more.
The 3E bard, with Inspiring Word and other similar abilities could be cool, especially if they can do it as a minor.

I don't know what you don't like about 3E but what I didn't like about 2E was that all characters ended up more defined by class than anything else. So, all fighters look the same after a while. You could easily bring in ideas from 3E/4E that would make everything unique but keep the core of 2E.

Feats are also a good idea, in that it would help you differentiate between characters and you have guidelines on their power.

Also, I don't know what you don't like about 4E but it also made races unique and useful abilities through all of the levels. Again, you could bring those ideas back, or make up your own with those as guidelines.

I also think that the reduced skill set of 4E is a good idea. It keeps the focus on adventurer related stuff and allows them to go a bit beyond if they want without it having to be a nit picky chain of feats or abilities.

I guess it depends on how much work you want to do. Same for your players. I stuck with 2E as the base idea here mainly because that's what most of the Dark Sun resources are done in and then it keeps it easy for you if you are using older stuff, except Psionics but I think those would translate to 3E's version easily.

A few more coppers worth of ideas.

 

[Greg K]

Wik,
Regarding GURPS being "buildy".

The problem you described is a problem with the player and, possibly, the GM.

It is a player problem if they taking disadvantages they know that the character will not suffer from. They are gaming the system.

It is a GM problem if the GM allows characters with disadvantages that will not come up or the character will not suffer from.

Point/build systems require mature players. They also require a GM willing to tell a player, "No!" when they try to game the system, break it (intentionally or not) or ignore the campaign guidelines). Some players are not mature enough and some GMs don't want to do their job.

"Min/Maxing and Munchkinism aren't problems with the game; they're problems with the player."
Roleplaying Game Manifesto
Guardians of Order