GURPS 4th Edition Revised Announced

GURPS is getting a revised 4th edition. Steve Jackson Games has quietly announced a revised version of GURPS current edition, with a focus on cleaning up wording and layout. Announced at Gamehole Con and further detailed in this thread on the Steve Jackson Games server, the revised edition will be fully compatible with all existing 4th edition GURPS material, right down to preserving page references in existing books. There will be rule changes in the form of additions that will be added via addenda, with players able to bring in those rules as they see fit to their existing 4th edition games.

GURPS stands for Generic Universal Role Playing System and is intended to be a rules system that can be used for any kind of story or genre. Steve Jackson has long-hinted that a new edition of GURPS was on the way, although it appears that they opted to keep the current edition rather than rebuild the game or make significant changes to its mechanics.

From DouglasCole on the GURPS forums:

Since the GURPS Fourth Edition Revised monkey is out of the sack:

Zero. It won't be years. Most of the work is already done.

1. By far the biggest differences are major changes to physical layout and design. I'm not sure what SJ leaked at Gamehole Con, so I'm not going to go into detail here beyond saying, "The thing will be easier to use and read." It will not look the same, despite #3 below.

2. It is definitively not GURPS Fifth Edition, or even a GURPS Third Edition to GURPS Fourth Edition-level change! It is a GURPS Third Edition to GURPS Third Edition Revised-level change. It will not make edition-level changes to point costs, modifiers, prices, weights, etc. All rules changes will be additions, in clearly marked addenda "chapters," so that people can easily decide what to retcon into Fourth Edition campaigns.

3. Top priority is to preserve page references so that whether you use the Basic Set, Fourth Edition or Basic Set Fourth Edition Revised, an internal "p. 00" or external "p. B00" points you to the same rule. This brooks little to no rewriting outside of the addenda mentioned in #2.

4. Inasmuch as there is some rewriting, as in #3, it will be to remedy some particularly offensive or unclear passages. Not to change rules!

5+. And other minor stuff while we're at it. The above will inevitably change the size, shape, and location of art and quote boxes, so expect art and quotes to change, too. We'll update the credits to reflect additional material in the addenda, and the creatives who created the revised book. I'm sure there are 100 things like that.

#3 is the single most important element in living up to the promise of compatibility. There are literally millions of page references in 21 years of supplements and articles, not to mention community discussions. Invalidating them would mean a huge slap in the face. But #1 is the main reason to do the thing. So, it isn't a conflict . . . it's a visual upgrade that doesn't insult customers, while still providing both enhanced readability AND some extra "best of" addenda.

I can say without shilling or exaggerating that it is far, far more than a new printing. It just isn't a full edition. There are things between the two. A revision is one of those things. If all a reader cares about is the rules . . . well, there will be lots of addenda, but no, not a full revision. However, lots of readers care about readability, sensitivity, design aesthetics, being aware that it's 21 years later, etc. even if not a single rule changes.

Well, that's it for my needless leaks to follow SJ's leaks, but the takeaways:

• Better, more readable layout with different art and quotes.
• Mostly less controversial words, excepting indefinite pronouns (for economic reasons).
• More than 25 pages of "best of" rules skimmed from 21 years of system growth.
• Incidental glitch cleanup (e.g., mistaken "damage" for "injury," or "than" for "that").
• Promise of NO rules or page-reference changes to maintain total compatibility.

 

[pawsplay]

Every time I see all this talk about a stripped down version of GURPS to get people into the game, I feel the need to point out GURPS Lite exists. GURPS Lite is:

• GURPS (the actual fourth edition rules)
• 32 pages
• Free to download
• Perfectly playable as-is for many genres

 

[dbm]

Power Ups 10: Skill Trees has a system where about 26 ‘trunk’ skills encompass the scope of all the 200+ skills in the core book with a fractal structure which still allows individual characters to specialise in sub-elements of those skill trees.

There is another Power Ups volume in development on skills, too, but we don’t know any details of that yet.

GURPS has loads of options to tune it, though I accept that isn’t very helpful for a person just starting out with the system.

 

[Ghost2020]

The only way I'd buy into GURPS again, would be if there was also a new Character Set book which had templates that included a pared down skills list of all those appropriate to the genre a character belongs to. I no longer care to cobble my own together from suggested primary, secondary and background skills and then match it up against other character types that are suitable to the same genre. I thought I might get that in the few genre books I bought - nope. I guess what I'm asking for is pared down, genre-based skill lists.

It's too much lifting IMO for the GM for a session zero. And I don't want my more creative, enthusiastic players getting bogged down and burnt out on reading through the 350+ skills, whether it be while initialy building, or going through character development. And man oh man, could someone at SJG please improve the layout of character templates - IMO those are near to butt ugly. And while they're at it here'd be a novel idea; a bit of artwork depicting at least some of the templates.

I can't argue that the core mechanics of GURPS is solid, but the execution of them into published books is IMO poor.

There are the 4th ed skill category sheets that help.

I keep going off about how good 3rd ed is, one main book, and the 3 template books - Warrior, Wizard, Rogue are fantastic with templates for all eras. GURPS peaked, and it was with 3rd ed.

 

[dbm]

For fantasy, you may well be right.

The things 4e does ‘better’ than 3e are mostly around genre hopping and mixing things up as it is a more consolidated system. 3e was an organic set of sometimes conflicting rules made up as they were needed.

 

[Ghost2020]

For fantasy, you may well be right.

The things 4e does ‘better’ than 3e are mostly around genre hopping and mixing things up as it is a more consolidated system. 3e was an organic set of sometimes conflicting rules made up as they were needed.

Those template books aren't just fantasy. They have modern, military, etc.

True re 3e, it was best with basic set and a genre book, and an appropriate tech book. My two cents.

 

[bergec]

I've always liked the Fate approach where you use general skills unless it is important to the genre. If vehicles aren't a big deal, you just have a single Drive skill. If vehicles are a centerpiece, you have different skills for Piloting Planes, Driving Cars, Driving Trucks, Piloting Ships, etc.

 

[AlexofBarbaria]

Like many games, specific trumps general.

I think my preferred approach for a crunchy RPG is to give yourself plenty of design space with lots of statistics for things (characters, gear, etc.). Then try to keep the procedures clean.

GURPS seems to go the opposite way. Things have surprisingly few statistics. Characters only have 4 core attributes, weapons and armor are coarsely statted (e.g., only a single DR value for armors). Then they give no fluffs about coming up with these fiddly exceptions and bespoke procedures.

E.g., for the Feint rule, instead of capping the bonus with an exception to a core mechanic, maybe give weapons a maximum Feint bonus?

I guess the minimal stats approach is better for games that want to telescope from simple to complex, which people seem to consider a strength of GURPS.

 

[Sketchpad]

There are the 4th ed skill category sheets that help.

I keep going off about how good 3rd ed is, one main book, and the 3 template books - Warrior, Wizard, Rogue are fantastic with templates for all eras. GURPS peaked, and it was with 3rd ed.

I've got to agree with Ghost2020 here. I'd really like to have a few sample templates and the rules surrounding them in the core book, then have a series of template-focused books to supplement the core. Even breaking down some of the genres a bit so you have a setting book and a setting specific template book would be good for me. Oh... and for creatures? Less templates and more solid stat blocks. I appreciate having the building blocks for everything, but often times it's nice to have solid stats that you can pull from.

 

[Staffan]

Power Ups 10: Skill Trees has a system where about 26 ‘trunk’ skills encompass the scope of all the 200+ skills in the core book with a fractal structure which still allows individual characters to specialise in sub-elements of those skill trees.

I took a look at that and... whatever possessed them to base the costs around having skills at ~25? I mean, sure, there is a sidebar about how you can change it to having the baseline be something higher than stat-5, but still?

At least in my, admittedly limited, experience, the main issue with character creation is that a modern-day character ought to have like a dozen or two skills in the 12-15 range, and that the cost of that is prohibitive because you need either unrealistically high stats or pay through the nose for all those skills. Skill trees would help with that... if you didn't have to buy them up from a -5 penalty (the standard default for an Average skill). So if you want, say, the Natural Sciences trunk at 5 (to get unmodified IQ roll on any natural science skill check), that would be 35 points.

 

[dbm]

The points costs will be set to keep a degree of parity between systems. At the end of the day, the GM sets the point total, and if you want broadly capable characters that costs.