Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9784772" data-attributes="member: 6799660">I don't think that most of this is serious calls for the game to be massively changed (they've already said they are changing so little that the page references won't change), so much as 'this is what I think they would need to change about GURPS to make it preferable to me.' I've certainly heard complaints about this in point-based or advantage/disadvantage-bearing systems. Kind of like white-room min-maxxing, it's always unclear how representative the complaints are, and whether it's something the complainer has seen frequently happen or simply sees as a real possibility. There's also the issue (like min-maxxing in, like, D&D 3e) that it's not necessarily unambiguous where the line is and two reasonable people can disagree on what is/isn't 'cheating' (let's call it violating the spirit of the mechanic). This is especially true for penalties in situations that might come up, but probably won't (and/or wouldn't natively, but 'I wouldn't have chosen it if I didn't want the GM to include situations where it came up.'). Or (and I'm honestly still on the fence about this one) the situation of behavioral disadvantages where one get points for playing a character how you had wanted to play them in the first place.I think, more importantly, is that you've uncovered the other major factor of GURPS-style disadvantages -- the GM has to know them, remember them, and bring them up. In a large group with characters with multiple disadvantages, this can be difficult and one or more can often fly under the radar. Systems where the disadvantage coming up has the person-most-invested-in-the-character-that-has-it actively looking for opportunities for it to rear its head have an advantage with this specific issue.Well, awesome in either the modern or archaic sense, for sure. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Overall, yes, GURPS kinda creates 'people' (or 'people, if the universe were such that...') as they exist in their everyday lives*, whereas Fate creates people as they exist in stories, or just in the most eventful days of their lives. Mind you, since we generally are playing the most exciting times of a character's life, GURPS then has some workarounds (ex. scores that wouldn't statistically work if applied to everyday life, but then guidance to only require a check under challenging situations) to get halfway back there.Yeah, I don't see any inherent reason why you couldn't do so with a Fate-like system (although it would be a re-build and re-playtest). I think that the reward-when-disadvantage-comes-up mechanic simply came to the fore at the same time as when granularity was in decline.Oh, let's be clear, even as just an artificial economy of traits, the GURPS point system is serving a purpose. It's just not the one that one might think it serves (communication and consistency would help in this matter), or want it to be. Being an alternate to other system's bespoke character creation mechanisms certainly is true.</blockquote>

Verification