Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Help Me Understand the GURPS Design Perspective
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7839078" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>In the early 90's I left D&D in frustration over its lack of skill system, inelegance, and inability to deal with combat maneuvers or really much of any other sort of cinematic rather than abstract combat propositions. My assumption was that GURPS would deliver the experience I was looking for.</p><p></p><p>And I did learn a lot of things trying to run a GURPS campaign, but ultimately I decided that GURPS read far better than it played. There are a number of problems:</p><p></p><p>a) It's too extensible and specific. It may be realistic that skills represent highly specialized knowledge but it's terrible for gameplay. </p><p>b) 3d6 is a terrible fortune mechanic. Having results glom around an average result may be a natural idea, but it's terrible for gameplay. </p><p>c) Point buy is a lousy chargen mechanic, especially in such a free form and extensible system, and most especially in a social game. Not only is it less balanced, but counter-intuitively it reduces player freedom. You end up as the players gain system mastery with a bunch of specialists that can only do a limited number of things well. I think it's worth noting that that in cRPGs true point buy is usually used only in single player games. </p><p></p><p>What GURPS is trying to accomplish is something I call "cinematic". A rules system is cinematic if the propositions and resolutions within the rules explicitly make clear to everyone collectively playing the game the sort of things which should be imagined. I don't however think that it is accomplishing that goal very well. The GURPS design dates to a period in RPG design history were realism was fetishized as the solution for every table issue. Whatever was ailing your game could be solved by greater realism. GURPS is what cured me of that mindset, though it took going into a GURPS rules subset called GULLIVER in an attempt to fix what was wrong with GURPS before I really started questioning my assumptions about how to play an RPG.</p><p></p><p>Aside from that you're dealing with a genre (Supers) that requires highly proactive villains that bring the protagonists into action, and it sounds like you have a GM that is trying instead to wing a loose sandbox game and you've ended up in a rowboat world. Rowboat worlds are characterized by complete freedom of choice but no real content to interact with and often very limited ability to carry out a plan even if you had a clue which way to go. </p><p></p><p>'Supers' as a genre by reputation requires players that counter-intuitively prefer low melodrama as a primary aesthetic of play. To make it work I think requires players that actively RP with each other.</p><p></p><p>GURPS has influenced the way I run many games, but I'd never go back.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7839078, member: 4937"] In the early 90's I left D&D in frustration over its lack of skill system, inelegance, and inability to deal with combat maneuvers or really much of any other sort of cinematic rather than abstract combat propositions. My assumption was that GURPS would deliver the experience I was looking for. And I did learn a lot of things trying to run a GURPS campaign, but ultimately I decided that GURPS read far better than it played. There are a number of problems: a) It's too extensible and specific. It may be realistic that skills represent highly specialized knowledge but it's terrible for gameplay. b) 3d6 is a terrible fortune mechanic. Having results glom around an average result may be a natural idea, but it's terrible for gameplay. c) Point buy is a lousy chargen mechanic, especially in such a free form and extensible system, and most especially in a social game. Not only is it less balanced, but counter-intuitively it reduces player freedom. You end up as the players gain system mastery with a bunch of specialists that can only do a limited number of things well. I think it's worth noting that that in cRPGs true point buy is usually used only in single player games. What GURPS is trying to accomplish is something I call "cinematic". A rules system is cinematic if the propositions and resolutions within the rules explicitly make clear to everyone collectively playing the game the sort of things which should be imagined. I don't however think that it is accomplishing that goal very well. The GURPS design dates to a period in RPG design history were realism was fetishized as the solution for every table issue. Whatever was ailing your game could be solved by greater realism. GURPS is what cured me of that mindset, though it took going into a GURPS rules subset called GULLIVER in an attempt to fix what was wrong with GURPS before I really started questioning my assumptions about how to play an RPG. Aside from that you're dealing with a genre (Supers) that requires highly proactive villains that bring the protagonists into action, and it sounds like you have a GM that is trying instead to wing a loose sandbox game and you've ended up in a rowboat world. Rowboat worlds are characterized by complete freedom of choice but no real content to interact with and often very limited ability to carry out a plan even if you had a clue which way to go. 'Supers' as a genre by reputation requires players that counter-intuitively prefer low melodrama as a primary aesthetic of play. To make it work I think requires players that actively RP with each other. GURPS has influenced the way I run many games, but I'd never go back. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Help Me Understand the GURPS Design Perspective
Top