Zinovia said:
The newer editions may have changed this, but when I played GURPS, I found combat to be boring and repetitive. Once we'd been playing for awhile, it was too easy for me to kill the bad guys, and too hard for them to hurt me.
That effect can be produced in just about any session. Why didn't the GM just crank up the bad guys? If it's so predictable, your character should have died like a dog if your GM wanted to take him out.
The magic system was very restrictive, with powers building upon each other. In order to toss a fire attack, I first had to learn other simple fire spells that I didn't really care about. I could not build the powers I'd envisioned for my character in the way that I wanted. I ended up optimizing my rapier skill to insane degrees rather than focus as much on magic.
That's just the default system. Conceptually, you have to learn "fire magic" before you master more powerful spells. If you want a different system, build one. GURPS Powers is great for this.
I have played Hero system only as a supers game (Champions), but enjoyed it more than GURPS. It has more stats, which makes it easier for me to define the character that I want.
HERO has STR, DEX, CON, BODY, INT, EGO, PRE, COM, PD, ED, REC, Spd, END, STUN, and basic movement rate.
Equivalently, GURPS has ST, DX, HT, hit points, INT, Will, levels of Charisma, levels of Appearance, DR and limited DR, Fatigue recovery advantages, Basic Speed, Fatigue, and basic move. It lacks STUN. GURPS further has numerous Advantages and Disadvantages like Ham-Fisted or Musical Talent.
I'd say GURPS actually wins this one, handily.
The powers are extremely flexible in the types of characters you can create.
I assure you GURPS is no less flexible.
I like the separation of Stun (for non-lethal damage) and Body (for lethal). That's something I wish D&D had in order to resolve once and for all the debate over what hit points really represent.
I don't like the distinction because it's unrealistic. In genres where being knocked out is no big deal, being sliced or shot usually isn't that big a deal, either.
I think that class based systems have some advantages over strict point buy. It's generally easier to make characters (Rolemaster being an exception). People know more of what their "job" in the group is supposed to be. They will always be good at most of the stuff they need to do their job (weird multi-classes and PrC's made this not necessarily true in D&D either). Character levels provide an easier handle on how powerful a character is. Somehow it's more satisfying to say "I'm a 10th level rogue" rather than "I have 80 points and am good at this weapon, and those skills" (or whatever, I don't know what the numbers should be).
Strictly speaking, point-based games win, if templates are available. I can choose a "class" in GURPS, taking up most of my points, and then, if I choose, further customize the character.
Levels are an appealing concept. I'm running a two year old 3.5 campaign right now, and I agree, levels are a handy concept and classes make character creation easy. But levels are also artificial and sometimes meaningless, and classes can be constricting.
). However, the reasoning for the defense roll is top notch you guys. Thanks.
