What is your Opinion of GURPS?

[Arnwyn]

I don't buy the retort (which I have heard before)

I should hope so! People vomit forth that argument here at ENWorld every time someone mentions "3e" and "min/maxing" in the same paragraph.

 

[d4]

I should hope so! People vomit forth that argument here at ENWorld every time someone mentions "3e" and "min/maxing" in the same paragraph.

probably because (at least in my experience) it's true. the players i know who are "min-maxers" are min-maxers in every system they play. the players who are not min-maxers are not min-maxers in every system they play.

i have never, in my 22 years gaming, experienced something like Psion describes, where a player is "normal" in one system and a "min-maxer" in another. therefore, i don't see min-maxing as being a fault of systems, but instead a fault in players.

 

[tauton_ikhnos]

What d4 said ^_^

 

[Staffan]

Kult has an interesting mechanism. Disads tend to be seen as point farms because players conceive them as being worth more mechanically than their actual negative impact. I feel GURPS makes this particularly problematic in part because it seems to give you SO MANY points for relatively minor problems. So reducing the point compensation is one way to address this. Kult has an elegant second way -- it makes the disadvantage an actual disadvantage in the mechanics of the game. Basically, Kult (a horror game) makes it part of the sanity mechanic, which is pretty important to the central focus of the game.

In addition, many things which are considered disads in other systems are advantages in Kult, because they improve your mental stability. Things like Code of Honor and such.

 

[Particle_Man]

Confession of a Gurps-only min/maxer

Actually, Gurps does tend to make some people min/max more often. I should know. I am one of those people.

When it comes to other systems, where you have levels, etc., then I get more into the roleplaying aspect. But when you have a "pure points" system, of which Gurps is one, I go nuts. I will take the 96 point dependant disadvantage if the GM is crazy enough to let me. I will take disadvantages that follow what I, as a player (regardless of the character), like to do or experience anyhow (impulsiveness, curiousity and weirdness magnet come to mind as candidates). I am the guy that goes for UBER-dex or IQ to become mr. (I can do anything). If I play a wizard, on the othe hand, I go for Johnny one-spell (max out abilities in one spell) if I can, to avoid fatigue costs and cast the same spell more frequently. And don't get me started on Supers.

In D&D I don't do this half as often. Sometimes I even deliberately play weak characters in D&D. (In 1st ed AD&D I once played a cleric/magic-user with int and wis of 9. My cleric spells fizzled a depressing amount of the time, but what the hey). I am actually considering a character that spends all of his feats on toughness, just to simplify the character concept.

So for all you people that say that it is a player problem, I am a living counter-example. Gurps makes me go crazy. It's an illness, I tell you! Heck, I just designed, but probably won't play, a 100 point character that using the 20 points per IQ rank up to get 13, 15 points back for 8's in other abilities, 1 point per extra magic-only fatigue, knack in two spells (earth to stone and sound), can get a skill level of 30 in the spell Create Warrior. Nothing like being able to crank out those meat shields (with the prerequisite Original-Star-Trek-Red coloured chests, of course) one per second, with the first one being around (and thus kitted out with armour) every waking hour. For 40 more points I can do this with beefier "warriors". Mind you, I am using 3e Gurps Magic, and obviously don't have access to all the 4e rules, so I imagine they may have cut the cheese factor a bit. And I like Gurps. Maybe I like it for the wrong reasons, though...

 

[ichabod]

probably because (at least in my experience) it's true. the players i know who are "min-maxers" are min-maxers in every system they play. the players who are not min-maxers are not min-maxers in every system they play.

i have never, in my 22 years gaming, experienced something like Psion describes, where a player is "normal" in one system and a "min-maxer" in another. therefore, i don't see min-maxing as being a fault of systems, but instead a fault in players.

You know, I looked, but I can't find a "min-maxer whipping boy" smiley. Min-maxing is not a fault period.

 

[d4]

You know, I looked, but I can't find a "min-maxer whipping boy" smiley. Min-maxing is not a fault period.

perhaps i should have said "attribute" rather than "fault."

and anyways, different people have different opinions. for some people, min-maxing is a "fault."

 

[d4]

So for all you people that say that it is a player problem, I am a living counter-example. Gurps makes me go crazy. It's an illness, I tell you!

you know, that still sounds like something intrinsic to you and not to the system. what is it about GURPS that forces you to behave that way? i can't imagine a book forcing my behavior in any direction.

 

[buzz]

Isn't it possible, though, for a system to intrinsically reward certain choices over others? I mean, in AD&D1e, elves were just plain better, and if you were more of a numbers person, you played the elf. Maybe GURPS simply rewards the min/maxer more than some other systems.

Just playin' Devil's Advocate.

 

[Particle_Man]

Isn't it possible, though, for a system to intrinsically reward certain choices over others? I mean, in AD&D1e, elves were just plain better, and if you were more of a numbers person, you played the elf. Maybe GURPS simply rewards the min/maxer more than some other systems.

Just playin' Devil's Advocate.

Got it in one, boyo! In Gurps, it is possible to make characters that are fantastically better than others of equal points. Not slightly better. Fantastically better. And there is a temptation with gurps to go "get the points first, go for the concept later". Or else, if one has a concept in mind, but just needs more points to make it work...min/maxing follows. Most other systems have means of reigning this in, or else use random factors (so you might end up with a fantastically better character, but that's just luck of the draw, not your own choices). I suppose the closest comparison might be Rifts (which is level based and not point-based). Some classes in Rifts are simply better, in every way. I only played Rifts once, so maybe there wasn't time for my "min/max" bug to be activated (or else it really is pure point based systems that do it to me) but I did notice that the Cyber-Knight could be designed to be better than the Wilderness Scout in every way. Not almost every way. Absolutely every way, without a single mechanical exception. (by the way, am I the only one waiting for the owner of Rifts to die so that someone else can buy the rights and make Rifts d20 legally?)

If it is a point-based thing, maybe it is the simple fact that I expect a 1st level character to be fairly wimpy, but with Gurps, there is no "level" to tell me that I am a beginner, so I try for all the marbles right away, rather than patiently waiting. But if I were GMing someone like me in Gurps, I sure as heck would put tight controls in place -- maybe going so far as: no attribute higher than X or lower than average, no (or few) disadvantages, a minimum of Y points into skills, but no skill higher than attribute + Z. And if I added something like "as a guide, consider your character to be 1st level for now, and add a level (mechanically meaningless but maybe useful anyhow) every W points" that might help. Mutants and Masterminds has tight "level limit" controls on everything, but is still a "pure points" system, so I find I am not an abuser with it (I hope!). Mage: The Ascension had me wanting to make a "Detective" character with some time/space spheres to help look for clues, but none of the flashy stuff. Likely would have been eaten alive by most of the "Bad guys" in that one without friends to protect me (I mean he had a gun, but how laughable is that vs. a demon!), but I didn't care. And that one is pretty much "pure points" too, though with some tight controls.

God, I don't know. Maybe it's the art. All I know is that when I play Gurps I go nuts, and it doesn't happen with other systems to nearly that degree.

This doesn't mean that Gurps is flawed. It does mean that core Gurps 3rd ed. requires a tighter Gm control than, say, core D&D 3rd ed. requires DM control.