What's your opinion of GURPS?

[KDLadage]

My experience tells me differently.

I am sure that it does. We all have different experiences.

A very strong warrior and a very cunning one can be expressed more fully in such a system than just taking Power Attack or Expertise.

Why? Are you saying that there has to be an in-game advantage to describing your attack one way or another before doing it is rewarded by the game? I see it as encouraging those that would normally dominate the conversation at a game table to do so more often and get rewarded for it, beyond the normal social rewards involved.

The strong one can actually describe how his blows are so strong that the opposition can not effectively parry with his feeble arms.

And they can without the dice involved. Or, in any system (say, d20) a GM would be more than within his or her rights to add a +2 to the roll (or what-ever) for a well thought out and described attack. Lord knows I have given such bonuses before (if they caused the game to become more enjoyable; if they were a distraction or became too much of a hassle, they went away).

The smart one can describe how his feinting and trickery misleads his opponent, also making his parries less effective. (Without needing to waste time with bluff rolls.)

But you are mandating the action and result before the result has become apparent. This can (and in fact, I would dare say "will") be very easilly abused as a core mechanic.

They do the same thing, but with their own styles. I feel that this improvement allows them to stay in their roles, even in the middle of dice-heavy combat.

And I say that it is equally effective/problematic no matter the system. To make it a core rule though makes it a mandate to many -- and this is (imho) a bad thing. (1)

Even if two warriors had the same stats and the same equipment, you could still tell the diffference between Bob and Joe, because Bob always uses large, overhanded blows, and Joe thrusts with short, precise strikes.

Sure.

The Exalted system gives no difference between the two styles (and neither does D&D, really), but it does reward them for having more personality than "I attack".

This is a problem with the players not opening up, not the system. Imho. Ymmv. Yadda yadda yadda.

(1) Which, again, by my estimation, has very little to do with actual role-playing. If your game involves a lot of true role-playing elements, then this sort of thing will take care of itself. If you game is, for the most part, nothing more than a hack-and-slash, strategic, table-top wargame... then no amount of additional description will transform it into a role playing experience. Imho. Ymmv. Yadda yadda yadda.

 

[PA]

Tri-Stat dX

My choice for an all-purpose rule-lite system: Tri-Stat dX

 

[kengar]

The beauty of the Savage Worlds system is that rewards creative tactics and manuevers in combat, but in a more tightly defined way than WuShu, etc. The result is a fast-paced "pulp" combat that is still well-defined.

So instead of -

Player: "I attack with my longsword."
GM: "Roll to hit."
Player: "I got a __ "
DM: "You hit, roll your damage."

It's -

Player: "I taunt the orc by making a rude gesture at him with my free hand, then I duck behind the tree & quick-draw my throwing axe."

GM: "Ok, roll to Taunt and I'll roll his Smarts to resist.
-roll-
He bellows in rage as you gesture. That's a +2 against him on your next action. He hurls his javelin at you, but thanks to the cover, it thunks into the tree instead of your flesh. He draws his sword and starts to move towards you."

Players: "I throw my axe with a called shot to the head then draw my sword, moving up to meet him."

GM: "-4 for a head shot, +2 for the taunt, that's a -2. Go for it.
-roll-
Ouch! That's gonna leave a mark! Roll for damage.
-roll-
The hatchet splits his face in two and he goes down in a gurgling bloody froth."

The great thing in SW is that the extra details don't slow play appreciable (if at all). We had a combat a few weeks ago. 30 combatants (4 PCs, 2 major NPCs & 6 men-at-arms NPCs under PC control, 4 giant lizard mounts and 8 mutant lizard riders). There was melee, automatic weapon fire, cover & fortified positions repositioning every round.

Total table time: less than 45 minutes

IME, it would have taken nearly two hours to play that out in d20.

PS- I'm well aware that I "livened up" the text of the 2nd example, but my point there is SW encourages the player to think about those kinds of manuevers and not just "toe to toe" it. Because there's a real payoff to trying creative manuevers and tactics in a SW combat.

 

[Belphanior]

Why? Are you saying that there has to be an in-game advantage to describing your attack one way or another before doing it is rewarded by the game? I see it as encouraging those that would normally dominate the conversation at a game table to do so more often and get rewarded for it, beyond the normal social rewards involved.

You don't have to describe it either way. You're just allowed the option of describing, thereby earning you an extra die or two (and Exalted routinely has 20+ dice for a single action, so it's not as if we're talking about huge changes).

I don't see how a conversation-dominator could be more often rewarded. If his description is good, he gets a die. But then it's the other guy's turn and the dominator has to shut up because it's not his turn anymore. Equal chances for everybody.

I also should mention that Exalted is a game about epic fantasy with a big dose of anime. This is not combat in the style of LotR, where archers wait for the orcs to close in to a few dozen feet. This combat is in the style of the Matrix and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

And they can without the dice involved. Or, in any system (say, d20) a GM would be more than within his or her rights to add a +2 to the roll (or what-ever) for a well thought out and described attack. Lord knows I have given such bonuses before (if they caused the game to become more enjoyable; if they were a distraction or became too much of a hassle, they went away).

This is exactly the way Exalted handles it. You say you have done it in the past. What is the problem then? Exalted is about cinematic combat, and over-the-top descriptions make it more fun. Those were your criteria as well.

But you are mandating the action and result before the result has become apparent. This can (and in fact, I would dare say "will") be very easilly abused as a core mechanic.

Mind you, only Wushu determines that outcome of an action before rolling. Exalted does not.
But Wushu is scene resolution, and the outcome of 1 action matters less.
So you kill a ninja. That matters nothing if your roll says it didn't reduce the overall threat level.

This is a problem with the players not opening up, not the system. Imho. Ymmv. Yadda yadda yadda.

But D&D does not even attempt to make people open up. Is there any advantage to describing your attacks? Using core rules no, though you said that you've allowed it from time to time.
Exalted offers a good carrot though. It's not a stick - those two dice don't mean all that much on your fistful of dice, so you'll still kick a whole world of ass without stunting.

Which, again, by my estimation, has very little to do with actual role-playing. If your game involves a lot of true role-playing elements, then this sort of thing will take care of itself. If you game is, for the most part, nothing more than a hack-and-slash, strategic, table-top wargame... then no amount of additional description will transform it into a role playing experience. Imho. Ymmv. Yadda yadda yadda.

Uh.. I dare you to define "true role-playing" in a manner everybody will agree upon.
I will concede that saying how you attack somebody is not all that heavy on roleplaying, but it does allow you to keep in character a bit more even if you're just rolling dice.

But things will not take care of themselves.
I play in a D&D campaign on friday. One character has gone politician because he feels he is best suited to rule the republic. My own character was married to another PC and had a child. By my own definition, I say this campaign has a fair amount of roleplaying involved.
But in combat, when I've had a few beers and it's 4 in the morning? I just can't be bothered to describe my attacks again after having done so for a few dozen times that evening. My DM doesn't give me a bonus or even 1xp more, and I'm tired anyway.
But in Exalted every single roll gets stunted upon. Not just combat, but also conversation get extra dice from this. Climbing. Jumping. Stealth. Persuits. Spells. As long as it uses dice, it can be stunted upon.
There's a small carrot to encourage it, and I can really notice how people describe things better. I can just visualize the whole world a lot clearer thanks to that.

 

[Lord Rasputin]

I'll be the odd man out, and say it:

GURPS is a better game than D&D 3e. IMNSHO.

When I GM, I use GURPS exclusively. I do not like, as a GM, the silliness of the D&D class/level/HP/alignment system, and prefer grittier games. GURPS does that well, and with a graceful core mechanic to boot. I'm not sure how it is "clunky," though I do like how difficulty is always addressed in d20. I like to focus on the role-playing aspect more when I GM, and d20 is more of a tactical combat simulator. It need not be that way, but I found when I was trying to fit D&D to my needs, I was making it into GURPS, so I started using GURPS for fantasy, too. (I like the GURPS magic systems better, something I did not expect to discover -- they looked too wussy at first glance.)

(Okeh, I lied. I run Toon from time to time. Works better for cartoons. I do know some Fudge, and am a bit interested in the system, though I am the only fellow I know who actually owns the special dice. I would also like to look more at BESM for more cinematic fare. Tri-Stat Star Wars has always struck me as a perfect combo.)

As a player, I'm more game-system amoral. Mostly I adapt, which is needed, since my own gaming groups run a bunch of stuff. In one group, close friend and I run GURPS exclusively; another runs D&D exclusively, a third will run D&D or CoC or D6 Star Wars, another is hankering to run D20 Modern cops or Cyberpunk 2020 cops (she has a cop fetish). Another group there is another die-hard GURPS nut besides me, two other guys who run D&D almost all the time.

In short -- go with what feels right to you, but be prepared to accomodate someone else's system of choice. Oh, and big D6s. Easier to see from across the table.

 

[Mark]

I just got sick of the "I swing... I swing... I swing..." style gameplay D&D seems to favor...

Games don't favor a style, players do...

 

[Teflon Billy]

What I'd love to hear is someone's opinions on Champions vs. GURPS...

For Years HERO system (Champions) and GURPS were my "one-two punch"

I ued GURPS to model gritty, low powered stuff, and HERO to model Flashy, High-Powered stuff. The systems were close enough to one another in structure that players of one could quickly pick up the other (Steve Jackson, the creator of GURPS descibed it as "Low Powered hHERO system at one point).

It's the closest I've ever come to the flexibility and balance I'd sought out in a "one, true system".

I mostly love GURPS supplements, and think GURPS Conan and GURPS Wild Cards should be study guides kept at hand while you read their respective source material.

 

[KDLadage]

But D&D does not even attempt to make people open up.

And I would say that it is not the job of the game to do it. It is the job of the Game Master to encourage such things.

Uh.. I dare you to define "true role-playing" in a manner everybody will agree upon.

Everybody? OK. I will. As soon as you can define everybody in a way that everybody can agree upon. Language is a tricky slope. Speaking of IS, Bill Clinton proved that we cannot all agree on just what IS means...

And just for the record -- I do not see these things as problems. I just do not see having a rule that encourages it to be an advancement... that's all. Everybody (however you decide to define it) should play however they are having the most fun. I have just had my experience wrapped up in the idea that any and all game systems, when employed by a skilled game master, are equally capable to producing hack-and-slash games, shakespearean dramas, intense role playing experiences, or increadibly exciting -- just as those same systems, when employed by an unskilled game master can degenerate into any of those styles unexpectedly, or be just plain utterly boring...

 

[Arnwyn]

Games don't favor a style, players do...

Not true, IMO.

If one doesn't think that a group's style will be entirely different between a game of L5R and d20, for example, then I think one might be somewhat surprised after seeing a few sessions of each.

 

[taliesin52]

Games don't favor a style, players do...

That's not entirely true. Certain rulesets favour high-action/heroics/cinematics. In games like BESM/d20/Star Wars(d6) you could state "I'm going to swing across that rope shooting my pistol from one hand, do a backflip and land on my enemy's head and punch the man next to him" with at least a modicrum of success. However in other systems like BoohHill or GURPS (with every optional rule like bleeding in effect, not basic GURPS) it would be lunacy and nearly totally impossible. Hell, in BootHill you'll be lucky to survive a straight-up fair gunfight most of the time. Ok, enough quoting of 20 year old game systems.

While you can play any game with any style you want, you're not going to have much fun if the ruleset isn't designed for high-heroics. That's not to say eitiher ruleset is better than the other, just that they're different.

As to GURPS, its a system I love. The sourcebooks are beyond being well written and indeed many could be cited effectivly in an historical or topical (current events/social systems) research report reliably. Even if you don't play GURPS favouring say.... d20 Modern, I wouldn't hesitate to pick up some of the GURPS sourcebooks for information.

GURPS is good for multiple genre gaming. D20 is ok at this, but there are significant rule differences between D20 Fantasy (DnD) and D20 Modern for example. In GURPS the same mechanics are used, just the equipment is different and the skill choices are different (Piloting or Firearms isn't useful in a fantasy game but neither is magic knowledge useful in a modern game without magic).

GURPS offers a plethora of levels of play anywhere from GURPS-lite to the actual printed book to the addition of various special rules (I cannot stress enough not to use the bleeding rules ). On top of this the number of published generes available are many. Some of the rules can be difficult to learn and/or use. Magic can be a pain in the butt using flowcharts and whatnot, and firearms are both highly deadly and somewhat complicated when the full use of snapshot, accuracy, etc... are factored in. However, you do not need to use all those rules to make a balanced game.

As GURPS is a point based system, it probably can lean towards min-maxing. However, I've never seen this as much of a problem. Simply put you need to focus on a few skills like dodge regardless of what your character concept is. And while your 200 point CIA superspy may be the best at getting information out of people or hacking computers (because you chose that as a speciality and min-maxed yourself thus), you're still as likely (ok mostly likely) to die at the hands of a 50pt character who's focused on combat.

I agree with (i think it was) KDL who said 4th edition is more than overdue. It is. There have been quite a few changes and innovations in the gaming industry and Steve Jackson (a rather personable guy who saved my college gaming organization from ruin) should take advantage of that. Hopefully we'll see a good serious revision in the next year or three, one which is as large of a change as 2nd ed. D&D was to 3rd. ed. D&D, while still being able to cross genres.