From: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu (Dave Bonar)
Subject: Re: Newbie System? (getting long)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
Organization: News and Views from LSU
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:21:27 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-21119]: sn01.sncc.lsu.edu

In article <Bvv3w5.1MF@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v124jw4y@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Benjamin R Pierce) writes...
>In article <1992Oct9.133812.13995@cs.tulane.edu>, eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu writes...
>>In article <1992Oct9.014129.13498@jade.tufts.edu>, gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris) writes...
> 
>>>	GURPS for a newbie?  I think not.  What if they don't think that their
>>>character must have a high stat to be good in skills, as you are forced to 
>>>think in GURPS?  What if they are unfamiliar with the character creation 
>>>system and create grossly inefficient, and therefore ineffective, and there-
>>>fore (we ARE talking newbies here) unfun characters?  GURPS requires far too
>>>much handholding in character creation to be a game for newbies without the
>>>guidance of Role-Playing Gurus, unless the newbies in question are accontants.
>> 
>>	Actually, that's the beauty of introducing a whole new group of
>>people to role playing.  If everyone is starting out basically even it 
>>doesn't matter!  Why are inefficient characters unfun?  If the newbies 
>>really get the idea of role playing it won't matter if their characters
>>aren't the most tightly designed in existence.  After they play a while
>>and learn more about the system they might look at their characters and
>>decide they need to be rewriten.  Oh well, maybe starting out new and
>>not worrying about maximizing designs will help keep them from always worrying
>>about making the perfect character.
> 
>I have to disagree here.  Bear in mind that most novice role-players are going
>to be coming in with certain preconceptions of what a game is.  Among these
>will probably be:
> 
>1. Games are structured (much moreso than the typical RPG session).
>2. Games have a definite winner and loser.

	I think there are two types of novice role players.  One is the
gaming type.  They probably come in with the ideas listed above.  The other
is the storytelling/dramatic type.  They get into role playing from the
other side and don't really view it as a game.  I'm not sure if this matters
for the discussion but I think it is a reasonable important distinction
when you're talking about new players.

>   A player whose character fails at nearly every action because he or she
>is inefficiently designed will not have fun simply because most of the other
>characters are also failing at everything.  

	Ok, when I say that GURPS is at least semi reasonable for a set of
novice players I do mean reasonably intelligent novice players.  They don't
have to be super genius level to figure that a score of 11 in a skill is
roughly a fifty percent chance of success.  The book even tells them this,
right at the begining of the skill section.

>If your first adventure had ended
>up with a summary like, "Well, you tried to rescue the princess, but failed,
>and now you're all dead and she got eaten.", how likely would you be to return
>for another game?  

	This thread started talking about a totally novice group.  From my
experiences a novice GM is going to make just as many mistakes as a novice
player.  They cancel.
	Besides, isn't that what happens sometimes?  How did you learn to
role play?  I started in a completely novice group (no one knew anything 
about it).  Sure we had some times at first where we kept messing up either
by not following some rule or something.  Oh well.  We enjoyed learning
the system together.  Some of our first characters were very stereotypical.
Some were wildly crazy.  If the novices can't realize that they are all
learning the system together and at least be willing to make some stupid
mistakes they probably won't make good role players anyway.  

>I feel that GURPS is (may the powers that be forgive me) not
>the be-all end-all role-playing system that many people on the net purport it
>to be; in truth, I've never liked it much.  I certainly feel that it is not a
>good choice as a first-time game; the rules strike me as too complex.  I feel
>that a more free-form game is generally much better suited to the purpose; the
>players are less likely to be driven off by movement rates, passive defense,
>impaling criticals, or what have you, and more likely to remember, "Hey, I had
>a really great time playing that wizard who could never remember what spell he
>wanted to cast!"

	That why I suggested a pared down GURPS.  Maybe I'll have to
write up the one page GURPS starter rules. :)

Dave
__________
Dave Bonar
eebonar@lsuvax.sncc.lsu.edu
__________

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc