From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Burn, GURPS, BURN!
Date: 26 Jan 93 00:07:06 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

In article <2266@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes
:
[stuff deleted]

>	GURPS is the BASIC of gaming; it CAN do anything, and has provisions
>to do so, but it can't do ANYTHING as WELL as a specific game designed for
>the genre.

I must disagree.  I have found GURPS to be more suited to my style than any
other system I've tried (and I've tried xD&D, Rolemaster, Stormbringer,
Conrad's Fantasy, and probably a couple that I've forgotten).  Of course, I
generally don't run the usual Big Macho Heroes Save The World game (preferring
the Random Joe Off The Street Saves The World type... 1/2 B^), and though I've
been intending to try it with GURPS for a couple years, I just haven't found
the time.  IMHO, it also does quite well with science fiction games,
particularly of the "Hard SF" sort.  True, add-ons are necessary, but that's
the way I like it... I don't have to pay for special info in Swashbucklers or
Martial Arts that I have no interest in.

You're right, and crossovers really do have problems.  That tends to be more
due to the FACT that higher technology societies stamp out lower technology
ones, without fail.  I suppose it's possible to come up with a screwball case
where an alternative to technology is developed, but the magic system presented
in GURPS Magic isn't sufficient.  I see this as not a failing of GURPS but a
failing of reality.

>>Yes: GURPS has a lot of supplements. This allows you to pick and
>>choose the materials relevant to your game, and shows that SJG
>>thinks each genre is interesting enough to merit a book, not just
>>a chapter. I seriously challenge the claims of anyone who thinks
>>a truly universal system (as defined by me) can fit in just a few
>>books.
>
>	What it REALLY means is that if you want a fully rounded 
>universal campaign, you have to spend your entire college fund in
>order to get the stuff you want.

IMHO, there's no such thing as a universal CAMPAIGN.  At least, if there is, I
don't want to play in it.  See above.

>>> If you mean that GURPS has managed to cram all kinds of things
>>>into a few easily computed and flavorless numbers, I also agree.
>
>>GURPS does not hang genre-specific flags on the numbers: it gives
>>you a few basic numbers which are needed in *any* genre, and puts
>>the interesting bits in the skills and advantages. If you think
>>the GURPS system, with its hundreds of skills (300+) & advantages
>>(150-200+), not to mention a vast selection of spells (450+) and
>>psi-abilities (50-60+), is "flavourless", then you are obviously
>>an uncreative dolt ;->
>
>	450 spells a vast selection? Rolemaster's original release had
>four times that many. GURPS is for Girly-men.

As a former RM aficionado, I must point out the fact that many, if not most of
the spells in Spell Law are of the form "See spell XXX in list YYY."  The
descriptions are vague at best, usually stated in a single sentence (!!!).  To
me, the GURPS Magic system has MUCH MORE flavor than that.

>	ALl those skills and advantages work precisely the same way.
>Flavorless. There's no difference IN GAME between casting a fireball,
>shooting a gun, controlling a mind, or flying a  ship. That was one
>of my major gripes about Spacemaster's PSI system -- they took their
>spell system and just taped  the word Psion over it.
>	Things which are different in KIND should be different in FEEL,
>or else just ignore the existence of mechanics and go all out roleplay.
>Don't compromise.

This is one of the silliest arguments I've ever heard on the subject.

Roleplaying is a game of IMAGINATION.  Remember that?  It's that thing that you
use when the GM describes something to you and doesn't draw a picture.  There
is no reason why casting a spell SHOULD have a different game mechanic from
shooting a gun.

Say Hapless Player is playing a part mage, part warrior type.  (BTW, don't
bring this up as impossible in GURPS... I've done it, and on 100 points.)

Hapless Player:  "I cast a Lightning Bolt at the Space Zombie."

GM:  "Okay, roll it."

HP:  "Roll what?"  <opens book... flip... flip... flip...>  "Ah, here it is. 
Roll d20, add level, and consult Chart C."  <flip... flip... flip...>

GM:  "The Space Zombie doesn't seem to be affected, even though you hit it
square in the chest."

HP:  "Okay, I get out my Handy-Dandy Power Knife (TM).  What do I need to roll
this time?"

It gets really tedious after a while, especially if there's a different
mechanic for EVERYTHING.  After all, shouldn't firing a .44 Magnum have
different mechanics from firing a .357?

1/2 B^)

>	Problem is people who can get, say, an 18 INT (not difficult in
>a fairly powerful campaign) and then can do EVERYTHING AT ONCE. Hell,
>their DEFAULT skills are as good as someone who was taught the subject.
>Even if they have no experience in the field.

Note that some skills have explicit (in the skill description) differences
between default skill and learned skill at the same level.  Sane GMs will
extrapolate to wherever appropriate, as deemed necessary by them.

-Doug Gibson
 doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu

Neither UCLA nor the National Science Foundation has a clue what I am doing.
They just pay me to do it.

"We have to tear you to shreds because we care." - EAC
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc