From: thornley@milli.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley)
Subject: Re: Faerie Folk (more pedantry that has nothing to do with gamin
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:18:17 GMT

Is this a private flamefest, or can I join in?  (BTW, this is posted only
in .advocacy.)

In article <20JAN93.23287310.0073@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CX6L <CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA> writes:
>In article <2223@blue.cis.pitt.edu> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>>In article <20JAN93.17014526.0219@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CX6L) writes:
>
>>>Considering how it is one of the few truly universal systems
>>>out there,
>
>> Uh-HUH. What's a truly universal system, and how do you define
>>it?                                                                    s,
>
>A truly universal system is one which can handle multiple genres
>and crossovers between them without experiencing major continuity
>problems and without exhibiting a bias towards one particular
>genre. For example, Hero grew from Champions, and to this day,
>the Hero system feels like a superhero game, regardless of what
>genre you play in: example - defining a computer virus as an EB
>usable vs. computer software, etc.... it is *not* truly universal.

OK, define a computer virus in the basic GURPS rules.  Hero has a way
to apply the basic rules directly to cyberpunk, as in Cyber Hero.  GURPS
requires additional rules, as in GURPS Cyberpunk.  Mind you, I'm not saying
that Cyber Hero has the better approach, but Hero is certainly more
universal in this case.  The key difference is that in GURPS you have to
write up special rules, and they are (IMHO) better suited to the genre,
while Hero was able to get by with applications of the general rules,
and these are less well suited to the genre.  There's no reason why you
can't play Cyber Hero with special rules for computer programs; heck, there's
no reason you can't play Hero with GURPS Cyberpunk rules.

BTW, GURPS has a bias towards realistic genres.  It's hard to design
characters that won't die easily without spending gobs of points on HT,
which is not necessarily in the character conception, and it's hard to
run a superhero battle in a city without killing *large* numbers of
civilians.  It has a bias towards genres with muscle-powered weapons, as
ST costs too much in genres with more sophisticated technology.  It has
a bias towards starting characters at ages 20-30, as that seems to be the
proper balance between buying stats and buying skills.  It virtually
forces good mages to be highly intelligent and have fairly good
social skills.  These features certainly don't make GURPS a bad game,
but it isn't truly universal.  It has difficulties with Marvel/DC
comic book genres, Saturday-morning cartoons, modern technology,
and transferring characters into rabbit role-playing (the numbers don't 
mean the same thing in GURPS Bunnies & Burrows).  It is difficult to
construct a top-flight mage or scientist who can't talk his/her way out
of a paper bag, a dummy who has been given great magical ability by some
god, a modern-day competent and extremely strong soldier, or a guy who
has no great talent but who has been around forever and has picked up
a lot of skills.  You may very well not like the problem genres, and
you may never have wanted to build one of the difficult characters, but
just because the system is biased the way you like it doesn't make it
unbiased.

>GURPS has advantages and skills that cover almost any ability you
>might want, with enough uniformity to ensure compatibility but
>enough variety to stave off boredom: the abilities appropriate to
>a genre are flavoured for that genre, but are portable between
>genres, since character points are the same everywhere. By dint
>of spelling out the Unusual Background advantage, GURPS gives
>even the most anal and uncreative GM a clear mechanism for
>resolving *real-life* power differences (eg TL7 is just better
>than TL3) in game terms. *That's* what I call universal.
>
I don't like GURPS advantages and disadvantages.  In most cases, they are
listed in painful detail, with no provision for variation in case your
character conception calls for something similar.  A few, like Unusual
Background, are thrown wide open for fast-talking players to try to
exploit hapless GMs.  In Hero, if you want to design a Lecherous character
with a difference, it's easy.

>> 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 ;->
>
Of course, the supernatural power system isn't universal like Hero.
In GURPS, you have the magic rules and the psi rules (both available
in full form in the supplements and reduced form in the basic rules)
and the superpower rules and alien powers and such.  In Hero, you have
one set of rules, completely described in the main rulebook, and you
can create magic rules, psionic rules, superpower rules, alien ability
rules, cyber ability rules, and everything else from it.  Now that's
being universal.  The power system allows you to design individual
spells or powers or whatever to match your character design, and
allows the GM to tailor the rules to match his or her campaign design.

>> (You expected me to RESIST this flamebait? I haven't really
>>slammed GURPS in months! Made snide remarks, yes...)
>
>Yeeeee-ha! The ol' flamewar has risen from its ashes!
>
So, I thinks, let's get the ol' GURPS-Hero flamewar going again, since
somebody else brought Hero into this.

>>>and the *only* one which is remotely realistic, balanced
>>>*and* well-designed,
>
>> (Takes five minute break to recover from hysterical laughter)
>
>> Balanced: as long as you play according to the methodologies
>>set out by the inventors, yes. But for the same number of points there
>>are some perfectly reasonable characters which CAN'T be built, and an
>>equal number of disgusting characters which CAN.
>
>The inventors assumed that the average GURPS player would be an
>experienced gamer, of a somewhat more mature age group than is
>the norm for gamers: the post-Man to Man, pre-GURPS questionnaire
>confirmed this. The system assumes that the GM will exercise a
>modicum of control to avoid "disgusting characters". True, GURPS
>is *not* the system for munchkins, or those who like to mangle
>the rules: it is not self-policing. However, in light of the
>fact that I play with mature, skilled and thoughtful gamers,
>this is not relevent to me. As for reasonable characters that
>can't be built: I've never had a player complain to me yet
>that the PC they wish to built can't be done.
>
With good GMs and good players, what the heck do you need all these rules
for?  Why do you need all the carefully listed ads and disads with their
precise game effects and exact costs?  Why do you need the detailed
discussion of point costs?  GURPS reads like it was designed to be a lot
less abusable than Hero.  If it really does attract all the mature types,
why?

As far as trying to build PCs, somebody on this net a while back wanted to
build a grizzled old mercenary with low attributes but lots of skill, and
found that she couldn't afford the character as it existed; she would have
to raise the stats and make the character more generally competent in
order to get it into the 145 points.

DHT


Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy