Running GURPS "rules lite" (but not necessarily GURPS Lite)

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Fair enough. I'll just back off from the original intent and just hope that the bits that I wanted appear organically. :smile:

And if not, that's cool, too.
 
thebigh said:
I dunno. I'm happy to keep chatting about GURPS and seeing where Pub thread-drift takes us.
Click to expand...
I'm betting on "broccoli recipes", personally. Because there's no veggie fitting GURPS better than broccoli, and we always turn to food...:grin:
 
Kage2020 said:
Or, as you note and as noted up-thread, just use the range bands from Action 2: Exploits. You might not like them, but they're an option of not having to deal with full Range/Speed table.
Click to expand...
What about the Range/Speed table, or range increments, do you find difficult?

One thing I've done even since GURPS 1e, is make a combat ruler, so I can just lay that from firer to target, and see the range penalty.

Of course, adding speed to range can slightly complicate that, but (for me anyway) only slightly.

Kage2020 said:
Again, this is the "git gud" argument that, if you'll forgive me, is not particular useful in this circumstance. We're back to Bones and Spock again.

I'm happy that you're "decades of experience" works for you---like it would work for anyone with any system---but that's less useful to novice GMs, GMs whose preferences don't align with spending decades of what for them might feel like banging their head against a wall, or for people who bounce off GURPS because it's "too complex".
Click to expand...
Well, except that at no point in my gaining those decades of experience with TFT and GURPS, did I feel like I was banging my head on anything, EXCEPT the 4e Basic Set*, or people who want to use 4e Powers or Psionics, or maybe some of the alternate GURPS magic systems, or trying to use all of the spells from GURPS Magic in one campaign, or GURPS Vehicles.

I think a big part of why that was never head-banging for me, was because I learned and played one thing at a time:

TFT: Melee (arena combats)
TFT: Wizard (wizard duels)
TFT: Death Test (programmed adventure)
TFT: In The Labyrinth (campaign play)

Then after that got to seem too simple for us:

GURPS Man To Man (arena combats)
GURPS Orcslayer (scripted combat adventure)
GURPS 1e/2e/Magic (campaign play)
GURPS 3e/worldbooks/house rules (slightly more developed rules)
GURPS 4e (kitchen sink in the Basic Set, unwanted rules changes, having to choose which rules to use or not)

(* Even with my decades of GURPS experience, I still find the 4e Basic Set to have too much in it to want it to be my core book for anything other than considering the kitchen sink of options, like during campaign design, or brainstorming.)

IF I were starting with 4e, and didn't want to mess with TFT or earlier editions, I'd suggest starting with very simple sample arena combats between normal low-powered humans with fist, then melee weapons, then guns, and then running a simple adventure again with simple normal humans, and then maybe a simple campaign which at least starts with simple things. Wait until you're comfortable with each level of complexity, weirdness, and options, before adding more. Ignore all the complex options in the Basic Set for a while, only adding a thing or two at a time at a pace that feels manageable. But, even that might be a bit hard to do because you need to find stuff in the 4e Basic Set, which IMO just has too much in it to be an easy learning tool. It's not that much in it is particularly complex, but there's tons of stuff, much of which even I probably will never use for anything.
 
I started with Gurps 1E, and used it until 2E came and replaced that with 3E, I did pick up 4E, but I hated cross-genre campaigns (at the time) plus I didn't much think there was anything useful for me in the books that I didn't have in other games. I moved away from GURPS (to BESM2E because of its simplicity) but even then when I used Gurps there were a lot of things I ignored like Snap shot, and detailed modifiers (I generally went with "what do I feel is suitable for this campaign.)
 
Savage Schemer said:
I was thinking sauerkraut, so one of us is waaay of.
Click to expand...
...I'm sorry to say, I'd say it's you. Sauerkraut reminds me more of some other game, something meatier, not nearly as universal, and preferably pulp-y:grin:!


Savage Worlds, I'd guess:shade:!
 
AsenRG said:
...I'm sorry to say, I'd say it's you. Sauerkraut reminds me more of some other game, something meatier, not nearly as universal, and preferably pulp-y:grin:!


Savage Worlds, I'd guess:shade:!
Click to expand...
I am absolutely open to being the one who's off on this one. There are only so many sauerkraut recipies to be had anyway :smile:

But I do have to insist that broccoli isn't nearly as universal as you seem to think it is. I'm guessing its association to GURPS lies in its capacity to produce chronic gas?
 
Skarg said:
What about the Range/Speed table, or range increments, do you find difficult?
Click to expand...

This apt quote that makes me want to watch the film again strikes me as apropos:

Martin Blank, Grosse Point Blank:

It's not me!
Click to expand...

Seriously, just because you can understand a thing doesn't mean that you want to deal with it all the time. That's the reason that I mentioned calculus and differentiating from first principles rather than just using the standard formula dy/dx = ax^a-1. Both get to the same answer, but the former takes a heck of a lot longer than the latter.

And, so It's not me!

That there are rules (like Action 2: Exploits) indicates that there is a desire to see simplification in some areas to suit the play style. This seems to be further backed up by SJGames' current move away from crunch-heavy books (market for it? cheaper to copy-edit / playtest? etc.).

This is the space I'm occupying at the moment: not from misunderstanding. I plain prefer the range bands. It's that simple. I like to run the game simple and call the shots rather than wading through pages of kruft that, while useful pre-game, is just unnecessary in most circumstances.

If using what they have and then just scribbling down major situational modifiers for combat and using "... With Spikes" for general guidance? I'm golden with that. What I wanted to do was explore other peoples' solutions to similar problems. Sorry, not problems: perspectives.

Skarg said:
One thing I've done even since GURPS 1e, is make a combat ruler, so I can just lay that from firer to target, and see the range penalty.
Click to expand...

Which I'm sure is covered by the VTT, which might bury that calculations. If this were around the table, I'd probably just use pencil sketches and range bands and be done with it. I have no interest at this juncture in the kind of games that require Tactical Shooting (or whatever).

Skarg said:
EXCEPT the 4e Basic Set*, or people who want to use 4e Powers or Psionics, or maybe some of the alternate GURPS magic systems, or trying to use all of the spells from GURPS Magic in one campaign, or GURPS Vehicles.
Click to expand...

That's... interesting. I don't quite see the problems with 4e, nor Powers, nor the alternate GURPS magic systems (indeed, Earthdawn/Shadowrun basically cries out for one of those systems).

Though not GURPS Magic. Blegh.

Also, GURPS Vehicles---like Fire, Fusion, and Steel or Heavy Metal---are fun! Their own minigames for building fun.

Skarg said:
I think a big part of why that was never head-banging for me, was because I learned and played one thing at a time:
Click to expand...

For me, it literally had nothing to offer me. The kind of game that it plays is not what I'm interested in playing or running.

Skarg said:
GURPS 4e (kitchen sink in the Basic Set, unwanted rules changes, having to choose which rules to use or not)
Click to expand...

Six of one, half dozen of the other?

Skarg said:
IF I were starting with 4e, and didn't want to mess with TFT or earlier editions, I'd suggest starting with very simple sample arena combats between normal low-powered humans with fist, then melee weapons, then guns, and then running a simple adventure again with simple normal humans, and then maybe a simple campaign which at least starts with simple things.
Click to expand...

We're revisiting the "standard advice" that you get from every single forum out there.

FWIW, I did this years ago---just like every GM that was trying to get their minds wrapped around a new combat system in a new game. Again, just because you can do a think doesn't mean that you want to do a thing.

Skarg said:
Wait until you're comfortable with each level of complexity, weirdness, and options, before adding more. Ignore all the complex options in the Basic Set for a while, only adding a thing or two at a time at a pace that feels manageable. But, even that might be a bit hard to do because you need to find stuff in the 4e Basic Set, which IMO just has too much in it to be an easy learning tool. It's not that much in it is particularly complex, but there's tons of stuff, much of which even I probably will never use for anything.
Click to expand...

And, I reiterate: It's not me!

I like the crunch of GURPS where it belongs: in the background, before hitting the table. When it's at the table, I like to run things faster and without spending oodles of time buried behind a book. (And, yes, I'll share the book with all the players simultaneously using technology because I never expect players to have the same buy-in as I do.)
 
I mean, the speed/range table, is just a range band table, plus the notion of adding a target's speed, when appropriate, to the range, before consulting the table.

That, and the speed/range table having more bands than the GURPS Action range band table, are pretty much the only differences in complexity, IIRC.

But it sounds like you just have such different tastes and notions of what's fun or not, that my perspective isn't doing anything for you.
 
Silverlion said:
I started with Gurps 1E, and used it until 2E came and replaced that with 3E, I did pick up 4E, but I hated cross-genre campaigns (at the time) plus I didn't much think there was anything useful for me in the books that I didn't have in other games. I moved away from GURPS (to BESM2E because of its simplicity) but even then when I used Gurps there were a lot of things I ignored like Snap shot, and detailed modifiers (I generally went with "what do I feel is suitable for this campaign.)
Click to expand...

In the period where I dropped GURPS to explore other generic systems, I picked up BESM and loved a lot of what it did. At the time, I just couldn't make the magic work the way that I wanted to because, IIRC, BESM tended to put magic in a big bucket that required lots of arbitration? Maybe I'm misremembering.

Since that time and so many other generics, I've promised myself that I'm not going to quit GURPS and move to another system as I had done before, in part because from experience I know that I'm going to have to make up far more stuff in the other systems. <sigh>

Savage Schemer said:
I was thinking sauerkraut, so one of us is waaay of.
Click to expand...

All I can say is that I can quite clearly see Asparagus...

gurps-complete.png

AsenRG said:
Savage Worlds, I'd guess:shade:!
Click to expand...

Now that is one of those generics that I looked in for my current project (Earthdawn/Shadowrun/etc.) given it had a native Earthdawn conversion along with things like Interface Zero, SLA Industries, and The Fantasy/Sci-Fi Companions. Not only could I just not get into the system but, perhaps ironically, when I looked at Earthdawn all that I could think of is that, rather than being a dedicated treatment of the setting that happened to use Savage Worlds, it just felt like Savage Worlds.
 
Skarg said:
I mean, the speed/range table, is just a range band table, plus the notion of adding a target's speed, when appropriate, to the range, before consulting the table.

That, and the speed/range table having more bands than the GURPS Action range band table, are pretty much the only differences in complexity, IIRC.

But it sounds like you just have such different tastes and notions of what's fun or not, that my perspective isn't doing anything for you.
Click to expand...

It's not me!

Seriously, I can understand the Speed/Range Table. It's a roleplaying game, not rocket science (as the common phrase goes). So if you love to remember reams and reams of modifiers than, yes, we have differing perspectives.

I am in no way a novice to GURPS and, equally, I have no interest in using games like Savage Worlds, FATE or whatever.

Edit: Boy that didn't come off the way that I intended it to in that second paragraph. Suffice to say that I love GURPS in the background. I don't like it when it gets in the way of the game at the table and, since I like to run things "fast", it tends to---especially when you have players that are new to the game.
 
Last edited:
Savage Schemer said:
Hmmm...I think I see your point. Asparagus it is! Now about those recipes...
Click to expand...

Wrap it in bacon or prosciutto and sprinkle with garlic powder. Cook, and then sprinkle with parmesan?

All it takes is for you to consult the basic range/speed table as a proxy for the enthalpy exchange between the cooker and the meat based upon its thickness, then take a Cooking skill modified by darkness etc...

Or, you know, Cooking +4.

:tongue:

Admittedly, now that I note Asparagus, I also see Vehicles and there's practically a zero chance of ever seeing that in 4e. O.o
 
Savage Schemer said:
I am absolutely open to being the one who's off on this one. There are only so many sauerkraut recipies to be had anyway :smile:
Click to expand...
Definitely not Universal, then:grin:!

Savage Schemer said:
But I do have to insist that broccoli isn't nearly as universal as you seem to think it is. I'm guessing its association to GURPS lies in its capacity to produce chronic gas?
Click to expand...
No, in the wincing it provokes in many players:tongue:!

Kage2020 said:
All I can say is that I can quite clearly see Asparagus...

View attachment 73233
Click to expand...
:thumbsup:
Kage2020 said:
Now that is one of those generics that I looked in for my current project (Earthdawn/Shadowrun/etc.) given it had a native Earthdawn conversion along with things like Interface Zero, SLA Industries, and The Fantasy/Sci-Fi Companions. Not only could I just not get into the system but, perhaps ironically, when I looked at Earthdawn all that I could think of is that, rather than being a dedicated treatment of the setting that happened to use Savage Worlds, it just felt like Savage Worlds.
Click to expand...
So...are you into sauerkraut:tongue:?
 
I am zero days old when I found out that the rather necessary update/FAQ to 4e is stored on the SJGames forum and fixes many of the frustrations that I've been having with the more complex power builds.

I'm not sure if a forum was the best way to organise or otherwise publish these materials. A Wiki might have been better. <Le Sigh>
 
AsenRG said:
So...are you into sauerkraut:tongue:?
Click to expand...

I want to be?

Fantastically low in carbs. I'm sure that I had it when I went to Bavaria, but darned if I can remember the taste. Maybe it was the bowl of yellow stringy stuff with chunks of ham that I had one night.

I should certainly find out, don't you think!?
 
Kage2020 said:
I want to be?

Fantastically low in carbs. I'm sure that I had it when I went to Bavaria, but darned if I can remember the taste. Maybe it was the bowl of yellow stringy stuff with chunks of ham that I had one night.

I should certainly find out, don't you think!?
Click to expand...
I like it, but that's me. I also like Savage Worlds...:grin:

So try it, and if you find you like it, well, one more thing to enjoy:thumbsup:!
 
Kage2020 said:
I am zero days old when I found out that the rather necessary update/FAQ to 4e is stored on the SJGames forum and fixes many of the frustrations that I've been having with the more complex power builds.

I'm not sure if a forum was the best way to organise or otherwise publish these materials. A Wiki might have been better. <Le Sigh>
Click to expand...
Is there some specific limited part you're referring to, or do you mean scattered throughout the whole GURPS forum?
 
Skarg said:
Is there some specific limited part you're referring to, or do you mean scattered throughout the whole GURPS forum?
Click to expand...

Nope, just the errata on the main site, and then the consolidated FAQ on the forum. Meh. It was just frustrating at the time, but I'm through it now and better for it.
 
Sharrow said:
You could, but why? Doing that does weird things to the probability curves and devalues high skill levels. And you'd probably still have bonuses and penalties for some things anyway. Advantage/disadvantage adds complexity unless it completely replaces bonuses and penalties (and in D&D also completely replaces changing DCs, which it doesn't {it's a shitty mechanic for a game of D&D''s mechanical weight}).
Click to expand...
Jeezus, it was an idea and I was real clear that I haven't been around GURPS in years. Calm down. Advantage/Disadvantage has bee co-opted by numerous game systems and what you think is shitty doesn't define it for the rest of us. Its exchanges like this that keep me away from GURPS.
 
Cross Planes said:
Jeezus, it was an idea and I was real clear that I haven't been around GURPS in years. Calm down. Advantage/Disadvantage has bee co-opted by numerous game systems and what you think is shitty doesn't define it for the rest of us. Its exchanges like this that keep me away from GURPS.
Click to expand...

You asked a question, multiple posters gave their responses to the question, and what you think is great doesn't define it for the rest of us. (For one thing, some of us haven't been around D&D in years, and we are no more guaranteed to be familiar with D&D system mechanics slang than you're guaranteed to be familiar with GURPS system mechanics slang.) Being turned off by a game system because you don't like the answers some posters give? You might want to take your own advice about calming down.
 
Skarg said:
(* Even with my decades of GURPS experience, I still find the 4e Basic Set to have too much in it to want it to be my core book for anything other than considering the kitchen sink of options, like during campaign design, or brainstorming.)
Click to expand...
THIS is the problem inherent in the system. The sheer amount of work the GM has to do to run a simple low powered fantasy campaign in Caithness is staggering. Building lists of allowable Ads/Disads, skills, etc is exhausting. Trying to explain to a new player what options out of that huge Characters book are applicable to the campaign takes more time than actually running a session of play.
 
Kage2020 said:
Back in the day, I GM'd Amber DRPG and loved the way that it flowed. What I don't like is the requirement for the GM to pull every answer out of their derriere. At about the same I encountered Eric S. Nylund's Pawn's Dream and it introduced me to an interesting variation on the Amber theme but which also led to something more... mortal, perhaps less hand-wavy (YMMV).
Click to expand...

Wandering off in a completely different direction to the actual question: have you played Everway? I find the Tarotesque card resolution dynamic provides an excellent middle ground between the resolution of Amber and the rigid numbers of more traditional systems.
 
Exploderwizard said:
THIS is the problem inherent in the system. The sheer amount of work the GM has to do to run a simple low powered fantasy campaign in Caithness is staggering. Building lists of allowable Ads/Disads, skills, etc is exhausting. Trying to explain to a new player what options out of that huge Characters book are applicable to the campaign takes more time than actually running a session of play.
Click to expand...

To be fair, you can get away without doing this with assisted character generation. I know that's very much a broken record for me, but the conversation that is created between character concept, player expectation, and setting design always ends up being a positive to me.

Dr Jack said:
Wandering off in a completely different direction to the actual question: have you played Everway? I find the Tarotesque card resolution dynamic provides an excellent middle ground between the resolution of Amber and the rigid numbers of more traditional systems.
Click to expand...

I haven't. From what I read on an rpg.net review (not a great one) it sounds intriguing, but at $60 for the PDF(s) it's probably out of my reach for something that I'm never going to use. I wish I could learn more... Ooh, and can with the "gateway" version.

I'll take a gander, but again I think that my "lite" systems are gone--a fact that seems exacerbated by many of the current crop. (I just cannot seem to get into them.)
 
Exploderwizard said:
THIS is the problem inherent in the system. The sheer amount of work the GM has to do to run a simple low powered fantasy campaign in Caithness is staggering. Building lists of allowable Ads/Disads, skills, etc is exhausting. Trying to explain to a new player what options out of that huge Characters book are applicable to the campaign takes more time than actually running a session of play.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it's a one-off. I DID build a list of allowable ads/disads/skills for my gameworld. It took me a while: the resulting three docs, including the full texts of new creations, total 21 pages. But that work's done. My final versions of all three were thirteen years ago. And now I don't have to have the same conversations each and every time someone new joins the campaign. The same applies to any other infrastructure work: while I do updates every now and then for the 250 page city out of which I tend to run parties, most of that work was finished by 2008, and complete enough to be going on with by 1984.

I don't call myself hard done-by for that. (And seriously? I could recite every word of those 21 pages, and it'd take far less time than a session of play. Most players who aren't stupid don't need to be led by the hand and told what traits pertain to a low-tech fantasy campaign, and which don't.)
 
I just looked at my current project, which is admittedly three or more settings in one, and it's currently at 87 pages of rules and not even 'fluff' yet. :shock:
 
Exploderwizard said:
THIS is the problem inherent in the system. The sheer amount of work the GM has to do to run a simple low powered fantasy campaign in Caithness is staggering. Building lists of allowable Ads/Disads, skills, etc is exhausting. Trying to explain to a new player what options out of that huge Characters book are applicable to the campaign takes more time than actually running a session of play.
Click to expand...
Yeah, for 4e. Using the skill list from an earlier edition would be far easier.
 
Ravenswing said:
You asked a question, multiple posters gave their responses to the question, and what you think is great doesn't define it for the rest of us. (For one thing, some of us haven't been around D&D in years, and we are no more guaranteed to be familiar with D&D system mechanics slang than you're guaranteed to be familiar with GURPS system mechanics slang.) Being turned off by a game system because you don't like the answers some posters give? You might want to take your own advice about calming down.
Click to expand...
I don't think Advantage/Disadvantage are "great" they are simple and definitely "lite". I'm not turned off by GURPS but attitudes like yours.
 
I think you're reading a more combative tone into Ravenswing's words than is actually there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top