Since there isn't a thread yet and I know some of you people out there also have it...let's get the conversation started.

So, how do you like GD3?

I've mostly finished reading it(Bouncing round chapters). So far it seems really cool for low powered but non-gritty games. Call of Cthulhu, Unknown Armies, Gurps anything and nWoD would be pretty easy conversions. I hope this book is just the beginning, and some generic genre books and/or setting books start to come out for this.

Pros: It's very versatile, very easy to understand and it inspires a lot of ideas. Easy to understand and well done miniatures rules. Some of the best vehicle rules in any RPG. Character generation appears to be very quick (30 minutes or so is my best estimate, 5-10 if people are familiar and know what they want).

Cons: The GM (Director) section is a little preachy. Although it seems it could easily scale to epic/super power levels, there's not much in the book about how to do it. It's no good for dungeon crawls.


So, I dig it. I definitely can't wait to play. Anybody else out there have any thoughts on GD3?

Brett is really good at making things modular and tweakable.  I think GD3 is a great example of this.  I'm enjoying reading it so far.  I do see it working best at gritty to mid-level, but need to put together a game.

I'm really looking forward to digging into this mofo like Scrooge McDuck into a wallet.  I really liked GD-i and Impresa, but I had a few beefs with them.  I'm hoping that GD3 will address them, and a quick scan suggests that it does.

I just need to print it out so I have something more portable to read.

FYI, I just released free usage notes to adapt the Atomik Add-Ons to GD3E. This makes combining your own custom Atomik cybernetics, aliens, psionics, and magic with GD3E even easier, especially since most elements convert on a 1:1 basis.

Cool, maybe next-next paycheck I'll pick up one of 'em (probably Magic). I just got a group together to do a little playtest this week, so as long as Sony doesn't treat me too bad I'll finally get to play it!

So, what's next for Genre Diversion Brett?

Maelstrom Crossroads is probably next, though it's not going to be like GDi games.

Not like GDi? As in how?

As in bigger? Deeper?

Are they going to be closer to Unbidden and Forsaken? (for those not in the know, Unbidden and forsaken is the free, full setting that comes with GD3, it's worth the price of admission alone)

I really liked the depth of Unbidden & Forsaken. It's not really a demo or freebie. It's like a pack-in game. If the coming settings are anything close to that quality, I'll be a happy camper.

As in bigger and/or approached differently. GD3 is a foundation not only for future quick-play games, but also more advanced ones like Maelstrom Crossroads and The Colonies 2.0.

Unidden was packed into GD3, because I wanted the core rules to be more than just core rules and people have been asking for a new edition of Unbidden for a while.

Yo, review, yo.  Reviews section, and my blog, yo.

Quote from: KrakaJak;280184Cons: The GM (Director) section is a little preachy.

Preachy in what sense?

RPGPundit

I just picked it up a couple days ago, but haven't had a chance to read it yet. I love GDi, especially with Miami Nights and Coyote Trail. How easy does it seem to be to convert the stuff from GDi to 3? I can't imagine it'd be difficult.

Quote from: Sigmund;281985I just picked it up a couple days ago, but haven't had a chance to read it yet. I love GDi, especially with Miami Nights and Coyote Trail. How easy does it seem to be to convert the stuff from GDi to 3? I can't imagine it'd be difficult.

It's simple:

1. Skills -> Pursuits: (1-3 is a proficiency, 4-6 is a specialty, 7-8 is a mastery)

2. Difficulty: Add 10

That's about it.

Quote from: brettmb;282016It's simple:

1. Skills -> Pursuits: (1-3 is a proficiency, 4-6 is a specialty, 7-8 is a mastery)

2. Difficulty: Add 10

That's about it.

Sweet, that's pretty damn easy Oh thanks for my current favorite games btw

No. Thank you

There's a lot of lines like "The Director should..." and "The players should..." for suggestions that are are more like style preferences. Here's an example,

Quote from: GD3While some roleplaying games foster an adversarial
relationship between players and directors, this is
not advised. Simple things make a difference, such as
letting players describe how the outcome of events
affects their consciences, being generous with their use
of experience and special gimmick powers, and sharing
in the pleasure of the group’s success. It is not a battle of
wits to see who is more clever. It is, however, a healthy
exercise of the imagination as everyone (players and
directors alike) attempts to bring a fictional world and
its inhabitants to life.

While not bad advice in the least, it suggests to me a kind of "one true way."

It's really just a tone thing, rather than a content thing.