Just putting my long-winded thoughts down here, and wondering if anyone has reached the same conclusion?

Last month my Burning Empires game finally died, as, once again, folks didn't show up (2 of 4 players did, and we played Fluxx and Dogs in the Vineyard, so we had fun and a great mass of beer). After that day I declared the game dead and said I'm refusing to do heavily "certain players being there" dependent games anymore (like BE so much is).

With that done, we discussed what should be the new campaign, and I suggested GURPS and fantasy. Everyone was hurrah for the fantasy (I've a homebrewed world which people like) but not so much on GURPS. Thing is, I mentioned C&C to them but don't actually want to use it, as I'm not big on it's leveling, and also, it's a bit inflexible for what I have in mind. Still, GURPS is okay and does the job, though character creation can be...difficult for new people.

Plugged along at making my world building in GURPS. Then last night, while the wife was out shopping, it hits me. Savage Worlds. Why not? One guy runs it as GM, and another guy loves the system. The others don't know it but will. So, I've settled on Savage Worlds for the new campaign (and yes, it's a story-arced campaign of 8-12 sessions as I plan it now, since we only play once a month).

In my head, Savage Worlds is working out as a "compromise"; in this case, it gives the flexibility I want for characters and some detailing of things I like, but without the complexity of GURPS for character creation or what I call "modifier hunting" (that is, stacking of modifiers thanks to the multitude of Talents, Perks, Advantages and the synergies between them). SW also has "levels" of a sort, which also works well.

Just starting working on it, but I have a feeling SW's going to give me better results for what I want. Or at least easier results with less headaches.

So, is that an apt idea? SW as a sort of sweet middle compared to GURPS and say, C&C? Or what? Where does it fit?

Yeah kinda but much less than you imagine.  Really the only thing that SW has in common with GURPS is the grid stuff which can be excised easily. I think the game is up your alley because it has narrative aspects you seem to prefer from reading your previous posts.

While they might both be generic, Gurps and Savage Worlds are philosophically very different. Gurps was always about simulation. The level of detail is really just a by product of a desire to accurate model reality - its genre equivalent.

Savage World is not simulation based. It designed is entirely focused on game play and sticking to its mantra of fast, fun and furious.  I think Savage World works very well as a reduced complexity compromise game for D20 players, where there are more obvious similarities, than for Gurps players.

I am not saying that one is better than the other, I am just saying difference between the systems goes deeper than just level of complexity.

If you are looking for game with same aim of Gurps but simpler Chaosium's Basic Roleplaying system might be a closer match.

Quote from: Marleycat;557433Yeah kinda but much less than you imagine.  Really the only thing that SW has in common with GURPS is the grid stuff which can be excised easily. I think the game is up your alley because it has narrative aspects you seem to prefer from reading your previous posts.

Yeah, you've got it. Though my thoughts on narrativism vis-a-vis actual mechanics for it is changing, thanks to my experiences with FATE and Burning Whatever. SW's bennies are as close as I want to get to that sort of thing. Maybe I'm getting traditionalist in my old age?

Quote from: Soylent Green;557440If you are looking for game with same aim of Gurps but simpler Chaosium's Basic Roleplaying system might be a closer match.

But then I'd have to BUY it, see? And that ain't happening even a little soon, with vacation coming up. Gotta save the pennies so I can drink it all away in Italy!

Quote from: Soylent Green;557440While they might both be generic, Gurps and Savage Worlds are philosophically very different. Gurps was always about simulation. The level of detail is really just a by product of a desire to accurate model reality - its genre equivalent.

Savage World is not simulation based. It designed is entirely focused on game play and sticking to its mantra of fast, fun and furious.  I think Savage World works very well as a reduced complexity compromise game for D20 players, where there are more obvious similarities, than for Gurps players.

I am not saying that one is better than the other, I am just saying difference between the systems goes deeper than just level of complexity.

If you are looking for game with same aim of Gurps but simpler Chaosium's Basic Roleplaying system might be a closer match.

SG's nailed it, I think. SW does have very one clear design goal: fast-paced combat that emulates over-the-top fiction in detriment of any attempt at "realism" or "grittiness", and which supports (but does not require) miniatures. Philosophical differences aside, though, it's definitely rules-light next to GURPS.

Also, where GURPS is mostly consistent and predictable, SW is full of gimmicky rules. These go a long way towards fighting the blandness common to generic systems, but might not be to everyone's taste.

OK some thoughts...
 
SW and Fantasy: For fantasy games I think SW is a bit weak in terms of generating random monsters, treasures and whatnot - I'm running a Dark Sun game with SW, and I typically end up using D&D (various edition) materials to generate magical items or random psionic powers or whatnot, then converting statistics as appropriate. While that's perhaps not optimal I do find that the system is very easy to work with - not hard to make up monsters and NPCs and things more or less on the fly if needed, and even making up full races and so on isn't too bad. Definitely low prep & easy.
 
(on a bit of a tangent, this also works for me since I'm shocking lazy as regards GM preparation, and don't particularly try to poke PCs in any particular direction most of the time. I'm curious as to how SW would work for someone with a more structured, prepared game style since sooner or later, even with bennies/GM bennies, I suspect some sort of ridiculous dice roll would lead to the party heading in an unexpected direction... )
 
SW 'realism': In general I think SW is actually more akin to HERO than GURPS, since its an 'effect-based' system where you pick a power (or a skill or Edge), and add explanations or trappings to reskin that to what you want. Realism wise, SW isn't completely unrealistic so much as that it trusts the GM to build something that works for them. I'm struggling to think of a fantasy example but for instance GURPS probably has X pages of rules detailing how pain penalties are different for cyborgs, while in SW the GM might just decide that your cyborg opponent has Nerves of Steel. Or GURPS probably has separate disadvantages for someone with a vow to give away worldly goods and someone who is just poor, while both would just have Poverty in SW? (forgive my lack of GURPS-fu here, just trying to articulate this thought as best I can).

Quote from: StanTheMan;557441Yeah, you've got it. Though my thoughts on narrativism vis-a-vis actual mechanics for it is changing, thanks to my experiences with FATE and Burning Whatever. SW's bennies are as close as I want to get to that sort of thing. Maybe I'm getting traditionalist in my old age?

My experience playing Trail of Cthulhu taught me that some narrativist mechanics might sound well in theory (and not always!), but in practice they run against what I want in an RPG.

I wouldn't consider SW bennies a narrativistic mechanic, in my opinion it's a form of emulation, but that's a discussion for another thread.

Quote from: StanTheMan;557429So, is that an apt idea? SW as a sort of sweet middle compared to GURPS and say, C&C? Or what? Where does it fit?

You haven't said anything negative about Savage Worlds. Frankly, I wouldn't think much about it, you like it, two persons in your group like it, it allows some flexibility in chargen and still it's simpler than GURPS. It sounds good to me.

I think whilst they are both generic they are totally different in the style of generic.

So SW is great for stuff you find in comics. I did a Strontium Dog Mod and its a perfect fit. So want a fantasy game that plays like a Conan or Magic comic ... SW will work, Want to run Star Wars, SW again.

Gurps is great for stuff you find in novels and in serious movies. Want to play some Iain M Banks culture SciFi or some Larry Niven. Want to run a fantasy game that feels more like Game of Thrones, Gurps can do that. So modern day military stuff, Hard Fi, and of course historicals and psuedo historicals.

So you could use Gurps to run a Billy the Kid cowboy game and you could use SW to run a Police procedural but .....

Quote from: jibbajibba;557477I think whilst they are both generic they are totally different in the style of generic.

So SW is great for stuff you find in comics. I did a Strontium Dog Mod and its a perfect fit. So want a fantasy game that plays like a Conan or Magic comic ... SW will work, Want to run Star Wars, SW again.

Gurps is great for stuff you find in novels and in serious movies. Want to play some Iain M Banks culture SciFi or some Larry Niven. Want to run a fantasy game that feels more like Game of Thrones, Gurps can do that. So modern day military stuff, Hard Fi, and of course historicals and psuedo historicals.

Spot on, jibba. I'd use BRP instead of GURPS but the sentiment is the same; one for grit, the other for over-the-top heroics.

Quote from: Claudius;557466You haven't said anything negative about Savage Worlds. Frankly, I wouldn't think much about it, you like it, two persons in your group like it, it allows some flexibility in chargen and still it's simpler than GURPS. It sounds good to me.

I think this is probably the key right here. You and part of your group have experience with it and like it pretty well...that should be incentive enough, IMO. That said, you're not wrong...it does allow for a good bit of flexibility with a lot less legwork.

Quote from: StanTheMan;557441Yeah, you've got it. Though my thoughts on narrativism vis-a-vis actual mechanics for it is changing, thanks to my experiences with FATE and Burning Whatever. SW's bennies are as close as I want to get to that sort of thing. Maybe I'm getting traditionalist in my old age?

If you stay away from the GNS nonsense about system mattering and "coherency", I think it's pretty clear that what good stuff can be found in Forge Narrativism theory boils down to setting design, situation design, and character design approaches that can be boiled down to some pretty simple advice that can be used with any traditional game rather than something that requires an entirely different type of rule system meant to work in a setting that's highly specialized. So I guess that you've figured out that whatever it is that you get out of Narrative play, you don't really need special rules to get it.

Quote from: John Morrow;557503So I guess that you've figured out that whatever it is that you get out of Narrative play, you don't really need special rules to get it.

That's a way to look at it, for sure. Or at least, many times, I got this feeling that the mechanics in the systems that I was using was getting in the way of the stuff I DID like; so you're right, in that sense. I didn't need the other sets of mechanics to get what I liked out of the game.

@everyone - thanks for the thoughts and all. Still trying to decide which system to use. I've got weeks on that matter, and one guy in the group just wrote that he actually prefers GURPS (we played it maybe 4 years ago for a cyberpunk game). So, just to muddy the waters a little!

I should say that I, personally, am more familiar with GURPS, though I HAVE run SW before, as I said, so it isn't like I don't know it. Le sigh.

But back on topic - I was just thinking recently that the thing I really liked form a lot of the narrativist games was this idea of the players being active in what goes on in terms of description at the table, and as mentioned above, this is one of those things that aren't specific to a rule system, but just to how you, the GM, set the pace of letting or encouraging people to do certain things. Doesn't even need "incentive" beyond "because it's fun that way."

Also let's quiet guy not engage in it if he doesn't want to, which can't be bad. Why force a guy to play a certain way?

You know jack about Savage Worlds if you call it a narrativist game.
I just hope your SW players point out each and every fucking mistake and error you make while running the game so you would take your Forgey hands off of the game. IT IS NOT YOUR STORYBITCH, DUDE!