I'm not a "die hard" 3e fan, so feel free to try and "sell me" if you like, I'm open minded.  4e was the last edition of the rules I purchased (got the first two books hot off the press).  I couldn't even get throguh them they were just so long, boring, and detailed.

Now, I like to have an open mind, and as I age my prefrences change.  I re-read things I didn't like a decade ago and find I like them more now.  On the other hand, some game sthat I was in love with years ago I re-read and go, man, these rules suck, good thing I was playing a house-rule version of the game.

So I'll be blunt and honest (If no one flames me on it!)  with all the information coming out about about 4E D&D, my group has pretty much decided that we will part ways with D&D when it comes out.

This means that we have to find a "replacement" system for fantasy games (as I don't want to stick with 3.5 either).  Not sure what we will use because I've already disqualified almost every RPG in the history of the hobby....so, I'm back at square one taking a second look at games I haven't touched for years, and never actually played.

The reason I look at 3rd ed GURPS as a viable option rather than 4th is because it is all wrapped up in one nice neat package.  How can a system that used to require 1 book now require 2 or 3 books that are larger in size and NOT be a bigger burden to learn and use?

Quote from: J ArcaneThat's pretty fuckin' sweet.  It's like everything you need that isn't in core, all in one nice neat package.  

Makes me want to pick up GURPS 3e again, or just DL GURPS lite, and run it just looking at it.

That's what I was looking for too.  I just wish it was an "official" supplement, or I had proof that it wasn't riddled with problems.  If any Gurps fanboy can tell me it's not an unbalanced fan work I'd appreciate it.

I think you are looking at 4e the wrong way. It is more accurate to describe it as a toolbox to make your own game, than a game itself.

Grubman,

GURPS actually "shrank" the needed books from 3 or 4 to 2 books when they made the current edition of the game.  In the late '90s, the GURPS Compenpiums I and II were almost necessary to play any GURPS game.
For 4th edition they moved the much of the masterial into the basic two rule books of (CHARACTERS, CAMPAIGNS)

To run what you want to, you could do it with just the two main books and your own creativity. If you want more detail and help, try GURPS: FANTASY and GURPS : MAGIC.  The current 4th edition version of Fantasy is just a straight toolbook for those people trying to creayte their own Fantasy campaign. All that stuff that you probab;ly didn't like in the old 15 years ago version of FANTASY has been shifted into BANESTORM (which I still like)

- Ed C.

Quote from: whiteyfatsI think you are looking at 4e the wrong way. It is more accurate to describe it as a toolbox to make your own game, than a game itself.

Oh I know what it is, but I also know that there is nothing wrong with having the core elements there.  If I wanted to do everything I would just write my own game.  Some people like to do more with the rules bit, some less.  When it comes to RPGs I don't want to mess with creating rules, I want to expend my energies on teh "creative" part of the game, writing adventures and running sessions.

I don't want to have to sit htere and guess what skills should be avaliable, or what equipment is time-appropriate.  I want to get to the fun stuff, making memerable game sessions.

Quote from: grubmanThe reason I look at 3rd ed GURPS as a viable option rather than 4th is because it is all wrapped up in one nice neat package.  How can a system that used to require 1 book now require 2 or 3 books that are larger in size and NOT be a bigger burden to learn and use?

I think you have a very mistaken assumption here.  3rd edition is not wrapped up in one nice neat edition at all.  To really use it, requires the two compendiums (I think that's what they were called).  They were considered a fundamental part of the basic game.  And there is a tons of inconsistencies.  4th edition is really nicely tied together in the two core books.  

The classic GURPS fantasy setting is Banestorm.  You should check that out.

All that being said, GURPS has a very different feel than D&D.  I think it runs D&D type fantasy really well. I've played in a small campaign of it and a friend of mine has been running a long-term campaign that the players, all newbies to roleplaying or previous 3.5 only players, are quite enjoying.  He also runs a great one shot CSI:Gondor (murder in middle earth).

So it definitely can be done and done well.  But the system has a totally different design concept than D&D. It's granular and it's "realistic".  By realistic, I mean that character development choices are wide-open but limited to the world's internal logic.  You don't get those sudden leaps and bounds in power that you do in D&D.  Personally, I find the granularity and choice far more satisfying than D&D, but the combat can be a little too granular.  While combat in D&D sucks, it is still fairly abstract and big crazy things can happen.  I have found these tend not too happen so much in GURPS (though this probably depends on the looseness of the GM and there are probably some things you could tweak).

It's also a very crunchy system and if you've got min-maxers, if they like the style of the system, they are going to find some pretty interesting and effective builds.  The system is really robust, so it's doubtful they'll break anything, but they'll keep you on your toes as a GM, making you work to come up with challenges, especially as power goes up (and it can go way up).

It's a very intricate, well-constructed machine.  Actually quite beautiful in many ways.  But I find it's thoroughness tends to impose itself on my games and slows them down.  But it's also very freeing for players, particularly with character choice, both at chargen and as they develop, which I found to be a massive improvement over D&D for fantasy.

Maybe if you described the play style of the group, what they liked about 3.5 (I assume that's what they were playing), what they didn't like.  What kind of situations they enjoyed, etc. we can give you a better prognosis of how GURPS would fit.

Walker-man,

...about the combat thing. I tend change session to session how detailed I go with it as a GM.

 If the players have had a rough work week - then I really use the damage charts and let them see how much damage they are infliucting.

 If they seem more into the character and story stuff thats going - then shorten it to just the bare essentials of whats need for combat.

There are plenty of shortcuts you can use with GURPS Combat without thinking of them as "House Rules" .

Compare it to some movies and TV shows , some fight scenes they do the slow-mo, overly artsy camera work so you can see in detail whats going on in the fight. In other fight scenes, its just a quick one or two punches or a roundhouse kick done at normal camera speed.

 I look at gaming a combat scenes the same way  - you don't always have to do the detailed version and youi can stay within the rules while changing it up occassionally.

 - Ed C.

Quote from: walkerpI think you have a very mistaken assumption here.  3rd edition is not wrapped up in one nice neat edition at all.  To really use it, requires the two compendiums (I think that's what they were called).  They were considered a fundamental part of the basic game.  

Perhaps you are right, but you have to understand my point of view.  GURPS 3rd did very nicely BEFORE those thick Compendiums came out for people like myself who don't need all those details.  I respect a good framework of rules, but don't get all anal about them and need every one spelled out and difined to the tee without a question.

Grubman,

 How about if I send you one of the books in the snail-mail?
The 4th edition ones of course.


 I feel like being a Klingon "Santa" this year.

Your choice: CHARACTERs, CAMPAIGNS, FANTASY , or MAGIC.


- Ed C.


Hey, you save some money that way and might try the system.....

Quote from: KoltarGrubman,

 How about if I send you one of the books in the snail-mail?
The 4th edition ones of course.


 I feel like being a Klingon "Santa" this year.

Your choice: CHARACTERs, CAMPAIGNS, FANTASY , or MAGIC.


- Ed C.


Hey, you save some money that way and might try the system.....

Well that is really about the most intense "sell me" argument I've ever heard!  Someone must really love GURPS!

Pretty happy with it , yep.

I like snail-mail too.

 

- Ed C.

Quote from: KoltarI like snail-mail too.

Well me to, since, being a city letter carrier, I wouldn't have a job without it .

Quote from: grubmanWhen it comes to RPGs I don't want to mess with creating rules, I want to expend my energies on teh "creative" part of the game, writing adventures and running sessions.

I don't want to have to sit htere and guess what skills should be avaliable, or what equipment is time-appropriate.  I want to get to the fun stuff, making memerable game sessions.

This is the number one reason I like GURPS. Fourth edition more so. It is a collection of well thought out and tested integrated pieces that just kinda belong together.

As far as the completeness leading to abuse, in my experience minmaxers and ruleslawers that are problems in a given game will be a problem in any game or not be in the game. Arguing about rules made up on the spot with problem players is even worse, most times they see it as an opportunity to directly twist the game.

If you start out with 3rd and if you find that as power increases things get more awkward, consider switching to 4th.

Edit: Note I didn't say 'perfect' rules.

Quote from: grubmanPerhaps you are right, but you have to understand my point of view.  GURPS 3rd did very nicely BEFORE those thick Compendiums came out for people like myself who don't need all those details.  I respect a good framework of rules, but don't get all anal about them and need every one spelled out and difined to the tee without a question.

Oh, well in that case, then you're probably fine with just the 3rd edition book.  GURPS 4th does spell most things out.  I think it's nice for the players to have all the options in one book and Characters does that.  But the Campaigns book isn't really necessary if you get the core 3d6, roll-under mechanic.  I'd say the main difference, then, between 3rd and 4th is that the latter fixes the problem where players would max out INT and DX.  Benefits are better distributed across the four core attributes now.

I think fantasy types in the GURPS community are quite excited about the new magic book (Thaumaturgica Magic or something?  Koltar, help me out here) coming out (and were never too excited about the original Magic).  My memory is very hazy now, but it sounds like there may be some creative, cool magic options there.  I think that's where GURPS shines, is in giving your players all kinds of choices, but as Kyle mentioned, this requires a certain level of system buy-in from players.  If they do buy-in, books like Powers and Martial Arts open the system up to all kinds of creativity.  You can make really cool non-spell-based magic users or magical creatures with Powers, for instance.

I use GURPS for online games, where the 3d6 roll under mechanic helps us resolve conflicts easily, and the players can tweak and customize their character development.  But it does not have tons of flavour and for me tends to bog down in combat, so I stick with Savage Worlds at the table.  If I were to do fantasy, I probably would use a lot of the rules for character development, but keep things loose in combat, as Koltar suggested.

Quote from: grubmanPerhaps you are right, but you have to understand my point of view.  GURPS 3rd did very nicely BEFORE those thick Compendiums came out for people like myself who don't need all those details.  I respect a good framework of rules, but don't get all anal about them and need every one spelled out and difined to the tee without a question.

I agree on this entirely.  All I ever owned and played with was GURPS core, and like, one or two sourcebooks I grabbed because the material sounded interesting.  The 3e core was a nice, complete, if basic, package, capable of running a lot of stuff out of the box, and even more if you were willing to make up some stuff.

The completism that kind of took over the game didn't really come into play until you started buying some of the later sourcebooks, and their policy of relentless cross-referencing starts meaning that you need to buy like half-a-dozen books jut to understand the one you just bought.