@Sandra ....I mean if someone wanted to run a game of Transhuman Space or Discworld i might* be interested.

*i would be


The first GURPS book I ever got was GURPS Discworld, the first edition, the one with GURPS Lite in the back that said it was a complete game (it wasn’t—it didn’t work w/o the full game).

The first crack in the GURPS fandom armor for me then was reading a GURPS Discword adventure in Pyramid or wherever and seeing that it double statted for WaRP. Which just looked like a way better game.

@Sandra @Capheind GURPS has flaws, but the biggest isn't so much the game, it's that everything is front loaded. You have to understand the entire, large game in order to start the game (well).

I like to use Fate as being somewhere on the opposite end of the spectrum. You start with minimal understanding and... discover that there's no game to discover, you have to build it yourself.

I think ideal games would be somewhere in the middle.

@jens @Capheind

I really, really want to get back into Fate now that Fate Condensed is out. I want a fresh canvas for my house rules and hacks now that I’ve taken my souped up version of D&D so far (#2097e). Not saying Fate is good out of the box but it’s really the game I wanna start working on.

But looks like next campaign is gonna be based on BitD. Maybe. If I can get my proverbial in gear and start working on that.

@Sandra @Capheind can't really argue with that. It just turns out that whenever I start on a game engine, I end up in GURPSish areas. I mean, not exactly, but close enough.

@jens @Capheind

The basic BRP/GURPS/Fudge abilities+skills+advantages engine is what I grew up with but that I really soured on over the years, because it uses the same mechanic for things that really should be different.

Talking, interacting, looking at things, opening chests, exploring, resource management and logistics… that shouldn’t be skill roll based. Dice can be involved but the dice should be on the side of the “world” not the char—i.e. “OK, that’s gonna take half an hour”→which has impact on random encounters etc.

@Sandra @Capheind I get that point, but I also disagree somewhat.

It's the same logic as D&D's combat rolls: it's not that you *swing wild* on a missed roll, it's that your thrust and parry with the opponent didn't land a solid enough blow to matter (unlike GURPS attacks).

Similarly, the skill in searching a chest isn't that someone can't do it, it's that they may not find something that's there.

But yes, GURPS is inconsistent here - like most systems.

@Sandra @Capheind but of course your view isn't wrong because of what I just wrote. I just think a bit of skill is realistic here.

So, let me ramble on in two directions here...

@Sandra @Capheind ... the first is really a question of the guiding dimension you're currently on.

Ok, so assume games are multidimensional things. In order to keep any kind of order to the actions of the players, you have to pick a dimension that is guiding all the others. In combat, that is usually time.

Varying movement speeds between characters is another way of saying that the space dimension is subordinate to time.

@Sandra @Capheind that is, you don't change the time intervals (rounds), but you adjust how far a character can move in that fixed time slot. Same with the limit on actions.

Because combat needs to be tightly synchronised, that's a good choice here.

But that doesn't mean that it's a good choice when synchronisation is not so necessary. As you say, searching is going to be successful eventually, so really you should determine how long it takes.

@Sandra @Capheind GURPSes ability focus basically never loses that time dimension as being guiding, which translates into degrees of success rather than amount of time as a result. It's perfectly appropriate for in-combat searches!

Other systems are more explicit in saying rolls are only necessary in tense situations, which is another way of saying that events need to be synchronised at the moment.

I think it would be more meaningful to have a degree of...

@Sandra @Capheind ... outcome and apply it either to degrees of success when time is a fixed amount, or degree of time spent when time constraints are more fluid.

But that doesn't really change anything about the abilities being the basis of the roll.

This is interesting stuff—maybe I quote it on the blog?

@jens @Capheind

I do use a time-based data-structure for searching, the ten minute exploration turn from older editions of D&D (including B/X):


But which of the walls is trapped, or which of the chests hold the key, or w/e is determined world-side not char-side.

Clinton’s classic experiment “Donjon” shows what happens when the world is all generated from char-side stats. Basically it’s a return to the old no-myth vs blorb discussions on Forge and S-G—char-side originated world-building makes a precommitted explorable world more difficult to prep and execute; the benefit is that you need less prep because so much of the world building is generated by the characters.

For example D&D 4e or PF2e (if you aren’t using the bounded accuracy mod in the Gamemastery Guide) where you can improvise a heist or whatever because, since the world scales so strictly with the characters that the opposition is essentially given. You meet a barkeep or a goblin or a minotaur or whatever? Gonna be matched to your level. That’s an example of char-side originated world building right there. Quite unblorby. In #blorb, the world and its entities are first class data-structures.


@Sandra @Capheind yes you may.

And no, you're right, not everything is char side - I may have misunderstood what precisely you were bothered with. Your three tiers of truth are a very good point for where to strike that balance.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Finkhäuser Social

A private instance for the Finkhäuser family.