[Dusqune]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

What do you mean by "text-based" and "game program"?

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

What is GURPS?

Is it a coherent set of game mechanics for creating, adventuring and advancing characters?

Or is it a logo and a name that fans associate with fun and goods times, the use of which will cause them to gravitate towards the OP's product?

The later is definitely very illegal.

But while I'm not a lawyer, I don't believe there's anything illegal about using other people's game mechanics wholesale (except for the "card tap" thing in collectible games), as long as you make up your own product name and don't use theirs anywhere. Doing so is still intellectually dishonest, and failing to try to make any improvements on the stolen set of game mechanics is distinctly feeble. But sadly, those kinds of crimes don't get people's rear ends in jail (or in buzzing chairs).

Note also that using other people's game mechanics, for making a computer game, without consulting with those other people, means that you have to understand the game mechanics to a great depth, in order to make an at least decent game out of it.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Come to think of it, I don't think GURPS fits for a computer game. Too much flexibility for convenient use that will get broken without a GM, and very little games. GURPS is optimised for one of the best balances of playability vs. detail level on a tabletop, which isn't such a big deal for a realtime computer-crunched game.

Originally Posted by BaHalus

Imo, GURPS would be great for a PC game. Essentially, the programmer would be the GM.
Creating the environment and the limiting rules. And, as a game would automatically make the roll and calculations, we could get more detail than available at tabletop. I really loved Arcanum and I think a true GURPS-based game could be even greater. Maybe with some tweaks,

Have any of you played KotoR? It was a Star Wars game based off of D&D (i.e., it used d20 mechanics and the classes were strikingly similar to the ones presented in the WotC RPG Star Wars book I own). But it was good and fun and all that, allowed for roleplaying within the game, and let you min/max to a degree.

Basically, what I was thinking of was a game with no graphics (cuz I can't do that) but only text. Descriptions of the actions and places and everything would be printed on the screen as text. Most actions would be limited down to options. (e.g., have menus that say: press 1 to go to the inn, 2 to go to the tavern, 3 to go to the blacksmith, etc.)

Yes, this would heavily reduce how much you can do with the game (combat movement comes to mind--I can't see a way to keep track of that without getting extremely complicated), but I was surprised at how many things I could do with just text.

Frex, Disadvantages. How do you reliably 'get points' for roleplaying if there's no GM? Well, when you are given conversation options, the game would check to see what disadvantages you have, and then add notes to each option depending on what you have. If you work against your disadvantages, you might have to make a self-control check to even use that option. Or, you could get 'exp' for voluntarily choosing the option fitted to your disadvantages. (enough exp would earn you a character point)

FREX:
(NPC has just insulted PC)
(PC has Bad Temper with a self-control roll of 9)
Options:
1) "Let's calm down and move on to the issue at hand..." (Self-Control <=7)
2) "Ha ha, very funny. Now..." (Self-Control <=9)
3) "Shut up! You don't know anything about me!" (Bad Temper+)
4) [IQ] "Yes, well if this is how you dress on a day-to-day basis, I don't see why any man would want to spend time around you either." (Bad Temper+)
5) [Bad Temper] <Punch her in the face.> (Bad Temper ++)

In this situation, the PC would have to make a Self-Control roll to act against their bad temper disadvantage (at a penalty for trying the most peaceful option). So if they chose 1 or 2, it would say [Success] and continue the conversation, or [Failure] and force you to choose from 3, 4, and 5 (but without the (Bad Temper+/++) notes). If they instead chose 3 or 4, they get some exp for aligning with their disadvantage, and if they chose 5 they would get a little more (but none from any of them if they chose 1 or 2 first, then failed). Option 4's [IQ] would designate that this conversation option is available because the character succeeded at an IQ check (to come up with a comeback in this case) and likewise option 5 would not be available if the character did not have bad temper in the first place. On the other hand, if they had other disadvantages (e.g., bloodlust, chummy, callous, sense of duty) then other options might open up. Or, if the character still had bad temper, but also had Pacifism: Total Nonviolence, then option 5 would not be available.

The game would be fairly linear in story--like any computer RPG. Even something as open-ended as Elder Scrolls has a linear progression of the main plot. The advantage would be that I can do stuff like above. The disadvantage: that I would have to program every single conversation in the game with every possible outcome (much like KotoR).

I would probably use GURPS mechanics, but if I probably wouldn't advertise it as GURPS. With KotoR, I have no idea if they got WotC's permission to use the d20 mechanics--they definitely never mention D&D or d20 in the game, and then Pathfinder is almost an exact copy of D&D, and I'm surprised they haven't had to quit that... etc....

Point is, I don't know what would be legal or not, but I hope I clarified what I'm thinking about doing. This would obviously be a massive project for one person, but...

I'm at least liking the whole disadvantages idea enough that I might nab that and use it or something similar if nothing else. How does that fit into copyright law? There comes a point where everything you do has been done before.