GURPS Ultra-Lite -- thoughts

[PK]

Originally Posted by mib2932

GURPS B343: "Regardless of the score you are rolling against, a roll of 3 or 4 is always a success, while a roll of 17 or 18 is always a failure."

GURPS p. B345: "You may not attempt a success roll if your effective skill is less than 3."

[PK]

Originally Posted by Der Wanderer

Doesn't it always give +4 to a set of skills?

No. The first level buys a Wildcard! skill at your attribute-2. Note that with one GUL level of skill, you're rolling against attribute - 6 + 4. In GURPS, that doesn't mean you start off at the default (-6) and then "buy up four skill levels". No, you buy the skill at attribute-2.

Think of if this way. In GURPS Fast-Talk defaults to IQ-5. If you buy a "level" in it (i.e., put 1 character point into it), are you now rolling against IQ - 5 + 1? No -- you're rolling against IQ - 1. From a GUL perspective, that 1 cp bought you +4 to your "skill roll", because you went from a crappy default to actually knowing Fast-Talk.

[jacobmuller]

Has anyone stared thinking in terms of Half-Levels yet?

Fractional levels gives you the major advantages and disadvantges; 1/2 = 20-24cp. You can go to smaller fractions but 1/2 level is +1 to DX or IQ. 1/4 is +1 to ST or HT...

Give all characters, 0-10 levels, a free 1/2 level in their chosen career. A 0 level GUL would then equate to 24cp GURPS. Non-Career skills are at Stat -6; Career skills are at Stat. Worth 24cp. If they choose Jack-of-All-Trades as a Career, apply -4 to all skills, i.e. an improved default.

[Gollum]

My opinion, just after reading GURPS Ultra-Lite very attentively, is that it is not as simple to play as it first appears.

The GM or the players will always have a lot of calculation to do during play: "Make a IQ roll - 6 + 4 (since you have the skill) - 2 for the difficulty..."

I know that this kind of calulation is very easy to do, but the problem is that there will be a calculation like that for almost every roll - just look at the examples! It is not a good idea when you try to introduce new players to a system.

And during combat, it is worth!

The GM and the players will always have to roll under their stat - 6 + the skill - half the skill of the opponent + the possible difficulty...

If they doesn't know GURPS Lite or GURPS Basic Set, they will be very afraid! They will inevatibly thing that GURPS is a game where you always have a lot of calculation to do, which is totally wrong.

But since "La critique est aisée, mais l'art est difficile" (criticizing is far much easier than doing), here is how I would correct this interesting little game...

1) The roll is made against the attribute.
2) If the player has the skill, there is no modifier.
3) If he hasn't the skill, there is a -4 (instead of the -6 ; the fact that a professional must have a -2 for an average task sounds very strange).
4) When he takes two times the skill a player gets a +4, 3 times gives a + 8, etc. Oh no! Forget this! Since there is no reward for experience (this is just a little game to introduce new players), and since the players just have 3 to 5 points to spend, they certainly won't take a skill two or three times. They will rather improve their attributes... They have the skill or they haven't is far much simplier.

For combats, the skill is not anymore a penalty (GURPS never worked like that). Instead of that, every character can choose two options instead of one.

The defense, which is still an option let you try to avoid the blow as usual in GURPS (a roll and, in case of success, there is no damage).

This new rule allows a huge diversity of options without being complex.
- One attack and one defense.
- One move and one attack.
- Two attacks but no defense.
- Two defenses, but no attacks.

In my humble opinion, it would be much easier to play (less calculation) and it would sounds much more like GURPS. But, of course, it is just my opinion...

[OldSam]

From my point of view the concept of subtracting half of the opponents skill from the own skill is uncomfortable while playing and also misleading because it works _against_ the existing modular concept - it is just not part of Gurps or Gurps Lite! (also it confuses the older hands who must explain the system to newbies)
What is the point about this system when it confuses players that read normal Gurps or Gurps Lite _after_ they played this version...? I definitely think it should be closer to the simple real mechanics to enable a soft-migration.

I second Gollums posting that a far better "easy solution" would be just rolling against the attribute with a simplified -4 modifier or without modifier if the right skill is there!

Also I'd clearly prefer a simple combat-model-idea like the one Gollum posted over the one with the penalties written up in Ver 0.8 - again because I would not introduce mechanics that are so far away from Gurps and because I don't like adding/subtracting things all the time.
(btw indirectly it always shows the enemies stats to the players, too)

Using wildcard-skills is a good idea for this mini-gameversion imo, but I'd recommend attaching the exclamation point (!) to the skills, so that experienced players now, "Ah: 'Sword!' is an wildcardskill", and I think new players just wouldn't care about this symbol.

Last but not least a note to the <Intelligence> -Attribute:
I think this one needs more explanation for total newbies!
It does not only include "Science and Codebreaking", but also social tasks and it also serves as willpower and perception - that should be noted imo.

[jSarek]

Count me among those who thought this would be a bit more, well, GURPS than it is.

It's a very interesting experiment, one which I think has a lot of potential . . . but I think it's a disservice both to this game, and to GURPS Proper, to call this little guy "GURPS." Other than the core mechanic and the names of the attributes, they're really two very different games. Potential players who want to learn GURPS are more likely to be confused by this guide than helped by it, while people who are put off by GURPS's attention to detail might overlook this rules-light gem because of its name.

My suggestion? Rename it. It has a lot of potential as a neat little stand-alone game (especially as suggestions from the community push it closer to a 1.0 state), but tying it too closely to the GURPS brand will only serve to confuse things.

Originally Posted by Kromm

Keep the ideas coming! And to come clean: This is a bare-bones, quicky item that got written in e-mail, and not really meant to be an "intro to GURPS" so much as "a look at how those crazy SJ Games people spend their time."

Unfortunately, I think in its current state, people are going to be looking at it as the former rather than the latter.

Originally Posted by JMason

Gavynn, have you seen the One Page GURPS pdf on Eric B. Smith's site? Check it out here (link).

That's a little closer to what I was expecting. I wonder if SJGames might do something similar to this as a game aid, in the same mini-fold format as GURPS Ultra-Light, in addition to the new stand-alone mini-RPG?

[OldSam]

Having read the "one-page-Gurps" and the "Mini-RPG" presented here, I am sure the most problematic point of the real Gurps Combat System to explain in one page would be the damage-model.
Expressions like "thr+2 imp" or "sw-1 cut" cannot be used in a one-page-system though they are not that hard to understand.

Anyway to be closer to the real system I think it would be better to use a simplified table than to work something out like the "combat skill levels" as a damage bonus because such a thing does not exist in Gurps and everyone migrating to Gurps would have to relearn the whole thing (despite from the fact, that it's really strange when the only difference between Axe and Knive is the users skill)

Here is an idea (first draft) how a very simplified damage-model could look like, please feel free to comment. ;-)

Basic Damage is like in the presented V.0.8. 1d/2 für ST8, 1d for ST10 etc.)

Muscle Powered Damage ist just split in five damage categories like this:

- Unarmed (punching, kicking...)
- Light Weapons include Knives, short Staffs, Shuriken etc.
- Medium Weapons include Rapier, Shortsword, Staff, Arrows from far distance etc.
- Strong Weapons include Sword, Small Axe, Spear, Arrows from near distance etc.
- Very Strong Weapons include Great Sword, Great Axe/Poleaxe etc.


Unarmed | Light | Medium | Strong | Very Strong
------------------------------------------------------------
dmg -3 | dmg-1 | dmg +1 | dmg +3 | dmg +5
normal | attack+1 | normal | dodge-1 | dodge&parry-1

(the bottom line is for meelee-weapons only, min. damage when hitting is 1)
(btw: Sorry, for the bad ascii-table-layout)

I included some small "balancing"-addons with the bottom line, which should on the one hand reflect an simplified implementation of encumbrancement (more weight with bigger weapson = less mobile/flexible etc.) and on the other hand should beware that strong weapons are too powerful.

[JMason]

Gollum had some very good points, as did many others that have posted. I think the main concern is that GUL feels like a game that uses GURPS terms, but is not GURPS in any real way.

Many people want a version of GURPS that can be used to introduce new gamers to the system, but not overwhelm them. Of course, GURPS being a generic system has so many parts that many people feel that it is just too big to use.

So after looking over the system again, and reading the excellent ideas here, I have the following suggestions:

Levels should try to consistently represent a set number of character points. Preferably 20 or even 10, since this would allow for more options with Attributes and the (later?) inclusion of Advantages.

A character sheet with a "fill the dots" or some similar method to give new players a simple guide on how they are spending their levels. See my example Character Sheet to see what I mean.

Change the "requires training" penalty to a default usage penalty. Also reduce this to -5 (assume most task are average).

Add the exclamation point to the end of skills. The first level of a skill should buy-off the default skill penalty. Additional levels should give a bonus that is as close to whatever CP it is decided to use for "levels". This work very well for a 20cp "level" since every one spend, including the first, will equate to 24cp.

Add a "defense" characteristic that is equal to 3 + (DX + combat skill) / 2. This is a bit complicated, but should only have to be done once.

Make combat a quick contest between the attacker's combat skill roll, and the target's defense roll.

One last suggestion is to revamp GURPS Lite 4th ed. I would like to see a more approachable format there, but that is a whole other discussion.

[cmdicely]

Originally Posted by Gollum

My opinion, just after reading GURPS Ultra-Lite very attentively, is that it is not as simple to play as it first appears.

The GM or the players will always have a lot of calculation to do during play: "Make a IQ roll - 6 + 4 (since you have the skill) - 2 for the difficulty..."

One page rules doesn't mean you have to have an abbreviated character sheet: I'd probably do a skill grid listing the the base roll for the skill against each attribute. So, the only calculation is whatever the GM does to figure the difficulty modifier including, where applicable, the -6 for difficulty, and whatever the player does to figure the margin of success when they roll.

For the grid, more specifically, I'd probably do something like:

             ST           DX           IQ           HT
Desc.        Strong       Agile        Normal       V. Hardy
Score        14 / 2d6     12           10           18
(Skills)
Samurai 3    --           24           22           30
Ninja 1      --           16           14           22

The GM and the players will always have to roll under their stat - 6 + the skill - half the skill of the opponent + the possible difficulty...

They will always need to roll under that, but if you divide the work right, its not an issue of calculation (except calculating margin of success against skill, possibly modified by difficulty). The person responsible for the character should have their defense value (1/2 combat skill) recorded on the character sheet, the person rolling the attack should simply say how much they made it by against their skill and any difficulty modifier (or if they got an auto-success by rolling a 3.) Then the player of the victim says whether or not they were hit.

Oddly, though, these two solutions both reveal a potential problem with the format and simplicity; because the presentation is so brief, things which would simplify it in play don't have room to be presented.

[Gavynn]

Following the good Dr.'s Live Journal entry, my I suggest this product be retitled GURPS Mini rather than GURPS Ultra-Lite. That might remove the impression that this is scaled down GURPS rather than a different mini-game.