05-19-2021, 09:53 AM | #41 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
I wouldn't start a DF campaign at 25-50 points, which is where a level 1 with average stats in OD&D would probably be. Just not 250.
|
05-19-2021, 11:40 AM | #42 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
But, let's look more closely at your statement. You say that 25-50 points would be about where a level 1 OD&D character would be. GURPS Campaigns says that 25-50 points is for "ordinary folks, such as accountants and cab drivers." A level 1 OD&D character is an experienced soldier, a beginning magic-user just out of apprenticeship, or an acolyte cleric. Of these, the first is easiest to compare to the list of point levels in GURPS. Most obvious is "Competent (50-75 points): Athletes, cops, wealthy gentry." The average experienced medieval soldier isn't necessarily the equivalent of a star athlete or a seasoned (and trained) cop, so "competent" seems the right power level equivalent for a D&D Veteran. The D&D Medium can cast one spell. The D&D and GURPS magic system have completely different underlying assumptions and mechanisms, so comparing by magical capability isn't straightforward. I would suggest that 3LBB OD&D's most powerful 1st-level magic-user spell is Sleep, and the equivalent GURPS spell, Mass Sleep, requires that you put at least one point each into Mass Sleep, Sleep, Daze, and Foolishness, and that you have an IQ of at least 13 and Magery of at least 0. That's a minimum of 69 character points just to cast the equivalent of a 1st-level D&D spell, and most magic-users who want to reach the higher "levels" in GURPS will need another 10, 20, or 30 points in Magery. You're not fitting all that in 25-50 points without burdening yourself with all sorts of disadvantages that your D&D cousin doesn't suffer. "Competent" seems necessary again. The Acolyte is hardest to quantify, because although they haven't got any magic spells, they do fight almost as well as a Veteran. They're about equal to a not-so-experienced soldier. Plus, they have something approximately equal to True Faith (15 points). So even if a not-so-experienced soldier was the equivalent of an ordinary accountant or cab driver (I don't think so), that True Faith is going to bump them to the next category. So if you wanted to start a dungeon crawl in the spirit of 3LBB OD&D, characters should probably around 75 points. And that's assuming you're only interested in the "powers" that characters get. If you want all the interesting social stuff that GURPS offers, like Wealth and Status and Reputation and so on, you're going to want a bit more. Maybe about 100 points or so. Say... maybe there's a REASON that GURPS used to assume that most characters started at 100 points...? ;) "With a little experience, these individuals could become full-time adventurers." |
|
05-19-2021, 11:42 AM | #43 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature Last edited by Polydamas; 05-19-2021 at 11:46 AM. |
|
05-19-2021, 12:52 PM | #44 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
All that said, I think the DF vs DnD tangent is largely detracting from the thread at this point. My purpose behind bringing it up was just to highlight the difference in approach to a similar genre by the two systems.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
|
05-19-2021, 01:34 PM | #45 | ||
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
05-19-2021, 02:30 PM | #46 | ||
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
||
05-19-2021, 02:56 PM | #47 | |||
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I wasn't talking about non-adventuring activities. The original D&D assumes you might have some of those in your background, but it's not going to give you any rules about them. Do what you want. The system doesn't claim to define everything about your character, only your basic abilities in generic terms (strength, intelligence, etc.), your special abilities (turning undead, spells, etc.), and your equipment. The DM would judge all else. If your character grew up on the shore, for instance, you might logically know how to fish, and if fishing became important in the adventure, the DM would decide whether it was true and how much you caught. Or, suppose you're playing Sam in a D&D version of The Lord of the Rings. You don't need to write a Gardening skill on your character sheet. You're Sam; you know how to garden. If it becomes important on an adventure, the DM will judge accordingly. This was turned into an official rule with AD&D: there is a list of "secondary skills," things like hunting, fishing, armorer, bowyer. No rules on how to use them; they're just things you learned in the background, and if you try to use them on adventures, the DM will take this into account. But yes, "backstories" weren't expected in early D&D — it was assumed you were young and eager to adventure, so your background wasn't all that important. The point was to create new stories based on your adventures. If a special ability was required that hadn't been mentioned before, like fishing, some DMs would let players announce that their character had grown up on the shore and learned to fish — and then this would become part of the character's backstory, so they couldn't suddenly claim to have learned rock-climbing as well because they lived in the mountains. You could still try if you didn't have the skill, but you'd be penalized in however the DM worked it out. Other early DMs just gave everyone a chance to do everything regardless of any backstory or lack thereof. Some rolled against ability scores, some didn't. The point is that early D&D didn't include MOST of the things you might try on an adventure on your character sheet or in the rule books, but that never meant you weren't expected to try them anyway. |
|||
05-20-2021, 06:53 AM | #48 | ||||
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
Quote:
That's the point I was getting at - a character designed for DF on a budget of [100] is going to be a more competent delver than a character designed for a more generic setting on a budget of [100], even if both are "veteran soldiers" - the former only has traits relevant to delving, while the latter is going to have more "civilian" traits eating up his budget. "Competent [50-75]" assumes you're accounting for everything GURPS allows you to define about the character, so in a setting where a lot of that stuff doesn't matter and thus isn't accounted for (like DF), you can reach that same level of competency with fewer points. If you took a [50-75] DF character and added in the "missing" traits (that is, those unimportant and thus unaccounted for in DF), you'd likely end up with something more like a [75-100] character. Quote:
Quote:
(As an aside, on the topic of essentially generating your backstory as you play, depending on what's needed at the time, GURPS could allow this with a wider interpretation of "Schrodinger's Advantage" that also allows for skills; this isn't something mentioned in DF to my knowledge, but could be useful if wanting that sort of old-school experience)
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
||||
05-20-2021, 07:33 AM | #49 | |
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Chatham, Kent, England
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
The Indiana Jones games' system was two-film specific, but the background information and suggestions definitely influenced my 'Amazing Adventures in Archaeology' GURPS games. So did Thrilling tales, some of Justice, Inc, GURPS Cliffhangers, and more recently Thrilling Tales and Savage Worlds. GURPS is the framework, the info comes from any source that fits, my mind does the rest. I found no shoe-horning was needed; taking all this lightly and letting it simmer in my mind while going through the motions at work results in a game I run pretty well at weekends. My players say it's my best one. - after Knights of the Star. :-) So with things taken from other games and systems, it's really as you describe, but taken lightly, it's not work to let it happen, rather than worry about compatibility: the style arises from the player's and GM's actions and knowledge of the environment, rather than a system. Last edited by sgtcallistan; 05-20-2021 at 07:37 AM. Reason: additional |
|
05-20-2021, 08:05 AM | #50 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
|
Re: Game Settings Written for the Game System vs. Generic Systems
Quote:
The answer to your question here is: they can be either, but they're generally assumed to be fresh-faced and wide-eyed, with combat capabilities equal to a veteran soldier, just as a Seer and an Adept have, even though they're unlikely ever to have fought in an army. But the assumption is not binding, and if you want to play someone who gets into adventuring after a decade of mercenary work, or anyone else who starts adventuring later on in life, there's no reason you can't. So to put all this into the Specific vs. Generic discussion: Dai Blackthorn (Pre-Banestorm) STR 8; INT 12; WIS 10; DEX 15; CON 12; CHA 11. Neutral Apprentice Thief. Dagger; Thieves' tools; Leather armor; Ring worth 4 sp; Pouch with 2 sp. (This is a complete character in OD&D.) What happened to all his skills? All the physical stuff is taken care of by his thiefly special abilities, while the social stuff is covered by his ability scores in conjunction with an understanding of his background ("Street kid, thief"). Can we not play him in as much depth as in GURPS? Have we lost anything in going from detailed GURPS to less-detailed D&D? Not really: the DM just takes what the player wants to do, considers Dai's ability scores as a measure of how likely it is to succeed, possibly rolls something if random determination is desired, and tells the player what happens. Which is pretty much what you do in GURPS too, only GURPS tells you exactly how capable the character is at any task without the GM considering things. HOW actions are resolved is different, but WHAT you want to do WHY you want to do it, and WHAT HAPPENS can be the same if you want them to be. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|