[DF] Levels

[Kalzazz]

Id love to see an GURPS supplement for video games like Shining Force, Fire Emblem or Warsong or such

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by b-dog

Pen and paper games excel in puzzles and atmosphere with some action along the way.

I think you're not interested in DF then. You want a broader fantasy game.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by b-dog

I don't get why you would computer games to be a big influence on a paper and pen game like GURPS DF.

Because I am the founder and first author of the DF series – DF 1 and DF 2 were personal projects, written largely on my own, unpaid time – and I like computer games. Every writer has likes and dislikes. In my case, I ditched pen-and-paper D&D when GURPS came along (in a tabletop game, I prefer point-build to strict class-and-level, generic to single-genre, and fantasy as a deviation from realism to fantasy in its own right), and I'm a dedicated computer gamer in my spare time. My personal creation reflects my biases.

Originally Posted by b-dog

There is nothing wrong with computer games but they tend towards mindless hacking and slashing.

Yes, and that's a valid style of play in pen-and-paper gaming, too . . . yet one that GURPS didn't handle well before DF. GURPS already handled what you call "puzzles and atmosphere with some action along the way" just fine – it didn't need my help for that, and I think that Bill Stoddard nailed it with GURPS Fantasy. GURPS generally tends to support a more thoughtful play style in which combat is often avoided because it's deadly. I wrote DF explicitly to depart from that and offer something to fans of another style of play.

Originally Posted by b-dog

That was the reason for the old school movement, to go back to the roots of D&D instead of just becoming a computer game hack and slash.

To be honest, I would say that:

1. This "movement" is just one of the usual cycles of nostalgia wherein older hobbyists look at what younger hobbyists are doing and go "Bah!" I've seen this in my other hobbies and I've seen it before in gaming. It isn't a stable basis on which to build a market, because eventually, younger hobbyists become older hobbyists who go "Bah!" at different things, while their former elders become non-hobbyists as often as not.

2. "The roots of D&D" is overstating the importance of one game. Inasmuch as there is a movement, it's just as much about getting back to other RPGs, including Tunnels & Trolls, Traveller, Gamma World, RuneQuest, and Villains and Vigilantes. Even for old-schoolers, D&D is an influence, not the influence. For instance, T&T is only a year younger than D&D, was actually the first RPG to which I was exposed, and represents the path of fun, tongue-in-cheek silliness that many of us have always preferred to serious play. (SJ's own The Fantasy Trip was very much in a similar vein, and was a major influence on GURPS and on me.)

[Jerander]

Originally Posted by Bruno

I think you're not interested in DF then. You want a broader fantasy game.

I'm not sure that's correct. b-dog seems to want GURPS Dungeon Fantasy to conform to b-dog's recollections/expectations regarding "old school" fantasy gaming (which, apparently, were much different from mine and that of some others), irregardless of the stated purpose, influences, and design points of GURPS and GURPS Dungeon Fantasy as articulated by the authors and line editors themselves.

The beauty of GURPS is that GURPS Dungeon Fantasy *can* be modified to meet b-dog's expectations, but b-dog will have to do the work (and there are people on the forums who will be happy to help with the endeavor). In the case of levels and "zero-to-hero" playstyles, two answers have already been provided.

b-dog has some fun ideas regarding cosmology and world-building, which, you're right, are full-blown Fantasy (and/or Horror) territory. However, the number of posts regarding how to recreate such-n-such an item from b-dog's "old school" gaming experience, makes many people wonder why use b-dog' uses GURPS at all. I believe b-dog even answered the question in another post a while back.

Personally, I love GURPS Dungeon Fantasy for every reason b-dog seems to find fault with it: No levels, no fixed classes, no required abiliity/skill progression, no alignments, no set cosmology/background/built-world, etc.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

Originally Posted by Kromm

I sincerely hope that more people will check out Dungeon Fantasy 15. It's our formal nod to the zero-to-hero style, yet it always seems to get ignored among all the "DF starts at too high a power level!" criticisms. While the zero-to-hero style didn't influence DF much (you spend very little time as a "zero" in fast-moving, high-powered killing-and-looting games), I think we did a good job of showing that such an approach is workable and then supporting that approach.

This was very deliberate, too. It wasn't just hirelings, although that's what I first bounced off of Kromm. Almost immediately we went to "and lower-powered delvers in general" using Sidekicks as a strong influence in the approach.

However, it's not only henchmen and hirelings - those guys (well, some of those guys) make pretty good low-powered heroes, or full-powered but non-standard heroes (some of the odder mixes of 125 template + 125 lenses, say). Going with 125 pointers will probably more suit a game that's meant to mimic old-school D&D. Going with 62 is a lot like playing zero-level guys . . . especially in my games, where most fodder monsters are more than 62 points.

A lot of the advice on multiple PCs and multiple low-powered PCs comes from my own play experience (albeit, not often in fantasy). The idea of sticking low-powered guys into dungeons appeals to me personally, and I think we did a good job of supporting that. Still, the basis of DF is higher-powered play and I think that's good. You know it works at 250, so if you start at 125 and work up you don't need to worry about the game "breaking down" in the same way that you often hear complaints about with D&D, where wizards scale up geometrically and non-mages don't.


Finally I'll note that while my own influence from 1st edition AD&D and 1st edition Basic Set/Expert Set D&D is strong, so is my influence from Rolemaster, so is my influence from the Unearthed Arcana era of AD&D (I for one loved it, and ran my longest and best AD&D game with UA classes and races), and so is my influence from video games. My GURPS influence is the strongest, perhaps - I've been running GURPS for longer than all the D&D and Rolemaster I played, combined. I'm less high-powered video game inspired than Sean Punch is, which is probably why the book we co-authored covers both high and low powered adventurers, but I'm not writing to purely emulate D&D. Just to emulate some of the fun I had playing it and playing other fantasy games.

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Kromm

1. This "movement" is just one of the usual cycles of nostalgia, wherein older hobbyists look at what younger hobbyists are doing and go "Bah!"

Yes, but you must acknowledge that back in my day we used to roll dice through the snow, ten miles, uphill both ways.

Originally Posted by Toadkiller_Dog

Finally I'll note that while my own influence from 1st edition AD&D and 1st edition Basic Set/Expert Set D&D is strong, so is my influence from Rolemaster, so is my influence from the Unearthed Arcana era of AD&D (I for one loved it, and ran my longest and best AD&D game with UA classes and races), and so is my influence from video games. My GURPS influence is the strongest, perhaps - I've been running GURPS for longer than all the D&D and Rolemaster I played, combined. I'm less high-powered video game inspired than Sean Punch is, which is probably why the book we co-authored covers both high and low powered adventurers, but I'm not writing to purely emulate D&D. Just to emulate some of the fun I had playing it and playing other fantasy games.

We certainly all bring our own baggage with us. Treasure Tables, for example, was inspired by things like certain kinds of old typeset, list-packed Judges' Guild books and the booklet of tables I picked up to go with my d30 years ago (even then, largely generic fantasy gaming resources). And Mirror of the Fire Demon comes from years of playing many fantasy games, like GURPS, TFT, BRP-derived games, and various ampersand games (white box and Advanced D&D, T&T, C&S, etc.), and most of them heavily house-ruled. Is D&D in the mix? Sure. But it's an ingredient, not the main body. Like Peter, the majority of my gaming experience has been in non-D&D systems.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Jerander

Personally, I love GURPS Dungeon Fantasy for every reason b-dog seems to find fault with it: No levels, no fixed classes, no required abiliity/skill progression, no alignments, no set cosmology/background/built-world, etc.

These absences are largely things that I like, too. I've relented on "no fixed classes" in the form of templates, which are still customizable and ultimately optional. However, I've done away with levels, required ability progressions, and alignments because I find those things painfully constraining when I'm a player and because I've never seen the supposed benefits they provide. I'm a manic "I'll do this, no, wait, this!" gamer who just hates to be bound to a specific path chosen by others. I've avoided a particular background because my favored style of fantasy offers escape from beneath the oppressive weight of laws, social classes, organized religions, etc. and is anarchy with swords and spells. It's no surprise that I designed a series that flows in that direction.

Fans of more thoughtful, setting-oriented play have a wealth of options: Banestorm (and Abydos), Fantasy, Locations: Worminghall, Thaumatology: Alchemical Baroque, Thaumatology: Urban Magics, etc. However, GURPS will never get strict class-level gaming with alignments and required advancement paths, because that's against Steve's philosophy. The fact that I agree with him may well be why I've managed to be the steward of his RPG system for 17 years.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Bruno

I think you're not interested in DF then. You want a broader fantasy game.

Just so.

While I'm not a dedicated computer gamer, I did play Diablo and Diablo II and I quite enjoyed them both. On the other hand, I would never use GURPS as an engine for such hack-and-slashing, where exploring dangerous locales, fighting an ever-increasing sea of enemies and looting everything one comes across are both goal and method. This is because I personally believe that the strengths of a 'traditional' roleplaying game over a computerised one are under-utilised when gaming in that style and the infinitely greater ease of play, not to mention shiny graphics, mean I'd consider the CRPG superior to the traditional one in delivering such a playing experience.

I don't want to work hard in order to use lower TL technology to imperfectly emulate what I could easily get from the higher TL equivalent.

No, when I use traditional roleplaying systems as the game engine, I'm doing so because I want to take advantage of the advantages it has over anything that we can yet run on a computer.

The PCs as well as the NPCs are not run by 'AI' subroutines that couldn't deceive anyone but a child, they are run by actual intelligent beings that can imbue them with personality and complex motivations, even responding to entirely unforeseen circumstances.

The world is potentially larger than even the most impressive sandbox game world, because the GM can detail any area that the PCs choose to visit during the course of play (or between sessions). And he doesn't have to rely on some randomisation algorithm, he can do so in a way that takes what is already known about the surrounding area in the game world into account, not to mention the actions and reputations of the PCs.

That leads to perhaps the most important advantage, because the game is run through an intelligent entity, not merely a device slavishly executing code, it is possible for actions to have consequences in a way that doesn't depend on a hopelessly abstract 'morality system' or a choice between one of several endings. To the limits of the reasoning capability of the GM*, the choices of the players can truly shape not only their own fates, but also have effects in entirely unforeseen (but plausible upon later analysis) quarters.

And there's no limit to the kind of actions the game engine can resolve. Anything one can imagine can be attempted, whether that's a strange impulse or a long-term plan to match the villain's long-term plan. And if the GM and system is good, the results will be logical and plausible, even when the designers did not remotely foresee that anyone would try it.

Given all this, I'd feel that I was failing to take advantage of the reasons I prefer GURPS to the newest computer games if I merely used it to emulate Diablo/Torchlight style dungeon-crawling. To truly shine, traditional roleplaying games really need characters with fleshed-out personalities, freedom from rails and consistent worlds that reflect and support the desired play style as well as responding to the actions of the PCs in complex ways.

I do acknowledge that this is my opinion and that people who play traditional roleplaying games for other reasons than what I perceive as their most important advantages over CRPGs might differ. For example, if the primary goal is face-to-face socialisation, it might not matter if the traditional roleplaying game is technically an inferior game engine for the style of play.

*Which ought to the be considerably superior to that of his players, for best possible results. Human intelligence assisted by a physically-randomised task resolution system can still outperform computers when it comes to incorporating events into an ongoing narrative in a way that allows willing observers the illusion that the characters involved and the world they live in is as real as ours. But only if the human is very smart, very knowledgable and, ideally, very diligent.

[b-dog]

Originally Posted by Kromm

I've avoided a particular background because my favored style of fantasy offers escape from beneath the oppressive weight of laws, social classes, organized religions, etc. and is anarchy with swords and spells.

The reason I like real world religions is because they seem more authentic during roleplaying. If you have a cleric who is a Jesuit or Catholic priest it seems cool to have them use their cross to drive away a vampire or other undead. But if your cleric has to use something like a Symbol of Ravenkind to drive away undead there is a moment where you feel ashamed and wonder what you did wrong in your life to end up being such a loser.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by b-dog

But if your cleric has to use something like a Symbol of Ravenkind to drive away undead there is a moment where you feel ashamed and wonder what you did wrong in your life to end up being such a loser.

That might be your experience, but it isn't mine. I'm not religious, but I've gamed with enough people who are that I would never, ever consider using real-world beliefs to justify the sort of carrying on that goes on in the kind of game where priests exist to "turn undead." I would consider that offensive. In my opinion, if your fantasy clerics with made-up religions seem like "losers" and a source of shame, that's a testament to a specific gaming group doing a bad job with fantasy religions, not a statment that fantasy religions are lame.