Just Roll 3d6 - GURPS Content Posts

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by GodBeastX

It's not that SJ Games isn't -asking- for these sort of submissions. Their wishlist has had Adventures on it and Encounters for some time: Here

But Writers submit what they are inspired to submit =)

Also Settings books don't sell as well more 'generic' Toolset books.

For instance not everyone running a GURPS Fantasy game has likely bought Banestorm, but they have bought Fantasy.

Then there are the 'intermediate' Toolset/Setting books like Monster Hunters and Dungeon Fantasy, one of which is a bit languishy and the other is juggernaut.

[trechriron]

Great posts!! Very good ideas here.

[GodBeastX]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Also Settings books don't sell as well more 'generic' Toolset books.

For instance not everyone running a GURPS Fantasy game has likely bought Banestorm, but they have bought Fantasy.

Then there are the 'intermediate' Toolset/Setting books like Monster Hunters and Dungeon Fantasy, one of which is a bit languishy and the other is juggernaut.

Settings books don't sell as well, which I am very aware of, but I wonder if it's because the traditional model is backwards for how settings are introduced to people.

Generally settings books approach a player by giving them all this vast information on the setting then say "Let your imagination run wild!"

I'm wondering if it'd be more effective to flip the script. Release a bunch of adventures/encounters/modules for play then if people find they are enjoying them, release a setting around it. Or maybe Adventures/Encounters/Modules will build the setting for you. Why do I need to know more than what is going on in the adventure I'm running?

At the same time, when you provide people with enough tools to build their own setting, are they likely to pay for one as opposed to just making a smaller version themselves? It's like giving you a bucket of blocks then making you pay for the instructions how to put them together when you already know how to make your castles.

Anyway, just my thoughts. I always felt people will be most interested in buying what gets them from book to fun with friends the fastest. That to me is the adventure module.

.. and I might be derailing this thread.

[Mr_Sandman]

I suppose my perspective comes from never really being into pre-made settings. Aside from the World of Darkness (which I ran in GURPS), Alpha Complex of Paranoia (where the setting is very much the point of the game), and maybe the world as presented James Bond 007 (if that counts as a 'setting'), I never much used published settings. So my opinion on what makes an 'extensive' setting may be a bit off from the mainstream

Besides Banestorm, there are a few settings supported with multiple books in GURPS 4e (Infinite Worlds, Traveller, Transhuman Space, and Prime Directive - I just realized they are all science fiction). Those certainly seem 'extensive' to me. The one-book settings in 4e (Vorkosigan and Madness Dossier, for example) look playable 'out of the box'.

What GURPS lacks is adventure modules or published campaigns that are connected to a published setting or each other. I'm not sure there are all that many games that offer those, aside from D&D or Pathfinder.

If you are going to discuss settings that can be adapted to GURPS, I'd certainly add that the many setting books and series that are available for 3e can be converted to 4e with very little work.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Mr_Sandman

Besides Banestorm, there are a few settings supported with multiple books in GURPS 4e (Infinite Worlds, Traveller, Transhuman Space, and Prime Directive - I just realized they are all science fiction). Those certainly seem 'extensive' to me. The one-book settings in 4e (Vorkosigan and Madness Dossier, for example) look playable 'out of the box'.

All good mentions! I never use premade settings so... yeah I'd forgotten about them (even though I now distinctly remember listing them all like 4 months back...).

[philosophyguy]

There's a new post up on using a "default" skill default. This post walks through how skill defaults function and suggests a couple of house rules to simplify defaults in play. These houserules should work well for rules lite games and should be helpful for new GMs that aren't as familiar with GURPS' skill levels, defaults, and the various exceptions to the standard default levels.

[philosophyguy]

Yet another new post, this time on using wildcard skills to speed up character creation. Choosing skills can be an overwhelming experience for new GURPS players, but the strategic use of wildcards can make skill lists less intimidating.

[philosophyguy]

Today's post is a review of Action 2: Exploits. Action 2 is a great tool for streamlining adventures and planning campaigns, so it fits nicely with the blog's theme of making GURPS simple.

[philosophyguy]

There are two new posts this week on Just Roll 3d6. The first, No Rules Arguments at the Table, continues a discussion that Peter V. Dell'Orto started a few weeks back.

In Encouraging Faster Play With Perks, I describe some existing perks (and suggest a new perk) that reward players for pre-calculating their common actions. This method makes it much faster to play with > 0 crunch, and it also switches crunch from a burden to a reward.

[Daigoro]

Just as an off-the-wall suggestion for the rules arguments issue- what about borrowing the "player challenge" rule from tennis? If you don't know it, a player can challenge a line call (i.e. was it in or out?) and the video judge is referred to. The players have unlimited challenges, but are only allowed 3 wrong challenges.

Would something like that be useful at the gaming table? If a player doesn't like a rule call, they can challenge it and then hold play while it's checked in the rule book. However, they can only do this a limited number of times- either a limit of wrong challenges as above, or just an overall limit- so then the player has to choose which points they really want to argue about.

It makes it a little less draconian than a complete "no arguments" policy, and helps the players think about the effect on game flow, and hopefully limits overly argumentative players. It would still be a matter of taste for which groups want to use it, of course.