Narrativism in GURPS

[nanoboy]

My wife and I are about to have our first baby, and I have little time before a forced hiatus into fatherhood. It looks like I have one more chance to run a game before my life makes a big change, so I decided to do a one-shot. I recently picked up Spirit of the Century by Evil Hat Games, and it looked pretty good, so that's what I'm going with.

Spirit of the Century is a game that uses the Fate system (which is derived from the FUDGE "system--" I say "system," since it's not really a system but a way to make a system.) The game itself is pretty far from GURPS in how it handles things. Most stuff is kind of hand-waved. For instance, you run out of bullets, if the GM thinks it would be interesting or dramatic for you to do so. Or, when you take enough damage, you describe the consequence to your own character, and if the GM likes it, that's what happens. That's one of the things that's neat about it. There are several ways that players can add to the game world. They can make up facts with the Academics skill, put Aspects (descriptive details that have game implications) onto places, make up weird gadgets on the fly, etc.

Spirit of the Century is hardly the only game that does this, but it is the only one I own. As I understand it, games like Houses of the Blooded and Dogs in the Vineyard do it, too. These narrative mechanics get the players more invested in the game, take some work off of the GM's shoulders, and add more flavor to the setting. It's important to know that they are mechanics, too. They're not just fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants stuff. There are rules for how they work.

What I am thinking is that the U in GURPS could be made more accurate, if there was a way to put in some narrative components. (Keep in mind that when I say "narrative," I am not referring to GURPS lacking stories. I'm talking about rules systems that allow players to alter the game world in ways that are outside of their characters' control.) These concepts are apparently in vogue in the indie RPG world right now, and they seem kind of neat. However, most of the indie games lack the level of simulation that GURPS provides for those of us who actually like that sort of thing. Basically, I'm wondering if anyone knows of good ways to elegantly work these ideas into GURPS, because when I am ready to game again, I would love to have my cake and eat it, too.

[Crakkerjakk]

What I've been implementing in GURPS is that instead of Self-Control or Frequency Rolls on disads, either the player or GM can compel disads, voluntarily suffering the effect of the relevant disad for a Luck Point. Luck Points act as single uses of Luck or Serendipity. Haven't actually used it in play yet, but I'm starting a DF game that will utilize the concept. We'll see how popular it is.

The idea is that it encourages players to roleplay their limitations with immediate rewards for doing so. A bit better than docking CP for not doing so at the end of the session, and less problems with inflation than handing out extra CP mid-game for good roleplaying.

And congratulations on your upcoming fatherhood. Good luck!

[zylosan]

I would personally have to say that GURPS is a very poor fit for such narrative rule elements. One of the basic principles of the GURPS ruleset is that everyone should be treated equally in a given situation. Often the easiest and fairest way to do this is with a formula. (Paraphrase from one of the books, cant remember which one.) Also this kind of thing works best in games in which the GM has not put a hugh amount of work into defining and detailing the game world.

On the implementation side of it, it would not take much to decide that margine of success would give a range of "creative license" for a skill check.

GURPS trys to give a reasonable simulation of the effocts and outcomes of an action. If you wanted to use the combat type of rule listed about you would pretty much have to scrap most of the advanced combat rules and the effects of injury. I dont really see its as being much of a positive trade off.

[lexington]

Well unless someone has expertise in a skill I just let the person using it make up anything vaguely plausible sounding about what they're doing or saying when they use it.

Making up weird gadgets on the fly can be reasonably approximated in GURPS as Gizmos + Quick Gadgeteer + Weird Science or Engineer in a sufficiently cinematic setting. "I arrange the flashlight and paperclips in my pocket into a one shot mind control ray!" Dungeon Fantasy has rules for that somewhere.

Congrats on the kid!

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by zylosan

I would personally have to say that GURPS is a very poor fit for such narrative rule elements.

Yes and no and maybe. Yes, integrating such a shared-narrative system with the existing rules would be kludgey, but also no, not such a big deal because such a thing doesn't _have_ to be integrated if you want the players rather than the characters to share the narrative control. And maybe, because GURPS already has some of that, in that players have been choosing to create backgrounds for their characters all along, but have only been getting or paying points for it at creation time. It would be nice to have a bit finer continuum than the currently coarse-grained Social disad - Serendipity - fleshwound opportunities.

[lvk]

GURPS has a brilliant system for giving narrative control in the hands of player. Fairy-Tale Magic in Pyramid 3/13 Thaumatology. Not exactly what OP meant, but it's fantastic narrativist tool.

[Azinctus]

Originally Posted by nanoboy

My wife and I are about to have our first baby, and I have little time before a forced hiatus into fatherhood. It looks like I have one more chance to run a game before my life makes a big change, so I decided to do a one-shot.

Congratulations. I've just had my second. But why does having a baby mean a pause in gaming? I missed a couple of sessions not more. The advantage of babies is that you can lob them in the baby carrier and take them anywhere (well anymore warm where people don't smoke).

Now I have a two year-old and a baby its getting more complicated. If the game isn't at our house we need a baby sitter. Three cheers for Map Tool and Skype.

Originally Posted by nanoboy

Spirit of the Century is a game that uses the Fate system (which is derived from the FUDGE "system--" I say "system," since it's not really a system but a way to make a system.)

Never played any of these "systems." but I have tried various free-form roleplaying games and exercises. GURPS normally seems like a million miles away from that.

Originally Posted by nanoboy

There are several ways that players can add to the game world. They can make up facts with the Academics skill, put Aspects (descriptive details that have game implications) onto places, make up weird gadgets on the fly, etc.

I have a player who does this in my Dungeon Fantasy game. Now we have the ground rules set I love it. He can't make up gadgets (too unbalancing because he's not a gadgeteer, though he can order stuff from in game gadgeteers). And he can't make stuff up about the other characters, but other than that he has a free hand. He's made up villages, added details motivations and lots of fun details. Often its just to crack a joke in play, but other times it becomes a major plot element (the PCs live in a village he made up).

I have no rules or system for this other than the ground rules I mentioned.

Originally Posted by nanoboy

These narrative mechanics get the players more invested in the game, take some work off of the GM's shoulders, and add more flavor to the setting. It's important to know that they are mechanics, too. They're not just fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants stuff. There are rules for how they work. [...] Basically, I'm wondering if anyone knows of good ways to elegantly work these ideas into GURPS.

Don't forget Serendipity; a game where all the players had Serendipity would feel very different from more realistic GURPS as every event of the plot was evaluated by the players: "Do I want this?"

[Jabani]

There are the rules that let the PCs influence the plot or circumstances of the situation with character points (I'm bookless at the mo, but it's in a sidebar somewhere early on in Campaigns).

You could get more aggressive with that, or to make it hinge less on the resource management of the all-important CP, you could add a separate "Plot Alteration" system/resource - you get 2 or 3 plot points for every 1 CP and may use them to shape the world. Naming the hamlet over the hill and describing the quirks of its mayor costs 1 PP; creating a hidden weakness in a species of dinosaur that the PCs are fighting costs 4 PP. You can play with the numbers, which gives the GM more control over the outcome: he can always flat out reject a player creation, but if he doesn't want to do so, he can make it expensive.

Use Spirit of the Century as inspiration! GURPS is pretty modular, so adding a new module shouldn't be terribly jarring.

[nanoboy]

Originally Posted by Azinctus

Congratulations. I've just had my second. But why does having a baby mean a pause in gaming? I missed a couple of sessions not more. The advantage of babies is that you can lob them in the baby carrier and take them anywhere (well anymore warm where people don't smoke).

Now I have a two year-old and a baby its getting more complicated. If the game isn't at our house we need a baby sitter. Three cheers for Map Tool and Skype.

Well, I want to make sure I'm in the swing of things before I game again. Besides, I would be under a lot of social pressure from folks mostly from my mom, who has never approved of my hobby, considering it childish. Some people would consider it shirking my responsibility and overloading my wife with child-rearing. I would love to host, but my group is kind of far away. I would likely have to start a new group if I am to host consistently.

Originally Posted by Azinctus

I have a player who does this in my Dungeon Fantasy game. Now we have the ground rules set I love it. He can't make up gadgets (too unbalancing because he's not a gadgeteer, though he can order stuff from in game gadgeteers). And he can't make stuff up about the other characters, but other than that he has a free hand. He's made up villages, added details motivations and lots of fun details. Often its just to crack a joke in play, but other times it becomes a major plot element (the PCs live in a village he made up).

I have no rules or system for this other than the ground rules I mentioned.

Do you think you could make rules for it? I'm just curious.

Originally Posted by Azinctus

Don't forget Serendipity; a game where all the players had Serendipity would feel very different from more realistic GURPS as every event of the plot was evaluated by the players: "Do I want this?"

That would be odd. I don't think it would necessarily work out very well, but I'm sure some GMs could pull it off.

Originally Posted by Jabani

There are the rules that let the PCs influence the plot or circumstances of the situation with character points (I'm bookless at the mo, but it's in a sidebar somewhere early on in Campaigns).

You could get more aggressive with that, or to make it hinge less on the resource management of the all-important CP, you could add a separate "Plot Alteration" system/resource - you get 2 or 3 plot points for every 1 CP and may use them to shape the world. Naming the hamlet over the hill and describing the quirks of its mayor costs 1 PP; creating a hidden weakness in a species of dinosaur that the PCs are fighting costs 4 PP. You can play with the numbers, which gives the GM more control over the outcome: he can always flat out reject a player creation, but if he doesn't want to do so, he can make it expensive.

Use Spirit of the Century as inspiration! GURPS is pretty modular, so adding a new module shouldn't be terribly jarring.

That may work. They could act a lot like Fate points. Use them on things and grant them for willingly submitting to Disadvantages as Crakkerjack suggests.

[Archangel Beth]

Originally Posted by nanoboy

Some people would consider it shirking my responsibility and overloading my wife with child-rearing. I would love to host, but my group is kind of far away. I would likely have to start a new group if I am to host consistently.

Yeah, if the parent most-likely-to-be-nursing doesn't play, and you're abandoning her to run off and game, that could -- to borrow MMORPG terms -- cause a distinct reduction in faction.

Mind, I've nursed a kid during a game (draped a cloth to keep the kid from being too distracted to nurse; my Big Shirt would've shown nothing of interest anyway), and I've even dealt with a "pay attention to me!" toddler when GMing, once, at a con.

(And I was once nursing a fussy baby, lying down as she insisted, and watching the screen for a text-based game I was GMing -- the spouse typed my responses for me. Go, go spouse-narration! Or something.)

So babies and gaming <I>can</I> go together, but if long car rides are involved and you'd be abandoning someone to the mercy of the small, needy, pre-sapient being (as opposed to "shoo, stop being underfoot; I want to take a nap with the baby")... I'd look into other tactics, such as perhaps the eyeball camera and speakers/microphone arrangement from Full Frontal Nerdity.


Oh, right, you had a different question... Narrativism in GURPS. Hm. Personally, from my experience tossing characters back and forth doing solo-roleplay with the spouse (not that kind of roleplay! for one thing, having a kid zonked out on one's chest (who will wake if one attempts to move it) crimps the style...), it's pretty easy to... just use the characterization stuff as a guideline. Maybe roll if you can't decide what would be most interesting. Maybe make a little chart for yourself -- something like

"If skill is 1-6, um, no, fail unless really dramatic and/or the dice love ya.

If skill is 7-11, player can choose whether success or failure will be cooler, and roll if GM disagrees with player's choice.

If skill is 12-15, assume success under most circumstances; player may choose to fail, GM should ask for a roll if the situation is kind of tricky or if the GM needs time to think.

With skill of 16+, failure is rare, will tend to be spectacular ("perhaps you shouldn't've cross-circuited to B with so much power in that jefferies tube, eh?"), and/or driven by narrative necessity. Roll if there is a really tricky situation.

In all cases, PC vs PC should be worked out gently between the players, with the above guidelines, but any case of the players sounding crabby should have the GM pounce in and say, "Let's roll dice for this one."

If the GM goes entertainingly purple on the prose, hopefully the players will get into the spirit of things and you can go, "He wounds you severely on the arm" and they'll clutch the arm and moan, "Augh! I've dropped my weapon, and can think of naught to do but fall to the floor, hoping to avoid getting the return swing in my throat! I shall grope for my fallen weapon, hoping it isn't kicked away in the scuffle!" (And the GM can go, "What's better?" in an undertone, and the player can go, "Ooo, kick it away! Kick it away!" Or maybe the other players will have a vote...)