Why I don't like GURPS Yrth

[b-dog]

I used to play a lot of AD&D when I was younger and then I quit playing RPGs for a long time. when I was in college I played Vampire the Masquerade and because the rules were sort of strange I bought GURPS Vampire the Masquerade. I then bought GURPS Fantasy which is set in Yrth. It was interesting because it had real world medieval cultures and religions but it was low powered and did not include dungeon delving which is fun to me. I love playing games where there are dark temples and dungeons to explore so that is why I bought GURPS Dungeon Fantasy. I like revisiting old school dungeon delving but the trouble is that I also like there to be somewhat realistic medieval societies and religions. So now I have to try to combine what I like from GURPS Yrth (and GURPS Historical books) with the DF series. I think that was the big problem of playing fantasy with real world religions and societies because once you do that generic or made up religions seem silly.

[Phantasm]

Not every fantasy setting is for everyone. I, personally, don't care for dungeon delving, preferring a bit of intrigue and rooftop chases with a hundred enemies with swords in front of me and a lone friend cracking pistols behind me. (I also don't go for Fantasy Gun Control in my games, either, which seems to put me in the minority.) In regards to religions, I prefer to keep things a bit of an eclectic mix; I've run a game with a religion based on the Spanish Inquisition-era Roman Catholic Church alongside a pantheon based on the Greco-Roman model in an Age of Sail/Renaissance setting to wonderful effect.

One of Banestorm's selling points is that it is not a "dungeon-delving" setting, which I appreciate. You'd probably not like my own fantasy setting for much the same reasons: no ancient dungeons to delve.

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by b-dog

I think that was the big problem of playing fantasy with real world religions and societies because once you do that generic or made up religions seem silly.

If fact makes fiction seem silly, that's not fact's fault. Maybe you should look for better fiction?

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

If fact makes fiction seem silly, that's not fact's fault. Maybe you should look for better fiction?

Yep, or make your own.
Yrth is a good setting, its not for me as I prefer to make my, I think most GURPS GMs do.
GURPS gives us great tools to do it too.
I honestly do not think any published setting is going to give you wnt you want, and if it does it wont satisfy many others. Any setting is ony going to work for a small number of people which is why settings are such hard sell.s

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by Refplace

Yep, or make your own.
Yrth is a good setting, its not for me as I prefer to make my, I think most GURPS GMs do.
GURPS gives us great tools to do it too.
I honestly do not think any published setting is going to give you wnt you want, and if it does it wont satisfy many others. Any setting is ony going to work for a small number of people which is why settings are such hard sell.s

Yep. The 3e setting books in my library are Vikings, China, Traveller, and In Nomine, and the latter was picked up because I was in an IN game run by our very own William. The only 4e setting books in my library are Traveller: Interstellar Wars and Hot Spots: Renaissance Florence. Fact is, most of my library are crunch books or tech catalogs, which I use to put my own settings together.

[namada]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[namada]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[David Johnston2]

There is of course no reason why you can't have a "dungeon" in Yrth. You have dwarves. They live in underground complexes. They sometimes get wiped out by their enemies and other things move in. They will even build underground complexes for other people. As for "real" religions, it has not been my experience that they are more interesting than the fake ones of, say, Glorantha, Harn or Middle Earth.

At least not as they are used in typical play where GMs will trot out the shopworn Olympians or Asgardians and leave it at that, without even getting anything close to the complexity of the real hellenic or norse religious scenes. In my experience it's less about presenting something less silly than it is about something that takes less effort on the part of everyone. Everyone knows what Artemis or Zeus was like. Everyone is wrong, but it's more important that they are on the same page without any effort than that they are right.

Of course I'll tell you what I find silly. What I find silly is the idea of going to a world that has elves, dwaves, goblins, and nations with names like Auberan and Xanthippe...and to have the only religions there be "real" ones (and only the usual suspects, never Etruscan or Celtic or any part of the popular mythologies that was a bit more obscure like Bonadea or Zeus Meilichios or even Janus) from Earth's present and past. Even if like Yrth it was inhabited in part by humans dragged in from Earth, what about the orcs, goblins and elves? How is it that they somehow have no distinct religions?

[namada]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[Ronnke]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Even if like Yrth it was inhabited in part by humans dragged in from Earth, what about the orcs, goblins and elves? How is it that they somehow have no distinct religions?

They do have distinct faiths and they are detailed in the Religions section of Banestorm, but they don't get the same level of treatment as the 'Earth' faiths.