GURPS 5E?

[Stormcrow]

I remember back in the days of the third edition, people complained that the skills weren't alphabetized.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Þorkell]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

I remember back in the days of the third edition, people complained that the skills weren't alphabetized.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Release two versions. One with alphabetized skills, advantages, and disadvantages. And the other one with skills, advantages, and disadvantages in categories.

Sure, it'd cost at least twice as much and would take a lot of work and be wildly impractical and I can't think of single good reason for doing so...

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

Release two versions. One with alphabetized skills, advantages, and disadvantages. And the other one with skills, advantages, and disadvantages in categories.

Sure, it'd cost at least twice as much and would take a lot of work and be wildly impractical and I can't think of single good reason for doing so...

Well we have this.
http://www.warehouse23.com/products/...ill-categories

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

Release two versions. One with alphabetized skills, advantages, and disadvantages. And the other one with skills, advantages, and disadvantages in categories.

This is the kind of thing that an electronic publishing system really suited to game rules could help with. It's one publication, that lets you view contents by categories, or alphabetically, or in whatever other way you can describe to it.

Such a system could also provide for rules updates, optional rules and rules subsets selections, and so on.

Unfortunately, such an ideal system doesn't appear to exist at present, and there's no way to fund it from the income of the TTRPG industry. An open source project would still be a very big job, especially since it would be necessary to provide good-quality viewing software for Windows, Mac, Linux, iOS and Android. At present, electronic TTRPG rules use standards developed for other purposes (PDF and HTML), which are not ideal, but tolerable.

[Opellulo]

I admit I skipped some pages of this discussion but it's a topic I want to put my 2 cents in:
- I get that SJGames is not a multi-million dollar enterprise but nowadays there are A LOT of new cool PPRPG that comes out from small companies or development teams. Add in an already existing audience that would be more than willing to join a GURPS 5ed Kickstarter and I think that the thing is not only doable but could also be very profitable.
- Mechanically wise GUPRS has a genial core idea (everything is 3d6 or under) and all else is just modules that you put on top of it.
What drags it down is IMHO its idea of being a "physics simulator" where every real and fictional aspect and phenomenon must be translated in game terms. I get that this was the way to make it "Generic" but i think it went too far (which system needs rules for irreversible radiation poisoning in its core book?). A more modern, fast and streamlined system could really catch-on: think it as a "Core GURPS" and everything else is a just different modules to add in (and, yes this also includes advantages, skills and rules since they are setting dependent and there is no need for huge lists of things you are not going to use). Drop the Tactical Combat: it's a lot of burden for something very specific, perfect for another module (maybe together with martial arts) and provide quick start kits for the most common campaigns (Fantasy, detective, sci-fi and such), also decrease the importance of points costs and templates, it's a lot of math and accounting for something that's forgot at game start.
- Refresh the graphic design with something cooler and eye-popping. Yes we live in the age of AI generated art but around there there are lots of amazing illustrators and artists that can really make the system shine. Look at "Quest","Lancer", "Tales from the loop" or "Spire" you want to own those manuals not only because they are amazing games but also because they are beautifully illustrated.
- Promote the game with cross-system promotions (things like Role compatibility and such) and no, I don't think that in 2023 a mobile app is something out of budget for even a small sized company.

In the end I am a bit sad, the RPG space is chocked to death by D&D grasp (that's pivoting to shared universe shenanigans so things are going to get worse very fast) all this while one of the best systems ever created is sitting in its comfy '90 corner.

[Lovewyrm]

I still remain of the opinion that 4e is really damn good, and that it's more worthwhile to shape the minds of people than the product to the mindset many people these days are required to have via so much peer pressure, even if it's not that good.

Remove fears of GURPS complexity and ideally, find a way to weave GURPS into the everyday media life.
If I had the sticktoitness of making youtube videos, or twitch streams, then I would absolutely sprinkle GURPS into my content by virtue of statting out characters or creatures from games or media I would feature on my videos.

At the end of an episode or arc of whatever I'm portraying, stat out a character from it and dedicate a minute or so of screentime to it.

I bet that would whet some peoples appetite...but I fail at the carrier media so...that's out for me :P

I consider this related to the visibility problem GURPS has, in my opinion, not so much mechanics.
D&D you are hard pressed to evade and that system was and is rife with problems, too.
But people just pick around it because it unites so many of them, because it's such an ubiquitous system.

Perhaps a final hurrah for GURPS could be a (free, or very cheap) master errata/houserule book that lists a collection of suggestions on how to make some aspect of 4e potentially better.

Because, ...well, personally, again (I touched on that in the other thread)
While I am of the very strong conviction that dark times like we live in pass eventually, that that doesn't change the fact that it's kind of dark right now, at least in media spaces...
And I am very wary about the chances of a GURPS 5e with fresh, contemporary blood in the case the current old guard ...well, I assume they are mortals with limited lifespans...

Too much awfulness and lameness and constrainedness in the zeitgeist right now for me to feel excited about a 'whole new rollup of GURPS to a new format/edition'

Would it make money? If they went full Global Corpo Homogenization Muzzle Non Offensive Smooth Corners Brain Mush Mode?
Quite likely, the peer pressure to celebrate this is at very high levels, but is it truly loved? Or just merely "Gotta play along or get wrecked over it"ed?

Of course the safest answer is to say "truly loved" because it's trouble free.
Ineither way, just in case it's not actually "truly loved" then such a 5e would be a shunt, a combo breaker that would disrupt the pretty coolness of GURPS and would mar the streak of a potential "All new and improved GURPS" of an era that has moved beyond the current zeitgeist.

And what's the rush to that? If one simply chooses to believe in changing people instead?
After all, it's 2023 right now, and even though Final Cut pro exists, there are people who use command line ffmpeg for editing videos, too.
Why? Because they somehow ended up being taught, or arriving at the conclusion that that too has perks.

And they're "normal humans".
So...yeah. My personal wish for a 5E 'at this moment in time is'
Rehabilitation of currentness 5E.

Leading humanity back into something that actually still works, is still very solid, and still provides a VAST scape of tabletop role playing.
Warts and all.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Edit: I just thought of a somewhat fitting (I hope) analogy for this.

What is the difference between someone who tries out an AI art generator to receive a random artwork of some specifications, generated completely new, not old at all.
And going to an image 'booru' (which are image indexers that attach tags to images to describe what they containt), entering similar specifications there, and seeing an ancient picture that they never have seen before?

Not many differences, the preexisting, but unknown image with similar specification is just as 'random' to the AI prompter than the AI generation, and in fact, if the old picture based on tags were returned by the AI...
I doubt many superficial users interested in AI art would even realize it.

GURPS 4E is the old image with TTRPG specifications.
GURPS 5E of the 'current era' is the AI generation, only...not about art but about 'role playing in a milieu that is...well...*gestures around*' ...you know?

To someone new to GURPS, because it's so 'invisible' 4E is just as new as 5E would be.
Only 4E is guaranteed to be pretty damn goooooood.

[acrosome]

Originally Posted by lugaid

There's a scene in Now You See Me 2 where the crew are passing and tossing the doohickey between each other and moving it around their bodies while they are being searched as a group which demonstrates how Sleight of Hand can be a useful way to hide things from a search.

...but... but... as you just said, that would be Sleight of Hand, not Holdout. In fact that's actually the defining use of Sleight of Hand- moving something around without letting others see you do it.

Let's be honest here. Holdout is 99% of the time "the skill of hiding weapons or valuables on your person." So, things like where to wear your concealment holster, or which seam to sew those jewels into.

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

Aren't a lot of you kind of assuming SJG's mission and goal here is to maintain and grow a large RPG ecosystem?

What if they're just trying to publish a good game that people will like and buy along with all the other games that they hope are good and people will like and buy?

That is certainly a fair point. After all I have mentioned labors of love several times already, haven't I?

Originally Posted by 4rc4num

4. Change the outdated magic system to Ritual Path Magic ! RPM is a much better magic system and the freeform magic merge very well with the universal nature of GURPS. Need some small changes and need to add effect shaping optional rule..

I'm going to vote a hard no on this one. Keep basic magic, but put it all in it's own book.

A lot of RPM lovers assume that everyone is an RPM lover. They aren't. RPM is not new-player friendly- it requires a lot of judgement calls from the GM, and often arguing with and among players about what is possible and how to do it, and thus results are far from standardized. And for a lot if not a majority of settings standardization and balance are what you need, not "make up anything" as in RPM. RPM absolutely should be made an official optional 5E magic system but keep basic magic first. It's already balanced for (and thus much much more appropriate for) bog-standard fantasy settings... and that's a significant reason in and of itself.

Now, as I just recommended the magic systems should have their own books, so this sort of wouldn't matter. But if SJG does keep one in the basic set then it should be basic magic.

Originally Posted by 4rc4num

5. Wildcard skills in the core. Very good option for new players who dont want to lose hours reading all skills in the book.

But wildcard skills are in the core books. That puzzled me for a bit. So I suspect that what you mean is to make them the default way that skills work, in which case I'll again vote hard no. This is easily explained by removing the hyperbole- no one "loses hours reading all the skills".

That being said, I have supported dividing the Basic Set into three books. The "Players' Book" would be like the current Characters book except that it would not include any exotic or supernatural traits or skills including magic (with maybe the exception of a few meta-traits like Luck or Danger Sense). Those would go in a separate "Advanced Traits" book. A lot of stuff from Power-Ups could then be included in either the "Players' Book" or the "Advanced Traits" book too. (And I guess that it could have it's own section on Wildcard skills.) Thus all of the stuff about modifying ads and disads also goes in "Advanced Traits".
Critically though, the basic rules about how skill checks work and the basic combat system might then go in the "Players' Book", so you could actually play a game with just the "Players' Book". I think that this would be very new-player friendly. The Player's Book would replace GURPS Lite.
And then the GM's Book is all of the advanced stuff, rules about jumping and digging, etc., tactical combat, and all of the optional rules (and the Body Shots rules need to be there, not in High-Tech). Actually there is a lot of stuff that could be moved to the GMs book from other sources. The chase rules from Action come to mind, since chases are so ubiquitous. And probably the wilderness and survival rules (or a modification thereof) from After the End.

Or maybe the books could be Basic Rules, Advanced Traits, and Advanced Rules?

Originally Posted by safisher

I would include the Basic Set changes in DFRPG.
http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=151846

Having just read through the link, I can support this. I am all for things that simplify while having similarly good results. What I hate from DFRPG is the "power object" rules. Keep powerstones.

Dammit. Now I have to crack open DF and actually look at it.

[Embassy of Time]

I want to go on record that I still think IOU would be the perfect main setting, but since my remark clearly fell on deaf ears, some thoughts :

1: Simplify. I am okay with complexity, but a lot of it currently has no purpose. Skills need not be E/A/H/VH, just have a modifier and make skills easier to use. Many advantages and disadvantages are basically variations on "+1 for this" or "-1 for that". Like Talents sum up a lot, much more can be summed up. And while Powers are cool, some serious streamlining is needed to make them more user friendly.

2: Deligate. Someone already mentioned rules in the basic set that seem to belong in very specific world books. Yes. As a litmus test, if nobody would be annoyed by the lack of a rule unless they used a very specific setting, put that rule in that setting supplement.

3: Limited(!) Open License. A true OGL has been found too problematic, but some lesser license allowing publications within a strict framework should be possible, like monster manuals, character collections, factions, vehicles, magic items, planets, and yes, adventures. All support existing settings and are low profit. Clearly defined licenses for online publications seem logical.

4: One(!) heavily supported central setting. IW is fine, but the support is lackluster. A setting that uses the system's strength should get the same treatment as Transhuman Space or Traveller.

5: Some kind of added punch. Hard to define, but GURPS pays the price of breadth by lacking a central concept that catches the eye. D&D has levels, CoC has Samity, etc., and many systems also use some form of power play (D&D high levels are insane, IIRC). Generic has a bad taste to it, sadly, as something bland. Prove them wrong.

6: Yes, apps. They are not that hard to make. Some JavaScript website is even easier. Allow user content, or sell content packets for a character creator, or regular updates, ir whatever. Nothing fancy, something handy.

7: We all KNOW this one, but few dare say it: Get some dedicated and talented fans to do a CritRoll style webshow and promote the hell out of it! This should be a priority for any game publisher, honestly. I'd watch a Munchkin channel. And if that exists, why was it not marketed to bits, at leadt in here?!

I would love to add a rant about PoD with something like IngramSpark, for those juicy color hardbacks, but my lack of publishing experience would be used against, maybe rightfully so.

I guess that is it from me. I doubt 5E will ever happen, and have accepted that GURPS has commercially become a relic from anither time, along with so many other treat games. Sad face...

[acrosome]

Originally Posted by Embassy of Time

I want to go on record that I still think IOU would be the perfect main setting, but since my remark clearly fell on deaf ears, some thoughts :
[...]

3: Limited(!) Open License. A true OGL has been found too problematic, but some lesser license allowing publications within a strict framework should be possible, like monster manuals, character collections, factions, vehicles, magic items, planets, and yes, adventures. All support existing settings and are low profit. Clearly defined licenses for online publications seem logical.

4: One(!) heavily supported central setting. IW is fine, but the support is lackluster. A setting that uses the system's strength should get the same treatment as Transhuman Space or Traveller.
[...]

I don't think that GURPS needs any default setting in the Basic Set, frankly. But I would say that IOU would be a particularly poor choice due to the high character point totals. Those high-point games are more complex, involve more rules (and extremes of rules, like the ST damage table, knockback, etc.), and are just generally more fiddly and harder to balance. If there is a setting in the Basic Set it should be very basic and easy for new players to wrap their heads around. Lantara might be perfect for that, actually. Flesh out the setting a bit (maybe with a nice map from one of the guys at Cartographersguild.com) and make it clear that Lantara is only one small continent and that the rest of the world is left for the GM to create. And it could remain in a free PDF to keep the Basic Set's page count down.

Because the page count could be much better spent by including things like the chase rules from Action, almost everything in the Power-Ups series, and the wilderness and survival rules from After the End.

I have of course made my thoughts on an OGL known on the thread about it. In short, I think that a limited OGL that makes it clear that third-party for-profit publishing of setting books and adventure modules is allowed would be both workable and beneficial.

Originally Posted by mburr0003

Except that Spears and Staffs really aren't wielded the same way. They can be, but how are you going to use a spear and shield using the staff skill? You don't. Two-handed spears are wielded more like polearms than staffs, but even then, spears really are different than polearms.

Like, you can combine the skills if you want, but in real life they are different enough to warrant separate skills (that default, sure, but still separate).

No, not... really. Just about all Staff styles include holding it near one end and poking with the other. (I cannot offhand think of an exception, but there may be one out there.) As you mention the only real difference comes in the one-handed use of spears, for instance with a shield, for which there could be a Technique. And Defensive Grip covers the sort of things that you see in Robin Hood movies.

As has been proposed, we should probably do away with most optional skill specializations and use Techniques instead, even with academic skills. History-9 with the Shogunate Japan-14 specialization technique makes a lot of sense and doesn't require anyone to memorize the rules for specialty bonuses when the character tries to remember something from his freshman Western Civ class. The only thing that really needs a specialty are things like Professional skills, Hobby skills, etc.

Heck, Polearm skill might change into Two-Handed Axe/Mace for the choppy bit with a technique if it has a pokey bit. Even more simplification. That kind of makes no sense for the archetypical polearm (pike), though, so maybe the other way around? Or just make the technique improvable to higher than base skill? Hmm. Have to think on that.

[JMason]

Okay, here are some random ideas I've had over the years:

* General skills - There are a lot of that have very close defaults, and it might be better to have a general knowledge or application skill that the existing skills are specializations of. This might even lead to a "tiered" approach to skills with specializations and sub-specializations. Maybe even going from Wild Card -> General -> Specific -> very Specific -> Technique

* Category Skills - A lot of skills could just be some form of Knowledge() or Profession() type of skills. Move more skills into this classification, even skills that have general application... if that application is just based on knowledge of X.

* Rules vs Catalog - I'm back an fourth on this, but sometimes I wish that all the skills, Advantages, etc. were in a separate book than the basic rules. Sure Basic Set 1 vs 2 have some of this divided, but I kind of want just a traits catalog, and a smaller book to find rule X.

* Combat modules - What I mean is that combat should be presented in the most BASIC form, then various other rules added as "modules" that can be inserted. The current basic, tactical, special, Martial Arts options breakdown is a little confusing. Just a big list of extra combat rules after the basic system would be nice. Try to reduce as much "snow ball" effect where each new optional rule relies on the last.

I know this would all require a TON of retooling, editing, etc., and some just might not be possible... but it'd be nice.