Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

... But he could have asked to play a ninja anyways. DF is GURPS Dungeon Fantasy, not "some other game system Dungeon Fantasy", it has all of GURPS behind it. Here's Martial Arts and the Thief template, go forth and build your ninja, young man! If appropriate to my game and you happen to be a young man, naturally.

If it's not appropriate, well then no Ninjas, on template or off, bought me the PDF or not, I don't care if you payed super buxx to get your copy printed in leather-bound hardcover with gold-leaf, your financial investment does not relate to my campaign.

And if you're not a young man, substitute whatever sort of "hail and well met" kind of thing you prefer.

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

So true. GMs who dedicate attention to world-building have every right and reason to think of PCs as part and parcel of the world too, including role-play backstory and meaningful application of things not detailed in rules.

Unfortunately there's a trend even among GURPS aficionados to treat the rules as the game. (When you hear someone describe parts of the rules as 'fluff' vs the more presumably meritorious 'crunch', for example.)

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

That's not quite fair.

The problem isn't actually seperating the fluff from the crunch. The problem letting the crunch drive the fluff.

Building a character (or a world, for that matter) in Gurps is like painting a picture. The crunch is the paint, while the fluff is the actual concept you're trying to make. Gurps has a wonderful variety of 'paints' with various thicknesses, bright colors, tints, brushes, little metal paint appliers, sponges, and so forth. You can make beautiful paintings.

But if you let the brightness of the paint drive what you put on the canvas, and allow any color that looks 'cool' by itself, you end up with a garish mess. Even in supers, whose point is to be a little garish (bright and all over the place) If you let just anything into a game, you will end up with something ugly.

On the other hand, some of the crunch fans are all about improving the capabilities of the tool set. I often prefer crunch in books because I use it to improve my worlds, and to model them even better. I set aside fluff surrounding a piece of crunch to replace it with another piece of fluff that needs a rule-set and those rules look like the original rule

Powerful effects are a great goal for some games. But they should be described in the game world first and the rules second.

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

As a GURPS writer, I'm aware that crunch outsells fluff, big time. If I submit a list of possible book proposals, the crunchy ones end up in the top rank and the fluffy ones end up further down—because the people who make decisions follow the sales statistics, and it's easier to justify a crunchy book as likely to sell.

For example, I'm rather proud of Worminghall, which is over 90% fluff, with a little modest crunch in the redesigned magic system to support the medieval worldview. But it isn't a big seller. I have two or three other "magical city" concepts that could be turned into books—but they wouldn't be in high demand. And that's why my last three books were a new system of magical abilities, a treatment of supersenses, and a guide to learning and teaching. I'm proud of those books, too, and they were interesting to write . . . but I also recognize that working in that end of the gaming spectrum will result in a higher return on time invested.

But also, I'd note that it's a specific kind of crunch. In Enhanced Senses, for example, there were a lot of pages of abilities with stats. There were a few pages that analyzed, extended, or modified existing rules, often in text boxes. There were only a coupld of pages of new fundamental crunch—things like advantages, disadvantages, skills, perks, quirks, and techniques. A new GURPS crunch book may get away with one new advantage; two is pushing it. In other words, crunch is carefully prevented from causing system bloat; instead it shows more ways to build things using already existing concepts.

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

I think he was trying to get at the covert values embedded in the two terms.
"Fluff" implies something valueless, weightless, disposable, and not necessary. It isn't the "real" thing.
"Crunch" has weight, has complexity...it is a "real" thing.

If different terms were used: concepts and implementations, for example--or flesh and bone...or I don't know...there would be different implied values.

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

It's sad but i would not allow cosmic, if it cannot be gmed then don't have it... Moreover i'm not here to recreate comics.

I have had many players go all paranoid over other characters because they could not defend against 'x'. Pain in the arse they are and then one comes in with a silly way of upsetting the game table and too whose amusement... only themselves which is quite sad really.

Reminds me of a spoof called BMX Bandit and Angel Summoner just let mega powered dude do all the work and get into all the trouble. Just clear up after him.

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

Well, sure. That's quite fair and honestly it's one reason I find myself preferring GURPS DF to other dungeon fantasies. But at the same time, some kid wants to play a ninja, and DF is being played either strictly or he's not sure how to go about it and, tada, GURPS DF: NINJAS! Comes out, and he grabs it, builds a ninja, and can play. Boom!

It's easier to do that in GURPS DF than it is in generic GURPS Fantasy, for example. It's more complete, and more "plug and play" than the average GURPS line.

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

Yes, this. I was trying to indicate that what is sometimes called 'fluff' should sometimes be given a higher importance. For example, I recently asked if Independent Body parts could use a character's innate attacks when they are separate. The answer some gave is it depends on where the attack is said to come out from, a matter not specified by rule, but suddenly significant.

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

That's not entirely correct. She did have High TL 2. And I had encouraged the GM to take away all of her neat toys. I thought it would be fun to have her fall from a position of power and have to operate outside her comfort zone. That's what I had intended to happen if the game had continued.

This is a problem with the way GURPS gives equipment away. You can buy a vehicle, as an example, with Signature Gear, or you can take it as an Ally, or you can have a Patron that has given it to you. The point price of these traits aren't balanced against one another. They can vary by many orders of magnitude.

It's a part of the system that isn't balanced well and leads to these sorts of problems where one player ends up with essentially the same thing as another, but at a wildly different point cost.

Re: Need help fighting the dreaded MinMaxer.
 

But those three things are not essentially the same. A car bought with cash, a car bought as Signature Gear, a car as an Ally, a car as equipment from a Patron...those are all different things, with different implications.

Car bought with cash has no protection and isn't special.
Car bought with Sig Gear still has to be something buyable...in other words not Kitt from Knight Rider. So it isn't going to be crazy special, but doesn't have any drawbacks.
Car bought as an Ally is going to have to sentient in some way because allies are NPCs played by the GM. Allies are also going to want things from the PC and will leave them if they are treated badly. That is going to result in a really different dynamic than just some Sig Gear car.
And car as gear from a Patron? Well, if you upset your Patron, your Patron is going to take the car back from you. You have strings on that gear.

As a GM, I would make sure that each version felt different in play.