Converting material from other systems

[panton41]

I know one of the great benefits that people tout about GURPS is how easy it is to convert material from other systems into it. At least that's the theory. In practice how easy is it really?

I've found it difficult enough that it's easier to use another system's published adventure as inspiration rather than convert it outright. With settings I've found it easier to make the setting fit GURPS than vice versa, even if that means breaking some long-standing assumptions the other system provided. (Not always for the worse, though, but not always for the better, either.)

[Dragondog]

When converting settings to GURPS, I try to keep as much of the setting as possible, but some things are so different that it's easier to use GURPS as is then to figure out a way to do it the other way.

Converting systems vary in difficulty. Some mechanics are quite similar while other mechanics in the same system can be quite dissimilar.

I'm running a Dragonlance adventure right now, as is, with GURPS instead of DnD3.5. So far I've only needed to convert a racial template (Baaz Draconian) and some NPCs of that race.

Most of it was fairly straight forward, but some traits were resolved so differently in DnD then in GURPS that I had to tweak them to GURPS resolution.

[Kage2020]

Originally Posted by Dragondog

When converting settings to GURPS, I try to keep as much of the setting as possible, but some things are so different that it's easier to use GURPS as is then to figure out a way to do it the other way.

This, for me. I try to come to converting a setting to another system, not converting a system to another system. Thus, for example, in "converting" 40k RPG over to GURPS I would ask how might the setting (as filtered through my interpretation*) be reflected in GURPS rather than, say, how did the Dark Heresy system handle "psykers" and "sorcerers." Rather than, "Oh, that's how Dark Heresy/Rogue Trader/Deathwatch handled bolt guns!" it became an issue of, "Okay, what is the closest approximation and what are the implications?" (For example, say that I select a "shaped charge gyroc" as the standard for the micro-missiles those things fire. Does that feel right from the perspective of the setting and, using GURPS as a consistent basis, what does the selection of a TL 8 technology imply for other aspects of the setting.)

Of course, you get "powered by" approach rather than a direct conversion. That's usually acceptable to me since I'm comfortable with many of the assumptions and options of GURPS. Then again I'm not uncomfortable breaking a bit of GURPS if it suits the setting (which is usually just a case of my being lazy and inelegant in crafting the GURPS interpretation than the fault of the system).

Kage

* This can in my experience be an important bone of contention in my experience, but to others it is less so. YMMV.

Edit: In retrospect it seems that I could have just said, "I agree for the most part" to the first post as well. :D

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

I know one of the great benefits that people tout about GURPS is how easy it is to convert material from other systems into it. At least that's the theory. In practice how easy is it really?

The key is to convert by name rather than number. D&D Orc becomes Gurps Orc, D&D Lich becomes Gurps Lich. I haven't even found creating fleshed out templates to be necessary.

[PK]

Pardon the tautology, but if I'm converting something over to GURPS, it's because I want to use GURPS to play it. Thus, I'm more than happy to break anything that relies heavily on rules from the other system -- but also just as happy to adapt it into GURPS if the rules mesh well.

GURPS Deadlands is a wonderful example. The hexslingers' success rolls were completely changed to use GURPS' success rolls instead, but then the playing card rules (which work just as well in GURPS as they do in Pinnacle's system) were retained for flavor. On the other side of things, the American Indians were radically changed to use GURPS' Path/Book magic instead of their own system, because that was a better fit for GURPS.

So yeah, if I'm taking something from another system, I'm doing so because I want to redo it in GURPS, so I don't see any problem with doing just that.

[Nymdok]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

In practice how easy is it really?

That depends on the level of rigor you apply to the conversion, as you mention in your original post.

We normally get a few post a year on how to convert another systems settings or Mechanics to GURPS.

For some concepts, like levels, there is simply no good analog.

The more you abstract a setting or other ideas from its rules system the more portable it becomes, but the more it relies on the GMs interpretaion of what those means in each system.

Its not unlike the problem of the infinite subtlety of orcs that shows up on these boards from time to time. There are differences in orcs in evey system, and gurps even has a racial template, and a monster template for them (In fantasy I think). Because they are different, that makes the translation difficult.

For example, if your translating a D&D orc to GURPS, do you simply say orc = orc and use the template, or do you say Orc as beginning level worthy = Orc as begining level owrthy and then convert on that basis fiddling with Attributes, Ads and Skill levels? Do you go futher still and import Gruumsh and other aspects of the orc society into the game as well? What then happens if you also want to incorporate Warhammer Orcs? World of War Craft Orcs? How do you differentiate them from Goblins?

Generally, as I convert I try to key in on a few signature features of an idea so that they will be recognizeable by the players and we can whiz on by the exposition. From there, I fill in what I think is suitable for my players, and the game, and what I get out of it is something that ends up being varrying parts of new and familiar.

Again, the problems arise when the GM says a world like ORC and people think of something the GM is not thinking of, also called assumption clash. For example, say they are playing Starting DF Charachters with skills in the high teens or 20's and they come upon a worthy Orc adversary who also has suitably high skills. If the players are thinking 1d-1 Hit Die monster, they may be suprised at the orcish skills.


Nymdok

[CousinX]

Originally Posted by Rev. Pee Kitty

So yeah, if I'm taking something from another system, I'm doing so because I want to redo it in GURPS, so I don't see any problem with doing just that.

A good example of how not to do it is how Disciplines worked in the GURPS Vampire: the Masquerade conversion. Rather than mapping the various vampirical powers into GURPS traits, they tried to retain the structure of the White Wolf's system. The result: incoherent and unbalanced. Oddly enough, they did a much better job with the Werewolf conversion -- each White Wolf "Gift" was given a GURPS trait, priced appropriately to what it did in the GURPS system ... the "level" of the Gift (an aspect of White Wolf rules) had no bearing on its GURPS rules or point cost.

[panton41]

I was thinking less "convert D&D to GURPS" and more "convert Tomb of Horrors to GURPS".

I'm considering raiding D&D adventure modules for a Dungeon Fantasy game, but it's more hassle than it's worth I'll just stick to doing it from scratch.

[sgtcallistan]

If I like it, I take the setting, adapt according to a benchmark or scale that I judge mentally, and adjust if it results in nonsense.

Basically, I look at the maximum that can happen, the minimum, and scale it against three dice.
-then wing the rest.

I rarely write anything down.

This, I find, is sufficient work. ;)

[CousinX]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

I was thinking less "convert D&D to GURPS" and more "convert Tomb of Horrors to GURPS".

I'm considering raiding D&D adventure modules for a Dungeon Fantasy game, but it's more hassle than it's worth I'll just stick to doing it from scratch.

I'd say (and of course YMMV) that reading through the adventure's plot and mining ideas is the optimal Work-Required to Benefit-Gained trade-off. It saves you the work of coming up with your own plot, npcs, monsters, encounters, traps, etc, but you don't have to do a room-by-room, stat-by-stat conversion. Where you have a better idea than the module, use that; where you can't think of anything to put in a room, consult the module for ideas.

Personally, I seldom use an adventure module exactly as written anyway, even if there's no stat-conversions needed.