Discussion on GURPS 4E Revised or Database

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

The problem GURPS has with this is there is no GURPS IP that can cross media.

GURPS as an IP is a games system that supports a wide range of genres and is pretty heavily weighted towards detail.

This gets at what I said in my previous post; namely, that we're selling the tools. SJ created a generic, universal system because he was tired of single-genre, single-setting games tied to particular sets of assumptions; which is to say, SJ created a tool kit, and that's what SJ Games wants to sell. In the past, we've adapted IPs in order to showcase how flexible GURPS is, but those adaptations have never enjoyed the success of the core system. And with good reason: The adaptations are "close enough," not optimal; showcasing the rules has a fidelity cost for the setting, and setting fans won't stay with a game that doesn't get their favorite IP right to within almost absurdly tight tolerances.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

As a tangent, for me Discworld and GURPS are about as incongruous a pairing as I can imagine in the Hobby.

As far as game engines go, I don't see another generic engine being better or worse than GURPS for Pratchett's work. In many ways, GURPS is a good match, as it's capable of the mad, kitchen-sink, gonzo stuff that shows up on the Disc. It doesn't force you to choose a genre first, which many other generic engines do; this is crucial, as Discworld isn't pure fantasy, but a weird mix of genres up to and including steampunk of late. The two also have a similar sense of humor (indeed, this helps to explain why SJ and Pterry get along!).

Can GURPS ideally showcase Discworld without the tools showing? That is a challenge! It's why we're publishing the Discworld Roleplaying Game and not GURPS Discworld, and why the upcoming edition is truly integrated and self-contained, not just a worldbook with a copy of GURPS Lite in the back. That approach was a lot of work for us, though, and it remains to be seen whether the expense and trouble, plus the licensing costs, will pay off. If the new edition is a success and brings new players to GURPS, we'll have a direction in which to move.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Kromm

This gets at what I said in my previous post; namely, that we're selling the tools. SJ created a generic, universal system because he was tired of single-genre, single-setting games tied to particular sets of assumptions; which is to say, SJ created a tool kit, and that's what SJ Games wants to sell. In the past, we've adapted IPs in order to showcase how flexible GURPS is, but those adaptations have never enjoyed the success of the core system. And with good reason: The adaptations are "close enough," not optimal; showcasing the rules has a fidelity cost for the setting, and setting fans won't stay with a game that doesn't get their favorite IP right to within almost absurdly tight tolerances.

I agree.

I think the problem will always be for a generic version of pre-existing setting/system you are relying on the existence of two customer groups.

Group one: Those who are already predisposed to like the generic system over the specific and who's first choice will be the generic.

Group two: Those who didn't like the specific setting's system enough to try an alternative system for the setting they did like.

They probably exists but they are by their nature again sub divisions of the hobby (i.e automatically limiting potential sales).

Additionally Group one can already use the generic system without a setting specific generic book using the specific's fluff (it's a generic system) how much of factor this will be will of course depend on how quickly the generic version is available after the original. That said even my limited knowledge of IP control and licensing tells me not many are keen to allow rivals soon after release of their own new product, they like to enjoy a significant period of being the only published option in the market.

And group two will have to not only want the generic version, they'll have to want it enough to re purchase material (you'll need both to compare). More over if they are new to the generic, they'll need to buy the generic system as well (if it's not included the 2nd parties setting book).

Originally Posted by Kromm

As far as game engines go, I don't see another generic engine being better or worse than GURPS for Pratchett's work. In many ways, GURPS is a good match, as it's capable of the mad, kitchen-sink, gonzo stuff that shows up on the Disc. It doesn't force you to choose a genre first, which many other generic engines do; this is crucial, as Discworld isn't pure fantasy, but a weird mix of genres up to and including steampunk of late. The two also have a similar sense of humor (indeed, this helps to explain why SJ and Pterry get along!).

Can GURPS ideally showcase Discworld without the tools showing? That is a challenge! It's why we're publishing the Discworld Roleplaying Game and not GURPS Discworld, and why the upcoming edition is truly integrated and self-contained, not just a worldbook with a copy of GURPS Lite in the back. That approach was a lot of work for us, though, and it remains to be seen whether the expense and trouble, plus the licensing costs, will pay off. If the new edition is a success and brings new players to GURPS, we'll have a direction in which to move.

Ah, sorry I didn't realise it's a stand alone game, I thought it was "gurps: disc world".

To answer the now redundant question, it's not that I think GURPS can't do discworld, it's that I think as a system it would be overkill. We know that GURPS can be light and fluffy, but I think the reality is in general the pre-existing GURPS fanbase, and therefore GURPS played "in the wild' so to speak is in relative terms pretty heavy and crunchy! More over GURPS has established a reputation as such in the wider hobby for a couple of decades.

Now maybe there's an opportunity in re branding to be had here led by a lighter Disc world system as a potential introduction to the fact that GURPS doesn't have to be full on tactical crunch despite the reputation it enjoys/suffers.

Maybe some kind of Discworld system - GURPS conversion.

And if nothing else a successful game is a successful game!

I have my own questions about the choice of discworld anyway (don't get me wrong I'm a fan from CoM) but this probably isn't the place for that.

Cheers TD

[Dammann]

My experience has been that if I invite non-rpg people to play, 75% stick with it, at least until the end of a campaign. If I had more time, I could run another campaign, for sure. We can be insular, as a community, but people will try this out. I could have just gotten my old group of friends from college to play online via roll20 or MapTool, I guess, but the key part of the experience, for me, is the face-to-face interaction with friends.

I will feel like I have succeeded in growing the hobby when one of my players runs a game. I look at this as something of a missionary minigame, and I hope to get to just play one day.

Of course, I make my preference for GURPS plain, and encourage people to buy the stuff they want to use. I know that a few members of my group have picked up GCA, and I know that a few have bought Characters and Campaigns. One guy bought DF 12. It has always been my experience that one dude owns most of the books, but others will buy stuff, too, if it interests them specifically, and then it can snowball.

A nice thing about some sort of central app is that if there is a benefit to having it for each person, and we can get new players in, the market will grow. The ideal, from my perspective, would be an app that is nice to have, but not completely necessary for each player.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

To answer the now redundant question, it's not that I think GURPS can't do discworld, it's that I think as a system it would be overkill. We know that GURPS can be light and fluffy, but I think the reality is in general the pre-existing GURPS fanbase, and therefore GURPS played "in the wild' so to speak is in relative terms pretty heavy and crunchy! More over GURPS has established a reputation as such in the wider hobby for a couple of decades.

I must object strongly to the characterisation of the Discword as light and fluffy. To take some of my favourites, Night Watch and Thud!, especially, they are heavier, richer and more textured than any roleplaying campaign I've played or hope to play. In general, most Discworld books are more 'adult' in tone, subject and treatment than roleplaying sessions can ever be, unless the players are genius paragons who never break character, prepare meticulously for weeks for every session and have crafted characters worthy of immortalisation in literature. It's just that Discworld books are also riotiously funny.

The Discworld books are not light and fluffy, even if the first few may have been. By now, they are stealth literature, featuring grit, complex morality, deep and textured motivations, violence with real consequences and villains with unsettling yet plausible characterisation.

I doubt I could run a good Discworld game, though I've run a session during the playtest that was fairly well received. But if I tried, I can't imagine doing it with anything other than GURPS.* Light-and-fluffy systems like Toon or BESM would be right out.

*Though I might end up using some books with GURPS Discworld that weren't incorporated into the stand-alone supplement because they weren't available at the time, like Ritual Path Magic.