Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-21-2012, 03:15 AM   #31
Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

I still do, for one.
Like some of the other posters, I haven't played in a while but when I do, I expect it'll be 3e rev. The primary modifications to 3e that I use (at least when I remember to) are the Mk II Mod 1 Healing System from John M. Ford's I'm Not Dead Yet! in RP 16 and the bonus character creation points system from Hernan Ruiz Camauer's Just One More Point ... in RP 24.
I have seven of the 4e books (Basic Set Characters & Campaigns, Powers, Psionic Powers, Mysteries, Fantasy & Infinite Worlds) and I can't say I care for some of the changes made to the game.
When 4e first came out, Templates (and Filters and Lenses) were billed as replacing the 3e chapter on Random Characters. OK, fair enough. Nowadays, the template system seems to have taken over the game. I swear, sometimes reading threads about a given character template leave me feeling like I've gone five rounds with Dragon D&D 3.5 prestige classes.
I regret the loss of 1/2 point skills and passive defense [PD]. I can't locate the source where I read it, but I do recall Steve Jackson commenting on 1/2 point skills. He thought that their inclusion was less elegant than having whole number skill points but the playtests confirmed time and again that they had to be included to permit balanced character creation. I always liked PD as it permitted the modelling of hard to hit [high PD] but easy to kill when you do [low HP] opponents vs. easy to hit [low PD] but hard to injure [high HP] opponents, eg. crocodile vs. elephant. Given that natural PD was limited to 6 and even most armor topped out at 8, it seemed pretty reasonable. A dodge 10 man in chainmail was going to be hard to hurt and a clumsy dodge 4 man would get an equalizer that would make him about as hard to hit as an unarmoured dodge 10 man. As for the uneven bonuses when converted to percentages, that happens all the time when translating a 3d6 curve. A 4e Per 16 man and a 4e Per 10 man aren't equally affected by a -6 darkness modifier or by the bonus from a set of night vision goggles, even though it's the same amount of darkness and the same degree of enhancement.
Flat attribute costs without doubling the cost after initial character creation had me worried about attribute inflation initially. It has been limited by a push to have attributes of 11 and 12 regarded as above average. This can be seen as steming from the 3e Who's Who books which took that view but the designers and contributors to that series used it as a means of nipping arguments of the "Aristotle should have a higher IQ than Einstein" type among the fans in the bud. It was taken as given that attributes would be placed as low as established measures permitted, with reputations having been acquired by high skill levels, backed by skill-enhancing advantages where appropriate/necessary.
Dai Blackthorn was a fairly average 3e character at 100 points. I ran a comparison of him with some of the Who's Who characters; the results are rather interesting.
People Dai regards as a bit slow (IQ a point lower than his): Manfred von Richthofen; Lucky Luciano; George Armstrong Custer; William Walker; Roger de Flor; Rodrigo Diaz; Joan of Arc; Vlad Tepes; Mata Hari; and Lola Montez.
DX:
People who are as Dexterous as Dai: Harry Houdini.
People who come in as close seconds: John Wesley Hardin; Shaka Zulu; and Roger de Flor.
In a fight:
People you could bet on Dai to beat with a shortsword: King David ben-Jesse; Sargon II; Cheng Shih; Oda Nobunaga; Cyrus the Great; Granuaile; Hannibal; Constantine the Great; Julius Caesar; Nebuchadrezzar II; Boudica; Cleopatra; Xenophon; Aristotle, Bartholomew Roberts*
People you might bet on Dai to beat in a shortsword vs. broadsword fight; Christopher Columbus; William Marshal**; Roger de Flor*; Rodrigo Diaz*; Harald Hardradi; Hernan Cortes; Atilla the Hun; Richard III; George Armstrong Custer; Justinian I; Peter the Great; Horatio Nelson; and Vlad Tepes.
Dai could probably take Lief Eriksson in a shortsword vs. axe/mace fight.
Somewhat iffier because different techniques are used but still probably safe bets for Dai to take with a shortsword simply because his skill is so high in comparison are: Tycho Brahe; William Shakespeare; Sir Richard Burton; Cardinal Richelieu and Ninon de Lanclos vs. fencing; and Tokugawa Ieyasu vs. katana.
The comparisons don't take advantages into account and the combats assume circumstances approximating a fair one-on-one fight with neither character getting a string of lucky or unlucky rolls.
Some of the particular flavor of magic, psionics and superpowers in 3e has been lost in the attempt to put everything into a grand unified theory of powers. The uneven point costs and mandated advantages for power level increases in Psionic Powers seem less graceful than the even point cost, no surprises style of 3e Psionics. Oh, some of them may find their way into my 3e game but overall I'm less than charmed with the changes.
In the end, I suppose my problem with 4e is that the philosophy behind the system seems to be drifting away from what attracted me to it in the first place. Maybe GURPS 5e will bring it back on course.
I can always dream, can't I?

Last edited by Curmudgeon; 03-21-2012 at 03:20 AM. Reason: spelling
Curmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2012, 03:35 AM   #32
vierasmarius
 
vierasmarius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
I regret the loss of 1/2 point skills and passive defense [PD]. I can't locate the source where I read it, but I do recall Steve Jackson commenting on 1/2 point skills. He thought that their inclusion was less elegant than having whole number skill points but the playtests confirmed time and again that they had to be included to permit balanced character creation.
That's true to an extent. I'm not a full-on Stat Normalizer, but I really like to build low point-total "realistic" characters, and the full-point skill level is generally too high to represent someone who's merely dabbled in a skill. GURPS has shifted back towards 3e slightly with the addition of the Dabbler Perk, which lets a character split 1 cp between multiple skills. However, it's far more versatile than 3e's 1/2 cp skill level, since you can split the Dabbler perk between from 2 to 8 different skills.

Quote:
Some of the particular flavor of magic, psionics and superpowers in 3e has been lost in the attempt to put everything into a grand unified theory of powers. The uneven point costs and mandated advantages for power level increases in Psionic Powers seem less graceful than the even point cost, no surprises style of 3e Psionics. Oh, some of them may find their way into my 3e game but overall I'm less than charmed with the changes.
Well, Magic in 4e is basically unchanged. Psionic Powers is far more graceful in 4e, since you no longer have arbitrary powers of questionable balance. You instead have sets of abilities priced according to their actual utility. Of all the changes between 3e and 4e, I think Rev PK's treatment of Psionics is one of my favorites. I'm not sure what you mean by "mandated advantages". Since the entire Psi system is built from existing components, if an individual character wants to develop his powers in a different direction there's nothing stopping him.

There are a few places in 4e where it lacks the complexity of 3e - notably the Rapid Fire rules and vehicle construction / combat. However, the changes were made for reasons of gameplay, to make the system smoother and more accessible, and I can respect that. I've toyed with Rapid Fire houserules, but haven't implemented them in-game because of the added complexity for little gain (at least at the scales I typically play at). Despite the detail of 3e's house rules, I would not choose them now, for the same reason.

Last edited by vierasmarius; 03-21-2012 at 03:41 AM.
vierasmarius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2012, 03:45 AM   #33
sjard
Stick in the Mud
 
sjard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Rural Utah
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

Is it odd that I've never used 3rd edition revised? I went straight from 3rd edition to 4th edition. The one time I tried to order a used copy of 3ed revised, I ended up getting a better condition copy of the same printing I picked up in '88 or '89. One of these days I will own a copy of revised though.
__________________
MIB #1457
sjard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2012, 04:38 AM   #34
Blind Mapmaker
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mannheim, Baden
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
I still do, for one.
[/snip]
When 4e first came out, Templates (and Filters and Lenses) were billed as replacing the 3e chapter on Random Characters. OK, fair enough. Nowadays, the template system seems to have taken over the game. I swear, sometimes reading threads about a given character template leave me feeling like I've gone five rounds with Dragon D&D 3.5 prestige classes.
I agree with that to some degree. Personally, I haven't created player characters exclusively by template yet. Sometimes I look through them to see if I forgot something essential, but usually I don't. I can see, however, that they are a great tool to get people more used to that other game to enjoy GURPS. If you are a beginner, you'd really want some help with that and 3rd Edition was lacking in that regard (at least the German version was). Professional Templates are also a good way to quickly stat some adversaries that should be able to do more than just fight. I still create most NPCs in more detail, but if you need to come up with something in a pinch templates are good.

Quote:
I regret the loss of 1/2 point skills and passive defense [PD]. I can't locate the source where I read it, but I do recall Steve Jackson commenting on 1/2 point skills. He thought that their inclusion was less elegant than having whole number skill points but the playtests confirmed time and again that they had to be included to permit balanced character creation.
I've had some very bad experiences with 1/2 points in 3rd edition. They were basically a min/maxers dream when they were unrestricted. I still use them in 4th edition, though. I only dropped them one level when compared to 1 point in a skill and I make it clear to players that they are a resource to get some background training in two to four areas, not to enable your IQ 16 mage to be proficient in everything. I like them especially in realistic games.

I really don't regret the demise of PD.

All in all 3rd edition is still a better game than most.
Blind Mapmaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2012, 05:10 AM   #35
smurf
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bristol
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

I saw I robot the other day... hmmm
smurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2012, 03:36 PM   #36
Ze'Manel Cunha
 
Ze'Manel Cunha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker View Post
I've had some very bad experiences with 1/2 points in 3rd edition. They were basically a min/maxers dream when they were unrestricted.
Especially when coupled with Eidetic Memory...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Mapmaker View Post
I've had some very bad experiences with 1/2 points in 3rd edition. They were basically a min/maxers dream when they were unrestricted. I still use them in 4th edition, though. I only dropped them one level when compared to 1 point in a skill and I make it clear to players that they are a resource to get some background training in two to four areas, not to enable your IQ 16 mage to be proficient in everything. I like them especially in realistic games.
The Dabbler Perk is our friend in that regard, especially when using a Perk limit.
Ze'Manel Cunha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 11:12 AM   #37
dworldjumper
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
I still do, for one.
Like some of the other posters, I haven't played in a while but when I do, I expect it'll be 3e rev. The primary modifications to 3e that I use (at least when I remember to) are the Mk II Mod 1 Healing System from John M. Ford's I'm Not Dead Yet! in RP 16 and the bonus character creation points system from Hernan Ruiz Camauer's Just One More Point ... in RP 24.
I have seven of the 4e books (Basic Set Characters & Campaigns, Powers, Psionic Powers, Mysteries, Fantasy & Infinite Worlds) and I can't say I care for some of the changes made to the game.
When 4e first came out, Templates (and Filters and Lenses) were billed as replacing the 3e chapter on Random Characters. OK, fair enough. Nowadays, the template system seems to have taken over the game. I swear, sometimes reading threads about a given character template leave me feeling like I've gone five rounds with Dragon D&D 3.5 prestige classes.
I regret the loss of 1/2 point skills and passive defense [PD]. I can't locate the source where I read it, but I do recall Steve Jackson commenting on 1/2 point skills. He thought that their inclusion was less elegant than having whole number skill points but the playtests confirmed time and again that they had to be included to permit balanced character creation. I always liked PD as it permitted the modelling of hard to hit [high PD] but easy to kill when you do [low HP] opponents vs. easy to hit [low PD] but hard to injure [high HP] opponents, eg. crocodile vs. elephant. Given that natural PD was limited to 6 and even most armor topped out at 8, it seemed pretty reasonable. A dodge 10 man in chainmail was going to be hard to hurt and a clumsy dodge 4 man would get an equalizer that would make him about as hard to hit as an unarmoured dodge 10 man. As for the uneven bonuses when converted to percentages, that happens all the time when translating a 3d6 curve. A 4e Per 16 man and a 4e Per 10 man aren't equally affected by a -6 darkness modifier or by the bonus from a set of night vision goggles, even though it's the same amount of darkness and the same degree of enhancement.
Flat attribute costs without doubling the cost after initial character creation had me worried about attribute inflation initially. It has been limited by a push to have attributes of 11 and 12 regarded as above average. This can be seen as steming from the 3e Who's Who books which took that view but the designers and contributors to that series used it as a means of nipping arguments of the "Aristotle should have a higher IQ than Einstein" type among the fans in the bud. It was taken as given that attributes would be placed as low as established measures permitted, with reputations having been acquired by high skill levels, backed by skill-enhancing advantages where appropriate/necessary.
Dai Blackthorn was a fairly average 3e character at 100 points. I ran a comparison of him with some of the Who's Who characters; the results are rather interesting.
People Dai regards as a bit slow (IQ a point lower than his): Manfred von Richthofen; Lucky Luciano; George Armstrong Custer; William Walker; Roger de Flor; Rodrigo Diaz; Joan of Arc; Vlad Tepes; Mata Hari; and Lola Montez.
DX:
People who are as Dexterous as Dai: Harry Houdini.
People who come in as close seconds: John Wesley Hardin; Shaka Zulu; and Roger de Flor.
In a fight:
People you could bet on Dai to beat with a shortsword: King David ben-Jesse; Sargon II; Cheng Shih; Oda Nobunaga; Cyrus the Great; Granuaile; Hannibal; Constantine the Great; Julius Caesar; Nebuchadrezzar II; Boudica; Cleopatra; Xenophon; Aristotle, Bartholomew Roberts*
People you might bet on Dai to beat in a shortsword vs. broadsword fight; Christopher Columbus; William Marshal**; Roger de Flor*; Rodrigo Diaz*; Harald Hardradi; Hernan Cortes; Atilla the Hun; Richard III; George Armstrong Custer; Justinian I; Peter the Great; Horatio Nelson; and Vlad Tepes.
Dai could probably take Lief Eriksson in a shortsword vs. axe/mace fight.
Somewhat iffier because different techniques are used but still probably safe bets for Dai to take with a shortsword simply because his skill is so high in comparison are: Tycho Brahe; William Shakespeare; Sir Richard Burton; Cardinal Richelieu and Ninon de Lanclos vs. fencing; and Tokugawa Ieyasu vs. katana.
The comparisons don't take advantages into account and the combats assume circumstances approximating a fair one-on-one fight with neither character getting a string of lucky or unlucky rolls.
Some of the particular flavor of magic, psionics and superpowers in 3e has been lost in the attempt to put everything into a grand unified theory of powers. The uneven point costs and mandated advantages for power level increases in Psionic Powers seem less graceful than the even point cost, no surprises style of 3e Psionics. Oh, some of them may find their way into my 3e game but overall I'm less than charmed with the changes.
In the end, I suppose my problem with 4e is that the philosophy behind the system seems to be drifting away from what attracted me to it in the first place. Maybe GURPS 5e will bring it back on course.
I can always dream, can't I?
I too still use it. As a matter of fact I will be having it as a major game system in my Meetup I have here in Phoenix. I will be doing alot of stuff with the system as in:

Making up whole books of monster for GMs to use.

Hopefully designing 1000's of vehicles (using Gurps Vehicles and GVB.)

And trying come up with a Fantasy game world (and others) that take a full advantage of Gurps.

I also have come up with a way to make character generation faster and more simple for new characters I call it using a Skin. Like you would put a skin on a phone you do that to the character generation system for Gurps. it is simple really. send me a message if you want to talk more or have any questions about any of this
dworldjumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 11:55 AM   #38
Stripe
 
Stripe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Midwest, USA
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

Honestly, is Fourth Edition not even more convoluted than Third now?

I agree that Fourth Edition is a side-grade, but if I had to chose between one or the other rules set, I would chose Fourth's. However, I would chose Third Edition Revised for everything else from layout to art to the vast library of supplements.

Fourth Edition's Magic, though, one of the most often used books by my group, sucks. That really hurts bad.

Third Edition's Robots is my favorite gaming book of all time, and I liked Mecha a lot too. None of that with Fourth and going by Spaceships, I don't think the upcoming Vehicle Design System, even though written by my favorite author, is going to sate my appetite. That hurts.

I'd rather have Third Edition Revised Revised. Since we don't, I'm playing Fourth. And loving it.
__________________
.
"How the heck am I supposed to justify that whatever I
feel like doing at any particular moment is 'in character'
if I can't say 'I'm chaotic evil!'"? —Jeff Freeman
Stripe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2012, 05:16 PM   #39
demonsbane
 
demonsbane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Spain —Europe
Default Re: Who else is still using Gurps 3ed rev

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjard View Post
Is it odd that I've never used 3rd edition revised? I went straight from 3rd edition to 4th edition.
Same here.
__________________
"Let's face it: for some people, roleplaying is a serious challenge, a life-or-death struggle."
J. M. Caparula/Scott Haring

"Physics is basic but inessential."
Wolfgang Smith

My G+
demonsbane is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
gurps 3e basic set, gurps 4e

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.