[Diatribe] Bringing the GURPS

[trechriron]

Inspired from "why is GURPS not as popular as d20" and "The OTHER GURPS renaming it" threads and perhaps a tinge of personal guilt...

Originally Posted by Various Person's Misconceptions

GURPS is not popular, it needs a new {adventure, setting, supplement, how-to guide} to invigorate its market presence, GURPS is too math intensive, GURPS character creation takes too long, GURPS is hard, GURPS causes geek-o-plasmy, GURPS is dry/boring/too generic...

*sigh*

I have pondered these "problems" much lately with the several threads bantering about the last 60 days. GURPS has some misconceptions out there. I think the desire of these threads are rooted in these misconceptions and what people perceive is a problem "selling the game". A new name is not going to change anything. A new setting or adventure is not going to help. Only the fan base through playing and sharing the game are going to increase the market value of GURPS and ultimately overcome the misconceptions. Even with our efforts it's likely GURPS will never overcome all its misconceptions or enamor its detractors. But we could be trying harder. At least, that is what I realized over the last couple of days.

Originally Posted by Trent's Analogy

I used to be an Amway distributor in my younger more ideal years. Eventually they changed their name in hopes of overcoming the stereotype of the "evil pushy MLM pod people". Problem was, Quixtar was considered just as "annoying" to people as Amway. MLM is MLM. Some people are going to be interested and others are going to find out your pitching an MLM and are instantly turned off. Also, the name change backfired. Many prospects considered it underhanded to be at yet another "Amway" pitch when they were pulled in under another pretext.

They eventually just went back to commercials talking about Amway. Because in the end, the time the company has been around and the name had more brand power than they could fight against. The focus had to change from a simple NAME to the behavior and approach of the distributors themselves. Impressions, misconceptions, and opinions don't change overnight. These kinds of real changes require substance. An investment of integrity and elbow grease from people who sincerely want the perception to change. Want another stark reality check? People still don't generally like MLM pitches including Amway. But the efforts of the company and distributors have started changing how people perceive Amway; more so than any other initiative the company has tried.

GURPS as a name is perfect. It describes EXACTLY what the game is doing. It has years of brand power and recognition. The misconceptions around GURPS are only going to be overcome with people playing the game and realizing the benefits of using GURPS. Also, consider that as my generation (class of 1980 inducted fat-beard grognards) ages, we have found less time to create and tinker. In my case, my desire to make my hobby a business has interfered with my deep need to create and express. I don't think I am alone in my dysfunction. Why not just support the game I love and not worry about the business? Is it really that hard to pull something together with GURPS? Are we not just getting distracted and lazy? I feel like I have been. Distracted and lazy.

Let's be honest. Even us GURPS fans don't help most of the time. There are a few diehards and then there are those of us with system ADD that are easily distracted. We sympathize with those who disparage GURPS because we hope to build bridges and understanding. We start fan Wikis that languish, collaborative projects that die in the creative womb, and generally carry on like a bowl of flakes surrounded by Fruit Loops in warm milk. There are people on the forums in the GURPS forum who don't like GURPS. Bah! We certainly don't need controversy, but it would be nice to see fans pitching ideas that help overcome the bias we (maybe subconsciously) see undermining the player base of GURPS. We don't need to disparage GURPS detractors. But we could revitalize a focus to inject solutions and ideas into those conversations to impress upon potential players what GURPS can do. There are piles of threads in the GURPS forum with no one is pitching GURPS system solutions or ideas. Are we missing an opportunity to Bring the GURPS?

In addition, we GURPS fans are constantly pining for the next thing but what about all the stuff we already have?!?! I have TWO shelves of GURPS stuff. Does it not bother me just a little that I have piles of GURPS stuff I could be using to run a fantastically fun RPG right now but I keep thinking "I need Low Tech or Thaumatology to REALLY pull this off...". B.S. Yeah, it bothers me now. I need to stop. I feel like my lack of support is helping a movement of fans that are actually sabotaging the support of GURPS.

I feel guilty about this (obviously!). I love GURPS. I have for some time. But I make excuses. "People won't play GURPS" "It's hard to find players" "It's too much work". Funny thing is; I am sure that if I brought an adventure with pre-gens to my monthly game day, I could find interested players who want to learn a new game or try something new. I just have to stop focusing on the misconceptions and start focusing on WHY I like GURPS and then do something with it.

After playing a multitude of games this year, I have realized I really just want to run GURPS. I am not going to compromise anymore. I have some ideas for "bringing the GURPS" so I am going to polish them up and share them. This convention I am attending next weekend is my last dalliance with other games. It's time I put my money (and time) where my mouth (and heart) is!

So, what will you do to share the game? What pet project have you put off? What Wiki needs some dusting off? What do we need to do to BRING THE GURPS?!?! I am interested in this conversation. Taking action puts us in control and gives us something we can do that doesn't' rest on the laurels of someone else. We are fans and our fanaticism can make an impact.

Anyhoo, that became a long winded diatribe! I guess I have been doing some soul searching, and pondering these threads, and I had an epiphany. My intent was not to insult anyone, so I apologize if I did. I just needed to vent/share!

Sincerely,

[shawnhcorey]

Originally Posted by trechriron

Let's be honest. Even us GURPS fans don't help most of the time. There are a few diehards and then there are those of us with system ADD that are easily distracted. We sympathize with those who disparage GURPS because we hope to build bridges and understanding. We start fan Wikis that languish, collaborative projects that die in the creative womb, and generally carry on like a bowl of flakes surrounded by Fruit Loops in warm milk. There are people on the forums in the GURPS forum who don't like GURPS. Bah! We certainly don't need controversy, but it would be nice to see fans pitching ideas that help overcome the bias we (maybe subconsciously) see undermining the player base of GURPS. We don't need to disparage GURPS detractors. But we could revitalize a focus to inject solutions and ideas into those conversations to impress upon potential players what GURPS can do. There are piles of threads in the GURPS forum with no one is pitching GURPS system solutions or ideas. Are we missing an opportunity to Bring the GURPS?

Actually, we do need people who are willing to complain about GURPS. Without complaints, there wouldn't be any improvement. If these forums turn into a love-fest where any disparaging remark starts a flame-war, then count me out.

What I like about GURPS: Advantages, Disadvantages, and Skills

When I browse through them, I can see characters taking shape before my eyes. The large number of them let me create a great variety of characters without the same old, same old you get with class-based systems.

What I dislike about GURPS: Combat and Magic

The combat system in GURPS is simulation, not role-playing. The 3e rules had three combat systems: GURPS Lite, Basic Combat, and Advance Combat; plus many, many options. GURPS 4e has two: GURPS Lite and Basic Set; plus many, many options.

The magic in GURPS is all or nothing. Either you get all the magic and spells or none. And, since it is so similar to D&D's mumble, wave, pow system, I find myself avoiding it. It is difficult to pick and choose from its elements and enforce those decisions on the players.

How to improve combat: There are two types of fights in RPGs: mook and boss. A mook fight does two things: use up consumable resources and allows PCs to show off their moves. PCs don't die in mook fights unless they do something outrageously stupid. Boss fights are the serious ones. There is no holding back in them. Both sides are out for the kill.

How to improve magic: Create a system that is built up from its part, rather than one that includes everything and then places restrictions on it.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by trechriron

. A new setting or adventure is not going to help.

On the contrary, if I had an equivalent to the Adventure Paths Paizo sells I could get a Gurps campaign into the next open slot of my most frequent gaming group.

That would give me the "review the book the night before" sort of prep that's the most I can usually handle these days and my group would be as happy to play Gurps as anything else.

The last Gurps game I did run was based on converting classic D&D material.

A detailed, extended open the book and go adventure would do more for Gurps (or any other game) than anything else in my opinion. It's certainly what I need.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by shawnhcorey

How to improve combat: There are two types of fights in RPGs: mook and boss. A mook fight does two things: use up consumable resources and allows PCs to show off their moves. PCs don't die in mook fights unless they do something outrageously stupid. Boss fights are the serious ones. There is no holding back in them. Both sides are out for the kill.

That is utterly incompatible with how I run role-playing games. In any fight, there is a chance of death through misadventure, or of other lasting harm. If the PC doesn't have a stake on the table, there's no drama, and there's no reason to run the fight at all.

This became utterly clear to me when I ran a campaign using the Amber Diceless rules. There is no element of chance in that system; your character has certain ranks in Strength, Warfare, and Endurance, and you send them up against a foe with certain other ranks, and the one who ranks higher wins. Oh, you can do strategy by trying to make it a contest in the thing you're better at (Corwin will try to use Warfare against Gerard, but Strength against Benedict), but if you're superior in all dimensions, you win. And I had situations where a PC was up against a bunch of common mortals. They were utterly boring. The game mechanics made absolutely clear that it was just "Okay, you beat orc #1," "Okay, you beat orc #2," "Okay, you beat orc #3," until we all go to sleep. Dice rolling can disguise this, but if the reality is that no dice roll will ever result in serious harm or impairment to the PC, it's ultimately just as undramatic.

The thing that makes mook combat dramatic is not the PC fighting a mook, but the PC fighting a whole bunch of mooks, who might overwhelm them by sheer mass of attacks. One attack roll won't get through, but if you have several of them per turn, eventually the PC will be unlucky, and then they die. So there's real tension over "will I kill them or break their nerve before my luck runs out?" As the ancient Greeks said, even Achilles cannot fight two.

I eventually figured out how to do this in Amber Diceless: By assigning a Strength rating to a group of ordinary men, so that they could make up for their inferiority in Warfare by forcing the foe to close and taking him down by sheer mass. But in GURPS-as-written, it's inherent in the system: You have a chance of not defending, and your foes have each a chance of a critical success. That effect is the last thing I'd want to get rid of.

Now, sparring, or sporting contests, are another matter. The stake there is not physical survival but honor. But if it's a real fight, PCs can die.

Bill Stoddard

[The Final Door]

As the guy who started THE OTHER GURPS, I would like to let it be known that it was not started in an effrot to rename GURPS. I was curious what all the "bad name" debators (myself a bit included) thought would be better. GURPS is a brand, it should not change. But idle curiousity is fun. IMHO. I think I even wrote this in the OP of the thread...?

Originally Posted by trechriron

GURPS has some misconceptions out there. I think the desire of these threads are rooted in these misconceptions and what people perceive is a problem "selling the game".

I just want more books. Sadly, that requires more profitability for SJG. And I want to speculate and examine the industry of RPGs.

A new name is not going to change anything.

Millions of PR specialists disagree. I partially(!) agree with you, though.

A new setting or adventure is not going to help.

I greatly disagree. Yrth is not very liked, even amongst GURPSers. And people like continued lines, i.e. more books for a setting. Adventures, maybe less, but books.

Only the fan base through playing and sharing the game are going to increase the market value of GURPS

SJG marketers will be sad to learn this...

GURPS as a name is perfect. It describes EXACTLY what the game is doing.

Nothing is perfect, and automobile describes that vehicle perfectly. I still say 'car'.

but it would be nice to see fans pitching ideas that help overcome the bias we (maybe subconsciously) see undermining the player base of GURPS.

You mean point out flaws and speculate on solutions? Because that's what I see people doing in the forum.

There are piles of threads in the GURPS forum with no one is pitching GURPS system solutions or ideas.

Rules questions? Because the focus is not clear to me here. Not being snarky, just... confused.

"I need Low Tech or Thaumatology to REALLY pull this off...". B.S.

I could game with rock-paper-scizzors and a napkin of notes. I don't need GURPS books, I just like to buy them = SJG profit.

But I make excuses.

I try to get people into my games. But I am not rebelling with it, just playing.

start focusing on WHY I like GURPS and then do something with it.

That and wanting it to grow are not contradictions.

So, what will you do to share the game?

A: Playing the game. B: Turning my GURPS 2.0 into a new game that will compliment and suggest GURPS for things it lacks (like a gazillion older books).

What do we need to do to BRING THE GURPS?!?! I am interested in this conversation.

Actions are for the real world. We just discuss actions in here, then see what we carry out. I say what we need is the proper material, and support of it. How to get that into existence is what occupies me. You seem to follow another path of thought, which I would love to hear; we talk here to hear people's suggestions, after all.

My intent was not to insult anyone, so I apologize if I did. I just needed to vent/share!

No worries. But I do not think there was much new in this, except the fairly cool BRING THE GURPS slogan :)

[sgtcallistan]

At the risk of sounding like I disagree with you; I feel there is no problem with GURPS (or indeed any game system) that does not fall before the idea of 'free your mind of preconceptions'.

All my own opinion, I must caution.

'GURPS is complicated / maths heavy / doesn't have scenarios / needs all the books.'

All nonsense.
All that is required is a GM and players willing to remember these rules:
-no rule that is not fun is needed.
-you do not need to stat everything.
-the toolkit does not need scenarios, and nor do you.
-you do not need rules for everything before you play.

If people want rules for the game world, tell them: '-remember Firefly / DnD / Indiana Jones / Conan / Star Wars / ? It's like that.

Suggestion:
Make notes during play: the game world becomes consistent depending upon player actions.

Hope this helps.

[knarf]

GURPS 4e is a damned complete game. I once ran a supers game with just the two corebooks and it was awesome. My current D&D game has me carrying 5 books and 2 issues of Dragon Magazine and we're only 5th level. Once we get up to higher levels and things get really wacky, I can easily see this increasing (oh, my aching back!).

[Johnny Angel]

Originally Posted by shawnhcorey

Actually, we do need people who are willing to complain about GURPS. Without complaints, there wouldn't be any improvement. If these forums turn into a love-fest where any disparaging remark starts a flame-war, then count me out.

What I like about GURPS: Advantages, Disadvantages, and Skills

When I browse through them, I can see characters taking shape before my eyes. The large number of them let me create a great variety of characters without the same old, same old you get with class-based systems.

What I dislike about GURPS: Combat and Magic

The combat system in GURPS is simulation, not role-playing. The 3e rules had three combat systems: GURPS Lite, Basic Combat, and Advance Combat; plus many, many options. GURPS 4e has two: GURPS Lite and Basic Set; plus many, many options.

The magic in GURPS is all or nothing. Either you get all the magic and spells or none. And, since it is so similar to D&D's mumble, wave, pow system, I find myself avoiding it. It is difficult to pick and choose from its elements and enforce those decisions on the players.

How to improve combat: There are two types of fights in RPGs: mook and boss. A mook fight does two things: use up consumable resources and allows PCs to show off their moves. PCs don't die in mook fights unless they do something outrageously stupid. Boss fights are the serious ones. There is no holding back in them. Both sides are out for the kill.

How to improve magic: Create a system that is built up from its part, rather than one that includes everything and then places restrictions on it.

I agree that some amount of complaining is helpful, and what you describe is often what happens over on the WoTC boards. I feel that there are obviously a few glaring problems with how D&D 4E is built -two examples are that the skill challenge math doesn't work well, and the system sometimes has a rough time handling combat in three dimensions, but if you were to mention such a thing over there, you're often told that the problems don't exist and that you're just trying to be a 'h4ter.' I think one thing to remember is that complaining without trying to help offer a solution is what causes problems though; if you don't like something, I think you should make an effort to offer an alternative or at least say that you think something is wrong, but you're not sure how to fix it. Anyway... I agree with the beginning of your post.

However, I disagree with other parts of your post. I don't think you are wrong; I simply disagree; in particular, I don't see anything wrong with GURPS combat. I love that there can be a little more realism in GURPS combat if I want there to be.

I still feel that there are three (at least three) levels of combat in GURPS. You have Lite (as mentioned), but I would also say that you have Characters which gives you the basics, yet more than Lite; you also have Campaigns which greatly expands upon the information given in Characters, and offers a multitude of options for both realistic play and cinematic play. I think this set up is fantastic because I can have combat with as much (or as little) detail as I want and still have options to tweek that choice into the type of game (realistic or cinematic) that I want to play. I highly enjoy GURPS combat, and I don't feel that the rules get in the way. Most of the time, the rules match what seems to make sense, and -to me- that makes it easier instead of harder.

To me, it makes sense that I would need to grab an opponent's arm to apply an arm lock; it also makes sense that being grappled would impare my ability to fight to some extent. To me, it doesn't make sense that a 'Grab' has no effect on me other than to apply the 'Immobilized' condition; I can still fire a bow, swing a broadsword, and cast spells perfectly fine. I respect your right to find fault with this area of the GURPS system, and there's nothing wrong with you're opinion; I'm simply stating for the record that I'm on the complete opposite end of the spectrum. I highly enjoy both GURPS and GURPS combat.


@ SGT Call

I agree; a lot of good advice there.


@ Trech

I await the 'next big thing' not because I'm not satisfied with the GURPS products I have, but for the opposite reason. I enjoy the GURPS products that I have so much, that I can hardly wait to get my hands on more. In particular, I'm anxious for Low Tech. I actually went out and bough the 3e version of the book because I couldn't stand the wait anymore. I still plan to buy the new version of the book, but buying the 3e version made me realize that a lot of the old material is still great material. Fantasy is another example of a great product.

Even if I didn't play GURPS at all I could still use the information to help me in other games. Fantasy is a great resource even for someone who doesn't game at all; I'd go so far as to say that someone writing a fantasy novel could benefit from reading GURPS Fantasy. My only regret is that I haven't had enough free time to read all of it yet.

[trechriron]

Thanks for the replies. I understand the desire for new books BELIEVE ME. :-D

I just think more focus on what we have - would be helpful. I am not suggesting to eliminate the desire for new books. That would be... wrong. :-D

It seems that people want ready to run adventures, that link into a campaign. Perhaps with some pre-gens tossed in for good measure. Perhaps even making that first one "convention demo friendly". Also it seems taking the wisdom from the forum gurus relating to adventure design and "at the table" encounter balance could be helpful in those adventures.

Perhaps this could be my first contribution to "Bring the GURPS"?

Mostly, I intend to keep bringing GURPS to our local Vegas Game Day and eventually forming a group to run a regular campaign. My web site has already been updated and I plan on adding a GURPS section to it very soon.

shawnhcorey - your post is a good example of how I view people being more vague than helpful. I personally will probably never use every option in combat (I say this of course until I meet someone who wants Martial Arts mayhem and loves GURPS MA... :-D) so I feel ya BUT with all the options in fandom and GURPS books what might you do to tweak GURPS at your table?

See, here's the thing. There is probably someone out there that feels exactly like you do. If you had an idea that inspired them that's two happy GURPS players. It would be neat to know how you might address your issues. There is a lot to GURPS and the toolkit nature lends to tinkering IMHO. What are your ideas?

[capnq]

Originally Posted by shawnhcorey

The 3e rules had three combat systems: GURPS Lite, Basic Combat, and Advance Combat; plus many, many options. GURPS 4e has two: GURPS Lite and Basic Set; plus many, many options.

The only change in combat between 3e and 4e is that "Basic Combat" was renamed "Combat" and Advanced Combat was renamed "Tactical Combat".

The magic in GURPS is all or nothing. Either you get all the magic and spells or none. [...] It is difficult to pick and choose from its elements and enforce those decisions on the players.

I'm baffled by the first two sentences. You get as many spells as you pay character points for; how is that "all or nothing"?

"Difficult" to pick and choose and enforce are not system problems. The first two are questions of how much prep time the GM and players are willing to invest; the third is entirely dependent on the group's social dynamics. No rules set is going to solve the problem of a GM who can't tell a player, "No. that's not allowed in my campaign."