Help bury my problems with GURPS?

[talonthehand]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

3e Knacks were a way to put a CP cost on a spell straight out of the skill-based magic system, to let you use it as a Johnny One-Spell without Magery or any prereqs. The CP cost was based on the enchantment cost as a recall, with a factor, so you 'd look up Flight and find out that it costs you 20 CP. Voila, a character that can fly. It was sort of the reverse of what you were asking for -- not building spells out of advantages and tweaking them, but buying the existing spells as-is. There are certain worlds or genres that this system was intended to fit. It always reminded me of Orson Scott Card's "Alvin Maker" world.

That said, if he does want that, there's fixed magic in Fantasy, and Shortcut to Power in Magical Styles (or Charms from DF 3, which is essentially the same thing as shortcuts I believe).

[panton41]

Originally Posted by Nymdok

#4
The value of a dollar in GURPS is not something you should obsess about any more than the value of a character point. The dollar in GURPS terms is an arbitrary unit of currency. Don't expect items to match real world values simply because no one can predict what will happen in the real world. (i.e. 100$ in 1986 when GURPS was first put out is now worth $200 in today's money. That's a change of 100% so far. The RAW difference in TL 8-1980 and 9-2025 is only 50%)

Personally, I prefer that GURPS uses a currency that's at least loosely based on a real-world value. It makes understanding the value easier since its roughly comparable to the current US Dollar and RAW says that the GURPS dollar is for metagaming accounting only, and that one GURPS dollar might be a Fnordian copper penny in a TL 3 game, or a dime in a 1930s pulp action game, etc.

Of course one GURPS dollar supposed is equal to the cost of a loaf of bread, and that's hard to find at my supermarket unless its on sale, normally it's $1.20 even for the cheapest store brand. (Which I'll admit, the store brand where I go tends to be better than most name brands, which is a big money saver these days.)

[Nymdok]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

Personally, I prefer that GURPS uses a currency that's at least loosely based on a real-world value. It makes understanding the value easier since its roughly comparable to the current US Dollar ....

As it stands, it IS loosely based on the US Dollar. The operative and emphasized word there is LOOSELY.

Even your bread example its off by a large % compared to the real world and Im not sure where this comes from or how useful a metric it is.

Im sure of this though, the economy works as written as long as its not put in weird situations. (i.e. Alchemists turn lead to gold en masse, Alien replicator tech is sold at walmart).

Ive joked a few times about GURPS: Storefront being a nice book on how to world build an economy. ITs threads like this that make me think it should actually be written.

Nymdok

[blacksmith]

Originally Posted by Venatius

#4: "Realistic" budgeting

Most items in GURPS seem to be based more or less on their real-world value. Okay, vehicles seem to be overpriced even for brand new never-driven-off-the-lot toys, but I digress. The problem is the lack of allotment for "balanced" as opposed to "realistic" item value. Let's say you're hypothetically running a classic fantasy game. Items in such a setting are by and large priced based on their actual mechanical value, using generally coherent benchmarks. But there's no allotment for that here. You COULD figure out a point-value-to-$ exchange rate, but for existing items, that would require painstakingly reverse-engineering them into advantages/limitations/modifiers, and purely guessing/handwaving on the variables that aren't allotted in these. Wouldn't it have been better to use "balanced" prices by default and just tack on the "realistic" ones in addition? This presents another pain for custom item design, as adding something with no real-world counterpart to the catalog requires a complete shot in the dark on pricing. At least with pricing based on point value, you'd have something to work from.

You have pesents owning lots of jewerly in your fantasy games? It has no practical use so it should be in their price range.

[Kage2020]

I can empathise with some of these problems, though to be honest most of them come down to my own love-hate relationship with GURPS: I love the game/approach but hate the fact that I don't get to spend the time reading through everything. On the bright side, the bods here seem to have an infinite amount of patience so all is well on the Western Front. For me, anyway. When I'm not to embarrassed to post... ;)

Originally Posted by Venatius

#1: A universal RPG with a non-universal magic system?

On my own behalf, I tend to categorise the out-of-the-box GURPS magic system as generic, rather than universal. With a bit of minor tweaking, either following the rules or just making conscious decisions about what you would prefer for a given setting, you can turn the generic system into a magic system for much generic fantasy.

Thus, as wrong as I might be, I view conflating "generic" with "universal" to be a conceptual mistake.

On the other hand, the flexibility of the magic system is enhanced in Thaumatology and a number of alternatives offered, as previously offered. The various types of syntactic magic tend more towards the universal than generic, though each comes with its own flavour.

And, of course, as numerous people have already mentioned, the Powers approach of using advantages/limitations/enhancements to build a power pretty much reflects the "universal" approach. (And one of the reasons that I consider Powers to be the third core book along with Characters and Campaigns.)

The only problem with Powers is that it can take a whole lot of time tweaking if you're not intimately familiar with the approach. (For example, I couldn't quite get Powers to work with the flavour of magic/psykers in the Warhammer 40,000 universe as I saw it or them, thus ended up using a merging of Powers and Threshold-based magic. As it stands, though, some of those assumptions are flawed--I can begin to achieve some of the effects, but my knowledge falls short with regards to some of the other problems that I had.)

Originally Posted by Venatius

#2: Lack of vehicle design benchmarks

Others have mentioned VDS as something that you might be waiting for. I'm also going to add in (and apologies if already mentioned) the Vehicles supplements--as described, these may provide the examples that you need so that you can subsequently custom-tweak them to give the "character" that you need.

On the other hand, there's no reason that you cannot just create the armour as a character (I'm thinking of the ISWAT robot in the back of the book). Indeed, I've been suggesting that some chappies who are playing around with Dark Heresy do something similar for the armour of the "Space Marines" to give them the same unique flavour as FFG's Rogue Trader attempts to do with starships (without going to video-gamey, of course).

Originally Posted by Venatius

but in GURPS, vehicles have traits characters can't normally acquire. Unusual body locations, range, combustibility/fragility/explod...ability(?), handling (a big one, there), etc. all have no way to be measured or priced that I can detect...

Well, they can be, AFAIK. I haven't attempted it myself, but one imagines that judicious name changing for skill, dexterity, etc., coupled with enhancement/limitations could do this.

Not that I would want to do that myself, so I'll just wait until VDS comes out and sign in contentment when it does. Until then, if I want to kludge it I'll either use Vehicles 3e or try to work something up in Spaceships, which while not ideal is a good enough stop gap measure for me.

Originally Posted by Venatius

The largest problem here, vehicles, sounds like it may be solved when the disturbingly omitted Vehicle Design System book comes out, but all the talk I hear about it seems to focus more on "realistic" vehicle creation rather than setting budgets and values, which worries me a bit.

Well, to be fair, no more "disturbingly omitted" than a void in any other system. Unfortunately, the only game system that I've purchased in recent history is Dark Heresy, and suffice to say that I felt that there were quite a few voids in that system (including no real vehicles to speak of, let alone description of the setting--though it does well with the themes of the setting). :D

With that said, I also don't have a problem with "realistic design" that can be contextually tweaked depending on the setting.

Originally Posted by Venatius

The problem is the lack of allotment for "balanced" as opposed to "realistic" item value. Let's say you're hypothetically running a classic fantasy game.

I guess it comes down to preferences here, since I tend to have a problem with "balanced" equipment lists. Typical fantasy settings, in my games, will rapidly have their price lists thrown out for a medieval price list.

I'm finding it difficult to get to grips with why someone would want a "cost determined by usefulness" economic model, but--hey!--each to their own. I would worry about food--which seems pretty darned useful all things said and done--becoming overpriced. Or water for that matter. And, of course, all that changing in a different world.

At the same time, I don't see why "custom device design" is impeded by the "realistic" list, though certainly why you wouldn't want to use Powers to develop an advantage-based can opener or tinder box. I guess I'm just finding it difficult to think of an example that might be obvious to you but would otherwise present some substantial difficulties. If, for example, you were talking about magical items then you could judge this from the value of magical artifacts. Made from Powers? Base the cost on the Cash for Points for the appropriate TL. If it's priceless, just assign it a ridiculously high cash cost.

Again, I'm probably really missing something here, so my bad.

Kage

[Captain-Captain]

From the publication of GURPS Fantasy 1st edition, where the Standard Magic system was introduced, you have had an alternate system: Alchemy. Change the brew times and maybe the material component costs and you have an alternate spell casting system.

When Fantasy was split into Magic and Fantasy 2nd you got a verb/noun system (used twice) and alternates like College Casting. Supers added a way to make 'magical powers' utterly independent of the pujblished magic system. Celtic Myths showed how to revamp the existing system around trees while Voodoo tossed it out and started anew.

[walkir]

Originally Posted by Venatius

#2: Lack of vehicle design benchmarks

For the most part, GURPS' approach to items is fairly realistic. That's fine and well. If you want to put in a new vehicle, look up its stats and copy 'em in. Want a setting to feature an unusual weapon? Just give it some stats and an appropriate price tag. No big deal. The big problem comes from unique or custom-made gear. Let's suppose, for example, you're running a fanciful mecha game a'la Gundam, in which each vehicle is as unique a 'character' as its pilot. There are no real world stats to borrow. There is no benchmark for cost or value. There is no way to do anything more than loosely eyeball them for comparable power and capabilities. Most games handle designing objects' traits little differently than that of characters, it seems. You can just buy up their HP, damage, etc., usually getting a discount of some sort for it being in an object. And GURPS kind of approaches that. But in this case, you aren't just creating a catalog of pre-designed hardware for characters to go out and buy or be assigned. In such a game, each one of these vehicles, be they spaceships, mecha, or whatever else, are unique creations. Half the fun is in the player getting to design them in loving detail (to whatever realism/detail level the game type demands).

Emphasis mine.

If you like a detailed design system, spaceships may be a bit superficial. It's designed for ease of use, building a spaceship from 20 blocks á 5% of its mass. It's versatile and useful, but if you care about details, you'll need VDS. Which won't come out before 2011.

[Venatius]

I know I have some replies (a surprising number for such a short period of time!), and forgive me for ignoring them for JUST a moment, but I just remembered my other main peeve. Editting that into the #3 spot on the list.

EDIT: Okay, I'm caught up now. Anyway, I'm glad to see these responses are largely consistent! I was kind of prepared to anticipate a lot of diverse "pulled out of extraneous orifices" material potentially, but it seems a lot of these issues have fairly concrete 'right' answers. Anyway. Going point by point and addressing this thread as a whole,

#1, magic. Some useful info there concerning the Thaumatology "magic as powers" thing. I'll definitely be checking that out. The problem of more specific systems that don't already have pre-written systems in a GURPS supplement still seems to remain, though. There are as many magic systems as there are possible magical settings, and any setup with a finite number thereof is insufficient. I'm hoping the "magic as powers" bit will help resolve the issue of spells without any analogs in advantages, though. While turning an advantage into magic is easy, the reverse doesn't yet appear to be true. But here's hopin'! In my browsing of thaumatology so far, though,

#2, vehicles. My statement the VDS was "omitted" was more that it seems like such an essential concept it needed to be one of the earliest things out, not the latest. I hope it tackles the issue. Hearing spaceships has something I can hobble through on for now gives me hope, though. I'm not demanding a simulation down to the quantum level, just a way of putting price tags on things. I just hope it's applicable to more than JUST spaceships in at least kind of a pidgin capacity. I know one supplement in the series features mecha, but from what I've glimpsed it looks like it just provides examples rather than giving any kind of design method or rules.

#4 as it's now listed, no signature. You know, my example probably does misapply this. I think we can consider it resolved without fuss.

#5 as it's now listed, budgetting. My main concern here is for putting price tags on things not based on any kind of 'marketable' value. If your world is simulating (or gently satirizing) a traditional fantasy RPG, things like "+1 weapons" will generally have some kind of consistent pricing. What I overlooked at the time, though, is that Magic covers this, if a little limpwristedly, with its section on magical economies. Still, it gives you somewhere to look. The overall point that the financial "point" system isn't necessarily meant to be balanced like character points are seems to be a fundamentally sound argument, so I'm probably misapplying it. This isn't really something that worried me a whole lot in the first place, so even a partial resolution mostly cuts the mustard here.

Anyway, thanks very much for the input! This is some serious headway in resolving my more serious concerns. Thaumatology and Spaceships are my next scheduled stops. Thank goodness for the advent of PDF publishing!

Small update: Amusingly, the magic issue seems reversed. Magic as powers seems to provide a solution to the finite systems dilemma while leaving the spells without advantages one unresolved. Kind of the opposite of what I was anticipating, but it's still nice to see that aspect cleared up a bit. This looks like a very good way to custom-tailor new systems with some kind of groundwork. It inclines me to ask; does Thaumatology cover any "bare-bones" system of no-strings-attached type magic? Thinking on it, it seems like such a thing might be workable for turning spells into natural abilities. You'd have to kind of judiciously avert your eyes from the character having the Magery advantage (probably?), but if it allows for spells that work like effortless natural abilities, it seems like it'd simulate that effect pretty well. I haven't yet seen such a thing (probably because it balances as gracefully as a hippo on pointe), but "Threshold-Limited" magic seems to approach it.

[Mathulhu]

Originally Posted by Venatius

It inclines me to ask; does Thaumatology cover any "bare-bones" system of no-strings-attached type magic? Thinking on it, it seems like such a thing might be workable for turning spells into natural abilities.

Why wouldn't that be an advantages with the "requires skill roll" limitation and "magic" source limitation?

3#

Deceptive attacks allow a highly skilled attacker circumvent active defences.
Telegraph attacks allow a low skilled attack make the victim use active defence.

PS I have always played and run using the optional rule that reduces successive dodges at a rate of -1 per dodge.

[Vaevictis Asmadi]

Originally Posted by Mathulhu

Why wouldn't that be an advantages with the "requires skill roll" limitation and "magic" source limitation?

If these spell-to-advantage abilities are meant for fantasy race templates, couldn't you give them magery and innate spell skills? And if you don't want to mess with the prerequisite tree, I think there is the version of magic in which the Thaumatology skill is the only pre-req: if you put Magery and racial skill: Thaumatology on the racial template, then you could include the spells you want as racial skills. Then you just have the mana issue to deal with ...