I've gradually become disillusioned with the class-and-level model of gaming. I have really thought over the idea of abandoning it for quite some time, but I don't really want to write a system from scratch. Curious about other options, I asked some people (http://www.forumopolis.com/showthread.php?t=33911) about other game mechanic systems.
One of the more interesting responses I got was The Window. (http://www.mimgames.com/window/) I've spent the last half hour reading through the system in its entirety (yes, it's that concise), and I'm pretty intrigued by its freeform nature.
Two things:
1. Give it a readover, and let me know your impressions. Personally, I'd love to try it out sometime.
2. Talk about a few other alternative systems you have experience with. Personally, I'm looking for something that goes well with the Jade Stage, but that doesn't mean we have to limit this discussion along those lines. Far better to have a good sense of what's out there, what's available.
Reading over window, I have mixed reactions. Part of the problem with the system is a concrete reward system - there is no concrete way to advance your character. While that is not nessicarily a bad thing, it still does limit the enjoyment for some people. The other problem is internal balance - there is no reason someone can't discribe a character in such a way to have d6's for most of their abilities, or even more realistically d8 (for those of you who are reading this but haven't read windows yet, lower rolls are better, and a d6 means you will never fail in a skill check. Average abilities are d12, meaning you have a 50% chance of succeeding.) However, the system does offer amazing flexibility and forces the actors (Window's term for players) to think creatively. Another flaw I see with it is the realities of handling a fantasy environment: if you are playing a magic wielding swordsman, who is a world renowned swordsman (d6) and a average ability mage (d12) and you wanted to strike your foe with a blade created and guided by your magic, would you roll a d6, a d12, or would you roll a d12 twice to deterimine if you were able to create and use the blade, and then the d6 on the opposed roll to see if you hit, or what? I'm going to give the system a more throughough look over, but my initial conclusion is that the system is excellent for a troupe of experienced actors with a storyteller who is quick on his feet mentally. I'd really have to try it out before I judge it any futher.
As for other systems, I've played a lot. I really like the World of Darkness system by White Wolf, which offers a lot of flexibility and openess and does encourage storytelling more than number crunching, but it would require making an entirely new system for each world, which is more effort and time than most people have. The Exalted system, again by White Wolf, has similar benifits and flaws. Mutants and Masterminds is a wonderful, flexible, and mostly OGC system that only uses a single d20. The flaw in the system is that people become rediculously powerful rediculously quickly, and it is structured mainly for a superhero game: other games don't work nearly as well with it. (exclusing fantasy and sci-fi with superhero-like elements.)
And I just found the optinals section of the system. Now I have even less objections to Windows. :)
Often the choice of gaming system, comes down to the type of game one actually wants to play. Certain systems work better for certain styles. I myself loved Ars Magica (1st edition; I am not familiar with any of the editions that have come since) for any type of high magic fantasy game, while Castle Falkenstien (not the gurps version), for victorian age/steam punk), WoD works fantastic for any modern setting (even those not based in horror), and the old school CoC (the percentile based one; not d20 for the love of all that is unholy), is marvelous for almost anything with a dark sinister feel.
I have come to realize over the years, that learning and teaching new gaming systems requires the full support of your players, and if they are not particularly interested in making the time investment, its not worth bothering. I have also found that it is crucial for the system one is implimenting, for the players to have full access to it, which often makes published settings (which everyone can buy a copy of) far easier to teach than anything one can homebrew (no matter how good it might be). For an experienced player, it is so much easier to be able to read the material at their own pace, and figure out the system on their own (with guidance as needed), than it is for you to teach them without their own reference.
Like Alex said, WoD is great, but it requires support material, because the core rules do not actually tackle anything supernatural, and Exalted (while also quite good from a rules perspective) is so completely intertwined with the setting, that the rules make no sense what-so-ever if you try to divorce them from the pre-published campaign setting.
On the plus side you can usually find Ars Magica (which I think you might fall in love with Crayon), on ebay for almost nothing. It was written by the same guy who eventually wrote Mage the Ascention, and Vampire the Masquerade (but it predates White Wolf). It won numerous Origins Awards back when it came out, including game of the year, and functions much like 1st ed Mage the Ascention, without being tied to the metaplot of the old world of darkness.
Something to consider at least.
-Peace Out-
I like the Toon system. d6's and d66's only. No levels or classes. You can make anything almost. This opens up the abillity to powergame, but since it'sa comedy setting, no one does. And there is no experience, but you can gain points to add to your skills or to gain new Schticks (special abbilities) by good roleplaying, completing important adventure bits, and being funny (for this last bit, the rule was that if you can make the Annimator [DM] or some players laugh significantly through something you do, you get an equivalent amount of new skill points).
Also, i love the fact that is you want to do something that is physically impossible, you have to fail a Smarts check first (i.e. not realise you're running over a canyon).
Quote from: DementiaReading over window, I have mixed reactions. Part of the problem with the system is a concrete reward system - there is no concrete way to advance your character. While that is not nessicarily a bad thing, it still does limit the enjoyment for some people.
The other problem is internal balance - there is no reason someone can't discribe a character in such a way to have d6's for most of their abilities, or even more realistically d8 (for those of you who are reading this but haven't read windows yet, lower rolls are better, and a d6 means you will never fail in a skill check. Average abilities are d12, meaning you have a 50% chance of succeeding.)[/quote]However, the system does offer amazing flexibility and forces the actors (Window's term for players) to think creatively.[/quote]Another flaw I see with it is the realities of handling a fantasy environment: if you are playing a magic wielding swordsman, who is a world renowned swordsman (d6) and a average ability mage (d12) and you wanted to strike your foe with a blade created and guided by your magic, would you roll a d6, a d12, or would you roll a d12 twice to deterimine if you were able to create and use the blade, and then the d6 on the opposed roll to see if you hit, or what?[/quote]I'm going to give the system a more throughough look over, but my initial conclusion is that the system is excellent for a troupe of experienced actors with a storyteller who is quick on his feet mentally. I'd really have to try it out before I judge it any futher.[/quote]I'm basically really intrigued, and I want to try it out, for sure.
While the Window is a noble effort, I'd have to say I'm not too sure about its merits. The whole idea of replacing numbers with adjectives that just happen to have numbers attached to them is rather asinine. Also, I don't measure paperwork by how much information I must record, but by how many times I must reference a character sheet during play, and since you have to check your competence in various skills and adjust your health as you take damage, the Window is about par for the course when it comes to referencing paperwork.
The Window, like most free-form RPGs, does allow for more description and less reliance upon rules-lawyering to resolve actions. But using fewer rolls during play does not necessarily free one from any of the inherent drawbacks of RPG rules in general. So long as results are determined by random rolls, the system is necessarily shackled by the laws of probability. If I'm going to play a game where probability influences the course of the story, you'd better believe I want a rules set where the probabilities have been rigorously analyzed and properly nuanced.
Too many free-form RPGs assume that mechanics with simplified probabilities somehow equal satisfactory action resolution, but I usually find the opposite to be true. A system of action resolution by random number generation only works well when you carefully consider how the numbers will impact your story, thus avoiding unanticipated pitfalls. Anything less is like baking a cake with random ingredients because taking the time to read the recipe takes time away from the actual experience of cooking; yes, you get more actual cooking done, but you're much more likely to find that something you do leads to an unexpected and unfavorable result.
When it comes to free-form roleplaying, I've always been of the opinion that one should just do some actual free-form roleplaying, not kinda-sorta free-form roleplaying with kinda-sorta probabilitic rules. If you want rules, go all out and define things clearly. If you don't want rules, go all out and drop rules altogether. When I'm playing free-form and have a character who's good with a sword and okay with magic, I can generally figure out how often he should succeed when using either without needing to assign dice to anything. Based on other knowledge about the character, I also have a feel for how often he'll be injured in combat, and I can figure out when, during the course of the narrative, it would make sense that he sustains injury. The only real free-form RPG is improvisational acting/storytelling; anything else is just a wimpy rules set that fails to live up to its full potential.
QuoteThe whole idea of replacing numbers with adjectives that just happen to have numbers attached to them is rather asinine.
I'm not sure asinine is the word I'd use. I mean, no, they didn't eliminate numbers. But it is a step toward ensuring that the numbers are derived from the characters, and not the other way around.
As for the rest, I'll chalk it up to a difference in playstyles. Obviously, the Window (and systems like it) are not for everyone. Personally, I am comfortable including probablity without placing probability under the microscope, but I fully except that not everyone agrees with me there. I don't know that unexpected results equate to unsatisfactory results, or that more complex probability systems are more effective. Maybe they are. But I know d20 isn't quite what I'm looking for all the time, and I'm willing to give other options a try.
I'll take a look at this in a little, but just a quick question.
Have you ever looked at FUDGE? I've not played it, but it is fairly straightforward and over the years I've heard from a number of enthusiasts.
Quote from: Luminous Crayon...they didn't eliminate numbers. But it is a step toward ensuring that the numbers are derived from the characters, and not the other way around.
I don't know that unexpected results equate to unsatisfactory results, or that more complex probability systems are more effective.[/quote]I know d20 isn't quite what I'm looking for all the time, and I'm willing to give other options a try.[/quote]
I do agree with that sentiment.
I'm just iffy about the Window; it hasn't convinced me that it has any features that make it more useful than X (where X is any other free-form RPG). To impress me, a free-form RPG needs to do something really clever, because I'm comparing its rules to no rules at all. Given a mature gaming group, no rules almost always win over scant rules.
These days, I use four systems:
D20, although only when DMing Iron Heroes, as I am personally not a fan of the system. In my mind, the very idea of "levelling up" seems almost counter-intuitive to the idea of experience.
GURPS; I've only just started using it, and it can require a lot of bookwork, but its realism is unparalleled, and for the gritty, harsh games I often run it's an appropriate vehicle.
NOBILIS, which really only works for the specific setting it is presented with, but is also diceless without being ruleless. Besides, the setting is frickin' shweet!
And straight-up totally freeform diceless roleplaying, which may be necessary for Tammurand, as I doubt any ruleset will ever succeed in providing a framework for the insanity that the setting contains.
As (Xathan? Dementia? Aw,screw it) Xathan said, Mutants & Masterminds accomplishes this pretty well, and it's a relatively balanced system that allows for high-octane excitement and virtually any play style for fantasy and superheroic gaming-- it has its own limitations, but it's a solid system.
You can adjust the 'power level' of an individual game to fit your needs, whether you want low-powered realism or extremely high-powered (and I mean it-- you can do almost anything with enough of the character-creation points, including lift upwards of 50,000 tons, travel well beyond lightspeed, and much much more).
The combat system focuses on non-lethal combat, but it also features rules for lethal damage. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but it's something worth at least looking at.
Window is not particularly good at what it does. Shows its age.
Risus (http://www222.pair.com/sjohn/risus.htm), by S. John Ross, is like Window, but better. T works for genres other than pure comedy with minor tweaks.
FATE (http://faterpg.com/dl/FATE2fe.pdf), by the Evil Hat Productions, is a good, yet quite rules-light, game. Aspects are especially ingenius.
Anydie (http://www.hitori.org/RPG-Toolkit-Wiki/index.php?title=Anydie), by me, is another simple RPG.
As is Pair o' Dice (http://www.hitori.org/RPG-Toolkit-Wiki/index.php?title=Pair_o%27_Dice_%28system%29). By "Shimeran" from RPG.net, whose name I don't know.
I've played a lot of systems at least once.
Ones I'd go back to if I could find anyone to play with:
original World of Darkness. The new one's got pretty shiny books, but the old one has more books in my library and a better level of system memoorization on my part. I can honestly create a Vampire: the Masquerade character from memory without consulting books, until I need to actually check what level X in discipline Y does.
DC Heroes. It doesn't do any genre other than superheroes well, but superheroes it does really well. It's classless and skill-based. Power selection is so wide that it's not hard to adapt any character you're familiar with from comics into the system's terms, even non-DC ones (Spiderman has Cling and Precognition with certain limits for the Precognition, just to throw out a random example).
Pre-3e D&D. Okay, you either love it or hate it. I love it. Every unholy abomination from 3e is absent. While powergaming and min-maxing are possible, the insane character optimization that 3e's combination of feats, expected magic equipment per level, and open multiclassing encourage is gone.
I'm a little confused on something: Do you hate d20 because it uses a certain die type, or because you associate it with class-and-level systems? Mutants&Masterminds is d20 without classes and levels (it has something called Power Level, but that's just a way of determining relative ability between characters and is not an advancement scheme). Unfortunately this is the only system other than 3.5 D&D that I've played and so it's the only one I can recommend from experience.
In my opinion "story-centric" low-rules systems like Window miss an important point about collaborative story building and its story-centric nature: it's better not to define a character's capabilities too much until they actually come up. Having played very freeform games for quite a while now I can actually say that this is an important aspect of what happens: the situations that their original abilities could be used in never come up, but they have to respond to what does happen and often require some reworking of their capabilities. When said capabilities are predefined and unchangable you have lost any possibility of changing them to conform to the needs of the story. This is a limitation that I believe all games systems should be accutely aware of.
Another thing is that I actually like it when systems somehow define my character for me. I've started to find this whole "background your character out" mentality to be a little stifling: when I first meet a character in a story do I know anything about them? Probably not. Instead they unfold as the story progresses. I prefer to play my game characters that way because then I can fit them to the needs of the story rather than sitting around waiting for a situation to come up which I can tie my background to.
:blah:
I hate to be a one-note band... but for fantasy gaming there's no better system out there than 2d edition Rolemaster. As a DM, you have to do a LOT of work up front to make it worth it, because Rolemaster rules need to be customized. But once you've got it down it is one of the most realistic and balanced systems I've ever played, and it just flows.
It's a class and level system, but the difference between levels is downplayed, and the classes are "guidelines" only (except for spell using classes). It's purely skill-based (again with the exception of the magic system).
Rolemaster. There's no substitute.
:soap:
Quote from: ScMpI'm a little confused on something: Do you hate d20 because it uses a certain die type, or because you associate it with class-and-level systems?
To whom are you addressing this question?
I've been studying some GURPS lately and am pretty intrigued by what I'm seeing. Any of you have a lot of experience with the system?
Quote from: Luminous CrayonQuote from: ScMpI'm a little confused on something: Do you hate d20 because it uses a certain die type, or because you associate it with class-and-level systems?
You.
Just to throw it out there, Unhallowed Metropolis is pretty neat, although probably also not what you're looking for.
It's somewhat setting-specific for a victorian alternative-history undead-plague setting (which is extremely cool). The rules can rather easily be modified to your general fantasy needs, which is what i've done for my current game, although the Callings (classes-but-not-quite) are rather setting specific (and optional, luckily). Me modifying them might just be because i don't have that many different rule sets, though...
Basically, i will recommend it to anyone but you :D
Ish - I haven't played GURPS, although I'm going to re-tool Panisadore to run in it. I *have* played what was essentially the alpha test version back in the early 80's - "The Fantasy Trip: In the Labyrinth" under the Metagaming imprint. When I started exploring GURPS around '02 I was surprised - it seemed so familiar. I had forgotten that Steve Jackson wrote TFT:ItL. ZTHe former needed a lot of modification (way too simplified) and most of what I had done GURPS also did - some in the same manner, some problems clearly addressed but in a different fashion. As classless, skill based systems go I think it's unparalleled, but definitely requires careful winnowing of options as you define your game/setting specifics. (It looks like 4e has cleaned up some potential broken combos.) If nothing else, it can simply offer an overwhelming amount of options which don't always mesh well. (Think of D20 Modern elements someone might want to incorporate into a DnD game.) I'm sufficiently familiar with the system basis (having alpha-tested the hell out of it) and know many whose opinions I trust that swear by it, so I'm comfortable recommending it prior to GMing the current system. (BTW - Amazon prices on this are unbeatable; I just ordered the current Basic Set pair for $48 and change w/the free shipping as opposed to $75 list for both.) I've read a lot of statements that it's overly krunchy; I don't think so much since all the Krunchberries conform to the basic pattern - there's just a huge variety of krunchberries to choose from. Once understand the basic system it's not so bad, you're not having to incorporate a lot of complex subsystem rule sets, just a few tweaks to the basis if you add on a specific, expansive overlay. Even that I think has been improved in 4e.
I read over the window and I found it very interesting. I think I may try it out sooner or later
It does seem a bit non-concrete, but it is way simpler than d20 where they basically came up with a rule for everything ever.
[blockquote=S&M]Ish - I haven't played GURPS, although I'm going to re-tool Panisadore to run in it. I *have* played what was essentially the alpha test version back in the early 80's - "The Fantasy Trip: In the Labyrinth" under the Metagaming imprint. When I started exploring GURPS around '02 I was surprised - it seemed so familiar. I had forgotten that Steve Jackson wrote TFT:[/blockquote]
Melee and Wizard were the rule books, if I remember, under the line of 'Microquest' games. I also played them early on, with 4th edition Tunnells and Trolls.
I had already gone skill based by the time GURPS was released, and I like a number of the things Jackson has done. He and I both have similar ideas, but his skills allow the attributes of the character to produce and untrained level, whereas I uses stats to mitigate the speed in which a character learns.
And that was my biggest complaint, in that in his attempt to get totally away from class-based, he does not adress well (in my mind) the dificulty in finding a skill or a teacher of a skill, or what skills are needed to learn other skills. He does rate the skills in order of difficulty, but this is a pretty simple mechanism.
I also am not a fan of the freeform advancement technique, and I like to see characters to only gain experience in skills they use.
I love GURPS for the freedom it gives you in creating and adapting settings and games. Unlike D&D and most others, this system sort of allows GM's to breaks Vreeks 2nd commandment, 'The System follows the Game, the system should never overrule the setting', due to the tremndous flexibility.
Quote from: IshmaylAny of you have a lot of experience with the system?
Me!
What I like about GURPS is its tremendous openendedness and flexiblity. What I dislike about GURPS is its tremendous openendedness and flexibility.
While I was learning the system, I was trying to convert some of my favorite characters from past adventures into GURPS characters... I had to post several times on the GURPS forum and get advice as to what combination of powers and such would best reflect their abilities. There was something sort of mathematical to it, and it felt like I was playing an intense munchkinesque game of minmaxing when all I was really trying to do was create a character with a certain combination of powers.
That's what's both interesting and maddening about GURPS. I must heartily agree with Vreegs 2nd commandment...
Talk about resurrecting a dead thread. I remember reading about the window when this thread came up, what two years ago now? I felt a resounding "eh" about it. Neat ideas, but so basic in execution it didn't do much for me.
As always, I recommend the Riddle of Steel. Also Shadowrun and the Burning Wheel are great. Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay has its merits (and its demerits; also, it's class, but not level based).
D6! D6! D6!
Weren't there kind of 'core' books released for different genres of D6 a couple years ago?
GURPS was kind of cool.
IS there such a thing as Riddle of Steel LITE (or free) version I could try out?
Quote from: IshmaylIS there such a thing as Riddle of Steel LITE (or free) version I could try out?
There were some quick start rules at some point, yeah, I think so. As to where...? I could look around a bit.
But admittedly the standard combat rules are pretty complex, at least until you get used to them, since they try to create a more realistic simulation of medieval martial arts (the only system ARMA sanctions as succeeding, btw).
@LV: They were - ITL was essentially the DMG for the system. He even put out a few Setting splats and 3 solo dungeons - these latter were in the mini booklet format (in little plastic boxed which Melee and Wizard were both released in minimal introductory forms under the product line you mention - with a pair of the tiniest d6 made at the time inside.) Metagaming "books" were magazine size glossy covers over newsprint for the most part - cheap ass games long before Cheap Ass Games.
[blockquote[LV]but his skills allow the attributes of the character to produce and untrained level, whereas I uses stats to mitigate the speed in which a character learns.
And that was my biggest complaint, in that in his attempt to get totally away from class-based, he does not address well (in my mind) the dificulty in finding a skill or a teacher of a skill, or what skills are needed to learn other skills. He does rate the skills in order of difficulty, but this is a pretty simple mechanism.
I also am not a fan of the freeform advancement technique, and I like to see characters to only gain experience in skills they use.[/blockquote]
While I like the levelless advancement (similar to Shadowrun's karma among others) I agree about the complete openness of "XP spending" - this was behind my question regarding Celtrician Guild School curricula the other night. I think the Universal aspect kind of rules out the system presenting such, but clearer "skill trees" along the lines of the magic flow charts 4e has incorporated could be implemented universally and would provide an excellent starting point for developing "who teaches what how well and to what depth" within a specific setting. Some things can be learned/improved w/out assistance, some not - those which can could still be learned faster/easier/better 90% of the time with such assistance. I'm going to have to work up something regarding progression, though I doubt I'll take it to the point of "everything only by school" - various alternative learning and training options should be present. The Khurorkh are predominantly more formal via Lodges, Shyz'n, etc., even though childhood/juvenile training is linked to family/clan the older members seeing to this are themselves part of some sort of Shyz'n, whether guild, grove/church/order, military unit, vessel or whatever. I definitely want to produce some distinctive "schools" in the world as in styles - whether fighting, artistic, healing, philosophical or what-have-you. Some things could only be learned from certain schools - esp. specific "secret" techniques. (Again, not only martial: craft/trade secrets, etc. as well.) I just want to leave a fairly large body open to learn with minimal restrictive mandatory affiliation, e.g., anyone can go to a Temple of Zelatrix and learn the basic carpentry to construct a sturdy bench for a very nominal donation/trade/volunteer service.
[blockquote[Sparkletwist]What I like about GURPS is its tremendous openendedness and flexiblity. What I dislike about GURPS is its tremendous openendedness and flexibility.
While I was learning the system, I was trying to convert some of my favorite characters from past adventures into GURPS characters... I had to post several times on the GURPS forum and get advice as to what combination of powers and such would best reflect their abilities. There was something sort of mathematical to it, and it felt like I was playing an intense munchkinesque game of minmaxing when all I was really trying to do was create a character with a certain combination of powers.
That's what's both interesting and maddening about GURPS. I must heartily agree with Vreegs 2nd commandment...[/blockquote]
Definitely on all counts. There's so much - and a lot of it done extremely well, that it suffers from "Lavishly Excellent Salad Bar Overload Syndrome" and it can be really hard to resist the temptation to try to add everything that looks really tasty even if some of the flavors don't quite mix well. Fortunately at present I only have a couple of NPCs to really convert - others are more conceptual and can simply be created. Converting a DnD character of higher levels to a GURPS character of proportional power/level/experience relative to their role in the old system can be extremely difficult if not impossible due to the combination of skills/feats/class abilities, etc.; it's often necessary to either drop some abilities or accept someone even more powerful in game scale. For key opponents in particular, either option can be very problematic and even more so if you need to transition PCs. There are some aspects of class abilities that I want to recreate within GURPS that I'm not not sure how I will approach exactly. I can work some into "training curricula" for certain professions - e.g., turning or some similar effect upon undead for professional priests (at least of certain gods, not necessarily all). Most I think can simply be left as skill/advantage options with the choice up to players rather then turning "professions" in the setting back into class-like straitjackets. Where there any particular examples you recall working particularly well/easily or difficult/broken?
Quote from: SilvercatMoonpawYou.
Go back and re-read the very first sentence in the entire thread, then, and it will answer your question.
Go back and re-read the very first sentence in the entire thread, then, and it will answer your question.[/quote]
Ah, well your thread title is "Systems other than d20" so I wasn't sure.
Like I said before the only thing I can plug from experience is Mutants&Masterminds. However reading a little about Jade Stage makes me think you want a system with less power focus, so I can't help you.
Mutants and Masterminds is a D20 system. The logo is on the cover.
I thought (going solely on hearsay, no experience with it at all) that Mutants and Masterminds, much like Deadlands, was originally its own system that was eventually ported to d20?
I've run GURPS 4E a few times, and I own most of the 4E books.
GURPS has a reputation for being "gritty", and it certainly can do that, but I found that it can do "cinematic" adventures in the style of the pulps equally well - in such cases, the PCs can be very competent, but they still shouldn't get too cocky like getting surrounded by hordes of mooks. They are powerful without being invulnerable, which is a balance I like.
For anyone planning to use GURPS for campaigns with a variety of supernatural powers of different origins, I recommend getting GURPS Powers. The Basic Set is a powerful tool for creating just the kind of campaign framework you want, and GURPS Powers shows you just how powerful it is. Your head will spin with ideas after reading it, and you will be easily able to come up with a setting with more than a dozen different types of supernatural powers which will feel completely distinct from each other - and yet still remain fairly balanced against each other.
And I can recommend GURPS genre books even if you are not interested in the rules. See my review of GURPS Space (http://www.enworld.org/forum/blog.php?b=66) for an example.
Quote from: Ninja D!Mutants and Masterminds is a D20 system. The logo is on the cover.
I couldn't find it on my copy of Mutants & Masterminds 2nd Edition.
Mutants & Masterminds is an
OGL system, but that's not the same as the "d20 system". Yes, it shares a lot of basic mechanics and expressions with the d20 system, but it is also radically different in a number of ways. It has no classes, and the
only impact the "power level" of a character has is limiting the maximum of his powers and stat bonuses, which is a drastic difference to the numbers level-based benefits of D&D and most of its other variants.
It's a fun game, and definitely worth a look.
Thanks for the input - I'm trying to sort out what I will need after the Basic Set in 4e - I still want a different feel between "arcane" and "divine" magic as well as psionics, etc. (DnD ki effects I also treat as a form of magic.) Does Powers integrate smoothly with Magic or is it better to use one or the other?
Quote from: Snargash MoonclawWhere there any particular examples you recall working particularly well/easily or difficult/broken?
I recall having difficulty making the "Leech" power work right, because they broke it down and modified it in GURPS Powers, and didn't add up to the same points cost as the aggregate power as outlined in the basic book... or something. It's been a while. I also remember having difficulty figuring out when exactly something should count as a "Malediction."
I did like all of the flexibility though, I was able to create some fairly interesting powers and the game mechanics to drive them were already all there and tested, as opposed to something I'd have to make up.
Quote from: Jürgen HubertGURPS Powers shows you just how powerful it is
And also adds to the confusion... ;)
GURPS Powers is entirely based on the "standard" advantages in the Basic Set - if you want to know how they work, the Psionics chapter in the Basic Set is a good example. The system in GURPS Magic is entirely different, though you could conceivably use both in the same campaign - the latter will tend to give mages more versatility while possibly sacrificing raw power. GURPS Thaumaturgy (which is available as PDF and will soon be available in print) gives a huge range of options and variants for the "standard" magic system, although I haven't looked at it too closely yet.
Quote from: Ninja D!Mutants and Masterminds is a D20 system. The logo is on the cover.
But it's not a class-and-level system, which is what Crayon mentioned in his first sentence.
@Jurgen: have you read/used any of the Power-ups or Dungeon Fantasy series materials?
No, I wanted to wait until they are released as POD products. Which recently happened, so I guess I should order them. But the Dungeon Fantasy series has been received very well...
Quote from: SilvercatMoonpawQuote from: Ninja D!Mutants and Masterminds is a D20 system. The logo is on the cover.
But it's not a class-and-level system, which is what Crayon mentioned in his first sentence.
Honestly, I've moved on from this thread's topic. If you notice, this thread was started in 2006. I've had plenty of time to find a system that works for me.
Now, by all means, continue the discussion if you like. I'm having fun reading the suggestions and the commentary. But the specific details of my original two-year-old request can probably be disregarded by now, I think. Statutes of limitations, style of thing.
There is no SoL on Thread Murder
Actually, some of what I've heard recently on GURPS (despite or because of the Real Men caveat) makes me want to check it out.
But since I'm not gaming right now, it's hard to justify the time or money.
I suppose I need to get a new group going. For that matter, I still want to try out 4e D&D.
It says:
"The Window assumes that the people who use it are intelligent and mature."
: D
I will edit my opinion once I finish reading.