GURPS is in dire need of proper hypertexted SRD with some convenient GCS integration - rules are too modular to navigate them via just pdfs. I do hope that it will finally happen in coming years with some talk of GURPS 5e coming out
I sometimes wish GURPS had an alternative action economy similar to Pathfinder 2e and I agree with organization of the books. I don’t think we need a 5th edition, just clean up and organize 4th edition.
Perhaps a complete rules reference book, index format. So we could look up "Shields" and have all the raw rules relating to them listed underneath as bullet points or alpha-numerically. Would be so much easier to get an idea of what to use and how you may want to modify each specific subject.
I gathered all the important GURPS combat rules for TL3 and reworded them into a far more concise, easily-referenced document. Considering how prolific you are in producing GURPS-related detail information, I’m surprised you haven’t already organized the rules better. If SJ Games wouldn’t let you post it on your websites, you could just use the book and page references, which would allow others to create their own document using your organization. Just a thought!
I actually was considering doing something like that, but since I remember where I can find everything, I thought that it's not worth the effort. But maybe someday I will make some consolidated pdf rules at least with only page references, that should be useful.
I bought enough combat cards for my players so that they had all of the info at hand (also for my idea of everyone declaring their intentions at the beginning of a round, placing down their maneuver card, then just cycling through. 1) to speed up play. 2) to help simulate 1 second turns better.
I think 3rd edition did a much better job at organization of all the rules than 4th did. Sure over time new books would come out and add in new rules, but then the Compendiums managed to compile all those rules, smooth them out where they conflicted and made an amazing system. When they rebuilt it all into the mainline Basic Set with the update to 4th edition, they took even more material from Pyramid magazines and other articles and a lot of discussion online. But somehow they lost the amazing layout style that third edition had.
@kolardgreene3096 I think I am the opposite, while the color changes for the chapters are kind of nice, the rest of the coloring I think distracts. The new Character creator is a good example of how not to organize information... good thing we have GCS.
On the subject of an SRD. If SJ games need more content to publish for GURPS, this would easily be it. It could contain addendums for all the reference books, but have the material contained in neat segments for each subject. I'd pay 3-4$ for a pdf of that type.
Trying to post my "Highly illegal comment that does not deserve to be read according to YT in chunks/replies to myself now) This might sound like a copout answer but, compared to D&D and Pathfinder, GURPS is almost impossible to frustrate me, that's how well I feel treated by it. "But did you not agree that statting out shapeshifting is a pain in the neck the other day" Yes, but ...the thing is. When it comes to GURPS, I see it as almost a language because it has so many building blocks. And not being able to use these building blocks properly to me, is like the fact that I am not a very good prose writer. It's a bit unfortunate that I cannot write prose as well as I wish I could write, but I get by with what I can.
And since GURPS is 99% optional rules, especially when it comes to monsters...I just wing the things I don't yet understand or am not good at, and use general roleplaying sensibilities. And the huge abundance of GURPS bits they offer makes it actually feel less bad. In D&D not understanding some little bit here and there always made me feel like a proper dumbdumb because it's already such a simple system, yet, it also had its fair share of dumb stuff (I don't think I ever really missed THAC0, and I understood that one... but imagine not understanding such a fundamental thing in such a relatively shallow system otherwise...)
So yeah, it doesn't feel too bad to me to stumble in GURPS, but I actually understand a lot of it, so, it really is all good. The organization of the rules could be better, yes but I never felt like it held back my enjoyment of it because so much of it is so good. (THIS IS THE PART THAT WAS ILLEGAL!)
The real issue seems to be how the books are organised and not consistent, and that Steve Jackson Games has not made an index, rather than big issues with the mechanics.
Number 1 was the hardest part of getting into GURPS for me. What's worse was since I was GM, some of my players expected me to know where to find these rules. After making some in the moment rulings, I ended up having to do a lot of page tabbing and index referencing.
I fully agree with the point about rules strewn around, especially in multiple books... But, for that shields example... won't the game work properly even when only Basic Set's rules are used? Or whatever is in Dungeon Fantasy?
The closest thing that you're describing is Pseudobot that looks through indices (and not all books even have indices). And that function stop working properly after Discord's update a few months ago.
I also hate the rules for mail armor - in RAW you can increase damage to a fighter wearing mail by putting your sword in scabbard and hitting with it. Luckily Tbone's edge protection is a good fix for it
Wouldn't the scabbard fly off if swung? This sounds like an improvised weapon, or a training sword or something...if the scabbard were to be tied down. I don't see how this would generate enough damage to matter, though. No way a scabbard would carry the same damaging potential as a dull sword that still has an edge.
About the video: 1- The print is so small that your points are virtually unreadable; 2- your commentary apparently rambles into areas that the texts do not mention (and due to accent, even backing up to repeat what you say several times leaves me zero understanding); 3- Several of your mentioned "inconsistencies" have to do with the variances of a) origin or source or b) Tech level. Differences in light illumination issues: candles, for example are made of different materials which yield different light levels. No torch will ever equal the light output of a "standard" oil lantern which is less than a standard "bullseye" and improvement in glass mfg at later tech levels improve those, too, for examples. Also, while you're holding a light source in darkness, YOU have difficulty seeing into the darkness, but someone in the darkness has zero difficulty seeing you. possibly from several miles. Diffuse beings are NOT the same as "swarms". Shape shifting is easy: a character sheet for each "form". The "vague" rules are to allow ease of scenario development and general play. As a GM, I almost never use Advanced Combat rules, and discourage such use by my players - unless something really specific is necessary for their character to do. (Combat is a MAJOR time consumption under the BEST of conditions. 6 players = almost a full night of combat, which in GAME TIME lasts less than a full minute!) NOTE: A GM since 1984.
2: This seems more like a "you" problem. The accent is understandable even at 2x speed. But for the future - you can use automatic subtitles in cases where you can't distinguish some particular phrases. They do help.
Just wanted to let you know, that I'll hopefully be gone for a long long time (I've been sick of (american) internet/media for a long time now, and YT is just too overbearing with all the 'suggestions') and I made the decision, and some chance rolls to determine the amount of years I'll shun it all... To be gone for...well, I dont wanna say the number to not jinx my willpower. But I won't be around if I can make it, unless I publish something GURPS myself. (I also have felt an art block (not GURPS related) for a long time and I told myself to only use the internet on things I am directly involved in in some creative project. Art, writing, programing, TTRPG.) Anyway, I tend to post on pretty much all your videos cause you're doing some great work, but, obviously won't be able to do that for a 'while', so... keep it up. hehe And feel free to delete this if you read it. I don't mind the comment here but, at the same time, it really is just for you. Have a good one and catch you around!
Using your own example of inconsistencies of candles: In an age of low-tech, such as medieval England candles are more advanced technology in that setting than in a modern day setting, therefore, a caveman may even consider a candle to be TL 3 opposed to a 21st century individual. Besides, these are just guidelines and not rules, per se.
So basically it's time for new 4e GURPS compendium books, at least for the spread out rules issue? And technically, if every other feature from those monsters is priced you could reach an approximate pricing for them by removing everything else from the monster, IF you know its cp worth, but yeah, kinda sucks that it is hidden, basically.
A few of my gripes: Perception being tied to IQ. Humans may be intelligent, but that doesn’t make us especially perceptive. Although it would be unbalancing for GURPS, in nature high perception is associated with DX (animals that depend on speed and agility are inevitably highly perceptive, while those with defenses like armor, quills, toxicity, etc. often have weak senses). (I know the fix is to decouple IQ and perception, but that’s not part of the Basic Set.) It seems that thrust and swing damage begin to diverge too rapidly, devaluing thrust with higher ST. Yes, there are some alternate rules available, but they tend to keep thrust damage parallel to swing damage even at extremely high ST. Why not simply alter the original system to diverge, just not so dramatically? Many people like to put themselves into games, which means converting your own abilities into character stats. The rules are generally vague on how to do this, but my main problem is that the one case where it gives precise rules, it falls apart. Supposedly, the “maximum weight you can lift over your head with one hand in one second … is equal to (STxST)/5 lbs.” I lift weights, but I’m a wiry dude and strength is my lowest attribute. Yet I can easily lift a 50 lb barbell from the ground over my head in one second. That would make me ST 16+. That can’t be right, considering even strong adventure heroes rarely get that strong. Additionally, “Quadrupling the time, and using two hands, you can lift 8xBL overhead.” I can barely manage 90 lbs, which is ST 11. That’s more like it. My point is, clearly the formulas are off…by a huge amount. Perhaps the first formula should be (STxST)/2 or 2.5. Study required. There is a huge difference between sprinters and distance runners. I think the Running skill should be based on ST for sprinters and HT for marathoners. The fatigue system needs work. For example, losing an hour or two of sleep doesn’t really make one less physically capable (the first 4+ weeks of Army infantry basic training we averaged 4 hours a night, but nobody ran out of FP). It definitely can make it harder to stay awake during down time, though. Those are my biggest issues! But they’re not deal breakers by any means.
I think it's a kind of logic that in order to be intelligent you need to be perceptive, too, and it's just the baseline. Not really disagreeing, though.
@@hansbrackhaus8017 Well, I get that…but that would mean that as a baseline all animals are far less perceptive than every adult human who isn’t mentally disabled.
@@Antitheist well it gives em bonus points to put into the other attributes... But yeah I still think that in one direction, it's tied, and not all animals are perceptive, but those which are intelligent generally are. Prey animals are perceptive, but usually not very intelligent, they're basically just wired 'nervously'. Also, consider koala bears, extremely dumb, it's said that they can't recognize eucalyptus leaves on a plate as food, even though it's their main fare. They can see it alright, but can't process it. A deer seems intelligent in comparison, but I see it, in the case of GURPS ...that they're not too perceptive for their intellect, but too dumb for their perception. So a deer with perception 15 but low IQ just doesn't know many things to do with what it sees. So, the deer is penalized via IQ, but a proper 'sapient' being gets the regular effect for free. That's just a lot more rare in other animals compared to humans, corvids, octopi, etc. All with great perception but also pretty decent IQ. Still more penalized than the human baseline. And for the human baseline, being 'IQ smart' kind of is tied to perception. ...possibly.
GURPS is in dire need of proper hypertexted SRD with some convenient GCS integration - rules are too modular to navigate them via just pdfs. I do hope that it will finally happen in coming years with some talk of GURPS 5e coming out
I sometimes wish GURPS had an alternative action economy similar to Pathfinder 2e and I agree with organization of the books. I don’t think we need a 5th edition, just clean up and organize 4th edition.
Perhaps a complete rules reference book, index format. So we could look up "Shields" and have all the raw rules relating to them listed underneath as bullet points or alpha-numerically. Would be so much easier to get an idea of what to use and how you may want to modify each specific subject.
I gathered all the important GURPS combat rules for TL3 and reworded them into a far more concise, easily-referenced document. Considering how prolific you are in producing GURPS-related detail information, I’m surprised you haven’t already organized the rules better. If SJ Games wouldn’t let you post it on your websites, you could just use the book and page references, which would allow others to create their own document using your organization. Just a thought!
I actually was considering doing something like that, but since I remember where I can find everything, I thought that it's not worth the effort. But maybe someday I will make some consolidated pdf rules at least with only page references, that should be useful.
@@dungeonsandgurps I think the GURPS community would appreciate that.
I got used to just shift+F ing keywords like skills or advantages to make sure I got all the rules for each character bit.
@@dungeonsandgurps That would be IMMENSELY useful.
I bought enough combat cards for my players so that they had all of the info at hand (also for my idea of everyone declaring their intentions at the beginning of a round, placing down their maneuver card, then just cycling through. 1) to speed up play. 2) to help simulate 1 second turns better.
Lets hope the new gurps 5 th edition, has a easyer rulesystem. We just havecto wait for two years, when gurp has 40 years birthday
I think 3rd edition did a much better job at organization of all the rules than 4th did. Sure over time new books would come out and add in new rules, but then the Compendiums managed to compile all those rules, smooth them out where they conflicted and made an amazing system. When they rebuilt it all into the mainline Basic Set with the update to 4th edition, they took even more material from Pyramid magazines and other articles and a lot of discussion online. But somehow they lost the amazing layout style that third edition had.
If third edition had full color pages to help differentiate bits of information even more (like 4th ed does), It would be the perfect layout imo.
@kolardgreene3096 I think I am the opposite, while the color changes for the chapters are kind of nice, the rest of the coloring I think distracts. The new Character creator is a good example of how not to organize information... good thing we have GCS.
On the subject of an SRD. If SJ games need more content to publish for GURPS, this would easily be it. It could contain addendums for all the reference books, but have the material contained in neat segments for each subject. I'd pay 3-4$ for a pdf of that type.
Trying to post my "Highly illegal comment that does not deserve to be read according to YT in chunks/replies to myself now)
This might sound like a copout answer but, compared to D&D and Pathfinder, GURPS is almost impossible to frustrate me, that's how well I feel treated by it.
"But did you not agree that statting out shapeshifting is a pain in the neck the other day"
Yes, but ...the thing is. When it comes to GURPS, I see it as almost a language because it has so many building blocks.
And not being able to use these building blocks properly to me, is like the fact that I am not a very good prose writer.
It's a bit unfortunate that I cannot write prose as well as I wish I could write, but I get by with what I can.
And since GURPS is 99% optional rules, especially when it comes to monsters...I just wing the things I don't yet understand or am not good at, and use general roleplaying sensibilities.
And the huge abundance of GURPS bits they offer makes it actually feel less bad.
In D&D not understanding some little bit here and there always made me feel like a proper dumbdumb because it's already such a simple system, yet, it also had its fair share of dumb stuff (I don't think I ever really missed THAC0, and I understood that one... but imagine not understanding such a fundamental thing in such a relatively shallow system otherwise...)
So yeah, it doesn't feel too bad to me to stumble in GURPS, but I actually understand a lot of it, so, it really is all good.
The organization of the rules could be better, yes but I never felt like it held back my enjoyment of it because so much of it is so good.
(THIS IS THE PART THAT WAS ILLEGAL!)
Maybe it was the word "hamstrung" instead of 'held back" or something cause...what the hell is up with this site lol.
The real issue seems to be how the books are organised and not consistent, and that Steve Jackson Games has not made an index, rather than big issues with the mechanics.
Number 1 was the hardest part of getting into GURPS for me. What's worse was since I was GM, some of my players expected me to know where to find these rules. After making some in the moment rulings, I ended up having to do a lot of page tabbing and index referencing.
Another well deserved like!
We need a 5th edition that comes with an online SRD
I fully agree with the point about rules strewn around, especially in multiple books...
But, for that shields example... won't the game work properly even when only Basic Set's rules are used? Or whatever is in Dungeon Fantasy?
They would, but Shield rules are also spread out across several different chapters of Basic Set, so my complain still stands, but to a lesser degree.
Do you have a video on armor types & layering? That system has always been a bit difficult to wrap my head around.
No, I don't. But maybe I'll make something like that in the future
Isn't there a digital version of GURPS, so you can just search a term, and all the matches show up on one page?
The closest thing that you're describing is Pseudobot that looks through indices (and not all books even have indices). And that function stop working properly after Discord's update a few months ago.
I also hate the rules for mail armor - in RAW you can increase damage to a fighter wearing mail by putting your sword in scabbard and hitting with it. Luckily Tbone's edge protection is a good fix for it
Wouldn't the scabbard fly off if swung? This sounds like an improvised weapon, or a training sword or something...if the scabbard were to be tied down.
I don't see how this would generate enough damage to matter, though. No way a scabbard would carry the same damaging potential as a dull sword that still has an edge.
@@hansbrackhaus8017 You are right of course, that's why i have issues with mail's DR -2 against crushing
@@hansbrackhaus8017 it's assuming your doing blunt damage
So now I know why it's kinda hard for me to read basic set
About the video: 1- The print is so small that your points are virtually unreadable; 2- your commentary apparently rambles into areas that the texts do not mention (and due to accent, even backing up to repeat what you say several times leaves me zero understanding); 3- Several of your mentioned "inconsistencies" have to do with the variances of a) origin or source or b) Tech level. Differences in light illumination issues: candles, for example are made of different materials which yield different light levels. No torch will ever equal the light output of a "standard" oil lantern which is less than a standard "bullseye" and improvement in glass mfg at later tech levels improve those, too, for examples. Also, while you're holding a light source in darkness, YOU have difficulty seeing into the darkness, but someone in the darkness has zero difficulty seeing you. possibly from several miles. Diffuse beings are NOT the same as "swarms". Shape shifting is easy: a character sheet for each "form". The "vague" rules are to allow ease of scenario development and general play. As a GM, I almost never use Advanced Combat rules, and discourage such use by my players - unless something really specific is necessary for their character to do. (Combat is a MAJOR time consumption under the BEST of conditions. 6 players = almost a full night of combat, which in GAME TIME lasts less than a full minute!) NOTE: A GM since 1984.
2: This seems more like a "you" problem. The accent is understandable even at 2x speed. But for the future - you can use automatic subtitles in cases where you can't distinguish some particular phrases. They do help.
Just wanted to let you know, that I'll hopefully be gone for a long long time (I've been sick of (american) internet/media for a long time now, and YT is just too overbearing with all the 'suggestions') and I made the decision, and some chance rolls to determine the amount of years I'll shun it all...
To be gone for...well, I dont wanna say the number to not jinx my willpower.
But I won't be around if I can make it, unless I publish something GURPS myself. (I also have felt an art block (not GURPS related) for a long time and I told myself to only use the internet on things I am directly involved in in some creative project. Art, writing, programing, TTRPG.)
Anyway, I tend to post on pretty much all your videos cause you're doing some great work, but, obviously won't be able to do that for a 'while', so... keep it up. hehe
And feel free to delete this if you read it. I don't mind the comment here but, at the same time, it really is just for you. Have a good one and catch you around!
Ah, that's a shame, even though it's understandable. In any case, thank you for your support, and good luck in your endeavors!
Using your own example of inconsistencies of candles: In an age of low-tech, such as medieval England candles are more advanced technology in that setting than in a modern day setting, therefore, a caveman may even consider a candle to be TL 3 opposed to a 21st century individual. Besides, these are just guidelines and not rules, per se.
Now you need to amend yourself by making a video called "5 things a l DO like about GURPS" :p
Oh, but I already made such a video, listing not 5, but 8 reasons!
So basically it's time for new 4e GURPS compendium books, at least for the spread out rules issue? And technically, if every other feature from those monsters is priced you could reach an approximate pricing for them by removing everything else from the monster, IF you know its cp worth, but yeah, kinda sucks that it is hidden, basically.
Yeah, a compendium would be nice.
And no, no other traits are priced.
A few of my gripes:
Perception being tied to IQ. Humans may be intelligent, but that doesn’t make us especially perceptive. Although it would be unbalancing for GURPS, in nature high perception is associated with DX (animals that depend on speed and agility are inevitably highly perceptive, while those with defenses like armor, quills, toxicity, etc. often have weak senses). (I know the fix is to decouple IQ and perception, but that’s not part of the Basic Set.)
It seems that thrust and swing damage begin to diverge too rapidly, devaluing thrust with higher ST. Yes, there are some alternate rules available, but they tend to keep thrust damage parallel to swing damage even at extremely high ST. Why not simply alter the original system to diverge, just not so dramatically?
Many people like to put themselves into games, which means converting your own abilities into character stats. The rules are generally vague on how to do this, but my main problem is that the one case where it gives precise rules, it falls apart. Supposedly, the “maximum weight you can lift over your head with one hand in one second … is equal to (STxST)/5 lbs.” I lift weights, but I’m a wiry dude and strength is my lowest attribute. Yet I can easily lift a 50 lb barbell from the ground over my head in one second. That would make me ST 16+. That can’t be right, considering even strong adventure heroes rarely get that strong. Additionally, “Quadrupling the time, and using two hands, you can lift 8xBL overhead.” I can barely manage 90 lbs, which is ST 11. That’s more like it. My point is, clearly the formulas are off…by a huge amount. Perhaps the first formula should be (STxST)/2 or 2.5. Study required.
There is a huge difference between sprinters and distance runners. I think the Running skill should be based on ST for sprinters and HT for marathoners.
The fatigue system needs work. For example, losing an hour or two of sleep doesn’t really make one less physically capable (the first 4+ weeks of Army infantry basic training we averaged 4 hours a night, but nobody ran out of FP). It definitely can make it harder to stay awake during down time, though.
Those are my biggest issues! But they’re not deal breakers by any means.
I think it's a kind of logic that in order to be intelligent you need to be perceptive, too, and it's just the baseline.
Not really disagreeing, though.
@@hansbrackhaus8017 Well, I get that…but that would mean that as a baseline all animals are far less perceptive than every adult human who isn’t mentally disabled.
@@Antitheist well it gives em bonus points to put into the other attributes...
But yeah I still think that in one direction, it's tied, and not all animals are perceptive, but those which are intelligent generally are.
Prey animals are perceptive, but usually not very intelligent, they're basically just wired 'nervously'.
Also, consider koala bears, extremely dumb, it's said that they can't recognize eucalyptus leaves on a plate as food, even though it's their main fare.
They can see it alright, but can't process it.
A deer seems intelligent in comparison, but I see it, in the case of GURPS ...that they're not too perceptive for their intellect, but too dumb for their perception.
So a deer with perception 15 but low IQ just doesn't know many things to do with what it sees.
So, the deer is penalized via IQ, but a proper 'sapient' being gets the regular effect for free.
That's just a lot more rare in other animals compared to humans, corvids, octopi, etc. All with great perception but also pretty decent IQ.
Still more penalized than the human baseline.
And for the human baseline, being 'IQ smart' kind of is tied to perception. ...possibly.
@@Antitheistintelligence gives you the ability to process visual information faster in real life. and or to recognize odd shapes
@@hansbrackhaus8017 Sorry, I didn’t see this until now. But those are some good points.
Dude, I posted like four versions of a comment and YT swallowed them all after a few seconds, this is getting real stupid. Nothing offensive in them.
Oh, right. English was mean to you again.
The i in Piton is like sit, not like site...like spit, not like spite... "stares at the camera"
I actually know this one, unlike my previous English hiccup. Maybe I was thinking of pythons when I was recording.
Actually, “PEE-tawn” is the most common pronunciation, but both “PIE-tawn” and “PIH-tawn” are also acceptable.
Then just play Metagaming Melee/Wizard, LOL
АЙ КРИНЖ!)
Y tho? =)