Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Loophole Hider 12-04-04, 06:15 AM	I play both these systems and was wondering what people though was better. There are however a few rules to this debate: 1. Please know what you are talking about - i know this is ovious, but it now means people can't use it as an excuse. 2. No insults to other players - this is a debate, not an argument, they are two different things. 3. Please say when you post whather you are pro D&D, pro GURPS or Neutral when you post. (say it in the bold bit as you post (can't remember the name of it) 4. In this debate im using D&D 3.5 edition and GURPS 3rd Edition (not the 4th as I don't have it) 5. Don't give massive essays, 1 or 2 points at a time should be enough, we want to discuss all the points, a few at a time, ot all of the at once. 6. Yes i know i have spelling mistakes, but ingore them please unless u don't understand what I ment... For the record (and because i can't do it as my bold is the title) im: Pro GURPS Anyway, this should be interesting. My first point is that you can campletly customise your characters, no character classes etc. I know to be a mage you need magcal aptitude, but you have varying degrees of it (1 2 and 3) as well as specific schools only and sun, moon and night mages. any comments? I know everyone here plays D&D as that is what this board is, are there any GURPS players out there?
nyysjan 12-04-04, 06:42 AM	Two of these :confused: Gurps + character creation + adaptability - rules heavy - too much necessary books (you can get by with one, but it gets a bit limited) DnD 3.5 ed + well defined and (mostly) simple rules + wizard and artificer character classes and character classes in general + Dragons + Eberron Campaign Setting (god i love the changeling) (Wont take an hour to make a character in a hury) - Elminster and Drizzt (damn über munchkin goody goodies) - so many damn stereo types (almost impossible to try something new) personally im more Pro DnD myself it takes forewer to learn all the rules for gurps unless you houserule all the time. plus i dont have a gurps book for magic and spells and those in the basic set arent much
Loophole Hider 12-04-04, 06:56 AM	^ thats where th pro part goes I disagree with the rules heavy - you can get as complicated or simple as you want. Its up to the group weather you use hit location, magic, bleeding, etc. It up to you, just like in D&D you can ingnor ruels as you like and add outhers in. Yes id does take more time to make characters, but hats because you have defined not only thier abilities, but WHO they are, their peronality, what they are good at exactly. It is more realistic, but once again, its up to you how complex you go. As far a needing lots of books needed goes. Its the same for D&D. I know u need 5 books for the basics + magic, and in D&D you only need 3, but both sets have loads of books out that its not a valid point in my opinion. BTW if you ignore magic, then you only need 3 books.
salamander 12-04-04, 07:18 AM	I don't play GURPS, so I put up Neutral (have to be fair, after all). I wanted to reply to that one point mentioned first though, about customizability because GURPS has no character classes: I don't like non-class based systems. I'm not saying classes can't be (and often are) restrictive, but they have two fundamental advantages. The first is that they make it easy for inexperienced players. Classes can help realize a specific concept and limit the amount of info you need to learn to be able to do so. The second, related to the first, is that they allow and even impose focusing on a concept. It's only logical that specific concepts are better at things related to their areas of expertise and worse at others that they shouldn't have any practical experience with. Non-class based systems (at least the ones I played) don't have that, and that leads to (or at least possibly leads to) characters that don't make a whole lot of sense.
Lord_Anthrax 12-04-04, 07:33 AM	I cut my teeth on SJGames' GURPS, and I have a lot of fond memories of the system and its expanding complexity over the years. Good Things about GURPS -Point-based character creation. -Built-in roleplaying caveats(Disadvantages). -Skill-based resolution system. -Ability to simulate pretty much everything. -Very professional and well-researched supplements that give a lot of information about a subject in an easily digested format. Bad Things about GURPS -Poor scaling for characters with high point totals. The system breaks down very quickly above a certain power level. -Emphasis on realism can be a hindrance for more cinematic gameplay. -Lack of flavor in game settings, as the generic nature of the rules precludes special circumstances. Or as Asimov put it, "Explaining a joke is like dissecting a live frog. The information is obtained, but the thing usually dies in the process." I personally found myself growing disillusioned with the system as its realism and lack of any really involved game settings weighted down on me. GURPS Fantasy wasn't fantastic enough. GURPS Supers wasn't superheroic enough. The system lacks the spark of wonder that other, more specific systems can give a genre of gaming in the way their rules are constructed. GURPS takes a genre and gives it a flavor akin to that of a boiled sock, I'm sorry to say. Personally, I think that the HERO system is a superior generic gaming system, though it also loses a good deal of the wonder a specific system can give, because HERO's rules really can simulate ANYTHING, something GURPS can't do, but in the process of designing something you once again lose that flavor of uniqueness.
WhiteHarness 12-04-04, 10:19 AM	I love GURPS. If I could find enough players, I'd play nothing else. I only bother with D&D because it's the lowest common denominator of tabletop RPGs, and I can always find somebody at the FLGS to play with me. It's the realism I like. No other system comes close, except for The Riddle of Steel, and that one still has some bugs to be worked out yet. In particular, I prefer GURPS' treatment of armour. It's actually worth your while to wear the stuff in GURPS, even if they do overestimate the weights (especially of plate armour) considerably. I also absolutely adored GURPS' default fantasy setting, Yrth. The inclusion of real, recognizable Earth cultures made characters easier to relate to. I thought it was the most believable fantasy setting I've ever seen, and I'm waiting with baited breath for the new edition next year. GURPS 4th edition rocks.
Stardrake 12-04-04, 01:14 PM	GURPS: Good points Classless Extremely Versatile Armor & Weapons work somewhat like the real things Excellent for Human to Human-Plus games Bad Points Complex (not so much for me, but I've been doing this a while :D ) Does NOT handle high-power well (MIGHT be fixed in 4e, but we don't know yet--I have my doubts) Got rather overwhelming in system add-ons in 3e--4e is helping D&D (3.x ONLY) Good points Everyone's heard of D&D Not as complex Wonderful for good old high-magic cinematic "I AM THE HERO" type games. Class system MUCH improved from earlier versions (more flexible) Bad points Highly Unrealistic Doesn't handle low-power play well (although much improved from earlier editions) Rather a one-trick pony (although it does that trick quite well) I will say that D&D 3e was the first D&D I found worth playing since OD&D (the 3 booklets of 1974--our group left it for RuneQuest and never looked back) RIght now, I run a D&D 3.5 FR campaign and am just before starting a GURPS Scarlet Pimpernel campaign (the kind of "human-plus" stuff GURPS handles well). So it depends very much on what you wanna do. D&D does Sword & Sorcery quite well--GURPS does more human-scale stuff quite well. (For Superheroes, I still prefer the Mayfair DC HEROES system, or CHAMPIONS--supers operate on a quite different power level, and don't blend well, IMHO)
R-man 12-05-04, 03:42 AM	While I like GURPS my main complaint with it has always been prep-time. Writing up a GURPS adventure with any number of NPC's and encounters will take at least twice as long a similar adventure written up in D&D. I am a father with two daughters, a husband, a homeowner, and oh yeah I have a full-time job. I don't have 10 hours a week to write up a 4 hour session for the once a week game. I have run a three year long Gurps campaign, and I am presently running a D&D campaign that has now been running for five years aprox..
Mister Mayhem 12-05-04, 04:39 AM	Fundementally, if you want high adventure, whether it be heroic fantasy, hollywood action movie, space opera (a la Star Wars) or even gung-ho superheroics, D20 is the more suitable system. If you want gritty, realistic adventure in which people trying to emulate the antics of hollywood die horribly in a hail of bullets, in which medieval combat is a nasty, brutal affair, the futuristic is "hard science fiction", or in which superheroes are more Punisher than Superman, then I'd say GURPS is more suitable. Sure, you can do either style of game with either system, but why play against the systems strengths? **** GURPS has the potential to be more realistic. But in certain genres, realism isn't as important as fun. If Hollywood action films were run with GURPS rules, most of the heroes would be lying dea on the floor within the first 10 minutes, which generally makes for a pretty dull movie. Of course, the opposite is also true. In some genres, realism is more important than action. If films like "Phone Booth" were run with D20 rules, the victim would have commando-rolled out of the phonebooth, taken a bullet in the shoulder, run up four flights of stairs and drop-kicked the sniper out of the window, again in the first 10 minutes, and again resulting in a pretty dull movie. **** I like a lot of things about GURPS, but for me, the mind boggling detail that you can go into in combat slows it down too much to be used as a cinematic system, as it tends to interupt the story rather than being part of it. For games in which heroic deeds and flashy combat are expected, I'd go for D20. But if I wanted to run something in which the emphasis was on planning and a desperate fight for survival, where - like in real life danger was avoided not treated with contempt I'd use GURPS in preference to D20. (Actually, I still wouldn't use GURPS, I'd use the BRP Cthulu rules for a modern or futuristic game, or the WFRP rules for a fantasy game). **** However, this is hardly the best place to come for an impartial debate about the merits of the two systems. Any more than the GURPS forums would be.
Loophole Hider 12-05-04, 07:50 AM	This debate is going quite well, although i would like people to comment on other points a bit more... However, this is hardly the best place to come for an impartial debate about the merits of the two systems. Any more than the GURPS forums would be. Thats why i put it in the general board. Where would you suggest we have it.... Lots of poeple are talking about the breaking down at high levels with the points. Can we be specific here, about when, 500 points? 1000 points? You have to remember that the standard character is 100 points with up to 40 points of disadvantages. The maximum points a character can have (even if they lower all atributes by 2 [don't coun't as disadvantagess unless you lower them by 3 or more] then you only have 100+40+60= 200 points (for a really crap character due to low atribs) +30 points if you ever wanted the be a kobold.... But less of that. you are talking about high power being broken - it probually it, but it is less broken than epic levels in DnD, especially as in GURPS the only reason you should have over 500 points is if you have super powers, and then they take up 100 or more points for a decent power... Epic levels is more broken than that, especially since GURPS is more relient n the GM checking characters first for ovious min/maxing. Another point which i am surprised that nobody has mentioned is the Experiance system. In Dungeons and Drangons you gain EXP by killing monsters. In GURPS, it is given out by the GM for roleplaying. Thats what GURPS is based around, Roleplaying. I know we can go down the whole line of D&D now gives out EXP for roleplaying, but thats not the focal point. It is possible to play GURPS succesfullly without a single punch, shot or spell being cast at another. I know that most games do, but the poit is GURPS is roleplaying based, and D&D is Fighting based. The Complex character creation, refferng to my previous post. Yes id does take more time to make characters, but hats because you have defined not only thier abilities, but WHO they are, their peronality, what they are good at exactly. It is more realistic, but once again, its up to you how complex you go. Along those lines, the standard 100 point (40 point disadv) character isn't that hard to make. The Basic Book has a section of how to do it quickly and simply. On average you should get 40 pts of disadvantages, spend about 40 points on advantages, 60-70 on attributes and and 30-40 on skills. also GURPS GURU allows character to be made quickly and easily and adds everything up for you. If Hollywood action films were run with GURPS rules, most of the heroes would be lying dea on the floor within the first 10 minutes, which generally makes for a pretty dull movie I agree that GURPS is more based along the realistic lines, but thats what you have things like enhanced dodge, extra hit points, hard to kill, weapon master , etc for. In one campaign 150 points (+50 disadvantages) we had a weapons master with the staff who prried away a few arrows fired at him. GURPS can be as cinimatic as you want, or as realistic. It depends on how the GM runs it and how many points you use. A hero in most movies would be about 300 points + lots of disadvantages due to enemies, dependents, etc. And would have lots of lvels in extra hit point, enhances dodge, ridiculus luck etc. Bad Things about GURPS -Poor scaling for characters with high point totals. The system breaks down very quickly above a certain power level. -Emphasis on realism can be a hindrance for more cinematic gameplay. -Lack of flavor in game settings, as the generic nature of the rules precludes special circumstances. Or as Asimov put it, "Explaining a joke is like dissecting a live frog. The information is obtained, but the thing usually dies in the process." The first 2 i have covered already the 3rd - lack of flavour From what i understand you are saying that either the setting (world) is boring or that there are already rule ofr special situations. The way i see it is: 1. It is the GMs job to make it interesting - like it is the DMs in D&D. 2. You are encouraged to make your own worlds amnd everything in them. 3. THere are a huge number of suplemental books of GURPS from Ice Age, to Terradyne (space age) to Time Travel books to Covert Ops, etc. You can use any of those books, and you don't even need to use the adventures printed in them as they tell you about the entire world, the poletics, the laws, the eycosystem, the timeline. In many D&D book i haven't found that. While we are on the subject of that, i fould the Fantast Folk hnds book had much more to offer on player races than D&D did in any of its books in term of the information on offer. 4. If you are talking about the special rules weing covered - isn't that the job of the book? to tell you how to play - you are of corse free to do whatever you like - as i saw in a bokk (think it was a Monk suplement book): Close to a Quote: "If a player decides to throw sand into an opponents face, let them, they have come up with a good idea / taken inituative - let it work or require an easy roll. Let it work a couple of time, but not all the time. If hroing sand in someones face worked all the time, barbarians would leave their swords at home and carry around bages of sand."... You get the Idea I apologise for the bukyness of this post - cya P.S. Please keep saying weather you are Pro GURPS, Pro D&D or Neutral. and remember this is 3rd edition GURPS vs 3.5 Dungeons and Dragons. Have a good day :D
Bedford 12-05-04, 09:45 AM	(For Superheroes, I still prefer the Mayfair DC HEROES system, or CHAMPIONS--supers operate on a quite different power level, and don't blend well, IMHO) I have to agree with you there. I've looked at 3-4 different Superhero systems for d20, and they just do not work. ANY OF THEM. Mayfair's was my first RPG, and it is still the best, but I use it's most recent version as the Blood of Heroes Revised Edition, which cleaned up the mechanics but suffered due to having to create brand-new supers. I also have the GURPS Supers edition. I like the heroes they created for it, but as for the mechanics, I was less than totally pleased.
Stardrake 12-05-04, 12:02 PM	When I talk about GURPS 3E breaking down at high levels, I referred mostly to superhero characters. For instance, my favorite super PC, Shillelagh (an Irish brick) had a Champions strength of 50. In GURPS (where ST is not logarithmic) he'd have needed a ST in the thousands. (Just to carry a mere 50 tons! Not really that much in comic-book terms...) I can't imagine trying to do, say Green Lantern, Superman, Thor, or The Hulk in GURPS Supers 3e--but that's what I like my supers to BE!! (Haven't tried any of the D20 systems for supers yet--level-based systems and supers have never gone togethr well, in my experience) Oh, and I should point out that if any earlier D&D version is invoked, I'm STRONGLY pro-GURPS. D&D 3.x finally made the system at least sensible.
WhiteHarness 12-05-04, 01:05 PM	I concur. I also feel that the changes made to D&D 3rd Edition made it more "GURPS-like", and therefore more sensible. Things like feats, option of using Armour as DR (even the same term as GURPS!), and greater class flexibility were all changes in the system that made me even bother to take a look at D&D3E...
zodiki 12-05-04, 02:10 PM	But less of that. you are talking about high power being broken - it probually it, but it is less broken than epic levels in DnD, especially as in GURPS the only reason you should have over 500 points is if you have super powers, and then they take up 100 or more points for a decent power... Epic levels is more broken than that, especially since GURPS is more relient n the GM checking characters first for ovious min/maxing. All games break down on the extremes. Another point which i am surprised that nobody has mentioned is the Experiance system. In Dungeons and Drangons you gain EXP by killing monsters. In GURPS, it is given out by the GM for roleplaying. Thats what GURPS is based around, Roleplaying. I know we can go down the whole line of D&D now gives out EXP for roleplaying, but thats not the focal point. It is possible to play GURPS succesfullly without a single punch, shot or spell being cast at another. I know that most games do, but the poit is GURPS is roleplaying based, and D&D is Fighting based. It's been years since I've used xp for monsters killed. How xp is awarded is completely up to the DM, that's why it's in the DMG not the PHB. Gurps has nothing on this point. In fact it could be argued that you are cheating the players if you don't award xp for things their characters can do that the players cannot. The Complex character creation, refferng to my previous post. Along those lines, the standard 100 point (40 point disadv) character isn't that hard to make. The Basic Book has a section of how to do it quickly and simply. On average you should get 40 pts of disadvantages, spend about 40 points on advantages, 60-70 on attributes and and 30-40 on skills. also GURPS GURU allows character to be made quickly and easily and adds everything up for you. The Flaw/merit system is fundamentally flawed. It is completely unrealistic to think a characters flaws should somehow translate into power somewhere else. It's the same argument I have about point-buy stats in D&D. Of course point-buy stats in D&D is an optional method for determining ability scores. The first 2 i have covered already the 3rd - lack of flavour From what i understand you are saying that either the setting (world) is boring or that there are already rule ofr special situations. The way i see it is: 1. It is the GMs job to make it interesting - like it is the DMs in D&D. 2. You are encouraged to make your own worlds amnd everything in them. 3. THere are a huge number of suplemental books of GURPS from Ice Age, to Terradyne (space age) to Time Travel books to Covert Ops, etc. You can use any of those books, and you don't even need to use the adventures printed in them as they tell you about the entire world, the poletics, the laws, the eycosystem, the timeline. In many D&D book i haven't found that. While we are on the subject of that, i fould the Fantast Folk hnds book had much more to offer on player races than D&D did in any of its books in term of the information on offer. 4. If you are talking about the special rules weing covered - isn't that the job of the book? to tell you how to play - you are of corse free to do whatever you like - as i saw in a bokk (think it was a Monk suplement book): Close to a Quote: "If a player decides to throw sand into an opponents face, let them, they have come up with a good idea / taken inituative - let it work or require an easy roll. Let it work a couple of time, but not all the time. If hroing sand in someones face worked all the time, barbarians would leave their swords at home and carry around bages of sand."... You get the Idea I apologise for the bukyness of this post - cya P.S. Please keep saying weather you are Pro GURPS, Pro D&D or Neutral. and remember this is 3rd edition GURPS vs 3.5 Dungeons and Dragons. Have a good day :D I don't think that a systems optional setting support speaks to the quality of the system -- both systems have excellent support in this area. What does speak to it is that with D&D I can create a homebrew game straight out of the box (the 3 core books) with no additional books needed and it will immediately be high fantasy without any need for modification. For the players there are already a dozen premade archetypal character builds with sufficient customizability to yield years of playing. As for D&D combat being unrealistic, it seems so because it's abstract in nature. A melee attack is not a single blow, it actualy represents damage potential. Armor class doesn't represent a physical barrier, but rather damage avoidance potential. The D&D magic system is both simple and highly realistic because it is so quantifiable. Magical effects and the ability to generate those effects don't vary from person to person. They are point and click. Hmm, pro D&D I guess
Mister Mayhem 12-05-04, 02:28 PM	...GURPS is roleplaying based, and D&D is Fighting based. :heehee: In fact, the reason GURPS has such a detailed and deadly combat system is because Steve Jackson didn't sit down to write an RPG. He sat down to right game mechanics for a gladiatorial combat game. The combat was the *only* thing. Hence the need to break the rounds down into single seconds, and to play up the differences between the weapons so much. It was *designed* so that a single, man-on-man combat would be a detailed event, being complex enough to challenge the players to choose the best tactics and being detailed enough so that the fight - which might be over within seconds of "game time" would last long enough to keep a couple of people entertained for while. Of course, D&D is also combat based but to try to score points for GURPS for not being combat based is erroneous and misleading. *** A question: Why limit this debate to only 2 systems, anyway? If we are going to talk about something other than D&D, why not include the BRB system in the discussion, for example, or any one of a hundred other designs of game mechanics? After all, there are systems that are more detailed and "realistic" than GURPS, and there are systems that are more abstract and cinematic than D&D.
Someone 12-05-04, 02:53 PM	Its hard for me to compare, as I think of D&D for fantasy, and GURPS for sci-fi/ modern. I'm currently running a D&D campaign, haven't been able so scrounge up enough interest to run a GURPS campaign. Oh well. I like how D&D has one, simple, core mechanic: roll a d20, apply modifiers, see if that is better than the target number. GURPS sort of goes the other way around: start with a target number, apply modifiers, then roll 3d6. I like how GURPS has the material to make up completely new stuff (I love GURPS Vehicles). Most of the new stuff to make up in D&D is (usually) just a new combination or variant of existing stuff. As for keeping the debate to just these 2 systems, what's next, Palladium/ Rifts? :D
Ut-Napishtim 12-05-04, 04:16 PM	Most of the pro's and con's have been covered up to this point. I'd have to agree that D&D has been made more GURPS-like though, which is a good thing IMHO. As has been mentioned I pretty much go with D&D because that's what everyone else plays, and some of the more hard core enthusiasts are very reluctant to try anything else. I do like the lack of classes and such in GURPS, and for a Modern or Sci-Fi setting it wins hands-down. D&D is a classic Fantasy game that has seen a lot of improvement over the years though. So for me it depends on the genre, for Fantasy I'd have to go with D&D or probably have nobody to play with. For anything else, GURPS rocks. Not that D&D isn't a great game, but d20 Modern is... well to be nice, not GURPS.
Loophole Hider 12-06-04, 03:05 AM	removed due to internet explorer.... lol
ssvegeta555 12-06-04, 03:39 AM	I like D&D more because I dont know what GURPS is. :P
Lord_Anthrax 12-06-04, 06:03 AM	I have to say that the one thing GURPS does best is to enforce roleplaying. Disadvantages have a real and genuine impact on how you can behave(though by the RAW in 3e GURPS you can seriously abuse mental disad's with high IQ and Strong Will, something that was fixed in 4e AFAIK). The one thing GURPS does worst is Superheroes. With them it's either all or nothing. A Superhero can either get hit by a tank round and smile, or he's a bloody smear on the ground. There's no middle ground. It's far too expensive to take any kind of DR that could stop it before it becomes more cost-effective to take Invulnerability. One ordinary guy with an AK-47 can do more damage than most superpowers. It just don't work. As for the system breaking down at high CP totals, just look at combat. Dodge, Parry and Block scores become so high it's basically a game of Russian Roulette. One good roll or one bad roll and the fight's over. In between it's nothing but attack-defend, attack-defend, attack-defend. With D&D, even at Epic levels the combat is still pretty evenly matched IME. And I never played the DC Heroes game from Mayfair, but IMO the best Superhero system ever put out was the old Marvel Superheroes game by TSR. Though Champions is a very strong second IMO, and Mutants & Masterminds is also pretty good.
Lord_Naerik 12-06-04, 09:07 AM	Just thought Id chime in here. In D&D you dont get get XP for killing monsters. You get XP for overcoming challenges. A subtle difference, but a real one...
Darth Teddybear 12-06-04, 12:39 PM	Hrm...I apologize in advance for not writing out my points in any detailed structure. Brain's tired, and I'm at work...heh...It basically boils down to I just like D&D. I enjoy it. I have never enjoyed a single GURPS game I've played in cause it took too long to resolve mechanics issues, and to create characters. Just my 2cp...
Sulaco 12-06-04, 02:30 PM	GURPS First played is something like 15 years, played a lot of it, don't really play it anymore D&D First played it more than 20 years ago, played a lot of it, still play it Winner: D&D In theory GURPS has so much going for it but I just find the system gets in the way. It just isn't nearly as much "fun" to play as D&D.
sambudak 12-06-04, 02:52 PM	PRO GURPS Been playing D&D longer, but like GURPS more because of its flexiblity and chargen. I still love D&D, it's like your first bike or something-- great ride while it still fit, and still fun but only for short periods cause it is too small now. The flexibility issue became apparent when I wanted to run an Old West Horror campaign, something D20 could handle, but not in 1991. Our group was chafing at the genre restrictions of good ol' D&D, and no one wanted to go buy a new system every time we got a new idea for a campaign. GURPS was our answer. The chargen point-buy is very nice and very fair, also provided in D20, but not in 1991. The dice-cursed players in our group embraced point-buy like a new religion. The player getting what they want without settling was a nice thing for the rest of us.
Wil_Hyral 12-07-04, 01:45 AM	I used to complain that D&D didn't cater to realism that much, but when I tried GURPS and Hero 5e, among others, I learned just why D&D doesn't do that. It's obnoxious. If I want combat with THAT many calculations, i'll go play a videogame. They have a computer to compute all that FOR you. The reason I play roleplaying games is because I want to play a role. I want the option of having a growing character, with countless choices and real fears and desires. I want a story that I can affect. That's what I want when I play D&D, and sure realism is fine, but there comes a time when the game feels more like work than entertainment. But hey, the real lesson of this thread is that "Gurps Vs. D&D" is a matter of taste. If your cup of tea is "many calculations, many details," go for Gurps. If you're willing to sacrifice specifics for the interest of speed / ease, then D&D would probably best suit you.
Cravensson 12-07-04, 09:08 AM	I don't think I've ever played GURPS. I have played Hero. I like it, but D&D is a heck of a lot easier, even in its current incarnation.
StormKnight 12-07-04, 09:52 AM	Neutral...sort of... Well, theoretically GURPS can do anything D&D can do. In practice, it can't neccessarily do it easily or in an obvious way. Its a very flexible and detailed system that can allow a great deal of customization. Its also rather clunky, and as has been pointed out it breaks down at higher levels. It also takes a great deal of work on the part of the GM to define the world and what abilities are a part of it. D&D gives a great deal of pre-defined material. Its character creation system is a bit simpler on the surface, though when you get into the mess that is D&D magic it gets complicated pretty fast. One of the things it really does have going for it is that it is designed to scale into higher levels of power well. I don't think either of them are particularly simpler or directly more playable than the other. Given the choice, I would probably use D&D for a "standard" fantasy game that I planned to play for a long time with characters growing a great deal as they progressed. I would pick GURPS for a non-standard world or setting that I wanted to customize, or for a shorter term game, or one in which I wanted players to really be able to define their characters. However, I must say that while I used to be a huge fan of GURPS and played it almost exclusively back in its 2nd edition, I can't see ever touching it again since discovering Tri-Stat DX and BESM.
JabberWocky 12-07-04, 10:21 AM	Neutral I personally have little experience with GURPS, but was learning 3E GURPS and am now attempting 4E GURPS for an online gaming group. I have very mixed feelings, as this online gaming group was originally D&D, and after seeing how "broken" the system was, turned immediately to hating everything d20 and loving GURPS. D&D, to me, is much easier and provides that one cliche setting you'll ever want to play in any kind of medieval Tolkienesque or greater fantasy setting. It doesn't include many rules about roleplaying and is very biased towards combat and mechanics, I'll agree to that. But, to me, this means that all the mechanical work has been done for you. Theoretically there are no mechanical issues you ABSOLUTELY OMG NEED TO ADDRESS, leaving you to focus on fleshing out the roleplaying issues of your character and campaign. Then again, you could play a hack-and-slash where the only roleplaying involved is that oh-so-stressful "talking to NPCs to get our next quest." GURPS, in character creation alone, offers so much more on the roleplaying aspect that it's astounding. Sure, I think the "buy disadvantages to get more points so your character can have more stuff" system to be a little over-used, but it's worked for a very long time now. I, however, think that the mechanics have been simplified to a fine point and feel almost lacking to me. But, the main point is, if you want to create a fighter-type who was forced out of his profession as a songwriter into the role of the warrior, you can without having to multiclass and suffer not only in bardic ability but also in fighting potential. If this floats your boat, fine. If not, don't do it. I personally would like to give GURPS a bit more of a try before making any final judgments, but D&D will always be my pet. ^.-.^
Gomezy3k 12-07-04, 11:26 AM	In my humble opinion 3X+ D&D seems more like the old Paladium game system. I haven't been able to find anyone to play the 3rd+ Edition but have read the PHB and DMG.... Unfortunately it is NOT a simple game system to learn or use..... As for GURPS... The group I play with would rather play the HERO system since GURPS is CHAMPIONS Jr. with a little less math...
Loophole Hider 12-07-04, 01:15 PM	I like D&D more because I dont know what GURPS is. :P As stated by rule 1, "KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT" That doesn't count - you haven't even put a reason or a comment in, I don't mind people who comment, even if they haven't played GURPS, but at least put a comment- or neutral as your status. :headexplo :rant: End of Rant... ------------------------------ To addres some earlier point: There are only 2 systems here because they are the only 2 i know well. Its also because most of my group are anti-gurps, but they have never even playd it, cept at lunchtime sesions in which we had 30-45 mins in between ppl getting there and packing up... I am finally running a GURPS session for them, well half of them, the other half are going to be playing tunnels and Trolls (TnT :mage: ) I think what this breaks down to is: GURPS is customisable, but takes longer to set up. D&D is quick and easy to play, but a one trick pony. So, down to my last question. which of these statments describes how u feel? 1. GURPS rocks - D&D sucks 2. D&D rocks - GURPS sucks 3. GURPS is good for non-standard D&D stuff, but preffer D&D 4. Preffer GURPS, but D&D is good. 5. Coulden't Care less. (aka Neutral) Im 4. PM me, ill keep a tally on my next post, next posts are for comments on the debate, not which # you are. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- P.S. Isn't Rant just the best smiley... :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:
DrWorm 12-07-04, 04:29 PM	We tried GURPS shortly after it's inception as we were fans of SJ (love Car Wars), but it fell apart in the flavor area so we dropped it eventually. I like the idea of a general system in theory, but in practice they are not that compelling due to lack of on-board flavor. It is interesting because I often drasticly tweak the setting so that it is not recognizable, but something about the on-board flavor just works for me. Even D20 Modern suffered from this until the settings came out. In my youth I had more time and more patience to try every new system that looked cool, and did try most of them up to about 1992. I think what it boils down to now is that my playing is limited now to about two, eight hour sessions a month, and D20 makes changing games easy. Call it lazyness, call me old, but with so many D20 games out it is just easy to decide at the last minute "Dude...need a break from D&D, lets play Spycraft" or, "I just got finished watching the SW DVD set back to back, lets play Star Wars". In the end I choose D20 becuase it is simple, fast, fun, and diverse.
JabberWocky 12-08-04, 02:43 AM	That's another thing about D&D that I really prefer. If you don't have the time, patience, or ability to sit and flesh out an entire campaign world based on a loose idea and a foundry of rules, then D&D is your bag of chips. Oh, sure, you can, but no one is going to blame you for playing in the Forgotten Realms and adding your own personal tweaks to it. There's a d20 system for almost everything you'd want to play, but it's all specialized. For instance, I was told that GURPS is divided into several different "categories," such as GURPS, GURPS Fantasy, GURPS Anime, GURPS Mecha (a subcategory of anime, dealing with Giant Fighting Robots), GURPS Future, etc. All general themes with a foundry of rules. However, if you wanted to play, say, Star Wars, you'd have to take GURPS Future and modify it to what you believe Star Wars to be. But with d20? Boom. There's a system already there for you. Just plug it in and play it. Not to say I'm not a fan of creating your own settings to be original, goodness no. I've done it myself more often than I've played in any one setting. In fact, I've never even played or ran a game in Eberron, my favorite setting in terms of flavor, nor have I ever played in generic Greyhawk.
Polaris 12-08-04, 03:05 AM	Everyone, While I have been less active lately, most of the board regulars know that I have had quite a bit of experience with DnD. I also have had quite a lot of experience with GURPS and am now setting up a 4E Star-Gate Adventure. I have also played in modern/sci-fi (Spycraft) games using d20. I think that both DnD and GURPS do what they do very well. However, overall, the custumizability and flexibility of GURPS means it does *more* things well than DnD when all is said and done. GURPS in the late 3E version had some fairly severe balance and play issues which hurt it. Fortunately these have been largely fixed in 4E. DnD OTOH is rapidly becoming unweildy to run. Neither DnD nor GURPS handles truly EPIC play well (i.e. Clash of the Titans and the like). When you get to God-like levels of ability, the EPIC DnD rules are just as broken as the GURPS rules. However, DnD does handle the classic high fantasy adventure well scaling from nobodies to movers/shakers probably as well as any system out there. Unfortunately IMHO that is ALL d20 does well. GURPS OTOH does low-fantasy reasonably well but really shines in modern, Sci-Fi, and moderate to low-powered Space Opera campaigns where cleverness counts....and your life may depend on it. I also find that GURPS does a superlative job with Espionage type campaigns as well as exploration/cross-time/time-travel campaigns. Indeed the system is designed for it. IMHO if you want to play Clash of the Titans, use Mutants & Masterminds or FRED. [Sorry Hero supporters, but FRED does NOT do low-powered campaigns well at *all*.] -Polaris
Loophole Hider 12-08-04, 04:08 PM	Very well said Polaris.
Goblyn 12-09-04, 12:42 AM	Don't get me wrong ... I really like GURPS with all its crunchy and customizable goodness. But DnD plays more smoothly, and is much easier to find players for. This won't stop me from buying GURPS add-ons and modifying them for DnD though.
Clangador 12-09-04, 03:02 AM	I play both DnD3.5 and GURPS4e. DnD3.5 does fantasy very well and has a lot of the flavor I like in a fantasy game. Plus there is a lot of support for it. For everything else I use GURPS. I can play modern, scifi, historical all with the one system no problem. And, I do like the whole point buy system and the fact it doesn't use any classes. Each system does what is is designed to do well. DnD does fantasy and GURPS does the whole universal RPG all settings in one system. Over on the GURPS boards it seems everyone is rabid anti-DnD. I'm glad to see there are other people who play the two systems like I do. :) :) :) ~Clangador
Polaris 12-09-04, 04:10 AM	Goblyn, I have to take issue with your assertion that DnD plays more smoothly than GURPS. IMX that isn't always or even generally the case. It all comes down to system familiarity. DnD 3.5 is at least as complicated and difficult to run as 4.0 GURPS. However, if your group is familiar with 3.5 DnD and not with GURPS, it won't seem that way....and vice versa. IMHO GURPS actually has the cleaner core system and is definately a more modular system (which I tend to like). -Polaris