PDA

View Full Version : Games with Robots, Androids, Cyborgs, AI



Comet
2016-04-11, 03:27 AM
I've been looking into sci-fi games to play or run. There's plenty of stuff for spaceships and weird planets and some stuff on human augmentation in several games but I'm having a hard time finding a game that really lets you play as a robot or cyborg or other primarily mechanical entity.

Eclipse Phase and Transhuman Space kind of seem like they'd fit the bill, but they might be more about wetware and biomods and such rather than mechanical beings and artificial intelligences.

Do you know any games that would let you play as a robot?

Anonymouswizard
2016-04-11, 03:41 AM
I've been looking into sci-fi games to play or run. There's plenty of stuff for spaceships and weird planets and some stuff on human augmentation in several games but I'm having a hard time finding a game that really lets you play as a robot or cyborg or other primarily mechanical entity.

Eclipse Phase and Transhuman Space kind of seem like they'd fit the bill, but they might be more about wetware and biomods and such rather than mechanical beings and artificial intelligences.

Do you know any games that would let you play as a robot?

Do you want to play a more specific genre? Say, Space Opera or Cyberpunk? (or Steampunk, I'm sure someone here can dig up a dedicated system)

I haven't read Transhuman Space, but Eclipse phase has both AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) and bot bodies as core character types. Synthmorphs (robot bodies) and AGI are looked down on in setting though, and a key part of the game is that you can switch bodies with a bit of preparation (or begin with several of them, I have plans for a character with 50-100CP of splicer* morphs spread throughout the solar system, inhabited by a bunch of Beta Forks. They'll swap with a fork whenever they need to travel somewhere else). You could play an AGI sleeved in an infomorph (no physical body), synthmorph (robotic body), pod (kind of a synth/bio mix), or biomorph (biological bodies). Less cyborg stuff though, although augmentation is just augmentation.

For universal games, both Fate and GURPS fit the bill. In Fate you can just take 'robotic lifeform' or 'heavily cybered' as an aspect, and get invokes and compels for it. In GURPS there's a machine meta-trait to let you play a robot, it includes things such as not having Fatigue Points but needing the occasional recharge.

* Splicers are my favourite morph, as they are pretty much everywhere as well as cheap and basic enough to allow you to tailor them to your needs.

BWR
2016-04-11, 09:33 AM
Play a droid in any of the Star Wars editions.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-11, 09:37 AM
Artifice and Engine Heart are good bets.

In Artifice you play as AI's, in Engine Heart you llay as service robots in a post-human world.

I'll keep looking for more.

All of Engine Heart can be dowbloaded here: http://viralgamespublishing.com for free.


If you google "artifice rpg" you can get a 1d4chan page with a download link, but I am unsure of its legality so proceed with caution and try to find a legit source if you can.

cobaltstarfire
2016-04-11, 09:44 AM
I haven't gotten to play engine heart (we never found a GM) but I made a couple of characters for it, and it's a pretty nice, simple, light weight system. It's also free.

hamlet
2016-04-11, 09:49 AM
RIFTS and Alternity both have robot/droid type characters available, though they're older and tend to not make folks happy who cut their teeth on newer games.

Magic Myrmidon
2016-04-11, 10:12 AM
Interface Zero 2.0 (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/124685/Interface-Zero-20-Full-Metal-Cyberpunk) has rules for AI, cyborgs, androids, etc. It's a cyberpunk setting for the Savage Worlds system. I just started running a game for it, and it's my favorite book for the system so far. Has some great equipment, a detailed world, and a lot of room for customization, what with it being Savage Worlds.

Rakaydos
2016-04-11, 01:04 PM
Myriad Song has a more pulp scifi setting, with some of the playable races being REALLY out there- and they do good job de-genericizing humans.

JoeJ
2016-04-11, 01:24 PM
You can play a robot in Mutants & Masterminds. It's even one of the pregen archetypes.

Knaight
2016-04-11, 01:51 PM
I've done this in Fudge. One of the fun things about the system is that it doesn't have any hardcoded attributes, so if you want to make a set that better fits robots (which I did) the system can handle it pretty well.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-11, 04:52 PM
I will put a disclaimer that mever really comes with generic systems, but that should be included every time:

Generic systems feel, well, generic. They can do anything pretty ok but they lack any form of internal aesthetic or any way to assist and inspire the aesthetic you want for your campaign. They can be converted into core mechanical systems for more specific purposes, but in general they will feel generic. (Like store brand vs actual brand.)

Some chafe at this assertion, but it's also pretty true. It takes a lot more GM effort to make Fudge or Fate fit the aesthetic of what they want to do than it is to make an already existing system dedicated to that aesthetic do the same.

Just some quick advice on that front. FATE and FUDGE and other such systems can do anything in a pinch, but pick a dedicated option when and if possible.

Knaight
2016-04-11, 05:19 PM
Generic systems feel, well, generic. They can do anything pretty ok but they lack any form of internal aesthetic or any way to assist and inspire the aesthetic you want for your campaign. They can be converted into core mechanical systems for more specific purposes, but in general they will feel generic. (Like store brand vs actual brand.)

Putting aside the store brand comparison, I wouldn't say that generic systems tend to feel generic. It's just that they tend not to be attached to genre and setting so much as a style that applies to a number of genres. For instance, GURPS does detailed and grounded very well. It can do detailed and grounded fantasy, it can do detailed and realistic sci-fi, it can even do detailed and grounded super heroes. So, if you want something like that it can do a whole lot better than a game made for the genre you want but in a different fashion. Meanwhile, Fate and Savage Worlds are both very pulpy. They can be very pulpy for a wide number of settings, but they're going to be pulpy regardless. Still, if you're aiming for pulp-something it might be better than a game dedicated to the genre but not intended to be pulpy.


It takes a lot more GM effort to make Fudge or Fate fit the aesthetic of what they want to do than it is to make an already existing system dedicated to that aesthetic do the same.
If you have a dedicated system, and it hits the aesthetic in multiple respects, sure. There are a lot of cases, particularly with more esoteric games, where it's vastly easier finding a generic that works for the style you want and then getting the setting into it. A game outright focused on robots, androids, cyborgs, and AI? That might be one of those areas where there isn't anything dedicated that really works too well. A fantasy dungeon crawl? One of the five hundred dedicated options should work just fine.

Anonymouswizard
2016-04-11, 05:27 PM
I've done this in Fudge. One of the fun things about the system is that it doesn't have any hardcoded attributes, so if you want to make a set that better fits robots (which I did) the system can handle it pretty well.

I've looked at FUDGE, and I'd personally recommend Fate over it. Or, to be specific, I'd recommend Fate for narrative games and FUDGE for more gamist games, and I just happen to prefer the former.


I will put a disclaimer that mever really comes with generic systems, but that should be included every time:

Generic systems feel, well, generic. They can do anything pretty ok but they lack any form of internal aesthetic or any way to assist and inspire the aesthetic you want for your campaign. They can be converted into core mechanical systems for more specific purposes, but in general they will feel generic. (Like store brand vs actual brand.)

Some chafe at this assertion, but it's also pretty true. It takes a lot more GM effort to make Fudge or Fate fit the aesthetic of what they want to do than it is to make an already existing system dedicated to that aesthetic do the same.

Just some quick advice on that front. FATE and FUDGE and other such systems can do anything in a pinch, but pick a dedicated option when and if possible.

Eh, the universal nature of generic systems is really overstated.
GURPS works really well for science heavy settings, as well as gritty games. It's ideal for characters who are essentially human, or at a pinch low powered supers, but can technically handle anything.
Savage Worlds is pulpy, and good for really action games, although I'm personally ambivalent towards it. It tends towards action heroes and low powered supers.
Fate is narrative, and works well for any genre. The characters are assumed to be competent individuals even in low powered settings. It's really adaptable to settings, more so than GURPS or SW, but if you don't like story focused games run away.
Mutants and Masterminds is a horrible system best suited to superhero level characters. I guess it's okay if you aren't willing to use the even more narrative Fate, but even the superpowers feel like a letdown compared to Fate's Venture City Stories book.

I will agree that it takes a lot more work to GM Fate than it does to run D&D. I mean, with D&D I only have to pick between umpteen fantasy aesthetics to use and then shoehorn in the magic system, while with Fate I can pick any genre (let's go out on a limb and say low fantasy), then I can look to see if a world is available for it, and then pick or create a magic system for it. In both cases I have to create a world if no suitable one exists. D&D can feel just as generic as Fate when run by a bad GM (when run by a good GM generic systems are awesome, as the GM will have made attempts to tweak the generic feeling away before the campaign starts).

thedanster7000
2016-04-11, 05:29 PM
Want to play as *insert thing here*? GURPS.

BayardSPSR
2016-04-11, 06:56 PM
I will put a disclaimer that mever really comes with generic systems, but that should be included every time:

Generic systems feel, well, generic. They can do anything pretty ok but they lack any form of internal aesthetic or any way to assist and inspire the aesthetic you want for your campaign. They can be converted into core mechanical systems for more specific purposes, but in general they will feel generic. (Like store brand vs actual brand.)

Some chafe at this assertion, but it's also pretty true. It takes a lot more GM effort to make Fudge or Fate fit the aesthetic of what they want to do than it is to make an already existing system dedicated to that aesthetic do the same.

Just some quick advice on that front. FATE and FUDGE and other such systems can do anything in a pinch, but pick a dedicated option when and if possible.

On the other hand, if you like running or playing games across a diverse range of aesthetics, you're much better off investing time spent mastering a system into one that can be adapted to all the aesthetics you want to play with, rather than buying a new book and mastering a new set of rules every time you think "hey, [thing] would be cool." Especially if no one's written an RPG for that aesthetic that works well or suits your playstyle.

EDIT: I mean, ideally, we'd all write a whole new RPG from scratch to suit the aesthetics and playstyles we want in any given game, but that's comically time-consuming unless your playstyle happens to involve extremely rules-light systems.

TeChameleon
2016-04-12, 03:15 AM
Shadowrun (at least 4th Edition) will allow you to play as an AI, and with a drone body (or set of drone bodies) you would qualify as a 'robot', I'm thinking... there's also options for brain-in-a-jar cyborg (which, from context, I'm assuming you mean when you say 'primarily mechanical entity' cyborg). Don't know if that's what you have in mind, but it is at least an option.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-12, 10:58 PM
On the other hand, if you like running or playing games across a diverse range of aesthetics, you're much better off investing time spent mastering a system into one that can be adapted to all the aesthetics you want to play with, rather than buying a new book and mastering a new set of rules every time you think "hey, [thing] would be cool." Especially if no one's written an RPG for that aesthetic that works well or suits your playstyle.

EDIT: I mean, ideally, we'd all write a whole new RPG from scratch to suit the aesthetics and playstyles we want in any given game, but that's comically time-consuming unless your playstyle happens to involve extremely rules-light systems.

The problem is that systems like FATE and FUDGE and GURPS already HAVE a built-in aesthetic, just ones that don't involve genres.

FATE is pulpy. Pretty much always. It's pulpy Fantasy or Pulpy Sci Fi or Pulpy Steampunk, but it's always pulpy.

GURPS is always simulationist.

FUDGE operates mostly how FATE does.

So like I said, it will be the Store Brand option for whatever you pick. Suitable, but not as good as a dedicated system. Most systems nowadays are only around 200 pages for the core ruleset since most people who play roleplaying games generally (outside this forum) actually don't feel the need to drown in rules and tables so they can sit down and have fun with their friends and eat cheetos while playing pretend with dice.

I learned Apocalypse World well enough to run it for the first time with 3 days of casual reading.

I learned Stars Without Number well enough to run it within about a week because it's layout is a bit terrible.

I figured out Shadowrun 4e in 2 weeks, but that largely has to do with being unusually busy and the 4e handbook having a truly awful layout. (It refers forward to later parts of the book almost constantly)

System MASTERY in the sense of having encyclopedic knowledge of an entire system the size of 3.5 takes years. And is entirely unnecessary for GMing or Playing a game.

If you're only allowed to GM systems you have absolutely mastered, then maybe 1% of current GMs should be GMing. The idea that you must Master a system to run it is ridiculous. You might be slow and halting for your first few sessions, but any reasonably forgiving group will be fine with it.

In other words, use rhe system you wanna use to fit the style you want. If you want to play FATE with the robots wallpaper on, then do that if it fits your needs. If you want something that gives you more explicit tools and more specific help, find a dedicated system.

Knaight
2016-04-13, 12:14 AM
The problem is that systems like FATE and FUDGE and GURPS already HAVE a built-in aesthetic, just ones that don't involve genres.
Exactly. So if you're using that aesthetic anyways, you're good, and it can generally handle genres which don't have any real support.


FUDGE operates mostly how FATE does.

This is just inaccurate. Fudge is a comparatively light system, but it shows its GURPS heritage. It's not averse to modifiers, the core mechanic involves a heavy curve that isn't easily mitigated (unlike Fate, which is built on the fate point economy and aspects), and it works just fine for games that aren't even a little bit pulpy. Fate may have blatantly ripped off parts of Fudge and then slowly erased all mentions that it did so, but it's the result of a series of systematic changes almost all of which make it pulpier. There's the way they extended the attribute ladder significantly, then put characters in a position to hit the highest levels on it routinely. There's Aspects and Stunts and what they do to the game. There's the way modifiers have been systematically purged, with negative modifiers for doing difficult things in particular vanishing. There's the breadth of the default skill lists in all Fate implementations compared to the example skills in Fudge. There's the Stress-Consequence system and how forgiving it is compared to the wound track.


So like I said, it will be the Store Brand option for whatever you pick. Suitable, but not as good as a dedicated system. Most systems nowadays are only around 200 pages for the core ruleset since most people who play roleplaying games generally (outside this forum) actually don't feel the need to drown in rules and tables so they can sit down and have fun with their friends and eat cheetos while playing pretend with dice.
200 pages is still significant, particularly when the whole group is supposed to know it. It's a lot less heavy than the D&D standard, and the 200 page standard is a large part of the reason that I can't take the claim that D&D 5e is a rules light game seriously, but it's far from nothing.

Also, system mastery is still valuable, as if you're learning the system you often have less mental energy for other types of experimenting. It's significantly more valuable if you either know a number of systems by heart, are really enamored with a particular genre and genre-implementation and know a system for that, or if you know a generic well enough to be able to do all sorts of bizarre esoteric stuff without struggle.

goto124
2016-04-13, 12:42 AM
the 200 page standard is a large part of the reason that I can't take the claim that D&D 5e is a rules light game seriously,

5e is lite for a DnD edition :smalltongue:

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 01:51 AM
Exactly. So if you're using that aesthetic anyways, you're good, and it can generally handle genres which don't have any real support.

Sure, but that's a big assumption.



This is just inaccurate. Fudge is a comparatively light system, but it shows its GURPS heritage. It's not averse to modifiers, the core mechanic involves a heavy curve that isn't easily mitigated (unlike Fate, which is built on the fate point economy and aspects), and it works just fine for games that aren't even a little bit pulpy. Fate may have blatantly ripped off parts of Fudge and then slowly erased all mentions that it did so, but it's the result of a series of systematic changes almost all of which make it pulpier. There's the way they extended the attribute ladder significantly, then put characters in a position to hit the highest levels on it routinely. There's Aspects and Stunts and what they do to the game. There's the way modifiers have been systematically purged, with negative modifiers for doing difficult things in particular vanishing. There's the breadth of the default skill lists in all Fate implementations compared to the example skills in Fudge. There's the Stress-Consequence system and how forgiving it is compared to the wound track.

I'll admit to having only been able to glamcr through FUDGE and I got a more pulpy vibe, but someone who has played more would obviously know more. But being GURPS-y doesn't really help.



200 pages is still significant, particularly when the whole group is supposed to know it. It's a lot less heavy than the D&D standard, and the 200 page standard is a large part of the reason that I can't take the claim that D&D 5e is a rules light game seriously, but it's far from nothing.

Also, system mastery is still valuable, as if you're learning the system you often have less mental energy for other types of experimenting. It's significantly more valuable if you either know a number of systems by heart, are really enamored with a particular genre and genre-implementation and know a system for that, or if you know a generic well enough to be able to do all sorts of bizarre esoteric stuff without struggle.

In modern games, the players rarely need to know all 200 pages worth of rules to play. (The average player can learn the core of Apocalypse World in 10 minutes and pretty much everything else in a single session.)

Learning other, similar systems takes a similar amount of time. The only exception is when the Character Creation minigame gets bloated and weird. Again, for any system that isn't terribly bloated it can be learned fast enough to have a go at it and figure out if it's a system you want to do more with. With free systems like Engine Heart, the worst possible outcome is you find out you don't like it.

Basically, as I said, if there happens to be a generic system that fits your needs and you can't find an existing system, just use/hack the generic. If there exists a system closer to what you envision, try it out. Unless the system costs 50 bucks and you would only ever use it once, you're probably not wrong to try something a bit more specific. Such systems (if they're half decent) will have GM resources more specific to your needs (something generic systems will usually lack entirely, seeing their flexibility as a replacement for good GM tools.)

Anonymouswizard
2016-04-13, 02:58 AM
So like I said, it will be the Store Brand option for whatever you pick. Suitable, but not as good as a dedicated system.

And sometimes store brand is just as good as name brand. In fact, I rarely notice a difference.


I learned Stars Without Number well enough to run it within about a week because it's layout is a bit terrible.

Cool, too bad it looks like a horrible Sci-Fi system compared to GURPS (the only reason I didn't learn that in a week is lack of the second book).

[/QUOTE]In other words, use rhe system you wanna use to fit the style you want. If you want to play FATE with the robots wallpaper on, then do that if it fits your needs. If you want something that gives you more explicit tools and more specific help, find a dedicated system.[/QUOTE]

Cool, GURPS gives more explicit tools for playing a robot, is it a dedicated system?


5e is lite for a DnD edition :smalltongue:

5e is less light and more trimmed down (specifically trimmed down by placing the explosives and hoping nobody notices the burn marks, while giving the cow armour).

thedanster7000
2016-04-13, 03:40 AM
Cool, GURPS gives more explicit tools for playing a robot, is it a dedicated system?


In fact, I think GURPS has rules for robots in the Basic Set, no supplements required.

Ashtagon
2016-04-13, 05:04 AM
http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/reignsteel/

GURPS Reign of Steel is the book you want. If I were to describe it in a nutshell, it's the world of post-apocalypse Terminator movies but with the serial numbers removed.

Anonymouswizard
2016-04-13, 07:51 AM
In fact, I think GURPS has rules for robots in the Basic Set, no supplements required.

Yep, the Machine meta-trait is in the Characters book, along with suggestions for additional advantages and disadvantages. GURPS is a brilliant generic science fiction game, able to switch between soft and hard but defaulting to relatively hard (for a game) except for spaceships.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 08:07 AM
And sometimes store brand is just as good as name brand. In fact, I rarely notice a difference.

You've stretchef the analogy beyond its intended meaning, but ok good for you.



Cool, too bad it looks like a horrible Sci-Fi system compared to GURPS (the only reason I didn't learn that in a week is lack of the second book).

I'll take it you've never played it and are replying like this out of what I assume is butthurt at a game that actively claims to be Generic (what did you think the G stood for?) might end up feeling generic.



Cool, GURPS gives more explicit tools for playing a robot, is it a dedicated system?

I said Tools for GMs not Rules for Player Options. These are two different things. I'm not much involved with the Robot Dominion style of story, but it could easily include things like possible goals robotic villains might have with regards to other robots, ways that robots might interact and be unique as NPCs beyond being a nifty bundle of stats. Providing ways and means for the GM to formulate a response to unexpected PC choices by creating easily-used narrative-informing tools that the GM can call upon, and ones that are tailor made to the genre. I can't say I've studied up much on GURPS, but it strikes me as being much more about being able to Stat anything rather than tell any kind of story. (Sadly, an RPG capable of handling literally any form of narrative does not exist and probably never will. No system is perfect.)

for instance, the kinds of things that happen when playing World Wide Wrestling, a game about Wrestlers in which matches are often not combat in rounds because the outcome of the match is more important than what actually happens, and focuses more on the really fascinating business/persona side of the industry, will likely not be handled well by GURPS.

A story about an automated toaster, a road re-paver, and a walking ATM trying their best to perform their duties in the absence of their human masters may be more difficult in GURPS than in Engine Heart. Both could do it, but one is built for it from the ground up. The other is not.

A story of military and service androids struggling to find acceptance as individuals and come to terms with who and what they are, and perhaps the atrocities they commited while under the forced jnfluence of their programming, and having those narrative steps have more than superficial mechanical impact on the characters, probably not a thing GURPS is good at. (And frankly, this has "Future PbtA system" written all over it.)

A pretty standard RPG adventure except all the characters are robots now? Yeah, GURPS can do that just fine because that's what it's designed for: Doing fairly standard RPG "kill bad guys, save world" adventures with whatever flavor you want. It's practically written on the box. Of course, it will pretty much always be that. That isn't BAD, just GENERIC and obviously so. And its genericness will show. When you play generic systems, it feels like you are playing that same system with different paint on because YOU ARE. It's not a totally new experience every time, it's the same familiar experience but with whatever flavor you prefer put on it instead.

Don't get butthurt because the Generic Universal Roleplay System lives up to its name. (Or rather, that someone pointed out that it does exactly what it claims to do on the box. I don't get mad when someone points out that my Chia Pet is basically just a weirdly shaped plant pot. Because that means it is working as intended)

goto124
2016-04-13, 08:19 AM
Don't get butthurt because the Generic Universal Roleplay System lives up to its name.

Will I ever hear a more Generic name ever again?

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 08:24 AM
Will I ever hear a more Generic name ever again?

Generic, the Passable at Most Things
From White Wolf or whatever they're called now

thedanster7000
2016-04-13, 08:26 AM
Something people don't seem to understand about GURPS is that it's not a generic system as a generic system. It's not a d20 clone with weapons for any setting, it's got unique, realistic, and frankly brilliant combat systems, survival rules, etc. It's realistic (although there are rules for different feels of game) and that's what makes it work as a generic system. Being designed to be generic doesn't make it work less well than other settings, because it's designed well. GURPS combat has a whole different feel to say, D&D and the like, you don't roll against AC to stab the goblin in its hit points (although there are rules to play it that way if you want to), you aim for body parts, injure, cripple, etc. Its ridiculous amount of supplements and different rules options really mean that it doesn't feel the same in every setting, because it isn't.

Anonymouswizard
2016-04-13, 08:50 AM
You've stretchef the analogy beyond its intended meaning, but ok good for you.

Now, don't act butthurt just because I used your exact words and applied them to the same situation. Maybe you notice a difference between Name Adventure System and Generic Adventure System, I do not.


I'll take it you've never played it and are replying like this out of what I assume is butthurt at a game that actively claims to be Generic (what did you think the G stood for?) might end up feeling generic.

No, I've never played SWN, because I've never needed to, GURPS can do all the Sci-Fi I want without PCs becoming able to shrug off a laser. Have you ever played GURPS? Because to me it feels no more generic than Unknown Armies except maybe in character creation, and that's just the fun of choosing magick in UA.


*words on how GURPS is simulationist and not narrative*

Yep, that's a legitimate complaint, but it doesn't make GURPS feel more generic, have you actually played the game?


A pretty standard RPG adventure except all the characters are robots now? Yeah, GURPS can do that just fine because that's what it's designed for: Doing fairly standard RPG "kill bad guys, save world" adventures with whatever flavor you want. It's practically written on the box. Of course, it will pretty much always be that. That isn't BAD, just GENERIC and obviously so. And its genericness will show. When you play generic systems, it feels like you are playing that same system with different paint on because YOU ARE. It's not a totally new experience every time, it's the same familiar experience but with whatever flavor you prefer put on it instead.

To be honest, I'll agree that GURPS needs a few more social systems, but it's not only good at 'kill bad guys, save world'. In general killing people is a bad idea in GURPS because of how fragile you are. Also again, have you played GURPS? The options are customisable enough that 'Roman Fantasy' and 'cyberpunk' feel different in play.

Man, I need to run more Roman Fantasy games, I'm considering making a more dedicated system called 'Patricians and Popularity', because it'll be fun to research and write it, as I can finally justify writing a new magic system for the setting.


Don't get butthurt because the Generic Universal Roleplay System lives up to its name. (Or rather, that someone pointed out that it does exactly what it claims to do on the box. I don't get mad when someone points out that my Chia Pet is basically just a weirdly shaped plant pot. Because that means it is working as intended)

Except you sound like you haven't played GURPS. In play it feels no more generic than D&D, World of Darkness, or Unknown Armies.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 09:27 AM
Something people don't seem to understand about GURPS is that it's not a generic system as a generic system. It's not a d20 clone with weapons for any setting, it's got unique, realistic, and frankly brilliant combat systems, survival rules, etc. It's realistic (although there are rules for different feels of game) and that's what makes it work as a generic system. Being designed to be generic doesn't make it work less well than other settings, because it's designed well. GURPS combat has a whole different feel to say, D&D and the like, you don't roll against AC to stab the goblin in its hit points (although there are rules to play it that way if you want to), you aim for body parts, injure, cripple, etc. Its ridiculous amount of supplements and different rules options really mean that it doesn't feel the same in every setting, because it isn't.

So all of them feel realistic and gritty but with different rules attached according to the setting?

I'm not sure how that's any different from a Setting book in 3.5
Eberron introduces all kids of new things to the 3.5 framework. But at no point would you believe you weren't playing 3.5.
If (for some reason) Paizo publishing released a, say, Naruto campaign setting manual for Pathfinder, with all kinds of new rules for Naruto stuff, it would certainly feel different. But it wouldn't feel like suddenly you weren't playing Pathfinder anymore.

That's the thing I'm talking about.

thedanster7000
2016-04-13, 09:31 AM
So all of them feel realistic and gritty but with different rules attached according to the setting?


GURPS has this thing accompanying basically every chapter called 'Cinematic Rules', which is a more high-powered, less-gritty feel to the game, all there with the rest of the rules if you'd prefer it.

Edit: A lot of the optional rules aren't setting-specific but more 'feel'-specific.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 09:42 AM
Now, don't act butthurt just because I used your exact words and applied them to the same situation. Maybe you notice a difference between Name Adventure System and Generic Adventure System, I do not.

I didn't throw insults at a system at any point, just pointed out that any metaphor breaks down when taken beyond intended limits. It was a metaphor, not an actual literal satement of equivalency. But hey, if it makes you feel better...



No, I've never played SWN, because I've never needed to, GURPS can do all the Sci-Fi I want without PCs becoming able to shrug off a laser. Have you ever played GURPS? Because to me it feels no more generic than Unknown Armies except maybe in character creation, and that's just the fun of choosing magick in UA.

Then you haven't even skimmed a rulebook because SWN takes a lot of its cues from OD&D. Characters die often and stupidly. When you have 20 hp at 4th level and most guns are chucking 2-3 d12s around by that point, and 0 hp means death, you might not feel like you can shrug off anything. Warriors have an ability that lets them ignore damage once per hour, sure. But that's not really the same thing you're complaining about. (And narratively speaking it's meant to display them getting NOT shot, not ignoring being shot. A soldier in a world with weapons that dangerous survives by not being there when the bullet arrives. It's a 1/irl hour free dodge.)
That, and SWN markets itself as being specifically meant for Space Opera as a genre, not broad Sci-Fi, though pulling off other sci fi tropes in the system is really easy since it's so modular. But again, it is an imperfect system and doesn't work for everything.



Yep, that's a legitimate complaint, but it doesn't make GURPS feel more generic, have you actually played the game?

Once or twice, many moons ago. It was rather obviously the same framework both times with new doohikies taped on according to setting. I don't remember most of the specifics thanks to time, but I recall being very aware that it was the same game both times.




To be honest, I'll agree that GURPS needs a few more social systems, but it's not only good at 'kill bad guys, save world'. In general killing people is a bad idea in GURPS because of how fragile you are. Also again, have you played GURPS? The options are customisable enough that 'Roman Fantasy' and 'cyberpunk' feel different in play.

They feel different in the same way Eberron feels different from standard D&D. But at no point will you forget you're playing GURPS.




Except you sound like you haven't played GURPS. In play it feels no more generic than D&D, World of Darkness, or Unknown Armies.
D&D is pretty much the catchall system for Pulpy Fantasy.
WoD I've not played personally, but all reports are that WoD is a core system with new doohikies attached.
Unknown Armies I've never touched, so I wouldn't know.

Those are three (Edit: Sorry, "at least two" is better wording here) games that sit below GURPS on the Generic scale, but not by a significant margin.

GURPS claims to be generic, and succeeds. You will get the "GURPS, except....!" Experience every time. It's what it's made for. That's the whole point of being generic. It serves a very broad mechanical purpose that is relatively easy to tack new things onto for a more specific experience, but that doesn't make it any particularly less generic than FATE, which does exactly the same thing. Except with FATE you needn't cash in for a new rulebook every time. So GURPS has the more lucrative business model, to be sure. (Though FATE tie-in splats are becoming more numerous by the day, for the exact same reason.)

As I've said several times now, GURPS is very good at doing what it does: Being a core system you cam attach an an endless amount of doodads onto to get the setting you want out of it. It will still be like GURPS and play like GURPS (because you don't have to relearn it every time, yeah?) But it will be GURPS as X or GURPS as Y. Again, that's not a bad thing and taking it as an insult is weird. It's really good at doing what it does. But let's not pretend each variation of GURPS is a mind-blowing new experience unlike any GURPS experience before it. It's still GURPS. Recognizably so, which is why people like it.
"Instead of learning multiple systems, I just learn GURPS amd then learn the new doodads as needed. That is mighty convenient!" For people that just want to learn one system and be done, GURPS is great (so long as anything they want to play will need to feel GURPS-y). There's nothing intrinsically WRONG with GURPS except for the weakpoint all Generic systems share by virtue of being what they are. Their biggest strength and their biggest weakness are the same thing: Being Generic. It's the tradeoff.

GURPS can give you the Post Apocalypse Setting experience.
It will never give you the Apocalypse World experience.

GURPS can give you the Cyberpunm experience.
It can't give you the Shadowrun experience. (Not as well as Shadowrun can, anyways.)

GURPS can give you any setting in a high lethality, simulationist way.
It can't do the pulpy FATE thing as well as FATE can.

GURPS can do robots.
GURPS can't do literally every possible robot rpg experience. It can do rhe GURPS version of the Robot RPG Experience, though, and do a crazy good job of it.

But if that's not what you need/want, play something that fits said need instead. Maybe GURPS works. If so, use it. If your vision doesn't include what GURPS is selling, don't use it. Simple.

And as has been said, sometimes store brand is just as good or better than name brand. But not often enough to call it universally superior.

GURPS is indeed flexible. (Duh. What kind of awful generic system isn't?) But it will always be GURLS at heart.

thedanster7000
2016-04-13, 09:49 AM
GURPS claims to be generic, and succeeds. You will get the "GURPS, except....!" Experience every time. It's what it's made for. That's the whole point of being generic.

Have you played GURPS? Because that's not how it feels in play at all. IMHO it seems like you're just saying it's boring without actually backing anything up.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 10:01 AM
Have you played GURPS? Because that's not how it feels in play at all. IMHO it seems like you're just saying it's boring without actually backing anything up.

And there's the miscommunication.

Generic =/= boring.

Generic means, in this context, something more akin to "Jack of All Trades, Master of None." But also not exactly that. Maybe "High flexibility, low specialization." Few systems will give the GURPS feeling to a setting better than GURPS does. And if you really love the GURPS feel (set of feels?) Then I have advice: Use GURPS.


GURPS has this thing accompanying basically every chapter called 'Cinematic Rules', which is a more high-powered, less-gritty feel to the game, all there with the rest of the rules if you'd prefer it.

Edit: A lot of the optional rules aren't setting-specific but more 'feel'-specific.

So if you used those rules with someone who had played GURPS before, could you trick them into thinking it wasn't GURPS? I'm betting thag it would be pretty clearly still the basic GURPS framework. (I wouldn't know, I haven't used those rules before and don't recall enough to comment.)

Again, Generic systems are great.

thedanster7000
2016-04-13, 10:06 AM
And there's the miscommunication.

Generic =/= boring.

Generic means, in this context, something more akin to "Jack of All Trades, Master of None."

Ah I see. However, I'm sure anyone who has played GURPS will disagree that it feels the same no matter the genre. Having the same base rules doesn't guarantee an identical experience.

Edit: I agree with you though that it, for example, could never do Shadowrun as well as Shadowrun can. I suppose my point is that, yes, it is built to do any genre, but it tends to do them very well.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 10:14 AM
Ah I see. However, I'm sure anyone who has played GURPS will disagree that it feels the same no matter the genre. Having the same base rules doesn't guarantee an identical experience.

I also never said identical. Just that it will always obviously be GURPS. Also I've been wildly editing on the fly and I'm low on sleep so excuse me if my thoughts seem disjointed, poorly worded, and vaguely erratic. So make sure to check back some, I think I clarified my points in a less hostile-seeming way already.

GURPS will always feel like GURPS because when you play GURPS... you're playing GURPS. (Distant sound of Xzibit)

That's not to say that Cyberpunk GURPS will be EXACTLY like Fantasy GURPS. But both will still be, at their heart, GURPS. Becaue both are still GURPS. The system hasn't changed, just the window dressing. Which means that GURPS is doing exactly what it was designed for. That's not a bad thing, it's just the nature of the beast. If you want to play something that doesn't feel like GURPS, you should probably not play GURPS. If you want to play something that feels like GURPS, then use GURPS.

thedanster7000
2016-04-13, 10:24 AM
I also never said identical. Just that it will always obviously be GURPS. Also I've been wildly editing on the fly and I'm low on sleep so excuse me if my thoughts seem disjointed, poorly worded, and vaguely erratic.

No problem.



GURPS will always feel like GURPS because when you play GURPS... you're playing GURPS. (Distant sound of Xzibit)

That's not to say that Cyberpunk GURPS will be EXACTLY like Fantasy GURPS. But both will still be, at their heart, GURPS. Becaue both are still GURPS. The system hasn't changed, just the window dressing. Which means that GURPS is doing exactly what it was designed for. That's not a bad thing, it's just the nature of the beast. If you want to play something that doesn't feel like GURPS, you should probably not play GURPS. If you want to play something that feels like GURPS, then use GURPS.

I feel like this is a common misconception that's all. It's obviously still GURPS mechanically, but the difference between a Cyberpunk and Fantasy Game's FEEL is immense, this is partly down to using guns instad of swords, using different skills, and the world itself. My point is that, at least in my experience, the difference between playing GURPS Fantasy and Modern feels as large on a subconscious level as GURPS Fantasy and D&D.

Anonymouswizard
2016-04-13, 12:46 PM
That's not to say that Cyberpunk GURPS will be EXACTLY like Fantasy GURPS. But both will still be, at their heart, GURPS. Becaue both are still GURPS. The system hasn't changed, just the window dressing. Which means that GURPS is doing exactly what it was designed for. That's not a bad thing, it's just the nature of the beast. If you want to play something that doesn't feel like GURPS, you should probably not play GURPS. If you want to play something that feels like GURPS, then use GURPS.

I'm backing up thedanster7000 here. GURPS will always play like GURPS, but it will feel different. In the same way that Unknown Armies does not feel like World of Darkness, despite them both being Urban Fantasy.

For the record, I have read SWN. I saw that it was based on early D&D and realised 'oh, it's meant to be an exploration game with combat in it, I'll stick to GURPS, it gives the feel better.' I agree that there are legitimate reasons to not use GURPS, from the long lists to the fact that it feels grittier than most systems, but GURPS doesn't have one feel. You might call that 'feeling generic', but if so than Unknown Armies must feel generic (which is a game built to model one very specific 'our world, but not' setting).

cobaltstarfire
2016-04-13, 01:02 PM
I suppose I'll add that the base game for Engine Heart is only 48 pages, even fewer if you count only the character generation rules/traits, and how to play. There are supplements for it I think, but I've never looked at those.

And you can make pretty much any kind of robot you want with it, the only limit really is your imagination, and I suppose the amount of points the GM allows you to start with.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 04:46 PM
No problem.



I feel like this is a common misconception that's all. It's obviously still GURPS mechanically, but the difference between a Cyberpunk and Fantasy Game's FEEL is immense, this is partly down to using guns instad of swords, using different skills, and the world itself. My point is that, at least in my experience, the difference between playing GURPS Fantasy and Modern feels as large on a subconscious level as GURPS Fantasy and D&D.

So you would regularly forget that you were playing GURPS?
You could trick someone with experiencw playing GURPS into believing it wasn't GURPS? And do so easily?

Yes, the story and setting will be different. The difference between using a sword and using a gun in am rpg comes down to description and what kind of dice you roll. (Unless they may an entirely different subsystem for using a sword that does not operate on any of the same mechanics. Which would be more silly than useful.)
FATE can do the different skills thing, too.
It will still always feel like FATE.

GURPS is not a shapeshifter. The entire reason for playing it is a consistent rulebase that allows players/GM to play any kind of game with less need to learn entirely new systems. The downside of this, the naturally occuring downside, is that GURPS can do the GURPS thing with any genre, and all the extra stuff will look and sound different, but at its core will still be the same as always. (Which is the entire point)

Again, GURPS being obviously GURPS but feeling a bit different because in this one you habe pewpew lasers and tbis one you have Swords of Justice is a vastly different kind of feeling difference than the one between D&D and Dungeon World, or between D&D and Shadowrun, or between Apocalypse World and Engine Heart.

It will go above the difference between D&D and Eberron because it shifts the entire genre around, but it will always recognizably and reliably be GURPS.
Which is the ENTIRE POINT.
To have a SINGLE SYSTEM
That DOES ANY GENRE
Without needing to LEARN A NEW SYSTEM
Because you will already know everything but splatbook special rules.

The natural downside of this is that when GURPS starts to feel old and samey (as all systems do, given enough time) you can't just slap a new tin of paint on and call it something new. It will still be GURPS. Because it IS GURPS. I could not take Apocalypse World, slap a GURPS label on it, and give it to a GURPS player with the expectation that they'll be able to pick it up and play it because it's suddenly GURPS now, and any such player woukd quickly realize something very weird was going on with this "GURPS" book.

Same goes for handing them literally any other system outside of GURPS that doesn't borrow from GURPS (but those will obviously stick out, as surely as it takes maybe a handful of minutes wjth the Dresden Files RPG to figure out its based on FATE. (Even without them saying so.)

That's what I'm talking about by system feel. You will always recognizeably be playing GURPS. If you're playing GURPS and suddenly it's class based and you're dealing with issues of ascension, gender, and ambition in medieval Iceland and only rolling 2d6 for everything, I imagine you'll very quickly realize that your GM is lying to you about what you're playing.

EDIT:
To put it in D&D terms that might illustrate my point better,
GURPS does not cast Polymorph.
But it IS a changeling.

BayardSPSR
2016-04-13, 05:23 PM
Jumping back...


The problem is that systems like FATE and FUDGE and GURPS already HAVE a built-in aesthetic, just ones that don't involve genres.

FATE is pulpy. Pretty much always. It's pulpy Fantasy or Pulpy Sci Fi or Pulpy Steampunk, but it's always pulpy.

GURPS is always simulationist.

FUDGE operates mostly how FATE does.

So like I said, it will be the Store Brand option for whatever you pick. Suitable, but not as good as a dedicated system. Most systems nowadays are only around 200 pages for the core ruleset since most people who play roleplaying games generally (outside this forum) actually don't feel the need to drown in rules and tables so they can sit down and have fun with their friends and eat cheetos while playing pretend with dice.

Those sound like dedicated systems to me: dedicated to pulp, to simulation, etc. If GURPS can only run simulationist styles of game, then it isn't all that generic, except relative to rule sets that are even more narrowly focused (like D&D). Maybe it's a semantic distinction, but a system I can use to do a narrowly-defined kind of anything doesn't seem like a system I can use to do everything I might want it to.

Which is why I conclude that the best system to use for a game (game here referring to the activity of a specific group, at a specific time) is the one that you write for that specific purpose, and that if you can't do that then you're going to have to compromise on either the suitability of your rules, or more time spent learning a new system for everyone, with a high chance that the new system you spend time learning may still not be suitable for what you wanted to do.

If I want to run a story-oriented Magical Realist Western game, and invest time in learning, say, Dogs in the Vineyard, only to find that it's not remotely what I wanted despite technically ticking the boxes, I just wasted a whole bunch of time that I could have spent taking rules I already knew how to use and modifying them until I got what I wanted.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 06:17 PM
Jumping back...



Those sound like dedicated systems to me: dedicated to pulp, to simulation, etc. If GURPS can only run simulationist styles of game, then it isn't all that generic, except relative to rule sets that are even more narrowly focused (like D&D). Maybe it's a semantic distinction, but a system I can use to do a narrowly-defined kind of anything doesn't seem like a system I can use to do everything I might want it to.

Which is why I conclude that the best system to use for a game (game here referring to the activity of a specific group, at a specific time) is the one that you write for that specific purpose, and that if you can't do that then you're going to have to compromise on either the suitability of your rules, or more time spent learning a new system for everyone, with a high chance that the new system you spend time learning may still not be suitable for what you wanted to do.

If I want to run a story-oriented Magical Realist Western game, and invest time in learning, say, Dogs in the Vineyard, only to find that it's not remotely what I wanted despite technically ticking the boxes, I just wasted a whole bunch of time that I could have spent taking rules I already knew how to use and modifying them until I got what I wanted.

FATE and GURPS are good at doing Any Genre, so long as it fits their Tone. (Which I think is a better word in this context.) I fail to see how being able to do Steampunk and Sci fi and Fantasy and (insert genre here) but with the stipulation of "but it will fit the tone of iur generic system" is considered "Specific." Their tone is specific, but everything else is rather not.

The High Probability of its not being exactly what you need is mitigated by it being (likely) very close. There are a lot of things to consider about the narrative you're constructing, and a system that hits 8/10 of those needs will be easier to modify into being what you need than one that hits 2/10.

Also, the idea that a new system must be made to fit any given need is a bit extreme. If my need is "hey, lets try Engine Heart," then Engine Heart works. Depending upon where our group goes with that system, and what things we start to want out of it, we might hack it to better suit our new needs. GURPS and FATE are as popular as they are because of their inherent flexibility allowing them to be "Good enough for my needs" options for even the most bizaare campaign concepts. The issue comes up when you get an idea/desire that doesn't mech with the feel of the system.

So basically, yiur Magical Realist Western Social game will be easier to craft out of Dogs in the Vineyard than from scratch or from Shadowrun. So saying that it is not perfect and therefore exactly as bad an option as systems that are entirely foreign to said concept is fallacious.

BayardSPSR
2016-04-13, 09:13 PM
FATE and GURPS are good at doing Any Genre, so long as it fits their Tone. (Which I think is a better word in this context.) I fail to see how being able to do Steampunk and Sci fi and Fantasy and (insert genre here) but with the stipulation of "but it will fit the tone of iur generic system" is considered "Specific." Their tone is specific, but everything else is rather not.

Yeah, tone-specific, rather than genre-specific. Good point. Obviously, more generic than something that's both tone- and genre- specific, but still a kind of specificity worth taking into consideration


The High Probability of its not being exactly what you need is mitigated by it being (likely) very close. There are a lot of things to consider about the narrative you're constructing, and a system that hits 8/10 of those needs will be easier to modify into being what you need than one that hits 2/10.

...

So basically, your Magical Realist Western Social game will be easier to craft out of Dogs in the Vineyard than from scratch or from Shadowrun. So saying that it is not perfect and therefore exactly as bad an option as systems that are entirely foreign to said concept is fallacious.

That would be fallacious; fortunately I'm not trying to suggest that a modified Shadowrun would suit the hypothetical MRWS-game. That said, not yet having acquired a copy of Dogs in the Vineyard, I can't know for sure that it's better suited to my intended game than a more-generic system that I already know how to modify. In contrast, I may know that the system I already know and have a copy of (could be GURPS, could be a genericized D20, whatever) isn't by itself right for the game I want to run, but already know how to make it suitable. So rather than figuring out the new system, figuring out how best to alter the new system, and then altering the new system, I'd just be making changes that I already know how to make. Even if it would take less time to alter the new system once I know how to do so, I'd be making a bet that learning it and learning how to fix it would take less time than fixing the system I already know. What's more, the more certain and specific I am in what I want from a game, and the more rules-light I want it to be, the better off I'm going to be making it rather than looking for something that is it.

Dogs in the Vineyard - which I do want to examine at some point - is a $15, 150-page paperback. I'm not sure how dense with content it is, but if I can read it at between one and two pages per minute, that's 75 minutes to 150 minutes. Personally, I think I can knock together a tonally- and thematically-specific rules-light system I'd enjoy playing in that period of time. If I liberally steal mechanics I've used in the past, even easier. It wouldn't be worth publishing, but it might be worth playing with other people. It's a gamble on whether I can pull it of, of course, and even if I can that doesn't mean I'd be able to in other contexts. It's also not necessarily true that other people should do it just because it strikes me as fun to try.

So I guess neither generic systems nor writing your own rules are for everyone, and that's okay, but there are situations in which both make sense.

Coidzor
2016-04-13, 10:26 PM
Man, this thread is making me remember how much I used to want to run a Phantasy Star game.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-13, 11:06 PM
Yeah, tone-specific, rather than genre-specific. Good point. Obviously, more generic than something that's both tone- and genre- specific, but still a kind of specificity worth taking into consideration



That would be fallacious; fortunately I'm not trying to suggest that a modified Shadowrun would suit the hypothetical MRWS-game. That said, not yet having acquired a copy of Dogs in the Vineyard, I can't know for sure that it's better suited to my intended game than a more-generic system that I already know how to modify. In contrast, I may know that the system I already know and have a copy of (could be GURPS, could be a genericized D20, whatever) isn't by itself right for the game I want to run, but already know how to make it suitable. So rather than figuring out the new system, figuring out how best to alter the new system, and then altering the new system, I'd just be making changes that I already know how to make. Even if it would take less time to alter the new system once I know how to do so, I'd be making a bet that learning it and learning how to fix it would take less time than fixing the system I already know. What's more, the more certain and specific I am in what I want from a game, and the more rules-light I want it to be, the better off I'm going to be making it rather than looking for something that is it.

Dogs in the Vineyard - which I do want to examine at some point - is a $15, 150-page paperback. I'm not sure how dense with content it is, but if I can read it at between one and two pages per minute, that's 75 minutes to 150 minutes. Personally, I think I can knock together a tonally- and thematically-specific rules-light system I'd enjoy playing in that period of time. If I liberally steal mechanics I've used in the past, even easier. It wouldn't be worth publishing, but it might be worth playing with other people. It's a gamble on whether I can pull it of, of course, and even if I can that doesn't mean I'd be able to in other contexts. It's also not necessarily true that other people should do it just because it strikes me as fun to try.

So I guess neither generic systems nor writing your own rules are for everyone, and that's okay, but there are situations in which both make sense.

As to your last point, no one has suggested otherwise.

As for familiarizing oneself with many systems, it has its own unique advantages in seeing mechanics you may have never seen before. (In some ways, Dogs in the Vineyard is like playing Poker rather than traditional "is X number higher?" methods. Someone who has only ever played and investigated one generic system may not even consider such a possibility (which is incredibly thematic in and of itself for Wild West settings)

Playing many systems just to try them is a thing you can do. And one I personally do and encourage. There are few downsides to building up a large collection of cheap/free rpgs as opposed to a very few expensive ones, except maybe a smaller amount of splat material. But it also gives you a broader working pool of systems to draw from when deciding what to use to play a certain kind of narrative. My current pool of systems I could easily run at any given moment is as follows:
D&D 3.5
Stars Without Number
Apocalypse World
World Wide Wrestling
Engine Heart
Shadowrun 4e
FATE (accelerated included)
Fall of Magic
Dungeon World
Shadows
And my small handful of homebrews.

This is a pretty broad list, and one that I continue to expand in regular intervals. I haven't GMed all of them with my group yet, but these are all ones I feel that I could GM for in short order. There are others that I own but would not feel comfortable GMing currently
(Only War, M&M, a couple others.)

So yeah, there's little wrong with expanding your GM toolbox as much as makes sense for your time/budget constraints.

thedanster7000
2016-04-14, 03:35 AM
The natural downside of this is that when GURPS starts to feel old and samey (as all systems do, given enough time) you can't just slap a new tin of paint on and call it something new. It will still be GURPS. Because it IS GURPS. I could not take Apocalypse World, slap a GURPS label on it, and give it to a GURPS player with the expectation that they'll be able to pick it up and play it because it's suddenly GURPS now, and any such player woukd quickly realize something very weird was going on with this "GURPS" book.
.

Obviously your point is valid, completely valid, but what I'm trying to get across is that if you played GURPS you'd see that GURPS does a very good job of not seeming stale. You're correct 100% in theory but in practice it does feel very different with every genre or tone it takes on. Perhaps though this is down to my familiarity with the system, so playing it comes as second nature to me, allowing me to focus more on the setting or genre, which is what it 'feels' like to me.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-14, 07:25 AM
Obviously your point is valid, completely valid, but what I'm trying to get across is that if you played GURPS you'd see that GURPS does a very good job of not seeming stale. You're correct 100% in theory but in practice it does feel very different with every genre or tone it takes on. Perhaps though this is down to my familiarity with the system, so playing it comes as second nature to me, allowing me to focus more on the setting or genre, which is what it 'feels' like to me.

I'm not talking about Genre feel, but system feel. Generic systems tend to have a long shelf life thanks to their flexibility, but GURPS is still GURPS amd at no point will you be convinced otherwise. If you really like GURPS' core mechanics then good news.

If playing the same mechanics over and over gets old (like for me) GURPS is not a good option even with new doohickies attached. And I prefer dedicated systems that give me a variety of narrative experiences not just in the sense of Genre.

I play SWN to get Firefly and Star Wars vibes out of my sci fi game. I play Shadowrun for my cyberpunk. For post-apocalypse stories that feel more Walking Dead than Mad Max, Apocalypse World. For the inverse I'd probably use FATE, but I'm not really sure. (Something with a more dedicated vehicle combat system that still lets the PCs be hardcore)

But this derailment has gone on long enough. Sorry OP

thedanster7000
2016-04-14, 10:40 AM
I'm not talking about Genre feel, but system feel. Generic systems tend to have a long shelf life thanks to their flexibility, but GURPS is still GURPS amd at no point will you be convinced otherwise. If you really like GURPS' core mechanics then good news.

If playing the same mechanics over and over gets old (like for me) GURPS is not a good option even with new doohickies attached. And I prefer dedicated systems that give me a variety of narrative experiences not just in the sense of Genre.

I play SWN to get Firefly and Star Wars vibes out of my sci fi game. I play Shadowrun for my cyberpunk. For post-apocalypse stories that feel more Walking Dead than Mad Max, Apocalypse World. For the inverse I'd probably use FATE, but I'm not really sure. (Something with a more dedicated vehicle combat system that still lets the PCs be hardcore)

But this derailment has gone on long enough. Sorry OP

Yeah, I agree, perhaps I haven't found this because I'm such a big fan of the system.

ImNotTrevor
2016-04-14, 04:20 PM
Yeah, I agree, perhaps I haven't found this because I'm such a big fan of the system.

It's easy to become blind to some of the downsides of a system when you like it a lot. Playing lots of systems just to see how they operate and such can reveal such things to you, but whether or not that is a good thing is going to be your call.

Back to the topic at hand, It's really gonna depend on what KIND of robot game OP is trying to run. Just "A game where everyone is robots" is, shockingly, too vague.

If yiu want less gritty Sci-Fi than GURPS will give you, you could in fact use SWN and fluff everyone into being a robot, and have a lot of their most important stuff be built-in, and make The Perimeter Agency their primary enemy. (Because they want to destroy any sentient machines because sentient machines are very, very dangerous). You can go the "Interplanetary smugglers with a lot of debt" route, which would be an odd one, or stick them on a planet as fugitives and refugees hiding from and striking back at local Perimeter forces and trying to gain allies and prove their innocence. (Or hide their guilt.) SWN takes a lot of the "Heist-y" gameplay of OD&D, but modernizes it to the point where it doesn't feel like playing OD&D anymore. It also has a LOOOOT of relly great GM tools for doing lots of different things.
Downsides are that it really won't allow you to play people that are vastly more powerful than a normal person, the combat can get a bit swingy and weird and is highly lethal until midlevel, when characters become a bit more substantial thanks to finally being able to afford better armor/personal shielding and the like.

thedanster7000
2016-04-14, 05:39 PM
It's easy to become blind to some of the downsides of a system when you like it a lot. Playing lots of systems just to see how they operate and such can reveal such things to you, but whether or not that is a good thing is going to be your call.
Very true, although I do play a variety of systems, although I doubt any others I play than GURPS would work for the OP's idea.



If yiu want less gritty Sci-Fi than GURPS will give you
Just going to point out that GURPS has a non-gritty 'mode' in which you take less damage and injury works differently and feels more heroic. But yes, depending on the type of game the OP wants to play, GURPS could easily not be ideal, and I agree with your suggestions.

Xefas
2016-04-14, 06:39 PM
Free Market
It'll ruin your friend~ships
Free Market
It's nihilism is end~less

Free Market
-It made my girlfriend cry!
Free Market
-Where your PC can't die!
(Even if they want to!)

Free Market
It makes you look inside yourself
Free Market
And realize there's nothing left

-Or maybe there was really nothing ever there at all~

Yea, Free Market! (https://www.burningwheel.com/store/index.php/freemarket.html)

DarkStar88
2016-04-23, 05:44 PM
I suppose I'll add that the base game for Engine Heart is only 48 pages, even fewer if you count only the character generation rules/traits, and how to play. There are supplements for it I think, but I've never looked at those.

And you can make pretty much any kind of robot you want with it, the only limit really is your imagination, and I suppose the amount of points the GM allows you to start with.

If anything, Engine Heart is just a little too Spartan. The scenery described in the modules is minimalist and in the modules you'll come across places that describe running into a whole class of bots that have just a 1-2 sentence description. And outside of robots in the modules there is no bestiary at all. I've spent several hours inventing some statted robots just so the Programmer (DM) can have some NPC's ready instead of nothing.

That being said I think the premise of Engine Heart is brilliant. While I'm usually a diehard fan of DGR*, the idea of overlooked robots left to fend for themselves is really unique. It's like the servants of a castle who the people in charge rarely think of and would never take into the wide world waking up to everyone who gave them order being gone from the king to the lowliest squire...every last person who told them what to do in everyday situations and emergencies, just GONE. Like the novels where something kills all the adults but leaves the children. And unlike human servants the player-robots don't have consistent abilities. They have different numbers of arms, ways of moving, physical abilities, etc. and (unless you decide otherwise) there's no room for self-improvement. It forces players to think harder how to be part of a successful team and there's also little use for money, which helps put the brakes on the "brute force and loot" driven style of play we're all familiar with. (I've been guilty of it myself on occasion!)

*Darned Good Reason - ie; you've wouldn't go out into a very hostile world with single-digit hitpoints and a rusty dagger. Hat tip to RHJunior for the term!