Updating the B/X Conversions Page

As I delve into my GURPS fantasy game, I've updated the B/X conversion page. The guiding principle is 'zero design', relying solely on conversions from B/X-like sources. I've opted for Basic Fantasy, a straightforward, ascending AC system that provides all the 'base data' I need for a robust conversion. Its simplicity and solid implementation give me confidence in the design choices.

Versions of the d20 fantasy game past the original B/X, BECMI, or AD&D do not convert well to GURPS. Everything past the video game-like D&D 3.0 scaled the hit point scale and eliminated the concept of hit dice, which are essential for the original numbers to work. Even AD&D 2nd Edition has very high hit points for the more enormous monsters, and they messed with the game's secret sauce when they changed the original damage scales.

An ancient red dragon with 660 (D&D 3.5E), 362 (Pathfinder 1e), 1,390 (D&D 4E), and 546 (D&D 5E) hit points shows you how much they scaled damage up to attract video gamers. In AD&D, S&W, or OSRIC? 88 hit points? BECMI? 90 hit points. OSE or B/X? 59 hit points. Even AD&D 2nd could have been better at 104 hp, but this is where it started. Fighters did not multi-attack in earlier editions of the game, which is what all damage scaling is based on. That 1d8+X longsword can still hurt a dragon in the earlier games, and in all later editions, that "basic attack" became a joke, along with most martial characters.

GURPS? The dragon has an HP of 50. This is an adult dragon, so an ancient red dragon would likely be 80 or 90, putting the GURPS HP scale directly in line with B/X games. GURPS was designed around the time of AD&D, so the numbers in the same area do not surprise me. The only real difference here is the curve, with B/X having a very weak low end, a sizeable middle distribution, and a longer high hit-point upper range. GURPS HP is primarily linear (since HP = ST in most cases) with a floor, starting at the default human 10 HP.

For me, the original B/X, BECMI, and AD&D games are not just fantasy; they are richly defined micro-settings, each inspired by a blend of Vance, Howard, Lovecraft, Leiber, Tolkien, and, surprisingly, the Bible. With their classic 'good versus evil' theme, these games are the authentic roots of the fantasy genre, a stark contrast to today's games that often dilute these classic conflicts with distractions and mass-media influences. They evoke a sense of nostalgia and appreciation for the origins of our beloved genre.

The fantasy genre is not the fantasy genre without biblical influence. Try to remove it, and it is AD&D 2nd Edition all over again.

Why not use Dungeon Fantasy monsters? I want to play the original adventures and directly use the statistics of the monsters and creatures in those books. The characters in Dungeon Fantasy are the heroes, while the converted monsters are the world's foes. It is an odd combination, more like GURPS characters in a strange, almost video-game-like reality, semi-based in the GURPS simulation, but with that classic dungeon-crawling feeling.

Yes, a goblin can have 1d6+2 HP. That is way less than Dungeon Fantasy's 12 for goblins and 14 for orcs. But using a hit-die scale lets me say, "These orcs are level 3 fighters; they have 3 HD." Suddenly, they are 18 HP beasts and have 14-minus skills. With armor, those are fearsome.

The base 1 HD versions of the monsters that serve a crucial role in the game-they are 'minions.' Dangerous in numbers, and with lucky hits, they can be taken down with one solid hit. Their presence adds a thrilling element to the game, making every encounter a strategic challenge.

Realistic characters in a B/X reality are the essence of the game. This means some monsters will be 'boss monsters' that a party needs to take on, while others will be more minion-like. Some monsters may be so formidable that they require modern weapons to defeat them or teams of twelve or more heroes at significant cost. This balance between realism and gameplay ensures that every encounter is immersive and challenging, adding depth to the game.

So, this is different from a typical GURPS game. The monster half is uninterested in simulation and presents that "hit die progression" where monsters start as minions and gradually outclass character power. The character side is 100% GURPS in living in a reality like that.

Each Character is a Game

Every character in GURPS is a game.

One of the things that I find most reassuring about this system is its straightforward and consistent rules. When you design a character, it's almost as if you're doing game design. Unlike the D&D-style' interrupt style design', GURPS doesn't endlessly tack on specific case rules that supersede the rule they just told you to handle one way.

If you have this ability, rule X works like special case Y. They keep doing this in the classes and spells, this endless series of short circuits and rule overrides. It is a spaghetti-coding waterfall rule design. But 5E is simple! When you start, yes. But after you buy the book, the first-level character is designed to get you into the game like a mobile game's first few hours.

300 special cases later from a dozen different classes and subclasses, I would rather be playing a game with consistent mechanics. As you level, things rapidly become more complicated.

I remember reading the first ability that gave me a "bonus action" in the 2014 5E rulebook. I flipped to the combat chapter and could not find anything mentioning "bonus actions," so I sat there, confused and wondering what the book was doing or if it was a typo. For a few hours, I sat there wondering, "What type of action is a bonus action, and where can I find it?" Later, we found the rules that said "only one bonus action per turn," we all realized "we were playing it wrong."

Again.

As detailed as GURPS combat is, I never had problems like this learning the system. Like the arcade game Qix, learning GURPS involves blocking off some rules, reading through them, trying them yourself, and then moving on to the next section. Even combat is like this. Learn turn structure. Learn to-hits. Understand the difference between melee and ranged. Learn how damage works. Learn how stunning works. Understand armor. Learn how dying works.

Once the GURPS framework is built in your head, the entire game is simple and straightforward.

As your character grows in power in GURPS, the system doesn't become more complicated. The odds improve, and you can buy more skills and abilities, but the fundamental structure of the rules remains consistent. You're not dealing with rule overrides, special action types, or creating interrupts to rulings.

GURPS actions are straightforward and consistent. You don't constantly change how you handle a situation, which can be a relief compared to other systems.

The math gets better.

The game doesn't get any more complicated.

Special actions open up, like the ones with hefty penalties, and you can do special attacks and defenses easily, where less-skilled opponents can't. You outclass your enemies and aren't gaining special attacks that lower-level characters can't have. All-out defense is not something only level 5 fighters unlock, and no one else can have, and it is designed to break a rule elsewhere.

Where the complexity of GURPS lies in character design. Designing a character creates a "game" that works within the GURPS simulation framework. Yes, you get the standards like attributes and skills, but you also get a set of powers you decide. You also get a set of advantages and disadvantages that define how your character works within the simulation.

And compared to a 5E or Pathfinder character, who can sometimes stretch across eight to twelve character sheets, most GURPS characters fit on a single two-sided piece of paper. I have had Pathfinder 1e characters in Hero Lab that came out to a dozen pages of text, spell descriptions, abilities, and exceptional cases up and down the two-column sheet.

But GURPS characters are a game in that the skills you pick unlock what you can do in the simulation. It sounds like "duh, that is what skills do," but it is more than that. When you build a character, you build the "game" you want to play in GURPS. Is your character more social? Stealth based? A melee combat juggernaut? A DX fighter? Or a mix of a few types? A crafter? A survival character? The character you build will be the "game" you play inside the "sim framework" of the rules.

YouTube: Solo Dungeon Fantasy, Vehicle Combat, and Live Play

Wow, we have a trio of cool videos to check out today, and the YouTube creators are really stepping up their games and putting out some great videos! All of these are new within the last day, and they are worth watching, giving views and likes, and supporting the GURPS YouTubers. To have so many cool videos dropping in one day is amazing, and I love to see the flood of GURPS content!

A GURPS vehicle combat example is a rare example of play and excellent for learning the game.

Imagine a video that's specifically tailored to your needs as a solo Dungeon Fantasy player. This is it! This video is a perfect starting point for those of us who prefer to adventure alone.

We also have a live play to watch and support. We love our live-play channels, which help spread the word about how great GURPS is for groups and streaming.

How did I find these? My search link is on the sidebar. Make your gaming world positive with the videos and creators we like that support our community, and avoid the constant drama and clickbait streams in the 5E world. Seeing people excited about playing, making games, and talking about playing makes me excited and keeps me positive and happy when I think about my games and recreation time.

Play games you love, immerse yourself in positive content, and be happy about your hobby.

After the End: Print Books

In the 1980s, my brother and I played the classic Aftermath game. This game got us out of AD&D and Top Secret, and we loved that system. So I saw pre-orders for the After the End books in physical copies, and I jumped at these.

The Aftermath game had a fantastic setting. It was not a "zombie" post-apocalypse setting; it was a gritty, hardcore, pick-the-end setting that offered two options: 20 years after or 200. The world could have ended due to nuclear war, plague, comet impact, alien invasion, societal collapse, or any number of other world-ending events.

Again, today, people don't get what an actual end-of-the-world setting feels like. There is far too much "Walking Dead" out there, which feels more like a videogame with infinitely spawning enemies that live forever, are always there for combat encounters, and never decay. I hate to be gruesome, but most of the "Walking Dead" would probably rot away within five years. You would see them naturally decrease over time. But because of television, they are immortal and infinitely respawn.

Like the Walking Dead, people are the reason we fight and the factions that oppose us. But the zombies in the setting are replaced by killer animals, androids, and high-tech warbots. Even a piranha can jump out of a river and bite your face, chasing you into an angry bear with a box of sweating TNT in his cave. We played that game with an insane twist, where even an ATM could try to kill you.

It was all worth it to get those cans of valuable beans.

https://www.gog.com/en/game/jagged_alliance

The original Jagged Alliance game on DOS felt a lot like Aftermath. You started out with small caliber pistols, scavenged 3-6 bullets here and there, used melee combat, and eventually found upgrades like hunting rifles, shotguns, and body armor. Everything had durability and wore down, needing repair or replacement. High-tech military weapons and ballistic armor were end-games +5 Vorpal swords and +3 magic plate mail. By then, you were fighting armored robots and androids in vast underground bunkers.

Jagged Alliance gets it, where finding one good quality crowbar opens up options to your party of mercenaries and explorers. That can be used to pry open doors, lockboxes, locked desks, storage lockers, and med-kits on the wall. The strong person in the group gets that, and possibilities open up. They could use it as a lethal weapon when in doubt.

And finding that pre-ruin crowbar is hard.

That incremental gear game is the heart and soul of Aftermath. You find something worthwhile, and raiders try to take it from you. You build a community, and raiders try to burn it all down. You explore the wilderness and ruins and deal with hazards from traps, radiation, bears, wild dogs, boars, weather, ambushes, and all sorts of other things that try to kill you.

It is like a puzzle game, where every critical gear discovery opens up more avenues and options for what the party can do, where they can go, how they solve problems, and how they proceed through the mission.

This isn't Fallout, either, at least not the "action game" new versions. These were the older Fallout games, where you never got in a pair of power armor or had personal nuke launchers. You had a single-shot pipe rifle and 20 bullets, and you learned how to repair it. Maybe some scavenged lamellar leather and metal layered armor that was heavy. Melee weapons were your mainstays. Archery and crossbows were viable alternatives.

Scavenging was a viable career if not a dangerous one.

The adventures here were simple and followed the familiar fantasy models. Bandits (orcs) raided trading caravans or stole animals or food. Someone was lost; a scavenging party hadn't returned yet. Rumors of a cache of weapons or other valuables circulated. A colony's water or power source needed parts for repair. Something strange was going on, and it needed investigation. The colony's radio picked up a SOS. Medicine was required to quell sickness. Dangerous mutated rats were sneaking in at night.

Or the model could follow the tried-and-true Western movie plots: bandits, bounties, sheriffs, gunfights, brawls, gangs coming into town, a lost horse, a remote farm or ranch sending a distress signal, or a messenger who needs to ride fast to an outpost or a nearby village asking for help. The mix of fantasy and the Western genre was fun, and you got to play with guns and high-tech stuff every so often.

Oh, and the Mad Max and Car Wars genre was not this either; that was way different, over the top and cinematic, with gas-powered mayhem and a Judas Priest soundtrack.

In those days, we did not need zombies or Fallout power armor; the post-apocalypse genre was better without them. The stories were more personal and realistic. The backdrop of the familiar world, now gone, compared with a future you make (or lose) is the drama of the setting.

It is good to see these two sourcebooks coming to print for the day when we lose all our electronic devices and need old-fashioned books to spend our time with after everything ends, and we find ourselves remembering a world that we knew once was.

Please Let Me Design the Character I Want

In my recent gaming adventures, I've delved into the world of Tales of the Valiant, a new 5E game by Kobold Press. It's a compelling alternative for those who may not be fans of Wizards. However, the electronic character sheets in Hero Lab, while functional, seem to have been left in a state of limbo, with no new updates or content for months. I have not been able to buy anything for the designer since it came out (remember this point).

I still like ToV for the "clean room" 5E it is, and it lacks the barrage and drama of D&D 2024/5. It is a good system if you are stuck using 5E.

I am also comparing it to Pathfinder 1e, the classic 3.5 system that refuses to die for me. Pathfinder 1e is my peak, all time best, d20 fantasy game. Having a complete set of books for this makes it hard to play this "D&D style sword & sorcery" with GURPS, so I use GURPS for dark fantasy, gritty fantasy, and other fantasy genres. Pathfinder 1e has never been topped, and I know how broken this game is. Like GURPS, it has exploits up the wall, and we house rule and disallow the obviously broken parts.

So, why bring these two up?

I can design fantastic characters in Pathfinder 1e with the Classic Hero Lab. I did a dual-wielding, short-whip plus short sword drow cleric who wears leather armor. She came out great, so I said, hey, let's try to design her in 5E!

No, please, no, don't.

The 3.5 rules have a relatively open feat list, which allows you to give clerics a two-weapon fighting feat and even weapon finesse to reduce her penalties to a +0 on each hand, so she is doing a d4 and d6 attack every turn with a DEX of 15. All she needs is combat casting, and she is complete. Though I could replace her weapon finesse feat with that, give her a -2 in each hand, and improve her combat casting. At low levels, I will cast spells out of combat and stick to hitting as much as possible until I get that feat when the spells get good.

But designing her in 5E? The designers know better than you. Trying to get a cleric proficient in martial weapons is hard enough, and dual-wielding is out of the question. I was trying to design her with my tools and ran into these "not in our design" roadblocks at every turn.

The trouble is, she is a valid character archetype! I could see a drow cleric like that in my world, using her whip to pull enemies toward her for a quick stab with the short sword. The problem is that most 5E designers can't, and they don't allow you to design anything remotely creative or fun. Between 2024 D&D and today's versions of the game, your options and creativity have gone down to what the designers allow you to do and nothing more.

In ToV, I am the classic D&D plate priest or the cloth-wearing World of Warcraft priest.

She is boring and, in some games, limited to blunt weapons only.

Again, the West Coast "big tech" design philosophy of D&D and these other d20 games comes up, and I feel I am playing a mobile game that won't let me do this with one type of currency and not something else with another. The shell game of 5E involves the designers laying out a maze of options for every character build, forcing players to go to Internet forums to find the best one. Eventually, the really broken stuff gets errata, and the best stuff is the new balance baseline for the next monster book. Everyone else "doing their own thing" gets left behind and seen as amateurs.

More often than not, the designer of a 5E game tells you what you can't do rather than what you can.

Pathfinder 1e, though my all-time great, still needs to catch up in many places, and I had to pay a lot of money for books and Hero Lab expansions (remember what I said?) to get any level of flexibility. This is another pillar of West Coast design theory, taking away as many options as possible in the base game and forcing players to pay to get them back, one at a time.

You can design your dream character once you give the company and its partners a few thousand dollars. This also puts the "sunk cost" strategy in play, where the whales will be vocal about "defending their investment" online, and you get these vocal advocates on social media who have the incentive to turn the hobby into a combat sport to justify all the money they wasted on a West Coast design.

I am being sarcastic and cynical here, and that scent of vinegar is in my words since I am cleaning my coffee maker today, but all this is true. I spent a few thousand dollars on Pathfinder 1e over the years, and I only now have the flexibility I have with the eighty-dollar Dungeon Fantasy boxed set.

I created her in Pathfinder 1e; the flexibility comes within 10% of GURPS. Pathfinder 1e has a lot of options, and I can build a wide variety of character types, but GURPS just blows any of these "dungeon crawl" games out of the water in terms of character design.

Very little here tells me what I can't do.

90% of GURPS is options telling me what I can do.

If it doesn't exist, I can design and have it myself. In West Coast games, I pay for a few options at a time and hope I get what I want someday. In GURPS, I have the full power of the game designer.

I can design her in GURPS easily, and better than even Pathfinder 1e with a bunch of custom spells she can use in her unique fighting style. Is she "system optimal" in GURPS? No, there are clearly better combat builds than hers, but her distinctive style of whip-and-short-sword is a fun, classic drow, evil-fighting style I can see enhanced by her dark cleric magics that I can give her in Dungeon Fantasy.

In Pathfinder 1e, I don't have many "combat enhancement" spells as a cleric, whereas, in GURPS, I can make a bunch of new whip and short sword spells if I don't have them.

The only thing West Coast games have over GURPS is ease of use. I can pop in and play with Pathfinder 1e, though character design takes just as long with as many books as I have. Still, when I play, there are many tables and random charts to make playing the game easy, along with giant lists of monsters and treasures. I have samples of NPCs created. All the spells are there. The magic items are plentiful. Everything is done for me. Though 90% of it I will never use, it is there.

When you boil it down, lists are just worthless lists.

The character is the heart of the game.

And if a game limits my character, it limits my fun.

Genre and the Centralization of Character

What is a genre? Does character serve genre? Or is it the other way around?

GURPS takes a unique approach, placing the character at the core of the game. Everything in GURPS, including the genre itself, revolves around the character sheet. The core of GURPS is character creation, which is the game's heart.

But aren't other games centered around character creation? Not really. I like GURPS because of the moment when the movie is blurry and the director focuses the lens on the main character in the film—the character. GURPS gives this "deep focus" where the hero is the most important element of the game. Experience, genre, and even the rules of "life" serve the central character concept.

Some games that use a generic-style character creation system tightly tie themselves to the genre and game world. Examples include Runequest, Traveller, and other games that tightly tie the experience to a setting.

GURPS's design has an almost "old school Hollywood" feel. The player is an actor taking a role, and the character on the sheet is the role being played. It doesn't matter if James Earl Jones is playing an evil sorcerer in Conan or a government official in a Tom Clancy movie; he is the player and brings everything he can to each role he takes on. Those two characters are so different, showing the actor's grasp of the role, character, depth, and range of this actor's profession.

Contrast this with modern games, which assume "you are the character" and the rules never allow you to live beyond yourself. Or they enable you to cosplay an internal identity, but it still is you under that face paint and foam rubber facade.

There is a massive difference between costume and make-up, who the character is on the inside, and their life experiences. Many players will say, "A dwarf is someone with a Scottish accent," and stop there. There isn't a life experience; you aren't acting; it is just a silly voice.

In GURPS, the character sheet is the "actor's notes" on who this person is. A part of the experience is living "outside the genre," and the character and how that character is played define the role and go beyond genre. An actor brings so much more to a role than a face and a voice, but the character the actor plays is also "not the actor."

In GURPS, I give myself a kleptomaniac or greedy disadvantage. I may not have a greedy or thieving bone in my body, but as an actor, I need to figure that out and use my life experiences to make this "role" come alive at the table.

That dwarf in GURPS will have a list of advantages and disadvantages outside of that silly accent. He may feel guilt over a loss in his past life. He may hold a grudge. He may have dreams. He likely has deep flaws.

Another troubling part about today's games is that they "sell a life experience" as the game. Life experiences happen outside the game, and they are what you bring to it to enjoy the game better. You end up playing every game with yourself as a character actor, playing yourself. You don't have range; if someone hands you a character sheet with something outside your life experience, you can't play that character.

Even if a game is about a list or a subsystem experience, you still need to bring your "acting chops" to a table and not let the game - or even your own self - define the character you play. That character sheet is the heart of the game; in GURPS, this focus is built into the game.

It's interesting how some games prioritize different elements over the character, like most generic fantasy games, many sci-fi genres, and even some modern Euro-style fantasy games. In these games, the 'lists' they provide are the core experience, and the collection of things 'is' the experience. D&D has embraced this approach, with licensed IPs taking precedence over generic fantasy elements. Mind flayers, beholders, and copyrighted content are featured as the 'bad guys' rather than generic villains like dragons or evil sorcerers. This caters to the players' preferences, but it's important to note that not all list games' are 'generic fantasy.'

This also covers Star Wars, Star Trek, and other sci-fi games that feel more like the 'list' of licensed IP gets put before the character. You play those games to experience the genre simulation. Understanding this variety of game elements can make you a more knowledgeable RPG player or designer. Many GURPS games fail since referees need to convert everything to have a complete experience.

Some games are such vast lists of stuff that it would take decades to convert them all over. Yes, you do not need to convert for a great experience, but there is still that feeling that a phonebook's content needs to be converted to have "all the options."

A mechanical system is built and placed before the characters in some games. In a game like Forbidden Lands, this fantastic "world generation engine" is mixed with preset encounters in the book, creating a dynamic game experience. The characters are the impetus of action and change, but the character sheet is not the "center of the world." You can still bring your "acting gravitas" to a game like this, but the natural appeal of the game is experiencing the "random systems" inside of it and seeing what world it creates for you.

These games aren't bad or wrong; they are just different. Games like The Walking Dead or Twilight: 2000 are incredibly fun, like a hybrid role-playing wargame and board game. They are the closest we can get to having a video game of the experience, and they give us resource subsystems and abstracted mechanics and deliver a more extensive simulation than "just a character."

You can play Twilight: 2000 with GURPS, sure. But the game delivers so much more than just one character. Again, this is a focus thing. Are we more focused on a character or the entire event around them? For some, playing through the whole event without the "character as focus" delivers the experience they want.

We can also borrow these generation systems and play the game using GURPS rules. This works as long as you can define where one game stops and the other begins. You still lose something, but you gain what you like about GURPS.

But there are times when I want my experience to center on that character and how I bring them alive with my ability to translate what is on that sheet, through my life experiences, to a character in the game who is not me.

Most of what is in GURPS, the advantage and disadvantage lists, are things outside my experience, the "not me" things I need to translate to make a character come alive.

This is why when I play a genre with GURPS, I focus more on the character than a generic list of stuff I need to convert over. I drill down on a character; the world and "junk in it" are secondary. I have books with stuff in them that I can use, and all the GURPS sourcebooks provide 90% of what I need. Most of the other 10% is something reskinned and "flavored" as something else. Converting things becomes an impediment to the fun of the game and also does not play into the strength of the system.

GURPS is a system that puts a character sheet first in an infinite plane of blank hexes. How those hexes appear, what is in them, and how you interact with them is the lens that genre and worldbuilding create.

But the character sheet is the pivot point in which everything else revolves.

Kitchen Sink Fantasy and Slowing Down

When I convert kitchen sink fantasy games into GURPS, I always emphasize the need to slow down and deeply consider the implications of the information presented. Many games provide 'lists with little thought' to fulfill specific criteria and offer content. However, the detailed and immersive game content truly excites and makes us eager to explore.

I am always careful around games with huge lists. They tend to prioritize quantity over quality, and they have ruined many of my games.

Let's take the archetypical 'giant ant' as a prime example. Most games would present a stat block and move on. However, a more thorough exploration of this creature, delving into its ability to crawl on walls, burrow, and carry its body weight many times, can significantly enrich our understanding and appreciation of the game world. This kind of in-depth exploration is what keeps us engaged and intrigued.

Okay, that is good to know, and while some games will tell you, "The referee is free to add that," they are.

But feeling required to give hundreds of monsters in a game means a lot will be lost. What happens when giant ants create a nest in a community? How fast do they multiply? Will they haul away every animal, crop, and person as food for the hive? How fast do they spread underground? Do they burrow into the basements and root cellars first? Is there a queen and an egg chamber? Can fire drive them away? What happens when you flood a nest?

All the above information mentioned takes a little thought to work through, but many games just rush right past that and move on to the next monster in the 'A' section. This rush can lead to a lack of depth and immersion in the game. Please slow down and consider the implications of game elements, as this can make us feel more thoughtful and reflective. In some fantasy worlds, the giant ant (especially like the above) is more of a monster suited for horror or even 'monster movie' games. I may not want that in a lighthearted fantasy game.

Some games assume that "everything is in every world."

Again, slowing down on lycanthropy can give you some fantastic games. Reading up on the myth of lycanthropes, we can go well beyond the "werewolf in the room protecting the chest of silver and healing potions" and get into mysteries, which person the werewolf is, and lots of social roleplay exploring the concepts of "monsters who live among us" and the suspicion and paranoia that can cause in a community. When the full moon approaches, a sense of dread and fear takes over the community as doors and windows are barred shut. When players are in the barred tavern and hear the first screams, what do they do?

Again, I may not even want lycanthropy in some worlds. The concept does not fit well if I don't wish to have those themes in my world or feel they would be distracting.

The lycanthrope entry should give sample adventures and hooks like the above. Instead, many games rush to the next monster, moving on without giving me anything to spark my imagination.

Orcs are another great example, and also a topical one. Assuming they are just another "marshmallow shape in the character options box" does them a great disservice. Can we give them a culture? Why do so many worship Orcus? What happens when they are added to a world? Do they have massive armies that take over land? Do they have so much infighting between tribes and factions that it constantly sabotages their efforts? What magics do they know, and did they come up with unique ones? 

Again, a great referee will create an excellent culture for them, show them respect, and give their kin a specific "gravity" to make them essential players. They don't have to be evil in every world, but just because they aren't, it doesn't mean they are just "another anybody in a fantasy clip art picture." They have a culture, a history, and a place in the world. Slowing down and giving them a place in the world gives them the respect they deserve.

What weapons would lizard people use? Long spears that could get caught in underwater vegetation, or short blades that they could use in underwater combat easily? What sort of missile weapons do they like? Blowguns? Slings? Do they cover themselves in mud as camouflage? How does an ambush work? I know they won't be showing up to a fight in full plate with English longbows, and they will adjust how they fight to the swampy environments they prefer to live in. Can they be trade partners? What gods do they worship? Do they raise alligators and other swamp animals for defense and food?

Slow down! Imagine. Take your time.

Make them live in the world.

Show them respect.

This is why I am careful around "games with lots of lists." They put me in a TLDR mode, where too much information is fire-hosed at me, and I don't care about any of it. Some games go, "Yeah, we have gem dragons; here are the stats," and never explain why they are here, what they are, where they come from, or what they represent in a fantasy context. They can't answer why they are essential to a fantasy world other than as a novelty in a list of other novelty monsters where only a few are compelling.

Some games hide efforts to control your world through copyrighted and trademarked content. Sure, some of these things are fun, but I stick more to the classic, public-domain, open-source monster lists than games run by big corporations. I like to write about my games, share, and write novels about them someday. I must be careful around copyrighted content to ensure "what I create is mine."

I am a big fan of gamers owning their own ideas so they can build on them and eventually monetize them. Copyrighted fantasy IP prevents that or creates a lot of work in replacing things.

Some games overload you with too many options, which should be better thought out. Yes, you can pick and choose, but there is a point of overload when a game has over a thousand monsters, many with nonsensical vanity variants, like "lava gnomes."

The concept of a "monster" reflects humankind's mortal failings. A dragon's horde represents the sin of greed and the power of the rich; the lands around him are likely impoverished. Old-style orcs were wrath, brutality, and the insanity of war. The giant ants represent uncontrolled nature and the failure to plan and defend communities from those ravages. Fighting these things should connect on a deeper level.

You aren't fighting monsters; you are fighting the weaknesses of humankind.

The mayor ignored the ants in the woods. The town's crops are ravaged, and starvation will occur during the winter. Was it caused by pride? Greed? Envy? Or just hiding the problem and pretending it didn't exist? A human failure caused this situation.

The characters can now step in and be the heroes the town needs them to be.

Games with enormous lists and little inspiration and thought could be better. They check boxes and don't deliver inspired choices. GURPS does a great job in its sourcebooks slowing down and providing inspiration on narrow subjects, which is why I love the game. Our few books on monsters are great (GURPS Dragons and a few others). When I run a fantasy game, I carefully go into the same detail on a subject to make it come alive and give it the respect it deserves.

We don't have "GURPS Orcs" or "GURPS Slimes" guides, but if I include a monster, I like to think the creations that I put in my game came from a book like that. A great moment happens in games when the players realize, "Hey, wait, there is a lot more here" about a monster. Their eyes are open wide, and they know they are playing something special. Are the orcs not just doing things like the orcs of other games? Do the slimes have a science to them? What?

A condensed list does not put me in that mindset. Yes, this is the job of a great referee.

But when I convert something into GURPS, I pull it from one of these lists and feel there are many missed opportunities to make monsters special and unique.