Tuesday, July 2, 2024

The GURPS Version Always Feels Right

Every time I engage in a conversion, the unique allure of the GURPS version becomes apparent. In GURPS: BattleTech, the actions, thoughts, and intricacies of every task take on a new level of enjoyment and satisfaction. The thrill of repairing a mech in BattleTech with a few skill rolls is heightened in GURPS, where a plethora of technical skills is required to fix the machine, each repair task presenting a unique challenge.

Traveller, in comparison, offers a different experience. Under GURPS, starships and exploration take on a more tangible and immersive quality than under the Traveller 2d6 system. The extensive skill list and deep character design in GURPS elevate immersion to a level I never thought possible in a tabletop game.

This leads to a thought-provoking question: does abstraction hinder immersion?

If you take a game like FATE or Cypher, where everything is abstracted, a cyber-security door and a roomful of goblins are rated using the same numeric system and rolled against as a "challenge" - is immersion ruined? The "so what" factor kicks in; who cares if this X is challenge 15? Isn't it different from the 12 we faced a few rooms ago? Roll a few dice, abstract a concept even more, and roll a few more.

Yes, suspending disbelief is needed, but rules-light and heavily abstracted games stretch that concept too hard for me. Nothing means anything anymore. If you can "get into it" - great - but if you are not motivated, what does anything matter anymore? It is all a rules-light, abstract, who-cares mush of concepts, special game terms, and pools that conceptualize things like health, power, social status, and stamina.

I love Cypher, but I must wrap my head around it and get into it. Everything makes sense when I am in the zone, linking obstacles to difficulties and abstract resolution methods. When I want a game that gives me immersion, the additional "abstraction layer" that needs to be layered on top of everything to make the game work ruins immersion.

I also love Savage Worlds, which, in a way, feels like "rules light GURPS," but it needs a specific "Savage Worlds OS" to be loaded in my head for everything to work correctly and the abstraction concepts to be able to drive the world. There are also a lot of "toys" in this system, like cards, chips, and other items, which I find a bit cumbersome when playing solo. This game was made to play with a group, and the toys enhance the group-play experience. This is a fantastic game, one of my all-time greats, but it could be better for solo play (for my taste).

The abstraction is still here, but not to the degree that a FATE or Cypher would stress to make the game concepts work. It is more of a rules-medium game with an abstraction layer on mechanics.

GURPS lets me go to the metal and get the total immersion hit that I crave, and it requires me to slow down and enjoy one or two characters. I don't need to simulate a party of characters in GURPS to play solo; just one or two, with a maximum of three, is acceptable. 

Do I need a starship crew to support my space captain? Create them all with GURPS Ultra Lite and put them on an index card. Seriously, they will all still be 100% compatible with the complete rules set, and I save a lot of time creating characters that do not need that much detail. Why waste time for the one or two moments in a campaign where possibly one skill a crew member has matters? If one is an engineer, the skill works for that; roll it, apply a negative modifier if it is unfamiliar or a "related skill," and move on.

But I am not abstracting them; there is a difference between simplified and abstraction. I could apply hit location, damage, and wounding effects if I wanted to "zoom in" and use the full combat rules with an Ultra Lite character. That UL character can be a full-game character in a pinch; I need to make a few trivial assumptions.

This is not like I am creating a 12-minus goblin, having the goblin roll 12- to attack a PC and requiring PCs to roll a contest versus a 12- to "defeat" them. Though, you can do that. The Ultra Lite way is to put an X- on a creature's attribute, give them a +4 skill if needed, assign an HT value, and be done.

You are not abstracting, just simplifying. The "GURPS OS" you need is still there, with minimal abstraction. This "OS" is also smaller than games with heavy abstraction layers, and things are easier to understand. Any abstraction translates between a simplified attribute and skill system and the game. You can still shoot a crossbow into that goblin and use the complete rules to simulate that strike if needed. Otherwise, knock the goblin down in defeat and move on.

Armor Class is an abstraction; you must explain it to every new player of B/X or 5E.

Armor subtracting damage is a "natural rule" and works the way people expect the real world to work.

But you are not abstracting the world, challenges, swarms of wasps, raging currents, orcs, dart traps, or any other challenge. The "simulation way" inside of GURPS still runs the show. There is very little or no abstraction between you and the world.

No comments:

Post a Comment