I was curious about this some years back.

Are there any published materials on how to run a game in a GURPS system?

but lack of Dex to Damage really seems to hinder him from being a hard hitter.

This is offset by nearly every firearm having the lethal trait, where on a crit their damage dice increase in size and they get an addition damage die.

The class is built around crit-fishing, and it works well. Granted, it gets hard to reliably crit higher-level enemies, but that’s easily offset by the party working together

Wait, your party works together??

Wish mine did that.

So much

GURPS Worldbook Index

(www.sjgames.com)

Hey everyone has their preferences but these posts gatekeeping what’s called an ttrpg always confuse me. And I’m even more confused by choosing to call it a video game. But you do you. Pf1 wasn’t a fun system to me ‍️

I’m a gunslinger in one of the games I play in, and yeah, I don’t do barbarian numbers, but I hold my own, and it is a FUN class to play. I built a dual-wielder with the hopes that it would play like Han Solo running down the hallway shooting back at stormtroopers, and it delivers.

Plus, being 60 feet away means that I can help everyone do damage at once. It makes the party happy, too.

Is it still compatible with all the money I wasted on 3.x Hasbro D&D?

While technically the answer is “no”, people who emphasize the difference don’t apply the “Rule of Cool” as liberally as I did.

I re-used all kinds of D&D 3rd Edition resources while switching to Pathfinder.

Sure, we absolutely shouldn’t just dogmatically use the numbers given in a 3E book with Pathfinder.

But I didn’t find it terribly hard to whip up Pathfinder monster and NPC number adjustments based on my 3E source books, more or less on the fly.

Many numbers given are close enough. Most abilities are easy enough to convert in a way that is fun. The Challenge Rating isn’t tuned as carefully, but i find the usual GM toolkit can address that. For example, throwing in a few extras baddies from over the hilldside can scale an encounter up, and awarding the players various story advantages “for good role playing” can scale an encounter’s challenge down.

If my napkin translation went too badly, I threw “Rule of Cool” at it, and just made sure the players were still having fun.

I will say, I relegated 3E stuff to filler encounters, just as I do with anything else I homebrew.

I don’t mind being on my GM toes for a quick encounter, or a short story arc. But I don’t like having something poorly balanced have a recurring role in my campaigns.

All to say I have used 3E source books liberally in my Pathfinder campaigns, and I’m not sure any of my players have ever noticed.

3.x was not some perfect, untouchable version of the game rules. PF2e isn’t either, but acting like 3.x is this finely-tuned specimen of the game is ludicrous. That game was janky.

If you like the game (and I did!), that’s fine! If you like the jank (and I did not), that’s also fine. But don’t act like 2e isn’t worth your consideration just because it’s a different game. It sounds just as ridiculous as refusing to consider a SNES because you poured “all this money” into an NES. Just say “eh, I like what I’ve got, it’s enough for me” and move on.

Re: oracle

Being a divine spontaneous caster fucks; your entire spell list is Heal if you need it, and literally anything else if you don’t. And trading a spell/day and slightly smaller repertoire for some extra durability is generally worth it in my experience.

Also Divine Access means you can pretty much pick whatever spells you want, and more as more gods come out or you and your GM make some more.

I liked the focus spells more back when battle oracles weren’t hit with the nerf bat and could literally just be the juggernaut whenever they got cursed

That does seem like a big upside!

GURPS Lite is available for free, and includes the basic rules on how to do things, combat, etc. It doesn’t include the introductory “What is a GM?” stuff to save space; though that does show up in the Basic Set. You can extrapolate quite a lot from just what’s in Lite - a lot of the stuff in even the Basic Set that’s not in Lite is corner cases (how far can I jump? What can I shift or drag, instead of lifting?), clarifications (how long does it take me to dig a hole?)… and lots more skills and abilities!

Mook has some very basic combat examples worked through here

In a little different vein, Feral Sword Wielding Wizard has some fight scenes from movies he’s gone through and labeled with GURPS combat maneuvers, so you can see how they work! (Just keep in mind this is with a bunch of optional rules!)

Game setting info beyond some basic blurbs in those rulebooks are not published online for free, but those aren’t needed if you want to homebrew your own setting.

There’s a caveat: there’s some extra character options in the APs, and not all of them are covered in Archives of Nethys. I had a new player join in on the Gatewalkers campaign I’m running and spent feats to pick up Verdant Core deviant abilities, which aren’t on the site.

Granted, the root cause was Pathbuilder not having any filter for which deviant feats a player can take, but not having it on Archives of Nethys or my physical copies of Dark Archive and Gatewalkers made it so much harder to unfuck

If you like Actual Play shows, the Film Reroll podcast plays exclusively in GURPS. They play a fairly light version of the rules, but still make custom mechanics for various settings that show how modular of a system it is.

The show takes the premise of a movie and plays it out as a roleplay campaign. My favorite is Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter, in which the GM tells the players they’re playing an obscure teen romance from the 80s so that they wouldn’t know they were in a horror movie. I probably wouldn’t recommend that for a table, but the actors know to expect tricks and it works very well as entertainment.

these posts gatekeeping what’s called an ttrpg always confuse me

This isn’t gatekeeping. This is authorial intent. The companies that produce these games have increasingly co-mingled their staff with video game studios, with a very intentional and explicit eye towards making the conversion to CRPGs easier.

Mechanics in the system that are fuzzy to implement in a video game environment get cut or edited into a numerical effect. Characters and monsters that exist or behave in ways that are difficult to conceptualize as a computer game get re-engineered. Non-combat features and more artistic roleplaying elements get beveled down. And the end result is a game that ports much more easily to a digital medium.

I don’t begrudge the studios for the transition, particularly given how much more money there is digital gaming. But when I’ve already got a stack of older edition books and mods and half-written home brews, there’s no rush to jump ship. Not when I’ve got my eye on an even older stack of Unknown Armies and 2e Mage: The Ascension books and I’m hoping to wrangle some players into a game that’s even more abstract and esoteric.

Me as a changeling the dreaming main washing my hands of the dirty pathfinder main.

I haven’t really played PF2e, but from reading it I don’t really love that it does the “numbers go way up” thing. I did 3e and I didn’t like the “I rolled a 4, but I have a +47 on my check” thing. I’m told PF2e has a “without level bonus” mode, but I don’t know if anyone plays it.

I mean, that’s part of why I preferred the Sega & NEC ecosystems in the 16-bit era, and why I preferred the 3DO later, but never bought the full console (I did have the 3DO Blaster). With a Genesis (not a Nomad), you could use the Power Base Converter to play SMS games, plus if you wanted, there were the CD & 32x setups as well. If Sega had looked at the CD & 32x the way they did the Mark 2 & Mark 3/SMS, and hadn’t been so damn beholden to Yuji Naka, it would have been much better. Then again, if they had done the SG-1000 / SC-3000 thing with the Genesis, we could have had another PowerPC based OS in the world.

Plus, the SNES was initially planned with backwards compatibility, but they ripped it out late in development. So, why should I give them money? It’s not like Ninja Gaiden Trilogy plays so much better than the NES carts.

That’s the 4e & 5e sales pitch. No interest then.

Oh, also, I don’t care about the setting. I don’t use Golarion anyway, because Forgotten Realms, Mystara, and Sigil exist.

Eh? It absolutely did not do that thing.

So first of all, if you like D&D 3.x or Pathfinder 1e, I’m glad! It’s a fun system. I have many great memories of amazing campaigns in that system, and I think it’s most important that you play the game you like. But I’ve been hearing this “video game” thing for half a decade now, which means I’ve got a whole big rant prepared. I’m…I’m sorry.

Ok. So. Yes, 5e filed off all of the stuff that was interesting, the big numbers that make people feel powerful, the stuff that made characters unique, etc. in its pursuit of making D&D like a video game. But Pathfinder went the opposite direction.

• You can make 238,140 mechanically distinct level two characters based on ancestry, class, and archetype alone (that’s not a random guess, I did the math); and while they won’t all have the same power level, they will all likely be able to contribute meaningfully. And that’s not even counting all the class-specific choices and options, or the other feats you could take. Paizo is six years into PF2e right now, and even though they had to waste a bunch of time dealing with WotC’s OGL nonsense, they’re up to nearly a quarter million different combinations; but 3.x didn’t get anywhere near that level of meaningful customization until Pathfinder debuted archetypes in the APG in 2010—a full decade after 3.0 came out.

• The 3-action economy is so much easier to play and explain than “wait, what’s a ‘swift’ action again?” (I’ve taught a seven-year-old how to play successfully), but it doesn’t feel like a video game like 5e does because there are actual, meaningful choices you can make with each of your three actions. While 5e (and 3.x before it) often devolves into “conga line of death” (surround the bad guy for flanking, whomp him with your biggest weapon twice per turn, don’t move because he’ll AOO you into powder), you can do essentially whatever you want with each of your three actions and make a difference.

• Plus, where 5e aimed at making things even more same-y with “bounded accuracy,” PF2e leaned into crits so hard that they had to lean into crit fails, too, in order to balance them. You can crit succeed and fail at skill checks, and the APs have rules for what happens when you do. Some weapons are built around crits, and they’re not a 1-in-20 chance anymore. You can do them quite often with the right build.

• As far as setting, the Forgotten Realms were probably interesting back when Greenwood came up with them, but putting a billion authors into the world has made it into the same bland, boring, Wal-Mart-Brand-Middle-Earth that Greyhawk was; but Golarion has something like three different continents for every possible type of fantasy setting you might want (that is a random guess, and probably an exaggeration).

And with the addition of Starfinder to the system a few weeks ago, all of that gets doubled or more.

Plus, it’s so much easier to run as a GM than the 3.x games were. I remember the first time I put a “hard” encounter together for PF2e. I looked at it and was like, “whoa, that can’t be right, I’m gonna have a TPK!” So I nerfed the encounter, and the players stomped it in two rounds. When I built an encounter the next week using the rules as written, it was a fun and dynamic encounter that lasted the entire session. One character went down. Everyone used their consumables and resources. It worked perfectly. Ever since, I trust that the encounter math knows what it’s talking about. When was the last time you were able to say that in 3.x?

Doesn’t help that we’ve got metric tons of content in the old system.

A lot of the really good stuff has been updated for the new system, either officially or by the community.

Why retrofit what didn’t really need fixing?

I mean…3.x was kind of janky. Yeah, it was better than AD&D, and yeah, it was awesome in its time, but it’s based on a 25-year-old system. People know a lot more about game design now, and it shows. Pathfinder 1e did noble work trying to make everything fit together, but they deployed a lot of duct tape over the nine years they were essentially “in charge of” the d20 system. When the “Pathfinder Unchained” classes came out, and you could see the difference between a modern approach and an original approach at the same table, it was like night and day. Some tables even banned Unchained classes because they would outshine the PHB/CRB classes, even though their damage output was still balanced.

I don’t think Pathfinder 2e is a perfect system. But it’s definitely better than the 3.x rules. That thing did, in fact, need fixing.

Just give me more APs.

They have! And they’re great! You just have to play PF2e, or convert them to your system, in order to play them. Or you can play third-party adventures, which are still coming out for PF1e/3.x as recently as yesterday.

Like I said, if you still like 3.x, I’m glad! Enjoy what you enjoy. I think it’s most important that people play the game they like at their tables. But 2e didn’t make it “video game-y.”