Anyone familiar with d20, d6 AND GURPS...need help for a gaming experiment

[FoxWander]

I'm trying to compare & contrast the main game systems I know and like- d20, d6 and GURPS. I figured the best way to do that would be to make a generic scenario and run identical (at least as close as possible) characters from the different systems thru the scenario and see which one runs best for my group and I.

Now creating the scenario is easy- it just needs to be something that will test the more common events in a game. Things like...
- physical tests: climbing, getting thru a locked door, sneaking past guards
- social interaction: bribes, diplomacy, fast talk
- magic: just a limited selection of simple FX
- fighting: vs. mooks and vs. a simple "big bad"

I figure breaking into a guarded tower to steal something or rescue someone will easily cover the basics. I could just run all this as a series of unrelated "task resolution" exercises, but that seems kinda boring and even a simplistic idea to tie them together would feel more like a game. And that's really what I want to test- the "feel" of the different games.

Anywho, like I said the scenario is easy, it's creating "equal" characters for these different systems that's the problem. That's where I'd like some help/advice. To be a typical GURPS game I need to create 100 point characters. No problem- been there, done that. But what level d20 character would that be? To keep things simple I just want to make 2 PCs. A fighter/rogue type and a mage/cleric type. Basically a stealthy fighter and a spellslinger. Without considering the emphasis and tweaking things like skills/feats/ads/disads bring to a character, my rough guesstimate is that a 100 point GURPS PC is roughly about a 3-5 level d20 PC. Would any other experts in these systems say that's about right? If so, the best way to do this may be to make the characters in d20 first, then switch to GURPS and start spending points until they're about even. Then tweak back and forth until I've spent 100 points and both characters are about equal. I've left the d6 PC out til now cause that one, I think, will be easiest- figure stats, then allocate dice/pips until it matches the GURPS/d20 PCs.

Anyone have any advice on this idea? Considerations I may have left out in this simplistic explanation? (I have more detailed ideas on this, but don't want to go into details right away so as not to start this discussion going on the wrong track right off.) Have you maybe done this yourself before and have it all stat'd out already? Any questions or comments at all? Your own opinions on these systems? Links to conversion sights that will make balancing this easier?

Thanks in advance.

 

[d4]

Without considering the emphasis and tweaking things like skills/feats/ads/disads bring to a character, my rough guesstimate is that a 100 point GURPS PC is roughly about a 3-5 level d20 PC. Would any other experts in these systems say that's about right?

i wouldn't. i'd say a 100-point GURPS character is more like a 1st or maybe 2nd level d20 character. a 3rd to 5th level d20 PC i'd peg at around 140-170 points in GURPS.

just my opinion, though.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

And that's really what I want to test- the "feel" of the different games.

Before you go to all this work, why do you want to determine the different "feel" and what are you looking for?

Those three systems have different design precepts. They don't begin at nor do they arrive at the same kind of gaming experience. They are all fun though. So your scenario you describe will have very different results across different games. Consider several guards at the base. In D&D, a single sleep might nail them all. If not, the combat will be brief. In GURPS, the combat may take a while. Afterward, healing will not be swift. The skill challenges will come out differently because the two systems do not scale the same way. Advantages and class abilities also don't compare easily.

You may be able to evaluate what you want just by getting opinions here before you spend three gaming sessions running this comparison. (I've played all three game systems - only once on d6 - so I can attest that they have different feels.")

 

[JonnyReb]

I tried doing a D20/GURPS hybrid a few years back, and found that a 1st level D20 character tends to the 125-150 points range for a comparible GURPS points cost. So many abilities are race or class perks in D20 that a GURPS equivilant gets a little point heavy to have equal ranges, uses, etc...

I agree with Varianor Abroad, each system has a different feel, and I think the most important consideration you may want to look at is what style you're looking for overall, and which system most closely gives you that feel. Plus don't forget - you can always steal and adapt components with a little work and judicial tweaking. ( I use a points system for Feats, for instance, because I like the more flexible customizing that such a system gives - a holdout from my GURPS days).

My $.02

 

[Dogbrain]

Current edition GURPS or the 4th edition (debuts at GenCon, has significant changes)?

 

[Funksaw]

I'd not say that to be true - I'd say a 100 point GURPS character to be roughly equivelant to a 10th level D&D PC if you're going for that fighter/rogue type, 3rd level if you're going for a wizard type.

The difference is the skills and the spells. These are two radically different systems. A GURPS character is more likely to succeed more often at skill rolls - since the fighter/rogue is essentially made up of skills, you get more bang for your buck there. On the other hand, spells in GURPS tend to be expensive, as they're not "buy once" propositions. A wizard in GURPS can buy a whole slew of spells which require lots of casting time and have a good chance of failing (say, by putting only 1/2 point in it) or know a handful of spells really well (requiring not even a verbal component or mana expenditure - by putting alot of points in it.) In contrast, D&D spells work the same way each time.

You really cannot create "equivilant" characters in the D&D/GURPS system, to be sure.

The "feel" of the three systems tends to come from it's core mechanics. D20 is a linear system with a linear mechanic - it's dirt simple, but results will tend to be random. D20's specific implimentation of the linear mechanic emphasises this by having binary results. (A system that downplays the randomness of a linear die system would be Unisystem light - through "success levels," a lower result-range, and a powerful metagame mechanic to affect rolls.)

GURPS is an example - indeed, the archetypal example - of the bell-curve system. A bell-curve system has predictable - but not predetermined - results. Rolls will more often end up as mid-range numbers. This produces a curious effect in that, as numbers are lower, additional skill levels make it much more likely that you will succeed at easy or average tasks, but not much more likely to succeed at harder tasks. (9->10, for example, increases an average task's chances of success nearly 13%, but a hard task with a -4 penalty's chances are increased less than 3%.) while as numbers are higher, skill level increases don't really make it more likely to succeed at average and easy tasks, but makes it MUCH more likely that you'll succeed at hard rolls. (14->15, for example, increases an average task's chances of success only around 4%, while a hard task with a -4 penalty gets a whopping 13% increase.) To a certain extent, it makes sense - an advanced degree in mathmatics doesn't make you all that much better at being able to balance a checkbook, but it makes you alot better at calculating the trajectory of a ballistic missle. (A system that downplays the "predictability" of the bellcurve system is In Nomine - this does it by reducing the range of the curve from 3d6 to the more "pyramidal" 2d6, and has a totally random success modifier.)

As for d6, I don't know much about it, except that it is a dicepool system. Dicepool systems - or "asymptotically approaching zero" systems are pretty unique in that they tend to be of an even higher competence than bell curve systems. This is because of the unique nature of dicepools - each additional die added to the pool makes it less likely to have an impact on actual successes - however, each additional die added to the pool makes it more likely to have *more* successes. Like bellcurves, additional dice make you more likely to succeed at normal tasks at less and less of a return on investment but (especially where the penalty is to the number of dice rolled and NOT to the target number) it makes it much more likely to succeed at hard tasks. The difference here is that going from one die to two usually radically increases the chances of success - much more than the 13% of a 3d6 GURPS increase. In Adventure! for example, the chances of succeeding on one die are 40% - but the chances of succeeding on two dice is roughly 70% - that's roughly a 30% increase in one go. This tends to create hyper-competent characters who tend to have a cinematic feel even in some not-so-cinematic genres. (See: Reckoning, Hunter the.)

Indeed, the core die mechanic tends to have more impact on the feel of the game than anything else. Going for something tactically based, or horror-movie like? Use a linear system. Going for something that feels "real" or where characters are not superheroic, but are competent from day-to-day and event-to-event, like film noir or science fiction? Use a bell-curve. Going for something cinematic, like monster-hunting, high-fantasy, pulp-action or superheroes? Use a dicepool system.

 

[FoxWander]

Indeed, the core die mechanic tends to have more impact on the feel of the game than anything else. Going for something tactically based, or horror-movie like? Use a linear system. Going for something that feels "real" or where characters are not superheroic, but are competent from day-to-day and event-to-event, like film noir or science fiction? Use a bell-curve. Going for something cinematic, like monster-hunting, high-fantasy, pulp-action or superheroes? Use a dicepool system.

This is an excellent point Funksaw, and really it's the core of what I want to test. Which system gets the job done in the way we'd most enjoy. Ideally it should enhance the mood of general gameplay and encourage descriptive action during combat, but not get us so bogged down in the mechanics of the game that the system becomes the focus of what we're doing.

This is something I've really grown to dislike about 3E/3.5 D&D. I feel the update to the system is both the best and worst thing that has happened to D&D. While the incredible array of options and choices make for fascinating characters and games, they also interfere with too many aspects of the game. Combat has become a tactical exercise of figure movement and die-rolling, and constant references to rules to see how this feat interacts with that manuever, or this spell affects that tactic, etc., etc.. However I'm sure most of this could go away once I know the rules and options as well as I used to know 1st/2nd Ed D&D. Well maybe.... since it seems every other day there is yet another new book out that adds ever more options and choices. (And don't get me started on the constantly annoying Vancian magic system! )

But this is not to say I want to give up D&D, well maybe, but not entirely! And besides, even with these (to me) faults- I still love D&D. I've been at it now for going on 21 years and don't see an end any time soon. For the most part I can overlook these psuedo-problems and just enjoy the game. But I can't help thinking there might be a better way to run things.

This brings me back to GURPS and d6. I'll cover GURPS first. Again, a system I've played for awhile now. The main things I like about GURPS are it's ability to create EXACTLY the character you imagine, and it's magic system. While you can't fry a room full of orcs with a single fireball (at least not without knocking your mage unconscious and burning a powerstone to boot), you can fling magic on par with anything the fighters and the stealthers are dishing out. And you can do it every battle. And you don't have to give up the cool and fun 'trick' spells that make a magic-user feel like a MAGIC-user! But, most importantly, there's no silly 'memorizing' spells- any spell you know you can cast- if you have the fatigue. The only tweak I would add to this is a way to prepare a spell in advance so you COULD fry a roomful of orcs with a fireball, but withOUT burning all your fatigue. The balance would be prepping would take time, and $$$, so you couldn't do it all the time. (but this idea is a whole other discussion, and probably not for this board)

So you might ask- why not just play GURPS? Well, partly cause it's not as well known as D&D (and those that do know of it either love it or hate it). Also, that cool character creation system is rather daunting to teach to a newbie and tends to make people lean towards the 'hate it' end of the spectrum if teaching it doesn't go well. But the main problem I have with GURPS is combat. While I rather like the inherent deadliness of it (even experienced fighters won't blithely wade into swordplay without a moment of worry), it's the "roll vs. your skill and his defense, then he rolls vs. his parry, then see who beats their skill by a higher spread and then repeat twice for EVERY action of EVERY combatant" system, that I hate. Getting into combat always brought the game to a screeching halt. So there we are again, part of the system I love, part of it I hate.

So d6 then- my experience with it was West End's Star Wars game. Mainly we all loved every minute of our games with that. Our games "felt" like the movies. They were great! So why don't I just get the new d6 books and have at it? Well there are a couple of things. 1, that gaming group is long gone now. I've yet to be in a group that got on as good as we did- that may be a big reason for the fond memories. And 2, part, and maybe a big part, of that success was the "Star Wars" aspect. You don't need alot of descriptive text to picture stormtroopers, or a starship chase, or a blaster fight in the corridors of a Star Destroyer. With that ease of getting "into the scene" it makes getting into the game so much easier.

And I did have problems with the game. There were alot of dice to roll. Adding up all those dice could slow things down. But, many times you didn't need an exact total. Knowing the DC you had to hit, then seeing alot of 5s and 6s (or 1s and 2s :\ ) made the result easy to see. And mostly that quick totaling could be incorporated into the action. As in "(roll Blaster vs. Dodge) Oh, you nail him right in the chest armor with your blaster, (roll damage vs. strength + armor) but he seems to shrug it off and comes up- gun blazing!" Now you may have noticed that quick example seemed to have the same aspects of combat that I just said I disliked about GURPS- my roll vs. your roll, wash & repeat. But somehow it came off easier than GURPS ever did. I think it's the fact that you skip the extra step of comparing your roll to a skill rating. Since the dice you roll in d6 ARE your skill rating, that's one less thing to slow you down.

The other aspect of d6 Star Wars that limits its appeal is that it was just Star Wars. While that's all well and good, it does tend to limit the dragon-slaying and fireball-throwing that makes D&D such fun. But then the new d6 covers everything now so maybe it'll be the one for me.

But I won't know that, for sure, unless I run a similar game with each system, with my current group, and see how it goes- how it 'feels'. And so, my experiment.

 

[collin]

While you're at it, why not include Savage Worlds from Pinnacle in your Compare-and-Contrast exercise?

 

[Funksaw]

I think that your current group would kinda resent that. Until a month ago, I could have reccomended Tri-Stat DX - it's not as robust as GURPS but it's alot simpler and it's also bell-curve based.

As for the D6 system... I haven't had a chance to look at that either. I tend to prefer dicepool systems and bellcurve systems to linear ones unless I'm playing a game where low skill totals and horror are the point. (Unknown Armies ALSO has a significant "whiff" factor, but the system is calibrated for when characters are completly scared out of their minds.)

Try flipping through D6 fantasy when you get it - I think the dicepools are significantly lower in the generic version. I could be wrong though - but that's just what I get from flipping through the rules.

 

[Conaill]

I'd not say that to be true - I'd say a 100 point GURPS character to be roughly equivelant to a 10th level D&D PC if you're going for that fighter/rogue type

Yeah right...

a 10th level D&D fighter can easily take on a whole pack of wolves single-handed. Heck, four black bears or crocodiles (total CR 6) would be a pretty even match. How about 3 lions, or 2 rhinos? Heck, a damn elephant would be a reasonable challenge for a single 10th level fighter!

100 points equal to a 10th level Ftr? I don't think so.

Level 1 or 2 sounds much more like it to me...