GURPS vs. DnD Combat

[@0bscure42]

I think this video would benefit a lot from some extra pre-production. Like, you could start by picking one specific version of the "d20 system" to use in the comparison and run a quick one-shot of it with some friends in order to make sure that the rules (and the experience of playing with them) are fresh in mind. That way you wouldn't have to open with an admission that you feel unfamiliar with one of the two rulesets that you're comparing, and you would be able to make definite statements about the rules instead of having to make generalizations that account for any/every version of the d20 system. I think the scripting could use a little more planning - or if you were improvising, you could make one "rough draft" version and then record it a second time for a "good copy". That way you can eliminate little issues that crop up, like when you forget the blocking details at 6m37s, or the confusion between 3m51s versus 4m01s, where at first you say that parrying is once per turn, but then later say that multiple parries come with penalties. Also, having the official rules of both systems on hand for when you make the video can help you make sure that everything is accurate and complete. Some planning or extra takes would also help you figure out how to structure the explanation. For instance: you introduce the idea that GURPS has "active defences" at the 37s mark, but you don't start to explain what that really means until 3m38s - a full three minutes later, which is almost 1/4 of the duration of the entire video. I think it's really important, for the overall flow of the video, that the moment you introduce the idea of active defence, you immediately explain the overall structure of an attack in GURPS. Instead, you kind of got lost in the weeds explaining AC, then explaining how GURPS handles armour, then explaining D&D's attacks again in their entirety. That's a really big example, but you also take time to get into the weeds in a lot of other cases, like stopping your explanation of the attack roll to mention that you can get a penalty for moving, or stopping your explanation of block, dodge, and parry to mention that fencing weapons get bonuses to mitigate parrying penalties. These detailed interruptions make it harder for the audience to stay focused on the key points, which in turn makes GURPS seem a lot more complicated than it needs to. It's better to give the general explanation, which would be easy to digest, and then get into the special cases, exceptions, and supplementary concerns (like the armour/damage thing) afterward. The other big issue is just the argumentation side of it. You spend a lot of time making sure to say that D&D is simpler, easier to learn and play, and that it has "the right amount of combat detail" for many people - but you don't make those same arguments in favour of GURPS. You only say that you like that it's "tactical and simulationist", and that people who like to play fighters *might* prefer having more different things to do. It's not a resounding endorsement! You've got to explain why tactics and simulation are valuable, how they help make the fights more dynamic instead of repetitive, or how they feel more concrete instead of vague and abstract. If the best you can say for GURPS is that you can always "just ignore [the extra options]", then you're really making it sound like even you don't believe in the value that those options are adding. I get the impression that you're trying not to piss anybody off by being overly critical of D&D, but if you want to win some converts then you've still got to make the case on GURPS behalf as well.

[@comfortablegrey]

Hexagons are the bestagons!

[@snailmailgames6335]

I am a simple man. I see a new easyGURPS video and I click.

[@easygurps]

And your clicks are much appreciated! Thanks for watching!

[@ultimategamer8622]

Dnd has defensive options, they’re just kinda gate-kept behind certain classes or features. Cool to see a system that lets everyone… defend themself

[@AtillaBuyukurvay]

So this is why GURPS never caught on.

[@swaggyseal]

more nothing else catches on beyond dnd it seems. even the "bigger systems" like gurps, pf2, pbta games can go relatively unknown even by 5e players.

[@thorinbane]

No just most don't want to explore beyond "i learned this one character and I won't even try any of the other 20 classes let alone a different rules set" and its the easiest game to find anyone to play with.

[@Drejzer]

D&D's HP is a very inconsistent abstraction. It supposedly is a combination of luck, physical health, stamina, will to fight and plot armour... But then there is healing magic... That restores their luck? It's a very strong placebo? Actually heals them it recovers stamina? Additional crack in that layer of abstraction are poisons, especially poisoned weapons. Why "you don't actually take a sword to your gut, but instead narrowly dodge it, only the one that actually brings you to 0hp is a real hit" it's a think, but you still take poison damage from the poison coating the weapon?

[@kajnake5905]

I decided Im not friends with dnd anymore and started cooking my own thing. Right now, hp is just your ability to parry and dodge, turning killing blows into scratches and bruises, so everything deals "damage" until a character runs out of stamina, where it actually begins to matter. So AC can easily translate to damage reduction. I also got really mad with dnds "dodge" action, which takes away your attack and is the only move thats somewhat defensive, so I gave all characters the ability to do something with each of their hands. So a character wielding a shield could use one hand to raise a shield, then their other hand to swing away. I also killed opportunity attacks! It really bugged me that if you want to go melee, youre stuck in melee until you disengage.

[@SimonClarkstone]

I had a thought for a while that D&D's martial defences didn't represent any kind of blocking/dodging maneuvre most of the time, so it's good to hear how another systme does it differently.

[@protocoldroid7388]

But what if the GURP wins the initiative? Does Deen-D suffer a reduction in sanity or should you roll to embarrass a nerd in the school cafeteria in a scene?

[@freddaniel5099]

The difference between GURPS and the "big brand name game" is a degree of connection to reality. As I see it, the mechanics of GURPS have a lot of connections and the other game doesn't. Depending on what an individual wants from their personal gaming experience, the choice of system seems obvious. "Play the game you want to play" seems good advice for everyone. Cheers!

[@easygurps]

well said! Thanks for watching!

[@TheRyujinLP]

The bigger problem is that modern D&D forgot what kind of game it is. OG D&D, it wasn't built around combat. In fact, you got the better reward by out thinking your enemies and by-passing them. It even had a reaction system that gave the players a chance of resolving things peacefully if they don't go murder hobo. The Combat also has a very different linage then GURPS. The combat in D&D was built from some kid trying to homebrew the man to man combat rules from Chainmail into something that didn't kill people with just one hit. It was derived from a mass combat game. GURPS came from Melee, a game of one on one combat. They're just built different.

[@migarsormrapophis2755]

DnD combat: "I swing my sword. I wait four seconds. I swing my sword again."

[@gethriel]

Only if you're a BAD storyteller. That is NOT what is happening.

[@stm7810]

@@gethriel mechanically it is, if DnD wants good combat it should allow it mechanically.

[@gethriel]

GURPS is ok if you want 20 hour combats, but damn. The versatility costs a LOT. I'd rather storytell with a faster, more simple combat system.

[@easygurps]

For direct comparison here is playthrough of an OSR D&D Basilisk Fight (kzbin.info/www/bejne/b5Kohnafe92Za8U) at about 24mins and here's a GURPS Basilisk fight (kzbin.info/www/bejne/pn3SgoiJhLiefNE) at about 32mins

[@thorinbane]

LOL D20 systems aren't simple. Hell all the conditions on people require tons of time to calculate, PF2 esp. In GURPS its robust enough to use what you want for combat without boggin down with more and more rules, but you can if you like with options. D20 systems are far more all or nothing. And vancian magic has been and will continue to be hot garbage.

[@allenherring7787]

When defending, why wouldn’t you always take the retreat action? A +3 to dodge is huge! And if it took you out of range you could always take a step maneuver to get back in range?

[@allenherring7787]

I’d love a video that explained the pros and cons of the various manuevers

[@easygurps]

You are right, always a good idea, I can only think of 3 situations where you would NOT want to retreat. #1 If you back is against a wall/cliff or you do not want to lose ground #2 If opponent still has move after his attack he may step back out of your range of your counter strike. This is not desirable if you are the aggressor and need to finish quickly (possibly while he is suffering shock penalty for one round etc.). #3 And of course if you all out attacked you CANNOT retreat defend

[@easygurps]

To be honest I've always found the retreating defense over powered a bit and have been considering requiring players to use a movement point to retreat, forfeiting their ability to then step and attack. Not tried it yet though.

[@PaulTheSkeptic]

I think there's a sweet spot between too detailed but realistic and too under detailed but faster and easier. And to me both systems seem to fail on opposite sides of the sweet spot. Why would every parry be less effective? I don't get that.

[@easygurps]

Because a round is 1s of time, you can dodge one attack per second without issue. But what if 5 attacks come at you in a 1 second window? Harder to perceive and deal with.

[@PaulTheSkeptic]

@@easygurps So it's not cumulative? It's only for the span of a few seconds? So let's say you defeat your opponents and another one spring up a few seconds later. You'd start over in that case?

[@easygurps]

@@PaulTheSkeptic yes sir. If you are referring to my house rule of "-1 per additional dodge attempt per 1s round"

[@PaulTheSkeptic]

@@easygurps I don't know any more than what I just saw in your video. Your house rule? I was just trying to understand. Thanks for the clarification.

[@easygurps]

@@PaulTheSkeptic Oh yes then I will explain fully: The original GURPS rule is that you can attempt to dodge any number of incoming attacks within a 1s turn. If 5 guys attack me in the same turn, I simply roll my dodge against each of the 5 attacks. My house rule gives you a cumulative -1 to dodge each additional attack after the first (in the same round). So the first guy I can dodge normally, the second guy I have a -1 to dodge, the third guy at -2 etc. After the round is over, we start again. Does that make sense? I made it essentially work the same way Parry rules work.

[@AndrewMorgan-yg6zq]

great content!