I keep coming back to GURPS 4th Edition. Part of why I like this game so much is that I only have to learn it once. I have the basics down, I can create characters, combat can be as simple or complex as you like, and if you avoid min-maxing you can design well-rounded characters.
There are games I struggle with, such as Rolemaster, and while documenting the individual battles with that game are entertaining and informative, when I want to invest in a longer campaign, even playing solo, my mind wonders if the rules I want are the ones I already know. I lose the crit charts of Rolemaster and/or HARP, but are those really that critical?
Social Play and Character Builds?
You have to ask yourself, how much of my solo play will be combat? If you are doing a lot of social play and character-focused play that leverages advantages and disadvantages, along with possibly the horror rules to put a layer between your solo reactions and your character, GURPS seems like a better fit.
I do like that removal of control, where the horror rules, and perhaps even rolling for reactions FOR my character to see how they will approach or view a situation, seems like a better fit for solo play than Rolemaster or HARP, or even Spacemaster for that reason.
The interplay between a social situation and the advantages and disadvantages you can build into a design adds a layer of unpredictability to social situations that you would not get from a game without them. If I design a rogue, and he has a greedy disadvantage that compels him to steal from shopkeepers and others when he is back in town - that is a moment of unpredictability and fun in social situations that can't be discounted. What if he has levels of charm and smooth talking abilities and can try to always talk his way out of the trouble he gets himself into? I can design that into a character as well, and this put a lot more options to mitigate disadvantages.
In a game where the unpredictability is only in the crit charts, you are going to have to engage in combat to experience those results and get that excitement. Thus, I am going to design combat-oriented characters, because there is little reason to build for stealth, social, reason, investigations, or any other non-combat activity. If I want to compel unpredictability in a solo game, I will leverage the disadvantage system to force the character - against my will - into social and other situations that are less optimal.
The fun will be getting away with them or getting out of them, which may lead to combat, but at least my character wasn't "looking" for the fight, or designed for it. And in fact, the non-combat skills I buy will help me get out of those situations, so there is a reason not to design a character just for battle.
Horror and Solo Play?
I get the feeling using the game's 3d6 reaction system to help me determine a course of action will be a big part of the game. Does my character react positively, negatively, or neutral (leaving it up to me)? Will he steal the necklace in the shop window? Well, roll the dice and determine a reaction. Maybe the good angel on his shoulder wins today and he leaves it be. Maybe the devil on his other shoulder wins and he tried to pocket it while no one is looking. Perhaps his greedy disadvantage take precedent and is rolled instead, or modifies this roll.
But having a horror and insanity system may also be useful. If you play in a fantasy world where magic and creatures are rare, and the world is mostly normal, then seeing a giant spider crawl out of a hole in the wall may force a fear and sanity check. My character may just well run instead of rolling for initiative and saying 'en garde!' That is fine with me, honestly, and it adds a layer of unpredictability, danger, and difficulty to the solo adventure. If I want him to be fearless, guess what? Design him that way, spend the points, and lessen the impact of fear.
Again, I have options here, and they cost character points if I want them. Is my character a spineless rogue? Let him run and don't buy that extra mental fortitude. Is he a barbarian who would go into a rage and take on any terror? Again, spend the points, make him fearless, and design him that way. The design system starts to take on more importance in your solo builds because you mitigate, or not, the bad things the system could do to you.
But you have to have some ground rules on what those bad things are, when you roll for them, and how often they happen. There is a balance here because you don't want to have the game devolve into, "take an action, make a roll to see if he does it," and so on where your character becomes almost completely controlled by the dice for every little action or every encounter.
Need to Define the Rules
But you have to have some ground rules on what those bad things are, when you roll for them, and how often they happen. There is a balance here because you don't want to have the game devolve into, "take an action, make a roll to see if he does it," and so on where your character becomes almost completely controlled by the dice for every little action or every encounter.I am sensing a theme here. You need a framework for what rules you are going to use, and when you are going to use them. These all center around a loss of player agency if certain rolls are failed, and then using that loss of control as a bad (or good) situation to resolve using combat or non-combat skills.
No comments:
Post a Comment