ftp.ee.pdx.edu/2014.02.ftp.ee.pdx.edu.tar/ftp.ee.pdx.edu/pub/frp/gurps/gurpreview

Internet Message Format | 1991-06-12 | 30KB

From cisunx!pitt!cadre!PT.CS.CMU.EDU!rochester!bbn!gatech!purdue!umd5!duncanj Tue Mar  1 08:52:13 EST 1988
Article 2323 of rec.games.frp:
Path: cisunx!pitt!cadre!PT.CS.CMU.EDU!rochester!bbn!gatech!purdue!umd5!duncanj
>From: [e-mail] (James Duncan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp
Subject: Re: Game Review: GURPS
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 1 Mar 88 00:11:06 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: duncanj@umd5 (James Duncan)
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 597


Sorry about the previous empty posts hope this one gets posted
successfully.
        - Jim Duncan

*** In article <[e-mail]* [e-mail] (Steve Maurer) writes:
*
*    This is a review of Steve Jackson's GURPS, Generic Universal
*Role-Playing System.   I warn you here, that it is somewhat long.
*You may want to save it, and read it later at your lesiure.  Comments
*are appreciated, but please don't post a followup if a reply will do.
*My net address is:   pyramid!tolerant!vsi!steve
*

I was impressed with this review and felt it was very fair and overall was
 well written.

*REVIEWER BACKGROUND
*
*    Before giving this review, I want to explain some of my prejudices.
*This way, you can see whether what I have to say, relates to what you
*feel is important in a gaming environment.   Whenever reviewing a game
*system, serious disagreements can arise because of the reletive importance
*different people place on "realism", "play-balance", and "playability".
*
*    I am a very experienced gamer, who plays a wide variety of different
*systems.   I have playtested, contributed to, and/or written articles for
*Champions, Paranoia, and a number of Chaosium games.  In general, I feel
*the following is true:
*
* 1] Games are most easily introduced by fellow gamers.  Even the most
*    baroque systems are thought of as "simple", by people who play little
*    else.   The most humourous example of this is AD&D players who complain
*    about the "difficulty of other systems".

How true!
*
* 2] Game systems are of little use when the GM is abysmal.   Similarly,
*    no matter how bad the system, if the GM is perfect and makes up his own
*    rules, the game will be a good one.  What a game system *does* do is:
*    A] Aid most of us GMs who fall between these extremes, by providing
*    realistic methods to handle classic situations (falling/combat/etc),
*    B] Distribute some of the work of keeping track of things to the players,
*    and C] Allow for reasonable portability between GMs and/or scenario
*    packs.

GURPS is very good in this area.
*
* 3] As a GM, I prefer realism in my games, even in a fantasy setting.
*    Simply put, I believe "realism" is another way to say "consistant",
*    and inconsistant settings prevent me from putting aside my sense of
*    disbelief.   In other words, simply because I play in a world where
*    magic is real, does not mean I can believe that there are humans whose
*    bodies can take more punishment than their iron shields ...

I feel the same way.

* 4] In a game system, I especially don't like rules which are wrong.
*    If a game just doesn't handle - oh say - fire, then fine.   However,
*    a system which gives a strictly stated rule for fire, which is plain
*    unreasonable or unrealistic, then I have to go to the trouble of
*    informing the players that this rule does not apply.   This means
*    that my game has just become a variant, and that my players have just
*    lost the advantages of 2A and 2C above.

What do you think of GURPS fire rules as far as armor protection
from fire?

*
* 5] Finally, the actual "system" of a game-system is usually less than
*    half of the real game, most tied up in the world-view presented.
*    These are always there, despite any "disclaimers" for changing the
*    game system placed in the rules.   95% of any game have all the
*    so-called "optional" gamesystem rules in force: alignment in D&D,
*    cult worship in RuneQuest, blood-and-gore-and-blood in Arduin.   While
*    you can often not-play "optional" rules, it causes much additional
*    GM work (e.g. what happens to Paladins in a "No alignments" D&D game?).

GURPS' design is rather modular. You use the Basic or the advanced rules.
If you opt for the advanced rules there are a number of optional rules which
add to the realism at the expense of added work/bookkeeping for the GM.

* 6] I have never found a perfect published game system.

Neither have I. GURPS is far from perfect but its the best I've seen.

*
*    My scale ranges like this: Abysmal -3, Very Poor -2, Poor -1, Average 0,
*Good 1, Very Good 2, Excellent 3.   This is not an "average" off all the
*aspects under review, but my overall impression.   Particulars follow:
*
*
*GURPS OVERALL    - Good to Very Good (1.5)

I'd say 2.4. I love the system but it has lots of room for improvement.
Read on to see why I give it higher marks.
*
*    GURPS stands for Generic Universal Role Playing System - this being a
*game which is designed to support numerous different world backgrounds
*using the same mechanics.   This idea, say the authors, is seperate from
*other company systems in the past, is that GURPS is not simply "patched,
*and modified ad-infanitum", but rather "all the basic systems have been
*thought out in advance.  It all works together, and it all *works*".  (Other
*company systems presumably include TSR's levels/character-class, Chaosium's
*percentile-skill-POWvsPOW, the Hero-Game-System, and others.)
*
*    Their criticizm of company systems is off target, in that many of these
*systems ARE quite consistant.   However, something that Steve Jackson missed,
*is that these games by and large are *packaged* differently, making you pay
*over-and-over for pages of the same basic game-mechanics explanation in
*addition to the new rules.   With GURPS, once you buy the basic set, the
*"World-Packs" assume that you already know how to play the game, and thus
*all the material you buy is new.

Good point on how GURPS is packaged differently. GURPS is best when you
intend to play in a number of different genres. TSR doesn't have any
generic system, but Hero Games might be considered to fit the category.
Anyone out there willing to give us a review of the Hero system?


*
*PRICE        - Good
*
*    Of course, there are problems with this packaging approach.  The basic
*set costs money ($27.50 as ordered from SJG), but you really don't get
*specific world info unless you fork out more for the World Book you are
*interested in ($10.50).   If you like playing a bunch of different games,
*it's cheaper and cleaner than other systems, but for one-game-world people,
*you might end up paying more.   In short, basic GURPS is a better than
*average buy.  With additional world books, it becomes an Excellent buy.
*With only one world book, it is an Average buy.

Retail:  24.95 Basic Set  and  9.95 World books.

*GAME SUPPORT    - Excellent (2.8)

I'd give them a 2.9 'cause they listen to their customers. SJG maintains
a bulletin board for player discussions and critiques. They encourage
user criticism and publish a newsletter called Role Player which gives
new rules and includes game errata. They also encourage players to write
game adventures and will publish your material if your good enough.
They have a set of GURPS Writer's Guidelines which you can obtain by
wriuting to them and providing a stamped self addressed large size
envelope.

*    Game support means the amount of game related materials available on
*the market in relation to years on the market, and it's utility/cost ratio.
*In this field GURPS excells.   GURPS has been out on the market for not quite
*3 years, and already it has 17 game packs out for it, or coming in a few
*months: Fantasy, Humanx, Horror, Old Stone Fort, Bestiary, Orc Slayer,
*Autoduel, 4 AD Suppliments, battle maps, etc.    Each is quite well done,
*and builds a realistic enough world for play to begin immediately.  There
*are some difficulties with the additional rules presented, but not enough
*to go into detail here about them.
*

I would have given them a 3.0 but they haven't delivered SPACE yet and
are behind schedule in releasing numerous packages. Never fear, though,
this will be a great year for GURPS players since SJG will release lots
of GURPS material this year - GURPS Space, Conan, Oriental, more AutoDuel
supplements, Survivor, Ice Age, High Tech ...

*GAME SYSTEM    - Good (2)

I'd say 2.5 here.

*    This is multipart, particulars follow.
*
*Characters:
*
*    Character Representation    - Excellent (3)

Agree entirely!  You can build and represent a wide range of characters
in GURPS. You can play a paladin, a sorcerer, a spy, an auto duelist,
a cop, a PI, a merc, a princess, a mad scientist, werewolf, elf, a
pilot, and on and on.

*   GURPS has, in my opinion, the best system out on the market for
*    representing characters and skills.  ( Note: this is different from
*    *building* these characters, or *adding experience* to them. )  All
*    characters have 4 basic Attributes: Strength, Health, IQ, and Dexterity.
*    Other Attributes, such as "Charisma" and "Good/Bad Looks", are optional
*    Advantages/Disadvantages, which most people won't have to worry about
*    unless they want to.
*
*    The system, like Hero Game Systems, is based on rolling low on 3d6.
*    Each skill the character has, is a number from 1 to a potentially
*    unlimited amount.  Rolling under your skill, with GM assigned modifiers,
*    means you succeed.  A 17-18 (or 10 plus your skill roll + mods) is a
*    failure except for skills that are 25 or higher, and a 3-4 (or 10 less
*    than your skill roll + mods: max 6) is a critical success.    There are
*    rules for sub-specialties, within engineering for instance, which give
*    you a +3 for your particular field, but a -1 on all others.
*
*    After careful analysis, I have found bell-curve systems to be the
*    best.   The reason: on any "flat die roll" (1d20 - 1d100) system, your
*    chance to critical has little to do with your actual skill ability.

    [ Examples deleted ]

*    In a bell-curve system, you don't have this problem.  A lockpick, with
*    a 17 or less on 3d6, is better than 10 guys with a 6 or less on 3d6;
*    and when it's a hard lock: -3 to skill roll, the expert really begins
*    to show his stuff.    Even so, there is a remote chance that somebody,
*    even a beginner, might still get very very lucky.

Note that in GURPS an 18 on 3d6 is always a critical failure regardless
 of skill and so is 17 unless you have a skill of 16+ in which case its
only an ordinary failure. A 3 or 4 is a critical success. If your skill
is 15+ then 5 is a critical, if 16+ six is a critical. Someone with a
skill of 16+ will score a critical on any roll of 6 or lower! Any roll
of 10 greater than your skill is also a  critical failure. In GURPS
you want to roll low as a failure results when you exceed your modified
skill level.

*
*    Now as for reservations: 3d6 is a very granular system.   Even when
*    it becomes effectively 6d6 in a Contest of Skills, there still is too
*    little chance involved in many of the skills.   The difference between
*    10- and 14-, is the same ground covered by a rise from 50% to 91% (or
*    in D&D terms 11+ to Hit, and 3+ to Hit.   This is very large for 4 skill
*    levels, even if they cost more per level.   You can see this most easily
*    in the Magic System, where all Mages buy up their Spell rolls to lower
*    endurance costs, but which also makes it almost impossible to resist
*    via the "quick contest" procedure.

I have no problem with the 3d6. I consider it a strenth. The person with the
better skill usually wins, not always but thats the way the smart money bets.
It works that way in real life too, especially when the difference is very
large.
*
*
*    Character Design        - Average (0.2)

Your way off on this one. I give it a 2.8. Character creation is one of
the systems strongest points. Its time consumming but well worth it. This
gives the players great incentive to roleplay their character. They chose
the character they portray and thus are happy to roleplay the character.
In Random roll generated characters, your left in the hands of Lady Luck
who more often then not is a real bitch! How many of use have been stuck
with absolutely pathetic characters just 'cause the dice rolled that way.
In GURPS everyone starts out equal but unique. You aren't predestined by
a losy dice roll to be a loser. You are what you make of yourself.
If you want to be a filthy rich, alchoholic, pyromanic then you may
do so, not because the dice dictate it but because you chose it.
*
*    Impressed as I am with this game, I am not so impressed by the
*    Character Design and Balancing rules that were given.  Not that the
*    rules are particularly bad for a point based system.   In fact, GURPS
*    does a commendable job.   This rating really reflects my own prejudices.
*    I don't like point-based systems, except under very limited circumstances.

I'm certain your players disagree with you on this. You have allowed your
own preferences in on this point to overly influence your review. I'm glad
you at least pointed out that it is a personal preference and not a fatal
sytem flaw.

*
*    In a point-based system, players don't roll up characters, they
*    "design" them.   This makes players very very happy.   This makes GMs
*    very very miserable.   First of all, since you can "legally buy" things
*    which the GM explicitly does not want in his game, the GM must play
*    policeman to be assured that all characters designed are OK.   I find
*    this a pain in the butt...
You're the GM, your word is law. Few the advantages have potential
to unbalance the game so just disallow ones you aren't comfortable with.
Things like Luck, Danger Sense and immunity to disease are possible
canditates. If you think characters should not start of so powerful
then simply reduce the number of points to build with, too weak then
give more points.

[ Comment deleted ]

*    getting "efficiency" questions, where one players PC is so much more
*    powerful than another PC, just because of point-accounting.   GURPS
*    is one of the best balanced point-systems I've seen yet, but it still
*    has its problems (don't even THINK of playing a Magician without the
*    maximum 3 levels of Magical Aptitude).    Finally, most point systems

  This is not really true. A level one or two mage can be quite powerful,
  simply use the points to get more skills or increase attributes. Yes
  it is more effective to take the full 3 levels of magic aptitude if you
  want very high skill levels but this costs 10 or 20 points which could
  be used to add skills/spells.

*    (and GURPS explicitly) encourages 'adventure-balancing' not based on
*    how powerful the characters are, but rather on how man *points* they
*    are.  (This is equivalent in D&D to saying: this 5th level Fghtr/MU/Thief
*    is equivalent to 5 + 5 + 5 = a 15th level Wizard in power).   This has
*    exactly the opposite effect of what I like to see in games, which is
*    investment in non-combat-effective skills which add interest to the PC.
*    For instance, you would never see lots of Magic Aptitude placed on a PC
*    in a non-magic world, just on the off chance there might later be a
*    "portal" to somewhere else.  And even if it was, GURPS GMs are

Your getting rudiculous here. Only a paranoid gammer would do this unless
the GM steered him in that direction. Eliminate this by saying there will
be no magic in the campaign. GURPS mana levels handles this quite well.
Mana level zero = NO MAGIC.

*    encouraged by the rules to count those extra 35 wasted points as

This is GM/player error not a GURPS error. In my campaign there are places
where magic exists and others where it doesn't. I informed my players
of this in advance and urged them to plan in accordance since they would be
gaming in both types of worlds.

*    somehow adding to the "power" of the character.    Poor old Einstein
*    might be 400+ points, but he'd be killed "adventuring" in a game 1/2 his
*    points, even if his player managed to persuade him to let him play.
*
Einstein is NOT adventure material and a player should know this as the
GM should point out to him. The GM should provide the players with enough
info in advance to allow them to know what type of characters can be useful
and which would be worthless. Einstein is useful on an exploratory/research
adventure which de-emphasizes danger and killing, but worthless in the hack
and slay style campaign.
*    One final note.   Lets say you *DO* want to play Einstein as a young
*    man.   How do you "purchase" him?  You literally can't do it unless he
*    starts off a blind paraplegic dwarf with a number of different social
*    diseases.   So you start him with no skills.  Just an IQ 19 alone prices
*    him too high.

     Einstein is NOT a 100 point character. He would not be a starting
     character but one that had been gamed for a long time. In GURPS
     IQ is not just base intelligence - whatever that is. No one has
     successfully defined and quantified it - it is a combination of
     basic intelligence, gained knowledge and experience. This is more
     realistic in my opinion. Suppose Einstein was never taught to read
     nor allowed to learn mathematics. Would he still have come up with
     his famous theory?
     Starting character Einstein:
       ST 9, DX 9, IQ 17 ( genius+ ), HT 9
       ( ST, DX, HT are all low average )
       Take 40 points of disadvantages and  5 points in quirks.
       Examples - near sighted, weird hair style,
                  absent minded ( not in this edition will be in next )
      This leaves you with 25 points to spend on skills. Most will be
      mental so this should be plenty.

*    By the system presented, the very beautiful princess
*    must either be low in attributes, or high in disadvantages....

        True.


* ... doesn't have a thing to make her interesting to play ...

        Untrue. Make one or 2 attributes low,  and/or take max. disads
        and you can get a fairly decent character.

*    (prefer)
*    lack of points altogether, and some system created for *rarity* than
*    a point based system, and just telling the GM to examine the *character*.

GURPS has a Random/Semi-Random character generation system. Use it if you
can't deal with the concept of character generation. Don't expect your
 players to speak kindly of you though. Also realize you are lowering the
players interest in role playing and entertainment is the reason we all play
these games any way. Your first concern is the entertainment of your players
after all your creating an interactive story together. The idea is to have fun.

*
*    Character Experience     - Good (2)

I give it a 2.3. Good but not great. The GM could be given more guidance in
how to award points. Also the dangers of giving to many points is pointed
out but not stressed enough.
*
*    In the opening credits, Steve Jackson gives credit to other systems
*    which influenced GURPS.  Most interesting was the Empire of the Petal
*    Throne, which in it's non D&D incarnation is surprisingly good.   It is
*    from this, I am sure that the experience system got it's start.
*
*    In GURPS you improve by gaining Experinece Points.   This you do
*    by either going on an adventure, or simply stating what your character
*    will be studying or training in.   Literally, you can create the life
*    path of your character, gaining "free" points of training for simply
*    using skills repeditavly.   Thus, a housewife may get free points in
*    childcare and cooking, even (especially) if she doesn't kill a single
*    monster in her entire life.   A welcome respite from murderfests.

Note: You may only use points gained to improve skills and attributes used
      in the game. The houswife could use the points to improve cookin,
      and child care but could not use them to improve her skill with
      the .357 magnum.
*
*    Points" gathered by PCs can be used to do a number of things.
*    "Buying off Disadvantages" is one (Disads are taken to increase the
*    number of character points at the beginning of the game).   You can
*    also *buy up* your Attributes, such as IQ.   And Experience Pts are
*    gotten mainly for adventuring/killing things.  I'm not so pleased
*    with this, but it fits in with the problems with Character Design,
*    so I won't rehash old arguments on realism.
*

No, no, no.  Most experience points are gained for good role playing.
You also get them for accomplishing a mission successfully. You do not
get them for killing things. ( Read 125 in Basic rules ).

*Playability:
*
*    Realism            - Average (0)

I give it a 1.0. It succeeds far more often than it fails. Some of the
failures are rather large.

*
*    GURPS tries desperately to be realistic.  In some places it
*    succeeds admarably, in others, fails miserably.   In truth, I can't
*    say it is particularly any better or worse than my expectations.
*    However by my scale, AD&D has an Abysmal(-3) rating, and RuneQuest 3
*    has a Very Bad (-1.8).   So things could easily be better for you.
*
*    In general, I find the combat system, and advanced combat system,
*    to be well thought out.  A little rules polishing can make it an
*    excellent system: for instance +1 to Dodge for every point of difference
*    between the Defender's and Attacker's Move.

Why? A dodge is a small move not an all out run. The only case where your
point makes sense is in a running battle ( i.e. swing a sword at a fleeing
foe ). If the attacker moves more than 1 hex (3yds) in the turn his attack
is  at -5, a big enough penalty.

*    of glancing blows, the rules have a concept of "Passive Defense", which
*    I approve of immensely.   (Though they still need polish, because an
*    attack which does massive damage should only be partly deflected.)

True.

*
*    Bad Points:
*
*        Knock Out - Knocking out a character almost always means
*            Health < 0.
     I see no problem with this. You should note that a blow to the head will
     allow you to knock someone out as well. HT/3 points damage in a blow to
     cause a stun which is almost as bad as being knocked out. HT/2 causes
     a knock out ( pg 95 Hit Location Table under Head: Result of Injury ).

*
*        Weapon Damages - Weak characters take too much of a penalty.
*                 A STR 8 "teenager" with a dagger, will almost
*                 never get through "winter clothing".   Guns are
*                 pathetic.

Yes Guns are lame. You over exaggerate the case of teenager with the knife,
but it is true to some extent. The main problem I have is not with the
basic damage done, but with the fact that there are no rules for added
damage due to blood loss. I can't understand how Steve missed this one.
If the teenager with the knife stabs you and you go unconscious, but he
doen't finish you off you can literally linger on for days without bleeding
to death even without any medical attention.

*
*        Fatigue -   Eeech!  Almost as bad as RQ3!  This starts out at
*            your STR, and lowers by ENC level + 1, every 10
*            seconds.  As your effective Fatigue lowers, so does
*            your STR.   This means average fighters can't use
*            a Broadsword (STR min 10) after 10 seconds!
*            Mages have no special "mage strength", which means
*            their physical STR immediately lowers after use of
*            Magic, which seems strange.

You are absolutely wrong on ALL of these except for magic which is
compensated for by the lower cost due to high skill. Your ST
lowers for an ENTIRE fight lasting 10 seconds or more. You only
take extra fatigue after every 2 to 3 MINUTES of fighting.
As for not being able to use your weapon, you obviously missed a
vital rule in reading the manual. Your weapon damage is NEVER
affected by fatigue. You do the same damage based on your original
base strength whether you have lost 1 fatigue point or all BUT 1
fatigue. So whether your current ST is 10 or 1, if your orignal
ST is 13 you do damage for ST 13! This is noted in the rule book as
an exception to reality made in the interes of pclayability ( . 117)

*      Weapon Lengths - Although I like the fact that they did think
*            about it, the rules for parrying with these weapons
*            aren't very good. Dagger Parry should *always* be
*            at an amazing minus.  Enough to make it not worth it.
*

Sounds reasonable.


*    Ease of Play        - Excellent
*

Strongly agree!


*    GURPS overall is easy to play.   Compared to other systems, it is
*    easy to play.  And compared to the amount of realism that it *does*
*    give you, it is very easy to play.    Not only that, there are even
*    game introductions which make it especially easy to play.  -- And if
*    you ever *do* forget anything, in the back of the Adventurer's book,
*    there is a Glossary *and* Index for every word or concept in the system!
*    No rummaging around trying to find the rules for left-handed-greek-fire
*    -throwing.   I think that even system snobs, who never play anything
*    that wasn't taught to them when they were a munchkin, might even find
*    GURPS easy to play.
*
*    Completeness        - Good
*
*    GURPS, unlike Hero Game Systems, has decided to ennumerate all the
*    possible Advantages and Disadvantages in the system.    This has it's
*    strong points in that you can tell your players to make a PC, with a
*    reasonable expectation that they won't come back with "Afraid of Death",
*    or "Hunted by Little Old Lady from Topeka", for -50 points.   However,
*    there are some perfectly reasonable Advantages and Disads which have
*    been left out because they didn't include them.   Adding them to a
*    single world isn't good enough in a system like GURPS, because other
*    GMs might not accept them.   The completeness of GURPS is good, but
*    it could be better.
*
*    Play Balance        Average - Good
*
*    This depends upon the particular module you are following.   I'm
*    not sure how it is in all modules, but the Magic system is mainly Good -
*    with a few flaws.   Horse Clans is well done, but it shows the features
*    of the worst point-balancing system.   To be a Vampire costs 100 pts.
*    To be a Horse is a 100 point Disadvantage......   are you thinking what
*    I'm thinking?    Oh NO!!!    Count Ed!!!  (Base ST is multiplied by 6!!!)
*    Pulling a huge cart with a strange mysterious dust-filled, horse-sized
*    coffin, Count Ed plods the midnight streets!   How many bites does it
*    take Count Ed?    <Clop*   <Clop*   <Clop*

 Vampires don't exist in Horse Clans but I love this example! :-))
 Horse Clans is kind of different. Its based on Robert Adam's
 series which contains intelligent psionic animals, hence PC's
 can choose to play horses or praire cats in this game world.

*    Seriously though, I feel the designers went to quite some trouble
*    to make GURPS well balanced.   Where they fail, a good GM can usually
*    spot the problem before it is too late.   "Passive Defense" provides
*    an immense hole in the rules for very tough fighters, because if it
*    gets too high, the character becomes just about unhittable.   There is
*    no easy way around Passive-D (except magic).

PD is limited to 4 in Medieval armor. But is 6 for Reflec - lasers only.
Its also 6 for AutoDuel body armor - the stuff must be like plastic teflon,
its amazing.
A BattleSuit also has PD of 6,
but its made of BPC - stuff from OGRE/GEV
that can take abuse from anything short of a tactical nuke ( DR 40+ ! ).

*
*    As for armor, I must largely agree with SJG.  There was a reason
*    why soldiers put up with the misery of wearing 80+ pounds of iron, with
*    assorted pinches, clanking, and unease.   Barbarians generally didn't
*    *do* very well against armored opponents, for very good reasons.
Absolutely! Barbarians are stupid.

*    believe SJ goes overboard when he says there is no DEX minus associated
*    with wearing armor.   Even though you can do cartwheels in plate, doesn't
*    mean that you can do it as well as if you weren't wearing it.  Some
*    reasonable -small- DX reduction might be in order, especially for
*    weight on or around the limbs.

I don't think this is necessary as the only real qusetion is does armor
lessen your ability to swing a sword/axe ect. - answer NO. The range of
mobility to your arms decreases but not enought to affect your combat
effectiveness. Note: For fine work like lock picking with gauntlets on
your DX is at -8 penalty.

*
*MATERIALS    - Good (2)
*
Agree on this one.

*    Basic GURPS is a boxed set, with 2 soft cover 8"x11" books inside.
*    The world books are about the same, except the color is better.   I
*    especially liked the Wheelan cover they got for Humanx from "Nor Crystal
*    Tears".    The layout and inking is professionally done.   I would give
*    this an Excellent, except I have a prejudice for hard cover books:
*    they are more expensive, but can take the years longer.
*

I like hardcovers too. Maybe we can convince SJG that GURPS would sell better
with hard copies, at least for the Basic set. Anyone for Deluxe GURPS?

*
*Well that's it.
*
*                        Steve Maurer

Over all a good review. If I sounded harsh in some places please don't
take offense. This was definitely not intended as a flame.

As a final note - Some of Maurer's misunderstandings of the rules in GURPS
are due in part to GURPS use of dside bars. Usually side bars are optional
rules, extra statistics and such, but on some instances critical essential
rules are put there. This leads to some GMs missing these rules S.M.
undoubtedly fell into this trap on at least one occassion. Overall he
seems to know the system fairly well and offered an honest insightful review.

            - Jim Duncan