This is a monthly r/GURPS thread for anything and everything related to your own campaigns. Tell us how you and your friends are making out. Update us on the progress of your game. Tell us about any issues you've run into and maybe we can help. Make suggestions for other players and GMs.

This is a monthly r/GURPS thread for anything and everything related to your own campaigns. Tell us how you and your friends are making out. Update us on the progress of your game. Tell us about any issues you've run into and maybe we can help. Make suggestions for other players and GMs.

Hi, i'm a long time GM, i've mastered games that were mostly narrative centric and the most crunch learning i had to make was just for stuff like the Old WoD games and CofD.

Beign a little scared of the crunch and knowing its a game with modular rules made me want to tell you some basics of what i want from my adventure and you can suggest manuals for that alongside some suggestions for approaching this game as a new GM.

Will you help me?

Here are the basics of my settings:

-its a post-apocaliptic medieval setting where a bunch of trees sprouted from the ground really fast, warping entire landscapes with their roots

-the PC are displaced people, survivors and refugees from many walks of life.

-Life in this setting is full of hardships but its not totally bleak, sometimes large towns thrive if people can put aside their differences and organize, but its much easier said than done.

-Combat should be quick and dangerous most of the time, especially if the party is outnumbered, so the bulk of the adventure will be in the form of exploration/survival

-Magic exist, only few people are born with magical abilites, very much like sorcerers from D&D, with two important differences: those are gift of the gods, as such they can be taken away if there's not a transational relationship in form of offerings to any god and they can pass those power to a successor, usually a son/daughter, a promising young temple assistant or an appointed nobleman/noblewoman. Most of these magic wielders are priest in a greco-roman sense or appointed nobles and those who are not tend to be scorned or, worse, killed outright since "they refuse to help their community with their powers". Layman magical istitutions exists but they tend to be fewer and they clash with many local temples and shrines authorites which are not centralized.

Nice to find fan material websites out there!

Okay, this is technically a repost, but I took the original post down after only a few hours, after I realized the website was not correct/complete.

My buddies and I are running over 300+ player hours of GURPS at GenCon Indy 2026. If you're curious or want a peek at these games before the event catalog goes live, here they are:

https://nickandnoseworldtour.us/games.html

I THINK i got how affliction (advantange) works, but what i'm curious is: can the user affect themselves?
Suppose i have Affliciton (Innate Attack 1), with the proper enhancements and limitations to affect the entire party. Their companions would use the innate attack advantage, but would the Affliction user also be able? Plus, is there a way to give a SKILL with the affliction advantage?

Hello all!
My friends and i love to play gurps on roll20, and we usually use Gurps sheet. (Style #1, not #2), but when i went to create a new game, it seems to be gone. Does anyone know what have happened to it? Thank you!

I'm sure someone somewhere has thought about this, discussed it, and disposed of it (as a general rule, I find GURPS designers and players both to be pretty thoughtful, thorough, and rigorous), but my initial cursory search didn't yield anything.

I'm thinking about combat, and specifically how active defenses work. As it stands, you have a skill, based on a relevant attribute, which is nominally centered on your odds of success at a task of average difficulty, thus having a task difficulty modifier of 0, with exceedingly easy tasks being considered essentially automatic (or +10), to 'impossible' (or -10). There are also mechanics for opposed skill checks, where the margin of success is what matters -- it's not good enough to just roll under your skill, the degree of success is what matters. I'm less concerned about Dodge, and thinking more about parries and blocks. Your parry is some function of your weapon skill (generally a coefficient of less than one), and you have to roll under this threshold to parry. It seems to me, though, that combat makes more sense as an opposed check, rather than two checks against a flat difficulty. A bare success at a parry succeeds against all but a critical hit, which seems to dilute the effect of high skill (although it still factors in), and to mostly neglect the notion of contests or opposed checks. It seems to me that a skill contest makes more sense, with the margin of success determining whether an attack hits or not.

Basic attack vs defense could impose a basic skill penalty to the defender's relevant skill (to reflect the challenge of reacting -- the same reason that parry scores are lower than one's basic skill). Other standard modifiers would apply (All-Out Defense, etc). A failed skill check by the attacker misses, regardless of the defender's roll. A failed parry roll in the face of a successful attack roll likewise is a failed defense. In the case of both rolls succeeding, the winner is the one who succeeds by the greater margin, with priority going to critical successes (a critical success trump's a simple success, even if the critical success has a smaller margin; opposed crits are resolved by margin).

This could complicate combat, and it could do so disastrously -- that would be a fair criticism, although reporting margin of success shouldn't be too onerous a burden for a player, methinks. And with margins reported, comparing them isn't too hard? I haven't tested this, so I'm truly open to hearing about how much this would complicate combat.

Basically, tell me why this idea sucks -- mostly, I'm pretty confident that it must suck, or else it would be commonly in use, if not actually RAW.

Also, I haven't really thought it out vis a vis blocking and dodging, so I'm happy to hear about that too. By and large, I'm a fan of trying to unify mechanics, and I like how GURPS treats combat as skills, rather than the more standard approach in other RPGs. Combat makes more sense to me as an opposed check, but making sense to me isn't necessarily a good metric for a game mechanic.

Thanks in advance for any comments :)