GURPS 4E Core Ruleset

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hector Trelane

To help achieve this very thing, you can post on this thread to demonstrate the breadth of user interest in GURPS and support ronnke's conversations with SJG's to agree to allow their product to become officially supported. All we have to do is stand up and say, "aye"!

---

The best way to get SJG to stand up and take notice is to talk about FG on the SJG forums. This way the discussion is in their face and the face of GURPS fans who may not be aware of Fantasy Grounds. Talk about the games you play, your love for the platform, and how it benefits your gaming experience. However, be honest about it, don't praise it unless that praise is genuine.

The next place to talk about GURPS/FG is popular gaming forums (ie rpg.net) and social media groups, twitter, etc. This helps promote GURPS and brings in new blood to the community.

If someone would like to, writing a Review of GURPS on FG over at the SJG forums would probably be a great way to kick off conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knucklehead

My wishlist:

Freeze CoreRPG requirement to avoid the "Rolling Release Blues/Everything Broke...Again" issue? Conceptually, I guess, it'd be keeping your own CoreRPG "branch" with the ruleset and then being able to merge to the new CoreRPG foundation when compatibility has been confirmed?

You know, for those of us that, em, always upgrade to the new shiny before considering dependency issues. :)

---

This is exactly how it was before the rework to Core (by necessity, at the time), and why said rework was such a PITA and took so long

For those wishing to demonstrate how FG works in actual gameplay, then you can direct them to my Twitch channel where my gaming group live streams our weekly sessions. We then upload those sessions on YouTube for those who can't catch the live games. Mook, also recorded and uploaded his very first FG session, which is a great reference to demonstrate how easy it is for a first timer to use FG.

Twitch Channel: https://www.twitch.tv/theronnke
The Olympus RPG Group YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCog...foShOVyXMbQugA
Mook's Game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILVXlbfcQcM&t=5s and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNNhn5tUC30&t=3714s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronnke

If someone would like to, writing a Review of GURPS on FG over at the SJG forums would probably be a great way to kick off conversation.

---

Will do so as soon as I have the video from my session up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Exalted

Will do so as soon as I have the video from my session up.

---

Great! Post the thread you here once you have it up and we can all support you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andraax

So, you want to push the responsibility of not updating CoreRPG (a supported ruleset) until GURPS (an unsupported ruleset) gets updated onto SmiteWorks?

---

No.

I'm saying that a ruleset developer should freeze a dependency as important as CoreRPG until they've done their own testing, THEN move on to the new shiny.

Cool story about "they tell developers in advance" and "it's on them" and "it's not on these guys."

I don't care, and neither does any other end user. What we all care about is that stuff works as expected.

If a ruleset developer disappears for whatever reason, your campaign shouldn't fall apart with a minor or revision update. But maybe it does anyway.... the good news is those incremental updates shouldn't fundamentally break the FG API, so staying frozen at 3.x.x and maintaining the ruleset should, if all goes as expected, be supported. It's not a perfect world, though, and I'm sure that minor/revision updates have had negative impacts in the past, and that maybe that *shouldn't happen* when it can be avoided.

It *does* require SmiteWorks to not introduce sweeping, tectonic shifts to the APIs in the same major version, but I think they already try to follow that practice.

Nobody's asking for blame to be shifted anywhere. I'm asking for sanity in upgrade policy. If your ruleset depends on CoreRPG, then really it depends on a specific version of CoreRPG, and that version should be distributed with the inheriting ruleset until it's compatible with the current version.

As for the last point: Telling users to maintain their own dependency support (or forego updates??!?!) for any type of ruleset is dogmatic neckbeardery at its worst, and a surefire way to push people away from the platform. A platform which touts the ability to be system agnostic and extensible, by the way.

You know ... I want it to be WHATEVER way is easiest for Ronnke, Smiteworks (and hopefully SJG) to put out stuff that can be used for Gurps on FG.

I don't give a flying about folks who need to have the clouds roll away with a shaft of light from the heavens revealing the utopic gurps ruleset. Where were you guys when the page was blank?

And before everyone's feelings get hurt, I don't represent SW or anyone important besides myself. I'm a person on a community forum.

Hi knucklehead Ive discussed with SmiteWorks before about keeping certain versions of CoreRPG alive - eg the last .z version (x.y.z like 3.3.2) of each .y version alive and so over time you would have something like CoreRPG.3.0.14, CoreRPG.3.1.9, CoreRPG.3.2.4, and CoreRPG in your folders. The bulk of rulesets would be based on CoreRPG. A community developer may choose to base it on the previous final/stable release by setting that in their code and foregoing new CoreRPG features until they are ready to update their ruleset.

The primary issue with this is there is code in the ruleset, code in CoreRPG and code in the application. Changes to the Application code are also going to break these previous versions.

Either way - at the time I discussed with SmiteWorks it wasnt going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seycyrus

You know ... I want it to be WHATEVER way is easiest for Ronnke, Smiteworks (and hopefully SJG) to put out stuff that can be used for Gurps on FG.

---

The kind of stability that's likely *already there* in CoreRPG comes even closer to a guarantee if the CoreRPG version a ruleset depends on is "frozen" by distributing it with the ruleset unless the new version is explicitly confirmed to be compatible.

This assumption only works if a generally accepted versioning practice is applied, of course. (CoreRPG Version 4.x.x makes no guarantees that anything works the way you assume it should, 3.x.x introduces no fundamental breakage, 3.3.x introduces absolutely no breakage, or restores functionality that got broken on accident)

The idea being that the maintainer of the ruleset doesn't have to fret over every change and can address those changes as needed. So you've got SmiteWorks not answering questions about unsupported rulesets, and maintainers not under pressure to re-implement something that may be fundamentally changed based on a previous assumption *until they're ready*

That's rolling back the clouds and shining a ray of light on developers, maintainers, and end users/customers, without which none of the aforementioned would exist. Considering all contexts is hard, but kind of important. For instance, potential new users have spent zero days here, but they're vital to growth of the platform as well as support of the ruleset by SJ. I'm not sure why they needed to be here since 2003 to make stability or ease of use a concern.

Not trying to represent SW, SJ, or even community members wants or needs, just myself, and people who haven't used applications requiring userland manual modding of OS/filesystem permissions, text editors, or crash courses in data formats and serialization to get a piece of software to function in like, at least a decade.

We agree, though, I want whats easiest for everybody, and I made a suggestion that I thought would do that.