Help the Newbie?

[malek77]

*Astounded at all the acronyms... *
Wow. I think I'm following.

Here goes...

Do you want a game system where the rules are reasonably fast and light handed that you can concentrate on the storyline? Then I'd buy CT and perhaps use the MT game mechanics.

Yes! Fast and light. I often have very specific ideas of how a campaign has to go, and it helps to have a 'lighter' system that you can push in the right direction (so you can bias a game to whatever you want to focus on - like Close Combat over sniping).

I have heard some bad press that CT (Classic Traveller?) was very slow...?

and you want to have a game system where character advancement and growth is discernable (which is not really the case with CT) - then go for GURPS.

I think I'll go get that GURPS lite thing and give it a go.


I feel to be heading for a CT/MT background and GURPS/MT mechanics. Or close to that.

MT is sounding particularly good...

(FYI : I'm familiar w/ the D10 Interlock rules used by Cyberpunk2020 and the percentile based Inquisitor rules from GW *ugh!*)

Actually, starship construction is a little off the GURPS Vehicles rules, but it's still pretty much GURPS compatible.

Starship construction seems to be the second most important thing after character creation in Traveller(I've heard jokes about CT players who mount deck plans on their walls).

I'm curious - how realistic are these ships? If you had plans for the higher TL gear, could you hand them to NASA and get something functional or do they keep focussed on rule effects for function?

 

[Malenfant]

Vehicle design in traveller is more realistic than effects-based. You're basically designing according to volume and mass constraints.

TNE's FF&S (Fire Fusion and Steel) is the most useful book, IMO. It tells you EVERYTHING about technology and equipment, and is just all round darn useful. Plus it's metric, if that floats your boat. Personally, I'd recommend that (you can buy it from drivethrurpg.com)

The CT/MT systems are OK - less complex and versatile than FF&S though, and CT has this awful 'string of digits' method of displaying ship stats that is utterly incomprehensible to anyone who doesn't know what each thing means. MT at least broke it down into stat blocks...

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by malek77:
Starship construction seems to be the second most important thing after character creation in Traveller(I've heard jokes about CT players who mount deck plans on their walls).

Joke???
What joke???
Once they are professionally framed they look really good, and hanging them on the wall makes them easily accessible during a game. Plus, the glass can be marked on with an OHP pen or grease pencil and easily cleaned.

 

[hunter]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
First, it was designed using D&D as a base, not D20 Modern (which AFAIK is more streamlined and generic and less fantasy based). This may be changing in the upcoming standalone Traveller's Guidebook currently in playtest here, but I'm not sure how much they've divorced T20 from D&D there.

That's the problem Malenfant, too many folks like yourself assume that just because T20 is based on the d20 system rules that somehow it is like D&D.

Then you say that d20 Modern is much more streamlined and less fantasy based. It is based on the same d20 system rules that we used for T20. They just tweaked them to make d20 Modern like we tweaked them to create T20. They went one route and we went another. As to 'less fantasy based', have you read d20 Modern? d20 Modern is also far less 'deadly' that T20.

BTW, d20 Modern came out a month after T20. Made it kind of hard to build our game around it. Wouldn't have mattered anyway, I am not a big fan of the d20 Modern rules.

Second, some of the feats in T20 just plain don't make sense to me - for example, why should you need a skill and a feat in order to fly a grav vehicle? I can't help but feel a point has been missed regarding feats - I see them more as manoeuvres you can do with skills (so you can take a skill of "Grav Vehicle Piloting" and a feat of "Stunt Driving"), not as surrogate skills themselves.

Vessel feats work pretty much like Armor Proficiency and Weapon Proficiency feats. They specify what you are qualified to operated. Your Driving or Pilot skill rank tells you how well.

Third, being based on d20 it suffers to some extent from the "get more snacky powerz" mentality that D&D usually has - as you go up levels, you get more feats and skills and abilities, which means the temptation is stronger to choose abilities because they make your character better in terms of game-mechanics (ie powergaming) rather than better in terms of actual character development.

I get a kick out of folks posting this one! Let's try your assumption this way...

Third, being based on GURPS it suffers to some extent from the "get more snacky powerz" mentality that GURPS usually has - as you gain more character points, you get more advantages and skills and abilities, which means the temptation is stronger to choose abilities because they make your character better in terms of game-mechanics (ie powergaming) rather than better in terms of actual character development.


Hunter

 

[hirch duckfinder]

"I have heard some bad press that CT (Classic Traveller?) was very slow...?"


slow at what ? i've never noticed slowness .

ct is rules-light . there is no task system . there is more reliance on the referee's judgement and interaction between the ref and players to resolve specific situations . which is all good in my ( thin ) book .

anyway , whichever rules you use , enjoy traveller .

 

[hunter]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
Frankly, I think T20 is somewhat hamstrung by the decision to base character generation on the IMO fairly atrocious and deathly boring and longwinded random character generation system used in CT - plus the d20 system itself isn't all that great despite being the most popular one around. GURPS uses a straight point-buy system that lets you make the character you want rather than one that you're lumbered with as a result of many endless crappy dice rolls.

The only randomness in character creation prior history is what assignments and outcomes occur. Unlike CT where you are randomly assigned skills for a term, in T20 you earn experience. You can then apply that experience towards improving your character once you have accumulated enough to earn a new level. Which means you get to PICK AND CHOOSE what new skill and feats you might want or what skills you might wish to improve.

How does this stop you from 'creating the character you want'?

Hunter

 

[hirch duckfinder]

and support current development by buying the d20 stuff . the gateway book is superb , as are the pdfs . i dont have the t20 book as i am a ct-er , but i'm sure it's quality is equally high .

 

[hunter]

Originally posted by Malenfant:
It also depends on what sort of system you like. GURPS is a more gritty (and more sensible, IMO) system than T20.

Are we talking 'die easy' gritty?

Well lets see:

The average Health in GT is 10, the average Lifeblood score in T20 is 10

If your Health falls below 0 in GT you are unconscious, same in T20

Average pistol in GT does what 2d? In T20 they do 1d10 on average. GT has a very slight advantage here.

And no, Lifeblood does not go up with each new level in T20.

You die very easily in T20. Armor, cover, and concealment are definitely your friend!

Hunter

 

[hunter]

Originally posted by malek77:
I have nothing personal against 20 sided dice, but I've been warned (read: observed monumental flame wars) about D20 systems throwing away realism for a hopelessly unrealistic Level system. Is this a valid concern or just pro-D10 propaganda?

Download T20 Lite and you can get a good idea of what the full book is like.

T20 Lite

D20 != D&D despite what many who have not bothered to look will tell you. If you don't mind classes and levels, D20 is no better or worse system than any other frankly. Like any system it has its warts and merits. The biggest advantage it has is that you are more likely to find folks who are already familiar with the basic rules.

Ooh - sounds the ticket. I am still interested in the Traveller Canon history...would taking the GURPS path hamper my understanding of it?

Not at all. You will have to do some very minor conversions if you plan to use non-GT source material, but it is trivial. The reverse works as well. The GT source material is quite easily used (and recommended!) with the other Traveller rules sets with minimal hassle.

Hunter

 

[aramis]

Be warned that some GT setting material clearly contradicts some OTU material (Several worlds in BTC do not match other (CT/MT) text on those same worlds).

some small issues, like Battledress skill for all marines (Not a requisite in any "fully authoritative" ruleset, in fact, not an option under CT/MT/T4 as written; the basis is an article by LKW, which few had seen until the reprints, and fewer still had used, which predated MT, so the chance to fix it was multiple. T20, during playtest, it was pointed out that it should be optional, up to the GM... and so it is. MWM never bothered making later traveller fit with Loren's article. Not even striker II.). Serious differences in travel costs, due to totally different mechanics for passage prices (Fixed by jump {CT, MT, TNE, T4, T20} or fixed by distance jumped {GT}).

Severl of these minor bits and pieces (of which I've listed a scant few, for space), equate to a host of differences in follow-on products, like GTGF, which is based upon LKW's "All Battledress IMC".

As I said, Malenfant, several fairly trivial issues do not match up; this is not, however, the place to debate the GT heresies. .

Not counting the big ones cause by the radically different assumptions about Life, Physics, measurement and Technology that are imposed by game system differences, there are a number that simply are a result of LKW writing from his PTU, and that flavoring the GTU. The corpus of canon, excluding rules issues, is huge and not entitrely self-consistant; Loren made many choices in establishing the (Fairly self-consistant) GTU. Some choices rankle some of us.

It does differ in ways few players will ever notice, and fewer still will care about, but if one is potentially going to get grognards, some of these may become issues. The ones mentioned above are NOT artifacts of GURPS, but are GT-isms which contradict other rulesets presentations; they are the biggest of the host, and the most visible.

Heck, the BD issue is one that sparked flame wars repeatedly. Still does. It makes a huge difference if there are IM's in CES's on patrol, or if the entirety of the IMC is BDress. Or even if everyone is BD trained, but not all are actually infantry. What's more, a later article for MT contradicted LKW's article, putting marine troops in CES's; it did add a level 0 skill for all marines: Drop Capsule Operations.

the GTU is much more self-consistant than CT, and will give one a well fleshed out TU to work with. It's officially NOT the OTU, but it is clearly VERY close. The differnces are really minor, but some of them are profound. (MWM stated on the TML that the GT Licence was for a "non-authoritative" version, shortly after the SJG license was announced.)

And as for Significant Minority: IME, about 25-30 % of the pre-TNE Traveller players did not like the TNE rules for one or many reasons, and felt alienated by it. Most still play CT or MT... and even MT annoyed a chunk. But, that "Very Vocal" group is also significant, becuase they happened to be very vocal at the right people: MWM and LKW, in fora where those two were semi-active participants.

Simply put, of those who, in 1994-5, were active on the Traveller Mailing lists, some 400 persons, nearly a hundred were on the XBML, so that we could discuss the imperium without being jeered at, and reference rules material for CT/MT. At that time, TNE was the official "Current RUleset"; with all the rulesets now "in release" in some form or another, traveller has a richness of rules that not only can, but often is, going to cause heated debate.

I'll also give Hunter due credit: The playtest for T20 was very responive to plytester feedback... sometimes even to the annoyance of the playtesters... one week saw three revisions. Several elements are designed to be snaggable for CT/MT/TNE/T4: T&C, HG-derivative ship design, Small Craft and Vehicle design, the background in general. It is playable, and feels much like CT or MT in play, but also supports the style of play of TNE quite well.

The one big failing is that we playtesters, specifically including myself, did NOT agressively test out BIG SHIPS and spinals adequately... and the end result is that the biggest glitch is the pointlessness of Battleships in T20.

GT, however, in addition to some choices hitting nerves in the debate-and-flame club, has issues which arise from purely mechanical issues well outside the scope of the GT rules ability to fix, some of which are quite striking on other aspects by extrapolation; others are clearly items which could have been tweaked, but at the expense of crossover. The ship design and ship combat mechanics are, well, fairly close to stock GURPS. Characters in all other editions are randomized to some extent, even T20, while GURPS is a point based game. That a Zhodani Tavershedle is at least 200 points, possibly more, based upon what they can do in various other editions, well... in CT I could play them. Under stock GT, I can't, as they are the equivalent points of two starting PC's.

 

[Evo Plurion]

Hey Aramis. WTFAYTA?

 

[jasper]

The one big failing is that we playtesters, specifically including myself, did NOT agressively test out BIG SHIPS and spinals adequately... and the end result is that the biggest glitch is the pointlessness of Battleships in T20.
So how much of problem would it be to include corrections in errata. And update the book when goes into another printing.

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by Aramis:
some small issues, like Battledress skill for all marines

Serious differences in travel costs, due to totally different mechanics for passage prices (Fixed by jump {CT, MT, TNE, T4, T20} or fixed by distance jumped {GT}).

Severl of these minor bits and pieces (of which I've listed a scant few, for space)

this is not, however, the place to debate the GT heresies. .

<snip of big ole rant>

A scant few? Ouch!

shrugs

I prefer BESM over Gurps as a rules set due to it being more compact but find the GT books a mine of goodies for any Traveller rules.

Casey

 

[Morte]

Originally posted by malek77:

Starship construction seems to be the second most important thing after character creation in Traveller(I've heard jokes about CT players who mount deck plans on their walls).

A couple of points...

I've never designed a ship for any version of traveller using the design rules. I have designed half a dozen T20 ships using a design spreadsheet somebody made, but I've frankly no idea what the design rules are. Nor can I see any need to find out.

If I were starting out, I'd ignore design rules and use the squillion or so existing designs available in books or on the web.

Traveller ship design is almost a separate game, played by different people from the ones who go adventuring around a table covered with pizza and character sheets, for other reasons.

 

[Morte]

Originally posted by Aramis:
Be warned that some GT setting material clearly contradicts some OTU material (Several worlds in BTC do not match other (CT/MT) text on those same worlds).

But then several worlds described in CT don't match their descriptions in other CT publications, and the setting contradicts the rules of the game left right and center...

The traveller setting has about 30,000 worlds, it's been going for 25 years or more, and quality control down the years has been poor. You will have to deal with that, whatever rules and setting you use.

 

[Malenfant]

Originally posted by hunter:

That's the problem Malenfant, too many folks like yourself assume that just because T20 is based on the d20 system rules that somehow it is like D&D.

Then you say that d20 Modern is much more streamlined and less fantasy based. It is based on the same d20 system rules that we used for T20. They just tweaked them to make d20 Modern like we tweaked them to create T20.

EDIT: Actually, you know, I can't really put my finger on the problem. Yes, you did change T20 quite radically from D&D, but to me it still feels similar. Maybe it's just a problem I have with the d20 system as a whole.

BTW, d20 Modern came out a month after T20. Made it kind of hard to build our game around it. Wouldn't have mattered anyway, I am not a big fan of the d20 Modern rules.

Well, yes

. I'm speaking from hindsight here. But as I said, ideally I think T20 might have been more to my taste if it had been OGL. But then the chargen system would have to be very different to what it currently is to make it appeal more to me (that's where most of my problems lie).

Vessel feats work pretty much like Armor Proficiency and Weapon Proficiency feats. They specify what you are qualified to operated. Your Driving or Pilot skill rank tells you how well.

Well, I'm not particularly fond of weapon and armour feats either

. I just don't see why you need a feat to tell you what you can operate - that's what skills are for in any other game.

Third, being based on GURPS it suffers to some extent from the "get more snacky powerz" mentality that GURPS usually has - as you gain more character points, you get more advantages and skills and abilities, which means the temptation is stronger to choose abilities because they make your character better in terms of game-mechanics (ie powergaming) rather than better in terms of actual character development.

Ah, but that's not how GURPS works. If you gain XP in GURPS, you don't really gain new advantages or disadvantages - you mostly spend them on skills or existing abilities.

With d20, it's more a case of "OK, I've gone up a level, now I get to pick from a list of cool new feats to make my character do fancier things".

The only randomness in character creation prior history is what assignments and outcomes occur. Unlike CT where you are randomly assigned skills for a term, in T20 you earn experience. You can then apply that experience towards improving your character once you have accumulated enough to earn a new level. Which means you get to PICK AND CHOOSE what new skill and feats you might want or what skills you might wish to improve.

How does this stop you from 'creating the character you want'?

OK, I was getting confused there, my apologies. However, I do think the T20 system is very very over-complicated and confusing. I remember it took me months to figure it out (on these boards too), and at the end of it I looked at it, went "OK, I get it, but wtf are they thinking?!" and decided never to try making a T20 character again.

For starters, you have the same names for the classes and careers, which makes things very confusing. You can choose classes before you even start your career (eg you can still be a first level Scout even though you're only in university). And then when you're in your career, you don't even have to spend your XP on a relevant class (the classic example being that you can be in the Merchant career and then spend all your XP on the Rogue class). And there's so much multiclassing going on that I have to wonder what the point of having classes was in the first place - it'd be far easier to just have one "class" that allows you to pick whatever feats and skills etc that you like throughout the whole process rather than go through the rigmarole of multiclassing.

So, OK, it may not be totally random like CT, but I do think it is needlessly overcomplicated and frustrating.

Are we talking 'die easy' gritty?

No, more like "less cinematic".

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by malek77:
Yes! Fast and light. I often have very specific ideas of how a campaign has to go, and it helps to have a 'lighter' system that you can push in the right direction
...
I feel to be heading for a CT/MT background and GURPS/MT mechanics. Or close to that.

(FYI : I'm familiar w/ the D10 Interlock rules used by Cyberpunk2020 and the percentile based Inquisitor rules from GW *ugh!*)

For a good single book version of the OTU background MT's Imperial Encyclopedia or GT's main book both have detailed Library Data and other information though both have some slight difference of tone than CT.

As for getting a game going others have already suggested good campaign books. I'm co-running a game using the Gateway book but have and like the Rim of Fire book. Since the Gateway book has a war going on in the area covered by Rim of Fire as a backdrop it's been useful for the game.

If you wanted you could use Mekton (also Interlock) with a Traveller setting if you like. If you fold in some of the Friday Night Firefight stuff it'd be just as deadly as a published Traveller ruleset. ^_^

As for GT/Gurps Lite I would stick with 3rd edition for the moment to simplify matters.
GURPS Resources Page
GURPS Lite 3rd Edition page

and download the Transhuman Space version as well. The WWII one is also free and has some extra combat details if you want them.

I thought Andy Slack had an article on playing Traveller from just GURPS Lite but either it's no longer there or I'm confusing people.

As for T20, one option I've used is to just give players 28,000 experience points to start with. Also I've done a test run of plugging T20 into Mutants & Masterminds point-based system and it seemed to fit quite well. It plays deadly and while chargen has some chugwork it makes for a fairly open character with hooks for background and roleplay. Offhand I find GURPS chargen to be just as timeconsuming with too many options and fiddly costs which is part of the reason I like BESM, a similar game.

As for d20 Modern I'm only keeping onto the book for two reasons, 1) it's clearer than D&D 3.0 and has white backgrounds 2) D20 Future is on its way which *might* be useful. These days Star Wars d20 looks more useful to a T20 game as a core book though I still like CoCd20. ^_^ If I want to play super-psionic spys I'll play Spycraft, if I want to play a Monster Slayer I'll play BTVS or the Angel RPG, and I don't want to play a modern-day Forgotten Realms or similar. (the three default settings for d20 Modern)

d20 Modern's IMO didn't diverage enough from D&D. Still uses hit points, monsters, psionics, spells all there with most right out of D&D and levels / classes are still there and so generic they are more of a hinderance than aid. I do like some bits from it though but I digress.

The bulk of the d20 / d20 Modern rules are here on WotC's site though for basic reference I prefer the d20 Modern PDF here even if it doesn't include the latest extras. They are helpful for T20 Lite esp. if you are not familiar with d20 rules.

To sum up, pick whatever blend of rules and setting you want and have fun! Welcome to CotI!

Casey (there's always RISUS Traveller )

 

[Morte]

Shall I do this? Oh what the hell...

Mechanics, chargen, setting, and resources here we go. Ignoring T4, T5 and TNE.

Mechanics...

There is a difference between simplicity and elegance.

CT mechanics are simple, but as a rule system it's not even slightly elegant -- there are different rules on every page, remembering one rule doesn't help you to remember another, book 4 generates characters twice as powerful as book 2, etc etc. There are some very nice house rules floating around that knock sense into it for people who've been playing 25 years, but they aren't in the books on sale.

Megatraveller tidied a lot of this up. It's been a bit impractical for statups because you could only get the books on eBay and in the real world that makes it hard to get a group going from scratch. But you can get it as PDFs now.

GURPS is elegant -- everything works the same way and hangs together -- and there are some modular/optional rules to vary the complexity to taste. But whatever you do, there's an awful lot of system there (200 skills or something). You do tend to end up looking things up, especially in the first year.

T20 is in the middle of everything -- more complex but more elegant than CT, less elegant but less complex than GURPS. It has the great advantage of being based on D20, the system that around 65% of gamers use, which helps in starting a game with regular gamers. It has the great disadvantage of being based on D20, which means that ignorant CT/MT/GURPS players will assume it's like Dungeons and Dragons (nothing like it).

Chargen...

CT, if played by the book, generates random characters through a "prior history" process and randomly assigns skills to them. The last time I tried to play a pilot in CT I ended up with a vacuum horse jockey and professional gambler. I'm not kidding, and this is not unusual. Some people think this is fun, maybe you agree. [Note: you can always ignore the book and say "make your stats + skills add up to 50".]

MT is like cleaned up CT, again.

GURPS is the opposite of CT, a pure design process. You spend points on this and that. It has "templates" (standardised rough desgins) for knocking up ex-marines, or scientists, or con-men, or whatever you fancy. Note that GURPS is designed for realism rather than balance, so don't expect a couple of well-designed 100 point characters to be equally effective.

T20 is in the middle again. It uses prior history which is pretty similar to CT, but that just gives you XP to spend on levels in various classes almost as you like. So you get a bit of background and end up with roughly the character you wanted. It balances PCs far better than the other systems, if that matters to you.

[Note: the prior history system in CT/MT/T20 gives some input to your "backstory", but it's pathetic compared to say CP2020 (or any game designed after 1980). Traveller's prior history system is the original and the worst. Everyone else learned from it, but the Traveller-playing world is terrified of all change.]

Rule books needed...

CT: bunch of reprints, vast amount of stuff on the web, forums to scour for the house rules that make it work.

MT: just reappeared as PDFs at drivethrurpg.com, can largely use CT material (adventures etc) unchanged.

GURPS: is Texan for "you need more books than you expected". You'll want the GURPS Traveller book, and the Core rules (GURPS Lite is really a sampler), and a setting book, and possibly one or two others (Aliens, Starships, Far Trader) according to your style of game.

T20: need the Traveller's Handbook (contains rules for play plus design rules for vehicles, ships, planets etc and GM tips). [In theory you need a D20 core book, but any D20 player can do the missing bits from memory.] There is a players book coming, which cuts the design stuff and throws in some more classes/gear/etc.

Settings...

All of the rules above could be used with all of the settings below. Some conversion work would be needed if you aren't using the setting with its default rules.

Classic Era: Set in about years 1107-1115 of the Third Imperium, which was seemingly a bit of a golden age. Main locations would be Spinward Marches, Solomani Rim, or Reaver's Deep. Neutral, general purpose adventuring era. Might need asome eBaying to get the books. Default rules CT, MT is OK.

MT era: 1116+ the rebellion, huge civil war, everything falling apart, turns out it wasn't so golden at all. Tough times. You may like the huge events or may feel overshadowed by them. All PDF now. Default rules: MT, CT is OK.

GURPS: 1120+ alternate universe in which Classic Era carried on and the rebellion never happened. Material is mostly for Spinward Marches with a side trip to the Solomani Rim. Pretty much the same setting that came with CT. Books from Steve Jackson Games. Default rules: GURPS.

M1000: so far set in the domain of Gateway on the other side of space from those above, in the year 993. Covers the edge of empire and border/buffer zones beyond. Another neutral, general purpose adventure setting. The only setting with a current stream of published adventures and whatnot. The main book is Gateway to Destiny. Default rules: T20, but makes a very good stab at being system-neutral.

The virus era: the setting that came with TNE, which I know sod all about. This is MT rebellion era a couple of decades down the line, once sentient AI computer viruses have smashed everything flat. Looks very grim. Deafult rules: TNE. May be hardest to convert, since setting has things impossible in other rules.

My personal favourite setting is Reavers' Deep, but it's abysmal as a book. The best all-rounder IMO is Gateway to Destiny -- good setting (second equal?), best book.

Writing...

CT books run the gamut as books. Some do genuinely make more sense read backwards, others are pretty decent.

MT books are generally well-written, ditto GURPS.

QLI are schizophrenic. Their setting books are models of clarity and utility, that all the other publishers should bow down to. Their rule books aren't.

Well, I hope this helps...

 

[ScottB]

Originally posted by malek77:
Starship construction seems to be the second most important thing after character creation in Traveller(I've heard jokes about CT players who mount deck plans on their walls).

Nah. Whether starship (and other vehicle) construction is important in a particular campaign is entirely up to the GM and players. Since there are detailed construction rules available for every version, Traveller attracts a fair number of gearheads who like to use them. But they're really a sideline for interested parties - in every version I've seen, you can run a game just fine without ever looking at the starship construction rules, let alone using them.

I personally am not much of a gearhead - I design what's critical, and fudge the rest.

 

[Morte]

Originally posted by Casey:
I thought Andy Slack had an article on playing Traveller from just GURPS Lite but either it's no longer there or I'm confusing people.

I think that was Chris Thrash in JTAS.

You can run GT with GURPS lite, provided you have Chris's article in which he's read the six other GURPS books for you and combined them into stuff the Lite rules actually cover.

Otherwise, I've tried using just Lite twice and it never worked for more than half an hour...

As for T20, one option I've used is to just give players 28,000 experience points to start with.

I heartily recommend this. I personally use "1500XP per year over age 18", but never mind.

Offhand I find GURPS chargen to be just as timeconsuming with too many options and fiddly costs which is part of the reason I like BESM, a similar game.

The secret of GURPS is the GURPS Character Builder software. The game shifts as much of its complexity into chargen as possible, then provides chargen software to do the grunt work. Quite clever, if you go along with it.