From Bespoke to Universal: Let's Talk About TTRPG Systems and Themes

[AbdulAlhazred]

So you’re saying it’s impossible to repurpose and/or extend Hero’s existing “tactical effects of powers and adjudicating battles” to tactical effects of teen romancing powers and adjudicating angst and teenage social tensions?

I think it won't be a good fit. I mean, maybe you could use the core resolution mechanics to do something similar to what Monsterhearts' do, but I think that will require some rework of that core mechanic, plus there's just a bit different kind of thing that a PbtA move and a trad action resolution 'task' mechanic are about. As I have said above, I think by the time you work all this out the game won't look much like Hero System anymore.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Her Wily Charm is attacking his Willful Shyness with a +20% bonus for Romantic Lighting. It would totally work and be a blast!

It has been a LONG time, did Hero come up with a "success with complications" or can you get a kind of "things get very complicated" result? Monsterhearts also features LOSING CONTROL of your character on certain results, which I'm pretty sure isn't a thing in Hero.

 

[Reynard]

It has been a LONG time, did Hero come up with a "success with complications" or can you get a kind of "things get very complicated" result? Monsterhearts also features LOSING CONTROL of your character on certain results, which I'm pretty sure isn't a thing in Hero.

Hero.is an old school RPG. Implicit in that is the idea that the GM can make whatever happen as long as it makes sense in play and reinforces the genre. Books like Strike Force make it very clear that running Champions means adjudication with comic book tropes in mind.

I think a lot of "new school" gamers tend to.ignore or minimize this aspect of play. They read the rules and declare that these games only allow for rigid responses defined by the system. But no one ran games that way. We all assumed genre tropes in our adjudication. It was assumed.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It isn't simple a matter of adding on extra mechanics. The structure of play, who says what, under what circumstances, and where the direction of play comes from, is different and serves a different agenda. Beyond that, there are plenty of mechanics in Hero which would be not only surplus to purpose, but actively detract from the focus on the elements of play that are important for Monsterhearts' theme and agenda.

Again, this is only true if your perception about the functions of that subgenre are only the ones supported by Monsterhearts. Since I don't believe that's true, I disagree with your argument.

Like I said, I was a fan of all of the Vampire Diaries related shows. And by itself, Monsterhearts wouldn't cover any of them properly from where I sit.

So at that point its just a question of where you want to start from.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It has been a LONG time, did Hero come up with a "success with complications" or can you get a kind of "things get very complicated" result? Monsterhearts also features LOSING CONTROL of your character on certain results, which I'm pretty sure isn't a thing in Hero.

The latter part absolutely is something Hero does under some circumstances. Beserk/Enraged, other Psychological Disadvantages and even PRE attacks are based around it to one degree or another.

 

[Reynard]

Once again, many newer games find ways to systemize stuff we have been doing for decades. That isn't a bad thing, and can often make things easier. But it doesn't mean people haven't been doing this stuff in RPGs forever. New games aren't inventing new new modes of play. They are just distilling existing ones sometimes.

 

[Campbell]

So you’re saying it’s impossible to repurpose and/or extend Hero’s existing “tactical effects of powers and adjudicating battles” to tactical effects of teen romancing powers and adjudicating angst and teenage social tensions?

Not at all. Just that would result in a game that plays nothing like Monsterhearts in the same way the Cortex Plus Exalted hack plays almost nothing like Exalted Third Edition (and that stuff is by design).

 

[pemerton]

@AbdulAlhazred started RPGing in the mid-70s. I think he's got a pretty good idea of the way RPGs were played "back in the day".

In my group's 1990s Rolemaster play, we would use the Depression critical table (from RMC III) to reflect the effect, on a character, of a shock or dramatic disappointment. But this is not the same as what contemporary game designs provide. There's a certain tension in rolling the d% and seeing what comes up; but it doesn't compare to the tension of the back-and-forth in a contemporary, well-designed social or emotional conflict resolution system.

Inventing RPGs was an achievement. But the achievements - in innovation, conception, technique - didn't stop in the 1970s or 1980s. Modern designers have solved problems, and created possibilities, that had eluded earlier designers.

 

[Wolfpack48]

eluded

lol.

 

[Reynard]

Inventing RPGs was an achievement. But the achievements - in innovation, conception, technique - didn't stop in the 1970s or 1980s. Modern designers have solved problems, and created possibilities, that had eluded earlier designers.

It isn't necessarily linear development. There are branches. Some innovations are just innovations and not solution. Some old designs work fine. The idea that whatever design elements you prefer are some sort of evolutionary advantage over ones you don't is myopic.