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

[soviet]

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.

You're projecting. He didn't say any of those things.

 

[Reynard]

You're projecting. He didn't say any of those things.

Maybe you should read his post again.

 

[soviet]

Maybe you should read his post again.

No I think you should. He is very clearly saying that certain kinds of storygame style play didn't really exist before, and people used tools like the RM depression crit tables to approximate it, but now systems exist that scratch that itch more effectively. The post says nothing at all about this kind of play being better or more evolved than other kinds of play. Those playstyles already had good systems for them.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

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.

Well, all RPGs assume things, at the very least stuff like gravity and people need to breathe, drink, and eat, the existence of language, etc. Sure, of course Champions assumes genre trope stuff appropriate to a '70s era comic. I don't think anyone is reading any of that away. What they ARE doing is questioning "who leads the dance" during play, and trad systems are built around that being the GM at multiple levels.

 

[M.L. Martin]

As-is Presence is a bit brute force for this purpose, being intended more for more "hard" uses, but yes, I'm pretty sure you could adapt it with some work.

Advanced Player's Guide II includes design notes and two Social Combat Systems, covering 18 pages.

 

[Reynard]

Well, all RPGs assume things, at the very least stuff like gravity and people need to breathe, drink, and eat, the existence of language, etc. Sure, of course Champions assumes genre trope stuff appropriate to a '70s era comic. I don't think anyone is reading any of that away. What they ARE doing is questioning "who leads the dance" during play, and trad systems are built around that being the GM at multiple levels.

But that isn't really a system thing, is it? That's just the style of play and the social contract at the table. I mean, you can have mechanics (metacurrency or whatever) but you can also just play in a fashion that lets players define elements and make choices about what happens.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I personally would say that Monsterhearts play will depend vitally on PbtA 2-6 and 7-9 results driving outcomes that are not aimed at by the players and not under the character's control. In PbtA play this is a very general sort of mechanism that is present in all types of situations. It would be perfectly feasible for the system to model something like "two characters become angry, begin to fight, and end up having an amorous encounter." All without any players, or GM, even considering that possibility. It's this very natural kind of being only partly in control that is a Hallmark of Narrativist play and is extremely hard to get with other techniques.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

But that isn't really a system thing, is it? That's just the style of play and the social contract at the table. I mean, you can have mechanics (metacurrency or whatever) but you can also just play in a fashion that lets players define elements and make choices about what happens.

But see my post directly before this. Many things are extremely hard to achieve like that. Imagine the simplest of examples, one which AW easily generates. My character interacts with your's, asking for something important to him. When you refuse, my character loses control and beats your's to death.

 

[Reynard]

But see my post directly before this. Many things are extremely hard to achieve like that. Imagine the simplest of examples, one which AW easily generates. My character interacts with your's, asking for something important to him. When you refuse, my character loses control and beats your's to death.

I am not sure I follow. Do you WANT a system that decides what your character does for you, or worse let's you decide what another character does instead of their player?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I am not sure I follow. Do you WANT a system that decides what your character does for you, or worse let's you decide what another character does instead of their player?

Sure! Sometimes that's exactly what you need in order to get an RPG experience that is genuinely authentic. I mean, sure, the old "my character just a game piece I name moves for" is a fine thing in its own way, but there's far more to RP than that!