What Mechanics or Systems Do You NEED?

[MintRabbit]

I need some way for the players to contribute to the world that we're playing in. I don't like coming up with all of it on my own.

So this might be a resource that the player can spend to introduce something new to the world, or maybe a part of a Session 0 that facilitates communal character creation. Numenera's Player Intrusions, Nibiru's Memory system, and the Your Exquisite Fae exercise from Brinkwood come to mind just off the top of my head.

 

[pemerton]

Unless I'm misremembering, however, they're training rules, not learn-by-doing, which is what I'm talking about.

At the start of a 4-year cycle, a player can throw 8+ to have their PC temporarily improve two skills. This is framed as training, yes. But it doesn't require "downtime".

There is a separate rule for developing a skill via downtime - the "sabbatical" rule.

 

[Thomas Shey]

At the start of a 4-year cycle, a player can throw 8+ to have their PC temporarily improve two skills. This is framed as training, yes. But it doesn't require "downtime".

There is a separate rule for developing a skill via downtime - the "sabbatical" rule.

I probably conflated the two, though the "temporarily" is--odd.

 

[pemerton]

I probably conflated the two, though the "temporarily" is--odd.

It lasts for 4 years. Then if the throw is successful again, the increase becomes permanent after another 4 years.

The skill gain from sabbatical is permanent.

 

[thefutilist]

I recently made the lightest game I could think of, for my style of play. It ended up being heavier than I thought.

There’s no GM.

Situation: Create at least 5 characters with tension between them. Probably no more than 7.

Scene framing: Take turns framing the scene. No one else has input.

Conflict resolution: If there is a conflict you MUST roll. Both sides of the conflict must agree there is a conflict. Flip a coin or roll a dice, 50 50. You can set stakes to clarify the conflict but only up to a shift in a characters priorities and you CAN’T set stakes beyond that. The roll determines the shift or not and the character shifted gets to narrate and is free to choose their actions.

I tried leaving out a scene framing rule and play collapsed into story boarding. I tried not being explicit about what the conflict roll dealt with and it was a little weak.

The weird thing about rules is that you have to bring a whole lot of aesthetic judgement and talk about how and why to apply them. I don’t think many people could run the game above, unless I described what I mean by the terms and so on. Which would probably take a few pages, maybe several.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It lasts for 4 years. Then if the throw is successful again, the increase becomes permanent after another 4 years.

Still strikes me as strange.

 

[aramis erak]

This is a question about personal preferences and NOT a question about objective game design truths or onetruewayism. Please respond accordingly.

For a TTRPG work for you, as a player or as a GM, what does it need to have in its mechanical base?

By that, I am essentially asking you what parts of play are important, but with a strong focus on the mechanics of it all.

Do you need a system that supports narrative elements through mechanics? Do you need the game to model the world, mechanically, in a realistic or at least consistent way? Do you need a robust and fun combat system? Do you need the game to get the hell out of the way with transparent and intuitive mechanics? Do you need a game to have new and interesting mechanics to bother with trying it?

Like that.

Thanks.

What I need:

• mechanical clarity — the mechanics need to be readily understood, at least in terms of when and how to apply them
• Preferably, either
  • Unified resolution mechanic — such as used by Savage Worlds, World of Darkness, GURPS, TFT, Dragonbane
  • Dual resolution mechanics — Such as how palladium has combat rolls on 1d20 roll high, and non-combat being 1d100 roll low.
• mechanics that support the genre.
• Enough setting fluff to identify the genre and support play
• Randomization. (I dislike totally randomless)
• Character creation mechanics.
  • Conversion from published does not count.
• Clear delineation of roles for participants. Even if the delineation is "all participants" without a separate GM.
  • who calls for the roll?
  • who sets the difficulty?
  • who sets stakes?
  • who participates?
  • who gets to roll? (which, in many games is different from participation, given help rules)
  • who narrates the result?

Edit to add: while not strictly "need" - if it's intended for multi-adventure modes, some form of advancement. And I do mean advancement, not point shifting

 

[aramis erak]

Hackmaster (being a semi-parody version of 2E with taken to the EXTREME) did this with every stat.

It also had the %ile raise a bit every level so that they had meaning; when you cross 100, the att goes up and the % goes down.

 

[GMMichael]

For a TTRPG work for you, as a player or as a GM, what does it need to have in its mechanical base?

What?

By that, I am essentially asking you what parts of play are important, but with a strong focus on the mechanics of it all.

Oh.

I like a GM/PC dichotomy, because being a PC who can will things into being is weird to me. When I'm a PC, I want to feel like I'm controlling a character, not the game world.

The basic resolution system should be simple enough. I don't know that an odds adjustment of less than 5% is a game-breaker, and I don't want to spend more time calculating my result than discussing what happens in the story.

And since I'm going to want to stab something at some point, optimized combat rules are needed. If the combat rules use the basic system, well, even better.

 

[demoss]

- An unambiguous way to describe things getting worse. Eg. hit points, conditions, etc. There needs to be clarity on "how much more do you have left in the tank". (As a GM. I'm ok playing without this, or having eg. HP hidden from me.)

- Support for my kind of fiction first. ie. rules don't engage until the fictional situation as descibed calls for them. "Describe what chracters do in fiction" -> "When situation calls for mechanics, use them" -> "Describe result in fiction". I'm ok with occasional rules first, but I don't like it as the norm. (Both as a GM and as a player. As a player this is central to my enjoyment. As a GM it's less important, but still get more enjoyment out of a games where this is true.)

- Bonus: character creation that is either a minigame or a creative exercise, not point optimization or a series of deeply interconnected decisions that you can mess up. Character creation that feels like work is not a deal breaker, but eh. (Both as GM and player.)

EDIT:

- As a GM, ability to create creature and NPC stats out of thin air without messing up the whole thing. Ie. necessary stat blocks must be small enough, and easy enough to understand that what I intended to be a cute rabbit doesn't lead to a TPK. Being able to go detailed is fine, but the minimum needed should be around 1-3 numbers, plus a single phrase or mechanical keyword. This isn't a 100% dealbreaker, but a strong preference. Good examples: HeroQuest, Over the Edge, Fate, Cypher System. Acceptable examples: OSR-style games.

- Bonus: support for wide "profession" skills. If I want to make a competent Naval Officer, I don't want to have to figure all the possible skills a Naval Officer realistically would have, especially if the game is 90% about going into haunted houses. I want to be able to write down "Naval Officer <skill rank>", and use that for all Naval Officer things, even if there's a more specific skill in the system. I can manage without this, but every game I've played that does this has been better for it. (Both as GM and player.)

- Originally I had Randomization, but then I realized that while it is my current preference, I would not mind playing or running Nobilis again, and I've always wanted to have a go at Amber Diceless...