Really, how important is the system/edition?

[Saeviomagy]

System matters.

The system defines how the world actually works. You CAN run shadowrun with Rifts, but it's going to be hard to explain why characters don't level cities with their mega-damage pistols.

And the more time you spend modifying a system, the less time you spend playing, and the less accessible the game becomes to newcomers.

That said: you're not going to WANT to spend time playing if your group consists of corrupt brazilian cops for example.

 

[Afrodyte]

I'm strongly introverted, so my inner life is sacrosanct. It takes a lot of energy for me to be around people (even people I'm close to). Psychologically, I need to plan and prepare myself to spend time around people. Thus I'm extremely purposeful about how I spend my time. So if I'm not enjoying myself, I'm usually thinking, "I could've been doing something interesting - by myself!!!"

Because of that, I'm pretty hardcore about what I show up to do. When it's time to roleplay, I'm there to roleplay. And it's highly specific. I'm there to play this particular style with this particular character exploring these particular themes. I'm fine with whatever facilitates that purpose. But everything that gets in the way of that plucks my nerves.

Next to people who don't understand or appreciate why I want to play, a system that inhibits my ability to play the game I imagine destroys my enjoyment the most because I'm spending as much time suppressing my distaste for certain rules as I am playing my character or running the game. I'd rather put my energy into a system that supports the kind of play experience I want (which varies from game to game). I'm a firm supporter of elegant, intuitive mechanics that support a specific style of play. So GURPS, HERO, and other "generic" systems don't do it for me. I refuse to play them no matter who's running. Even if my very good friends are involved, that will simply be something we don't do together.

All things being equal (group, time, place, etc.), system matters most.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I agree RC, to a certain extent. I think though that it depends on how much the DM and/or players wanna modify the system they choose to use.

For instance with a car trip you can't pave your own road. With an RPG you can,analogously speaking. You can modify anything you want. You can pave or repave the road as you like.

Assume that the car is the system, and the road is your friends.

If you're a good mechanic, you can tinker with the system, and make the car run better. But it will cost you time (at the very least). Having a car that runs well matters.

The odds are good that you can't pave the road. You might be able to remove a big obstacle -- like a fallen tree -- with some help and a lot of effort, but you pretty much have to take the road as it is......or choose to drive somewhere else (i.e., play with other people). If you choose to drive somewhere else, there is no guarantee that the road will be any better.

Out of the two, the car (system) is the thing that you have greatest control over, and can most easily modify to meet your needs. Ultimately, the group is the most important factor to having a good trip, but most groups are (by definition) average. Therefore, it is the system, not the group, that is easiest to leverage from a good trip into a great trip.

IMHO, of course.


RC

 

[TheAuldGrump]

System is secondary, and more important for the GM than the players, I think. So it is important, just not the most important thing in a game.

That said - I am almost always the GM, and hardly ever get to play - so my preferences in system are what tend to matter. If I do not like a system it spoils my enjoyment, and this affects the game.

I am not a rules light GM, preferring meat on the bones. Nor am I a big fan of homogeneity. 4e leaves me cold, as does Savage Worlds.

That said - I rather like True 20, which departs from the 3.5 rules set at least as much as 4e. While I have never played Mutants & Masterminds the system looks fine.

And I am currently converting two of my homebrew settings to Fantasycraft (one from 3.5, the other from Spycraft) and run a Pathfinder game for younger players.

I currently have them playing a Mutants & Masterminds supers campaign set in 1912. They may even wind up trying Warriors & Warlocks down the road.

That sounds interesting!

I have been trying to get my Spycraft players to try a WWI steampunk/dieselpunk espionage campaign for years. No luck there though, they have heard me expound about that war and want 'nothing to do with shaking hands with the dead'.

The Auld Grump

 

[Minicol]

Extremely important today, as gamers cannot accept any kind of gaming fiat as in "OMG, we've been playing for some ten years together, and he never killed anybody at the table, but I think that TODAY ! he is out there to get us !"

This kind of mentality makes the choice of a ruleset you all agree on very important !

 

[Ariosto]

As GM, one can downplay the importance of mechanisms by reducing the degree to which they occupy players' attention -- if the players are amenable. I've had some fine experiences that way with rules sets that I have otherwise found tedious and not wanted to GM myself.

That does not satisfy players who find dealing with the rules a big part of the pleasure. For them, the time-consuming details are a reason to choose (e.g.) Chivalry & Sorcery or WotC D&D (or 3e over 4e, or vice-versa). The ways in which time and energy are by design invested vary, and thus get different responses from different people.

There's a popular game that to other eyes is "action packed" with "cool", "exciting" and "tactically rich" stuff -- but to me is dull in a way that's mind-numbing when it's not nerve-grating. From experience, the little interest I can find in it is not enough to keep me happily engaged through a four-hour session (much less a longer one).

RPGs that do please me (including some of comparable rules complexity) have been around for decades -- and been found wanting by enthusiasts of this new game. It's the differences that give a reason to switch ... or not to switch. Some people can enjoy both, and that's nifty for them.

For the rest of us, there's not much point in trying to please everyone. As with food, music and other pleasures trying to turn A into an imitation of B is not likely to please fans of either. It easily becomes a pointless and costly exercise.

More to the point is hooking up with people who are on the same page. "Editions" that are really different games mess with "network externalities".

 

[Raven Crowking]

There's a popular game that to other eyes is "action packed" with "cool", "exciting" and "tactically rich" stuff -- but to me is dull in a way that's mind-numbing when it's not nerve-grating. From experience, the little interest I can find in it is not enough to keep me happily engaged through a four-hour session (much less a longer one).

Thank you for trying RCFG.

Sorry you didn't care for it.


RC

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That sounds interesting!

I have been trying to get my Spycraft players to try a WWI steampunk/dieselpunk espionage campaign for years. No luck there though, they have heard me expound about that war and want 'nothing to do with shaking hands with the dead'.

The Auld Grump

Thanks for the complement!

FYI, here's a link to the thread in which I talk about that campaign.

 

[Rechan]

I think some of it depends on the person.

For some people, System/Edition is a matter of identity. Sort of sports. Some just want to hang out with their guy friends around a TV. Others just like to watch the game. Others identify with THEIR Team, and will "hate" another person because they root for the rival team. And then there are those that decorate their car in the appropriate decals and show up at the game with a painted face and a letter on their naked stomach.

If you ask each one of these people "So, what are you?" One will shrug and say, "I like football", the next says "I'm a sports fan", the next will say, "I'm a Packers fan!" The last will say "PACKRS FOR LIFE WOO HOO YEAH PACKERS!"

For another, system is a matter of taste. Heavy Simulation for instance, versus heavy rules, versus more story oriented. Compare for instance WHFRPG vs. HERO vs. Prime Time Adventures. The actual mechanics, or the tone that the mechanics enforce (such as grittiness vs. high power) fulfill different needs for different types of people.

 

[Jack7]

Assume that the car is the system, and the road is your friends.

I meant to respond to this earlier, and then forgot. Now what I meant was the analogy of the game being a vehicle, and the system being the road.

I've never heard of other people being described as a "road you travel down." Rather I've always heard others described as companions you take with you down along the road. (Though I'm sure my wife has at some point or another described me as a near fatal car-crash.) But I found the analogy clever in many ways and very interesting. It's not what I meant but it was an interesting idea. An interesting psychological perception. Or conception.

For some people, System/Edition is a matter of identity. Sort of sports. Some just want to hang out with their guy friends around a TV. Others just like to watch the game. Others identify with THEIR Team, and will "hate" another person because they root for the rival team. And then there are those that decorate their car in the appropriate decals and show up at the game with a painted face and a letter on their naked stomach.

If you ask each one of these people "So, what are you?" One will shrug and say, "I like football", the next says "I'm a sports fan", the next will say, "I'm a Packers fan!" The last will say "PACKRS FOR LIFE WOO HOO YEAH PACKERS!"

For another, system is a matter of taste. Heavy Simulation for instance, versus heavy rules, versus more story oriented. Compare for instance WHFRPG vs. HERO vs. Prime Time Adventures. The actual mechanics, or the tone that the mechanics enforce (such as grittiness vs. high power) fulfill different needs for different types of people.

I think those are some good observations Rech. With me, since you can modify the RPG or system anyway you like (you can't modify football if all you're doing is observing it, and you can't modify it if you're playing it professionally, for obvious reasons) because you are personally involved in the game, design (redesign for your own purposes), the creation process, or the milieu, it's not quite the same thing. But overall I think those are some good observations in stating general principles of how people might view these things.