Jon Peterson: Does System Matter?

D&D historian Jon Peterson asks the question on his blog as he does a deep dive into how early tabletop RPG enthusiasts wrestled with the same thing.

Based around the concept that 'D&D can do anything, so why learn a new system?', the conversation examines whether the system itself affects the playstyle of those playing it. Some systems are custom-designed to create a certain atmosphere (see Dread's suspenseful Jenga-tower narrative game), and Call of Cthulhu certainly discourages the D&D style of play, despite a d20 version in early 2000s.

Does System Matter?

Dungeons & Dragons started out as a game with such an adaptable and open-ended set of rules that early adopters questioned whether any fur...

playingattheworld.blogspot.com

 

[Aldarc]

It's been a while, but I remember reading a piece in a car magazine wherein the various editors picked a vehicle they would want as their only car, and it was interesting seeing where they were willing to compromise and where they weren't (and how that was different for each contributor).

IMO, the conversation seems to have an odd call and response between (1) the car design matters and (2) yeah, but people have their own preferences and can use their car as they feel like as if (2) was somehow being ignored or argued against as being relevant to the discussion in (1). Of course people have their own preferences and places where they draw the line. Some won't drive stick-shift. Some one may want an impractical luxury car. Some have a sentimental connection to a brand or make of a car. Some people would really like two convenient cupholders while driving.

Similarly in TTRPGs: Some people HATE roll-under systems. Some people dislike systems where the GM doesn't roll. Some LOVE dice pools. But IMHO these are points in favor of system matters. A game is a gestalt of its constituent parts and any of these parts could be a deal breaker or a tolerable "necessary evil" but that does not somehow disprove the gestalt of the system and how it impacts the game experience.

 

[TheSword]

If I were to only use a single axis I would only bother to keep one game on my shelves. I do not. If I were to only use a single axis I would only play or run one game. I do not. And if in real life I were to only use a single axis I would only use one screwdriver in my toolbox and one kitchen knife. I do not.

If you want different things at different time you might play different games.

I further do not believe that even you use only a single axis unless you, if given the choice, have the same meal every time. After all if you're only using a single axis one meal must be "the best".

I believe that you might have decided that one RPG is the best for you - but any time you read someone who explicitly uses more than one RPG then they are obviously using more than one axis. And accusing them of thinking there is a best is a misunderstanding - repeatedly doing so is a strawman.
If you want different things at different time you might play different games.

I play different systems. Not sure where you get the idea that I only play D&D comes from. I value them for different tasks. However at that task I pick I can put them on a spectrum. That’s why I’m saying working out whether you’re interested in the idea has already be determined when working out the task.

Tonight’s dinner isn’t a roleplaying system. There are considerably less variables to determine. How hungry am I, how expensive is it, how long do I have to prepare it and how much do I like it. That’s pretty much it.

Now a roleplaying system will have dozens of variables and at that point multiple axis become too unhelpful. This is just my point of view.

 

[prabe]

IMO, the conversation seems to have an odd call and response between (1) the car design matters and (2) yeah, but people have their own preferences and can use their car as they feel like as if (2) was somehow being ignored or argued against as being relevant to the discussion in (1). Of course people have their own preferences and places where they draw the line. Some won't drive stick-shift. Some one may want an impractical luxury car. Some have a sentimental connection to a brand or make of a car. Some people would really like two convenient cupholders while driving.

Similarly in TTRPGs: Some people HATE roll-under systems. Some people dislike systems where the GM doesn't roll. Some LOVE dice polls. But IMHO these are points in favor of system matters. A game is a gestalt of its constituent parts and any of these parts could be a deal breaker or a tolerable "necessary evil" but that does not somehow disprove the gestalt of the system and how it impacts the game experience.

I was remembering something from probably the mid-late 1990s--I'm old--but I can see an online conversation going about the way you describe.

 

[TheSword]

IMO, the conversation seems to have an odd call and response between (1) the car design matters and (2) yeah, but people have their own preferences and can use their car as they feel like as if (2) was somehow being ignored or argued against as being relevant to the discussion in (1). Of course people have their own preferences and places where they draw the line. Some won't drive stick-shift. Some one may want an impractical luxury car. Some have a sentimental connection to a brand or make of a car. Some people would really like two convenient cupholders while driving.

Similarly in TTRPGs: Some people HATE roll-under systems. Some people dislike systems where the GM doesn't roll. Some LOVE dice polls. But IMHO these are points in favor of system matters. A game is a gestalt of its constituent parts and any of these parts could be a deal breaker or a tolerable "necessary evil" but that does not somehow disprove the gestalt of the system and how it impacts the game experience.

You are right. It doesn’t disprove it, because there is nothing that can be proven or disproven in that situation. It all just comes down to what works for a given individual/table.

To be clear I’m not saying system doesn’t matter. Just that teasing out what will work for a given individual is like deciding what is the best recipe of a dish. It’s gonna depend.

 

[TwoSix]

Everything from styling to function will vary depending on the people you talk to and their preferences. There is no single solution, even for people incredibly knowledgeable about the topic.

I feel like this is kind of circling the much broader question: "If no one can agree on what matters, does that mean nothing actually matters?" Like, if we all have different preferences on what games work best for us, does that mean system doesn't matter?

I'd personally argue the opposite, that the fact that we all have disparate preferences means that those differences between games matters quite a bit. But I can see where one could draw the opposite conclusion.

 

[prabe]

I feel like this is kind of circling the much broader question: "If no one can agree on what matters, does that mean nothing actually matters?" Like, if we all have different preferences on what games work best for us, does that mean system doesn't matter?

I'd personally argue the opposite, that the fact that we all have disparate preferences means that those differences between games matters quite a bit. But I can see where one could draw the opposite conclusion.

I think maybe you're looking at "different things matter differently to different people." Applies to cars and to TRPGs.

 

[Neonchameleon]

If you want different things at different time you might play different games.

I play different systems. Not sure where you get the idea that I only play D&D comes from. I value them for different tasks. However at that task I pick I can put them on a spectrum. That’s why I’m saying working out whether you’re interested in the idea has already be determined when working out the task.

But the time you do that is emphatically not when discussing them on message boards. It's when you've taken the information available in to run this game in specific which includes what the timescale is and who the players will be.

And no, your last sentence isn't correct. I, like many on this board, am interested in game design as well as in play. A good game doing something I don't want done still has a quality and a usefulness even if I never intend to run or play it.

Tonight’s dinner isn’t a roleplaying system. There are considerably less variables to determine. How hungry am I, how expensive is it, how long do I have to prepare it and how much do I like it. That’s pretty much it.

So ... because there are fewer variables you make the decision more complex?

Now a roleplaying system will have dozens of variables and at that point multiple axis become too unhelpful. This is just my point of view.

If multiple axes are unhelpful then how in the name of the little black pig is a single axis helpful? Especially when talking about games.

 

[TwoSix]

I think maybe you're looking at "different things matter differently to different people." Applies to cars and to TRPGs.

Sure, but does that mean "system matters" or "system doesn't matter"? I'm attempting to circle back to what this thread is nominally about (which isn't cars).

 

[Neonchameleon]

You are right. It doesn’t disprove it, because there is nothing that can be proven or disproven in that situation. It all just comes down to what works for a given individual/table.

To be clear I’m not saying system doesn’t matter. Just that teasing out what will work for a given individual is like deciding what is the best recipe of a dish. It’s gonna depend.

On the other hand I'm a relatively experienced GM who sometimes plays with randos off the internet and has run games for multiple groups because friends have asked me to. It doesn't all "just come down to what works for a given individual/table" so much as picking the right game for the right group is a skill.

If I know that of a group sitting at the table one of the players is allergic to peanuts and another completely loves hot food both are going to impact my cooking.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Oh, there are . There certainly are care enthusiast forums!

But here's the thing, and I can speak from experience. You will get incredibly disparate opinions as to what matters. From car enthusiasts.

They can, and will, agree on certain things- like the horsepower of the vehicle. But the sheer number of opinions you can get as to what is the proper vehicle if you want to do "X" will be staggering.

The factors that people use to determine what matters is incredibly idiosyncratic. For that matter, reasonable people can disagree about very specific things; if you want a really fun time, try going to a car enthusiast forum and having a discussion about German, Japanese, and American reliability, repair costs, and engineering in general across brands.

Everything from styling to function will vary depending on the people you talk to and their preferences. There is no single solution, even for people incredibly knowledgeable about the topic.

(If you want to see something fun on a regular basis, there is a weekly column on a website called Jalopnik where the writers offer their suggestions for a used vehicle for someone who writes in ... and the solutions cannot be more different.)

So then I'm not sure what your point is. There are multiple opinions, so we shouldn't hear them? I would think it's the case where there is largely one prevailing opinion where no discussion would be required. "It's bad to stomp on puppies!"

I'm kidding around about the puppies, of course, but I am genuinely trying to understand your point.

If we try to loop back to the intent of the phrase "System matters" in the sense that Peterson seems to have meant in his essay, then I think he's saying that the rules and processes you use will influence the experience you have. Do you disagree with that?