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

 

[Ovinomancer]

The op links to Edwards' blog, he is system matters.

It links to Jon Peterson's blog. Edwards isn't even mentioned in the OP. I think that @pemerton may have quoted him at some point in this thread, but that would be it. I didn't refer to Edwards at all, and you brought that up while quoting me. I must say, this exchange is terribly confusing, mostly because I can't even track where you're coming from.

So you play with not having an idea of the rules and even "to suss out" the rules is bad? Hmm, that's cool, you do you. We do indeed play differently, as I like to have some sort of working knowledge of them; usually for me it is wander around and interact with the environment in game, while having a beer, and a laugh with friends.

Uh, what? Where did you get that. Of course I like to know the rules, but I know them as a player, not a character in the game. At this point, you've moved topics in every response, and I'm still not sure what you're trying to get to. Maybe it's me, in which case, someone please lend a hand? My translator appears to be on the fritz.

EDIT: ah, the blog the OP links to links to Edward's blog. This needs one of those Inception BWAAAAAAs.

 

[dragoner]

Link to it in the op: The Forge :: System Does Matter and Vincent Baker of Pbta is also part of that scene, I am surprised you didn't know that? You should read it, that probably is why you feel confused, or not.

For translations, try yandex or google, though I also speak Russian, Czech, and German to some degree.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

The simplest proof that systems matter is the fact that people play with systems at all. If did not matter at all, players would absolutely drift towards the least incovenient and easiest solution which would be no system at all. You can argue that you can play anything with one system and that it does not really make a different to move to a different one is actually arguing against your own argument.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Link to it in the op: The Forge :: System Does Matter and Vincent Baker of Pbta is also part of that scene, I am surprised you didn't know that? You should read it, that probably is why you feel confused, or not.

For translations, try yandex or google, though I also speak Russian, Czech, and German to some degree.

That's not what the OP links to, although the blog the OP does link to has a link to that essay. Intuiting that you mean the second level of linking is what prompted my Inception comment above. I'm also aware of Vincent Baker's roots, not sure what made you jump to the conclusion I wasn't, when what I did say was that I didn't reference Edwards and that the OP doesn't link him, so your comment was a non sequitur. Now I understand that you somehow jumped from my point about PbtA not being a physics engine to Vincent Baker being the author of AW to Vincent being part of the Forge discussions to Ron Edwards having blogged on a similar topic to the OP to now assuming that I know nothing of any of this because I didn't follow this chain of logic which you did not share.

And, no, the translation problem is not the language, but rather the baffling structure of your posts and the way they alternate between odd direction shifts, leaps in topic, and unsubstantiated assumptions about what I think or do. Trust me: I'll tell you, you needn't guess.

 

[dragoner]

It is a simple truth that it does matter, in particular to mechanics of why try to fix things when there is system that does what you want anyways. It is also true in what you learn first can have an effect on how you learn things later, I still see westerners do things, which do not make a lot of sense but then I just think that's what they do and move on.

 

[Ovinomancer]

The simplest proof that systems matter is the fact that people play with systems at all. If did not matter at all, players would absolutely drift towards the least incovenient and easiest solution which would be no system at all. You can argue that you can play anything with one system and that it does not really make a different to move to a different one is actually arguing against your own argument.

This does seem obvious, but... it's apparently not. Interestingly, the second link to Ron Edwards in Jon Peterson's blog post (which is what's linked in the OP, if confusion remains anywhere) discusses a possible theory as to why this may be. Unfortunately, like a lot of Forge discussions, it's very unflattering to the point of insulting at times, which hides that there's an excellent point in there -- that people are often conditioned as to what RPG means, get locked into that mindset, and then have difficulty, if not hostility, to learning alternative concepts.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

This does seem obvious, but... it's apparently not. Interestingly, the second link to Ron Edwards in Jon Peterson's blog post (which is what's linked in the OP, if confusion remains anywhere) discusses a possible theory as to why this may be. Unfortunately, like a lot of Forge discussions, it's very unflattering to the point of insulting at times, which hides that there's an excellent point in there -- that people are often conditioned as to what RPG means, get locked into that mindset, and then have difficulty, if not hostility, to learning alternative concepts.

What would the alternative be? If we take any kind of fixed or written rules (no matter the complexity) as a system, the alternative would be an entirely organic, or free form and chaotic form of play? Would power dynamics and a natural order emerge in that free form of play? A different kind of system?

 

[dragoner]

There are freeform rpg sites and forums, a fairly large community. I run an sfrpg group on fb, and we get them joining, and being confused it is not a story telling, writing environment such as that. I also belong to writing groups as well.

edit: Here is one - RP Forums - Index page

 

[Ovinomancer]

What would the alternative be? If we take any kind of fixed or written rules (no matter the complexity) as a system, the alternative would be an entirely organic, or free form and chaotic form of play? Would power dynamics and a natural order emerge in that free form of play? A different kind of system?

I think we have a misunderstanding. I agree with you, but, as shown in this thread and elsewhere, many don't. I was discussing some of the reasons that they might not, and it boils down to a conditioned mindset that there's only one approach to RPGs, and all that changes in system do is fiddle with the details. Thus, system doesn't really matter because it's really just a matter of details - the core play is still the same. If you think all games are Monopoly, because you've only ever played versions of Monopoly, then this is an understandable position. In effect, this conditioned approach to RPGs is the default assumption for how all RPGs work, so system is fundamentally the same.

I mean, if you were introduced to RPGs through D&D, and have played D&D primarily, maybe with some dabbling in some other d20 games, then, yeah, these systems are all very similar in approach and the core play loop is pretty much the same. You have to wander further afield and take some risks on other systems to really get to games that don't look at all like D&D.

I also think there's a difference between a game that does have a system and ones that are just ad hoc negotiations. Having a conflict resolution system, even if it's as simple as 'what Bob says goes' does separate out from free-form make believe. It changes things into a game, or, at least, is a necessary step in that direction. Play is not the same as Game. This is, however, a quibble.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

There are freeform rpg sites and forums, a fairly large community. I run an sfrpg group on fb, and we get them joining, and being confused it is not a story telling, writing environment such as that. I also belong to writing groups as well.

edit: Here is one - RP Forums - Index page

I got experience with RP like that.

Could I compose a roleplay message and, without consulting anyone, describe how your character dies spontaneously?