overgeeked
Open-World Sandbox
Most versions of D&D have that baked in. The exception is 3X, where the referee is expected to build monsters the same as PCs are built. This carries over to most D&D-like games.
Asymmetrical Complexity in RPG Design
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
I'm not sure that's true. With D&D the players and GM have different rules for many of the things they do, but both are of about equal complexity. Your 2E character has this list of stats and abilities and proficiencies and equipment, while the GM has monsters with hit points and abilities and attacks and so on.
I would say that, from experience, OD&D, 1e, and Basic (B/X, BECMI) are strongly asymmetric.
The DM is required to know a lot. The players? Not so much.
Maybe. I think tables reduces that kind of complexity, compared to having to know rules and reference equations and such.
.... well, I can say that tables do reduce the complexity. But having played and ran those games extensively, I can also assure you that the level of knowledge required of the DM is so much higher than that required of the players, and it's not even close.
overgeeked
Open-World Sandbox
Right. But other than the to-hit matrix, the referee is not regularly checking their math on anything. The players are. The referee can simply declare something is so, from monster stats to NPCs to gods. The players, not so much. They have rules they are generally required to follow…unless the referee says otherwise.
Seems as though y'all have kinda gotten there, but I was going to suggest that any play where the players aren't supposed to engage with the rules as rules--where all the rules and rulings go through the GM/referee--is going to be wildly asymmetric in play and in complexity, and is going to put a lot more work on the GM/referee than on the player/s.
That is, of course, the opposite of where I think the OP was pointing, where the players have complex rules for their characters and the GM has simpler ones--typically pitched as being that way because the GM has a lot more to consider and keep track of.
That is, of course, the opposite of where I think the OP was pointing, where the players have complex rules for their characters and the GM has simpler ones--typically pitched as being that way because the GM has a lot more to consider and keep track of.
If you take a game like Dragonbane as an example where the majority of the rules information flows from the PCs, I think you start to see assymmetry with the higher complexity on the side of the PCs. The GM doesn't set DCs -- those numbers are defined by the PC skills and abilities -- and adversaries are simpler to run than PCs. Monsters even moreso because their actions are random and don'e engage the system the same way that NPCs do.
Note, also, that I am talking about rules complexity. I am not talking about workload. Those are different things.
Note, also, that I am talking about rules complexity. I am not talking about workload. Those are different things.
They might be different, but they seem to be very closely related.
TwoSix
Everyone's literal second-favorite poster
Dragonbane was one of my first thoughts as an example.
Daggerheart would also be a more recent example.
Similar Threads
