Asymmetrical Complexity in RPG Design

[Umbran]

Or scope of the campaign, or integrating PC backstories, or world building, or scheduling sessions, or preparing handouts, etc. So many things beyond system complexity contribute to GM

When the context is rules complexity, I would not have expected anyone to consider non-rules, out of session effort to be included in the thought of GM workload.

I was talking about workload during a session of play.

 

[overgeeked]

Dead simple enemy stat blocks are definitely high on my list, and eliminating setting DCs in favor of inherent PC qualities is another.

Well, then Forge of Foes and Blog of Holding for D&D 5E. With a little work you can make similar charts for other games.

D&D 5E assumes PCs will have a 65% chance to succeed. So do that. That’s 8+ on a 1d20. You can port that anywhere and adjust as needed.

 

[overgeeked]

Or scope of the campaign, or integrating PC backstories, or world building, or scheduling sessions, or preparing handouts, etc. So many things beyond system complexity contribute to GM workload.

Return of the Lazy Dungeon Master and Game Master’s Book of Proactive Roleplaying. Those help with some. Worlds Without Number is great for worldbuilding.

There’s also other styles of play that don’t worry about PC backstory.

 

[Reynard]

When the context is rules complexity, I would not have expected anyone to consider non-rules, out of session effort to be included in the thought of GM workload.

I was talking about workload during a session of play.

Like I said, talking about workload muddies the waters and pushes the discussion into areas that are out of scope for the subject.

 

[Umbran]

Like I said, talking about workload muddies the waters and pushes the discussion into areas that are out of scope for the subject.

I kind of thought "during a session of play" is pretty specific, clear, and unmuddied at this point.

 

[aramis erak]

You don't mean players vs other players.

That does happen a LOT in fantasy. In fact, it was such a difference between fighter and Cleric/Wizard that many groups insisted first PC be a fighter in TSR D&D and many other games to avoid the complexity of the magic rules for the first PC or two.

Even in 5E, casters are more complex than non.

It's even more so in Rolemaster, Hârnmaster, and a few others...

 

[Anon Adderlan]

a GM will struggle to improv with even a very low complexity game if they don't know what rules there are.

Honestly if an RPG doesn't help enable improv then it doesn't matter how complex the rules are.

They are playing an essentially different game within a game, and their rules complexity is often greater than the "normal" player rules complexity.

I've often wondered how far we can actually take this idea. For example, is it possible for one player to play a purely tactical game while another plays a narrative one? Because these agendas come into conflict enough that entire theories emerged to resolve it. And the key problem here is complexity goes hand in hand with available bandwidth, as there is only so much time to play, and so much complexity a player can engage at once. And if things like tactical battles take up the majority of it there won't be any left for other kinds of play.

It's a matter of managing the human resources at the table which a lot of games simply don't account for.

I was thinking about how Tweet was famous for his free-flowing, amazing DMing style, which lulled WoTC into thinking Everway would be an easier sale than it was. From Shannon Applelcline-

However, the freeform system required a very good gamemaster, and not everyone was a Jonathan Tweet or a John Tynes (who had been running playtests for the Wizards crew).

In other words, the problem was that the two people running the playtests were so good that they didn't realize that others might struggle with it.

One of the biggest cognitive hazards designers run into is not accounting for their own biases, resulting in games which don't actually help anyone else run them like they do. Games need to provide clear procedures with verifiable results or else players will simply apply their own. And if those happen to be based on D&D all they'll see is how the game doesn't meet their expectations.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

One of the biggest cognitive hazards designers run into is not accounting for their own biases, resulting in games which don't actually help anyone else run them like they do. Games need to provide clear procedures with verifiable results or else players will simply apply their own. And if those happen to be based on D&D all they'll see is how the game doesn't meet their expectations.

So true. This is the second-order design problem with TTRPGs.

You can put out the rules, but there's always the question of how the game will be played.