Different philosophies concerning Rules Heavy and Rule Light RPGs.

[pemerton]

Both responces are pretty fair. I will keep them in mind going forward.

Roleplaying game writing is partly an exercise in genre fiction. Not that we’re writing stories for others to consume, but we do provide tools our audience will use in making their own settings, characters, and events. So info about how storytellers work is often relevant to us, including info about things like inspiration.

I write professionally, but not fiction (genre or otherwise) - I'm an academic in literary disciplines (law and philosophy), and my work is published in academic journals and books. The idea of trying to do serious work without talking to others - about my ideas, about their ideas, about others' ideas - and without reading, is pretty odd to me. (I know that Andrew Wiles isolated himself for a long time while coming up with his Fermat proof. But the pure mathematicians whom I know - who are top scholars at top US institutions - seem to rely on community too, even if the role of their community is a bit different from that in my fields. Wiles is an extreme outlier.)

When it comes to acknowledgements and influences, my view is that footnotes are easy, and that it costs nothing to include someone in the acknowledgements (or even to mention, in a footnote, that a particular idea or approach was suggested by <so-and-so>). So I try to be as generous as I can. And I've also benefitted from colleagues being generous to me (the "CV" of works where I'm in the acknowledgements reads better than my own CV of published works!).

My experience in RPG design is nil, outside of GMing Rolemaster for about 19 years, which inevitably required making decisions about how to integrate and develop the many optional rules and rules modules that are found in the many RM companions (and some are even in the core rulebooks). But I don't see how someone would design a RPG without engaging with the best of the existing design work.

For someone coming from D&D, here are four free resources that I think are worth looking at, just to see what is possible and how different from D&D a RPG can be:

* Story Bones <https://legacy.drivethrurpg.com/product/81905/Story-Bones-Plus-PDF>, the core engine for Maelstrom Storytelling, a late-90s RPG that is a pioneer in using free descriptors and combining them with close scene resolution (it post-dates Over the Edge but predates HeroWars on the free descriptor front; and predates HeroWars but postdates Prince Valiant on closed scene resolution). Reading this system (and HeroWars/Quest) also helped me to run skill challenges in 4e D&D.

* Cthulhu Dark <http://catchyourhare.com/files/Cthulhu Dark.pdf>, which is an incomplete system (it doesn't say how to frame scenes, or how to establish consequences) but illustrates what is possible with an absolutely minimalist free descriptor approach to PC build and building a dice pool for resolution.

* Burning Wheel Hub and Spokes <https://legacy.drivethrurpg.com/product/98542/Burning-Wheel-Gold-Hub-and-Spokes>, which sets out the core rules for framing, resolution and advancement (but not PC building) in a FRPG which overlaps heavily with D&D in genre but differs from it pretty significantly in methodology. I can report from experience that the BW rules for framing and resolution can also be used quite effectively to plug the gaps in Cthulhu Dark!

* Wuthering Heights <wuthering heights>, which in both genre and methodology is a long way from D&D, but (in my admittedly limited experience) is eminently playable and delivers a fun experience.

 

[Autumnal]

Excellent stuff, pemerton.

 

[1QD]

I write professionally, but not fiction (genre or otherwise) - I'm an academic in literary disciplines (law and philosophy), and my work is published in academic journals and books. The idea of trying to do serious work without talking to others - about my ideas, about their ideas, about others' ideas - and without reading, is pretty odd to me. (I know that Andrew Wiles isolated himself for a long time while coming up with his Fermat proof. But the pure mathematicians whom I know - who are top scholars at top US institutions - seem to rely on community too, even if the role of their community is a bit different from that in my fields. Wiles is an extreme outlier.)

When it comes to acknowledgements and influences, my view is that footnotes are easy, and that it costs nothing to include someone in the acknowledgements (or even to mention, in a footnote, that a particular idea or approach was suggested by <so-and-so>). So I try to be as generous as I can. And I've also benefitted from colleagues being generous to me (the "CV" of works where I'm in the acknowledgements reads better than my own CV of published works!).

My experience in RPG design is nil, outside of GMing Rolemaster for about 19 years, which inevitably required making decisions about how to integrate and develop the many optional rules and rules modules that are found in the many RM companions (and some are even in the core rulebooks). But I don't see how someone would design a RPG without engaging with the best of the existing design work.

For someone coming from D&D, here are four free resources that I think are worth looking at, just to see what is possible and how different from D&D a RPG can be:

* Story Bones <https://legacy.drivethrurpg.com/product/81905/Story-Bones-Plus-PDF>, the core engine for Maelstrom Storytelling, a late-90s RPG that is a pioneer in using free descriptors and combining them with close scene resolution (it post-dates Over the Edge but predates HeroWars on the free descriptor front; and predates HeroWars but postdates Prince Valiant on closed scene resolution). Reading this system (and HeroWars/Quest) also helped me to run skill challenges in 4e D&D.

* Cthulhu Dark <http://catchyourhare.com/files/Cthulhu Dark.pdf>, which is an incomplete system (it doesn't say how to frame scenes, or how to establish consequences) but illustrates what is possible with an absolutely minimalist free descriptor approach to PC build and building a dice pool for resolution.

* Burning Wheel Hub and Spokes <https://legacy.drivethrurpg.com/product/98542/Burning-Wheel-Gold-Hub-and-Spokes>, which sets out the core rules for framing, resolution and advancement (but not PC building) in a FRPG which overlaps heavily with D&D in genre but differs from it pretty significantly in methodology. I can report from experience that the BW rules for framing and resolution can also be used quite effectively to plug the gaps in Cthulhu Dark!

* Wuthering Heights <wuthering heights>, which in both genre and methodology is a long way from D&D, but (in my admittedly limited experience) is eminently playable and delivers a fun experience.

Thank you for the links I will check them out. When I started my journey I did not want influence from other games at all. I was disatisfied with a lot that DnD had to offer. Thier idea of game balance always irked me. And nearly every other gaming environment took a simular path. I wanted a game where balance wasn't done by completely nerfing things, or players.

I wanted rules that made sense contextually, but still allowed players a great deal of freedom. That said, If I am soo off the mark, then why did PF2e and Dnd5e both attempt the same thing?

There have been a few ideas here that I have seen, some of them even in the, your game doesn't need this section....That is why many of my guidelines are optional or feature a streamlined versions.

I have also heard it stated not everyone can ablib a game of the top of thier head. I do that every week twice a week. I may make a custom encounter, but I let the story and the encounter system drive the plot, which grants me a tonne of freedom.

So this is why I avoided all the other systems. One I didn't want to plagerize, copy or be overly influenced by a lot of the games out there, because they had much the same thing going on. And even in my game there will be famil;iar things, both good and bad, But I can say from the testimonials I got from my last conventions, where I ran a 1 shots all weekend, The reviews were positive. Many people have told me that my game is better than DnD. While I will take that with a table spoon of salt, it does keep getting said. Besides people are often nicer to you to your face than from behind a computer screen.

 

[chuckdee]

Cthulhu Dark

The full version with everything is here for reference - https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/341997/cthulhu-dark

 

[1QD]

I write professionally, but not fiction (genre or otherwise) - I'm an academic in literary disciplines (law and philosophy), and my work is published in academic journals and books. The idea of trying to do serious work without talking to others - about my ideas, about their ideas, about others' ideas - and without reading, is pretty odd to me. (I know that Andrew Wiles isolated himself for a long time while coming up with his Fermat proof. But the pure mathematicians whom I know - who are top scholars at top US institutions - seem to rely on community too, even if the role of their community is a bit different from that in my fields. Wiles is an extreme outlier.)

When it comes to acknowledgements and influences, my view is that footnotes are easy, and that it costs nothing to include someone in the acknowledgements (or even to mention, in a footnote, that a particular idea or approach was suggested by <so-and-so>). So I try to be as generous as I can. And I've also benefitted from colleagues being generous to me (the "CV" of works where I'm in the acknowledgements reads better than my own CV of published works!).

My experience in RPG design is nil, outside of GMing Rolemaster for about 19 years, which inevitably required making decisions about how to integrate and develop the many optional rules and rules modules that are found in the many RM companions (and some are even in the core rulebooks). But I don't see how someone would design a RPG without engaging with the best of the existing design work.

For someone coming from D&D, here are four free resources that I think are worth looking at, just to see what is possible and how different from D&D a RPG can be:

* Story Bones <https://legacy.drivethrurpg.com/product/81905/Story-Bones-Plus-PDF>, the core engine for Maelstrom Storytelling, a late-90s RPG that is a pioneer in using free descriptors and combining them with close scene resolution (it post-dates Over the Edge but predates HeroWars on the free descriptor front; and predates HeroWars but postdates Prince Valiant on closed scene resolution). Reading this system (and HeroWars/Quest) also helped me to run skill challenges in 4e D&D.

* Cthulhu Dark <http://catchyourhare.com/files/Cthulhu Dark.pdf>, which is an incomplete system (it doesn't say how to frame scenes, or how to establish consequences) but illustrates what is possible with an absolutely minimalist free descriptor approach to PC build and building a dice pool for resolution.

* Burning Wheel Hub and Spokes <https://legacy.drivethrurpg.com/product/98542/Burning-Wheel-Gold-Hub-and-Spokes>, which sets out the core rules for framing, resolution and advancement (but not PC building) in a FRPG which overlaps heavily with D&D in genre but differs from it pretty significantly in methodology. I can report from experience that the BW rules for framing and resolution can also be used quite effectively to plug the gaps in Cthulhu Dark!

* Wuthering Heights <wuthering heights>, which in both genre and methodology is a long way from D&D, but (in my admittedly limited experience) is eminently playable and delivers a fun experience.

Looking at your bones link I saw exactly what I saw in almost all rules light systems. There is literally no difference between my current character and my last character. It's all just roles and the suggestion to draw your character to make him feel alive. What it misses completely is the ability for the player to identify with the character. What is thier strength, or intellect? How well do they smell or hear, or how fast are they. In real life these things are pretty much paramount to survival.
I agree with your statement, it is a far cry from Dnd, but not a direction I wanted to go on.

That said, your suggestions added unique views towards roleplaying. I am sure many of them have thier fan base.
I learned that people often like rewards, upgrades and a sense of growth. The moment you go from the green little noob, to , Oh hey, I am actually kind of a threat now. Seeing your character progress is very important to some people.

That said I want to thank you for well thought out reply and taking the effort.

 

[chuckdee]

Quite right, don't let the others influence you.

I was wondering about the context of this, but now I get it- I have nothing constructive to add, I don't guess.

 

[pemerton]

I was disatisfied with a lot that DnD had to offer. Thier idea of game balance always irked me. And nearly every other gaming environment took a simular path. I wanted a game where balance wasn't done by completely nerfing things, or players.

I wanted rules that made sense contextually, but still allowed players a great deal of freedom. That said, If I am soo off the mark, then why did PF2e and Dnd5e both attempt the same thing?

There have been a few ideas here that I have seen, some of them even in the, your game doesn't need this section....That is why many of my guidelines are optional or feature a streamlined versions.

I have also heard it stated not everyone can ablib a game of the top of thier head. I do that every week twice a week. I may make a custom encounter, but I let the story and the encounter system drive the plot, which grants me a tonne of freedom.

So this is why I avoided all the other systems. One I didn't want to plagerize, copy or be overly influenced by a lot of the games out there, because they had much the same thing going on. And even in my game there will be famil;iar things, both good and bad, But I can say from the testimonials I got from my last conventions, where I ran a 1 shots all weekend, The reviews were positive. Many people have told me that my game is better than DnD. While I will take that with a table spoon of salt, it does keep getting said. Besides people are often nicer to you to your face than from behind a computer screen.

I'm not sure what you mean by rules that make sense contextually but still allow players a great deal of freedom. You mention D&D and PF, and what is most distinctive about them is their intricate PC-building rules (including spells and magic items); and also perhaps their intricate wargame-y rules for resolving combat. Are you talking about those sorts of rules?

I don't know what your "story and encounter system" looks like, and so can't tell how your game handles scene framing, stakes, resolution and consequences, though the overall way you talk about RPGing is making me think of something post-1984 AD&D-ish.

Looking at your bones link I saw exactly what I saw in almost all rules light systems. There is literally no difference between my current character and my last character. It's all just roles and the suggestion to draw your character to make him feel alive.

I don't get this. The difference in characters is (i) in the fiction, the difference between the characters, which (ii) is reflected, mechanically, in their different descriptors.

What it misses completely is the ability for the player to identify with the character. What is thier strength, or intellect? How well do they smell or hear, or how fast are they. In real life these things are pretty much paramount to survival.

This gives me a reasonably clear impression of what you game looks like, in general terms. I guess my question would be, what does it do that Rolemaster or RuneQuest don't already do?

 

[MichaelSomething]

So this is why I avoided all the other systems. One I didn't want to plagerize, copy or be overly influenced by a lot of the games out there, because they had much the same thing going on. And even in my game there will be famil;iar things, both good and bad, But I can say from the testimonials I got from my last conventions, where I ran a 1 shots all weekend, The reviews were positive. Many people have told me that my game is better than DnD. While I will take that with a table spoon of salt, it does keep getting said. Besides people are often nicer to you to your face than from behind a computer screen.

Have fun reinventing the wheel.

 

[chuckdee]

Have fun reinventing the wheel.

To add to this, when you reinvent the wheel, you almost always end up with an inferior wheel. That's the reason that people use what has come before in order to iterate on the progress that has already been made. That's what I love about this hobby - people take what has come before, remix or reimagine it, and create something a lot better, elevating the entire hobby. It's an all boats situation, where the rising tide makes everything better. It's one of the reasons the OSR space is just as a rich with new ideas as the indie RPG space. Which, being out of the hobby, they might not have been exposed to.

But of course, this is falling on deaf ears, quite literally.

 

[aramis erak]

To quote half a dozen professors at two different institutions I have attended:
"One source is plagiarism. Three or more is research."

A few have also said, "0 sources is ignorance." One said "No sources is fiction." (He was a practicing lawyer.) But even most fiction authors do research.

And no one who's played any RPG is free of RPG influence in any RPG they later design.