Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Retreater" data-source="post: 9258931" data-attributes="member: 42040">I stumbled across a YouTube video about the improvement of the modern style of boardgames vs. traditional board games. He gives examples of why games like Resistance are better than Werewolf, and Pandemic is better than Clue. And it is making me think about how to apply this thought to TTRPGs.(Linking the video below for you to enjoy.) [MEDIA=youtube]AhaylQfzCmo[/MEDIA]Here's a quick list of the 10 reasons (though the video goes into more detail than I can here)...10. They don't outstay their welcome. They have a definitive end that can be predicted. This builds tension and excitement.9. Every turn is fun. You don't get a dead turn spent just rolling to move and not getting to a destination. All players are equal (same number of actions). There's always something worth doing. You don't have skipped turns (no "Go to Jail" cards.)8. No player elimination in modern boardgames.7. Scores are less varied. Objectives can be hidden and not revealed until the end. Scores are often not tallied until the end, so a player doesn't sit around for the whole game feeling like a loser.6. Different set-ups mean there are unique dynamics to change strategies. It's not always the same game (i.e. chess).5. Players have agency. Failure isn't controlled by luck.4. When luck is used, you roll (or draw cards) before deciding what action to take. 3. Boardgames used to be intended for children or were based on war/fighting. There is more working together and less conflict now.2. Games are less aggressive as a result. You aren't required to bankrupt or wipe out your opponents. They can be competitive without being aggressive. 1. There are many options.After watching the video, I went through D&D and put it through the same metric.10. There is no definitive end. We have no idea how long the session/campaign will last (usually). The game usually ends by scheduling problems, lack of interest, TPK, etc. (What if we actually set a limit on a number of sessions? Or an achievable level limit?)9. There are dead turns. Characters have to spend actions to get into position. Or other times they're Held, Petrified, etc. This is very noticeable in games where it takes 10-30 minutes to go around the table. (What if we rethought the action economy that movement doesn't take the standard action - just makes it a little less effective? Like your damage is halved if you have to run across the battlefield?)8. Characters get killed - or sometimes just get stuck doing nothing. [I once had a game where I had to go sit in another room because my character got imprisoned - for TWO sessions!] (What if character death happened at the end of the session? Like the final effect of the death didn't occur until after the last encounter of the night?)7. We don't use traditional scoring methods in TTRPGs.6. I think we're good on different setups in RPGs.5-4. It stinks to lose your high level spells to bad die rolls. What if we allowed you to roll before you cast the spell? If you roll bad, maybe you hang on to the spell slot?3. Yeah, we're based on fighting. Don't know if there's a good way around that.2. But maybe we don't have everything "fight to the death" (as is the Paizo tradition).1. We do have a lot of options, but we don't discuss them much. Most of the games that have their origins in the 1970s-1990s probably feel around the same with dead turns, character death, no definitive end, etc. I don't know. I'm just sort of rambling here. Do you think RPGs need to modernize like we've seen in the boardgame hobby?</blockquote>

Verification