Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 9589321" data-attributes="member: 23484">These are good questions, but it's not the way I would approach the problem: you end up with too many games, because granularity always allows more divisions. I would look for games that have something distinct about them, in terms of setting and/or mechanics, and see how those specific features (a) interact with other subsystems within the game and (b) work out in play. To take two of the games mentioned above: both Burning Wheel and Reign offer non-D&amp;D fantasy, and both of them require a high degree of GM control -- more than D&amp;D. And both produce deep, rich characters out the gate, that are in my view well balanced against each other. And yet they couldn't be further apart: BW uses lifepaths (the only implementation of that approach I like other than Traveller), and Reign has you roll a fistful of d10s and a unique and deep character emerges. Both systems are also cheat-resistant, in that you can choose lifepaths to get what you want or pick your d10 rolls, and the character still stands alongside one rolled randomly. They're totally different games, that achieve similar outcomes (when measured against D&amp;D, though different means. Classic Traveller is a good system to look at for D&amp;D players because (a) everyone needs more science fiction in their life, and (b) there is almost no character progression. And yet, it's an amazingly fun game. Characters aren't balanced, and they're not going to improve, butyet they can tell amazing stories, and there is a rich setting if you want it. And so forth.In my view, thinking about every type of game (card-based; diceless; GMless;; etc.) might give you some candidates, but if they don't pluck your fiddle you ain't getting a tune. It's important to learn about systems, and then look at what works (and, perhaps more importantly, what doesn't).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kobold Stew, post: 9589321, member: 23484"] These are good questions, but it's not the way I would approach the problem: you end up with too many games, because granularity always allows more divisions. I would look for games that have something distinct about them, in terms of setting and/or mechanics, and see how those specific features (a) interact with other subsystems within the game and (b) work out in play. To take two of the games mentioned above: both Burning Wheel and Reign offer non-D&D fantasy, and both of them require a high degree of GM control -- more than D&D. And both produce deep, rich characters out the gate, that are in my view well balanced against each other. And yet they couldn't be further apart: BW uses lifepaths (the only implementation of that approach I like other than Traveller), and Reign has you roll a fistful of d10s and a unique and deep character emerges. Both systems are also cheat-resistant, in that you can choose lifepaths to get what you want or pick your d10 rolls, and the character still stands alongside one rolled randomly. They're totally different games, that achieve similar outcomes (when measured against D&D, though different means. Classic Traveller is a good system to look at for D&D players because (a) everyone needs more science fiction in their life, and (b) there is almost no character progression. And yet, it's an amazingly fun game. Characters aren't balanced, and they're not going to improve, butyet they can tell amazing stories, and there is a rich setting if you want it. And so forth. In my view, thinking about every type of game (card-based; diceless; GMless;; etc.) might give you some candidates, but if they don't pluck your fiddle you ain't getting a tune. It's important to learn about systems, and then look at what works (and, perhaps more importantly, what doesn't). [/QUOTE]

Verification