Have you (and to what extent) designed your own RPG?

Have you designed your own RPG? And to what extent?

  • Meh, who cares?

    Votes: 0 0.0%

Mercurius

Legend
Obviously this forum doesn't represent the "average gamer" and really only may represent GM-types on the serious-to-hardcore side of the spectrum, but I am still curious as to what percentage of folks here have designed their own games, and to what extent.

Regarding the poll: Please choose the "highest" on the list that is applicable; for example, if you've designed your own game but it is unpublished, but also created houserules, just check the second poll option which may (or may not) include options below it on the list.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad



Yes, it's about half-done, but it is unpublished (and will probably remain so unless I get a sudden influx of illustrative talent to append numerous pieces of artwork to it and cash to procure its printing, or otherwise magic to make books out of thin air). Just something to play with my buddies.
 

Voted: "Kind of - I've dabbled with ideas but nothing concrete (yet)"

I've had a few in process for a long time now, but they can go untouched for long periods of time. It's easy (for me) to get discouraged at just how unoriginal your (my) stuff can be when you look at everything that has been done already.
 

back in late 1980/early 1981 our group developed a very modern version game using somewhat the D&D system as a basis.

we called it Dirty Wars.

it lasted until about christmas time. then i got the Top Secret boxed set. so we gave it up.

i think i still have the charts, character sheets, and price guides we created somewhere in my gaming notebooks.

later, we developed a space ship fighter game. which we gave up for star fleet battles.
 

The things I've done to what was once 1e AD+D to build the game we still play puts me in the "Kind of - major houserules to existing game" category.

Lan-"but it's still vaguely recognizable"-efan
 

I've been working on Starguild, an OGL sci-fi role playing game for quite some time, and I've got it ready for publication bar some of my final images. To be honest I've been in that stage for quite a few months now, but other bits of real life have prevented me getting the final touches in.

It has been pretty well received in the various playtests that have been run to date.

Hopefully 2010 will be the year!
 

I think it's probably hard to impossible to come up with completely new ideas for RPG's today. Just about every possible mechanic, campaign/genre idea, and story idea has pretty much been done. The only thing new is in how they are used or put together.

Anyways, just my opinion.

B-)

Yes, this is true, but I don't see "newness" as equating with quality, real innovation, or depth. What you describe is what I would call "horizontal" value, it is the breadth and diversity of ideas--the "landscape," if you will, that is explored. Originality comes from discovering a new pocket in that landscape, which you say has pretty much been colonized. I pretty much agree, but only if we're talking about the surface of the landscape. We have mapped the entire earth, but only on the surface level--what about the depths of the oceans? And even more so, the depths of our own souls? This would be the "vertical" axis, which is depth, meaning, substance, and what could be called "mythic resonance."

This is why you might find a movie, for example, covers no new territory but is still deeply meaningful. Or vice versa: a clever new approach to story but with little depth or humanity (Quentin Tarantino made a career out of this).

This is not to say there are new ideas out there, but that we shouldn't be concentrating on the search for the next thing if we're only looking at surfaces, which becomes a kind of shallowness and is inherently a doomed proposition.

In that sense, in terms of "verticality," there is infinite room for development in RPGs, both in terms of aesthetic quality and depth of meaning. I mean, I'd rather see "just another vanilla fantasy setting" done well and with beauty and meaning then a novel idea without anything deeply resonant. The former become enduring classics, the latter fads that fade away and die. To put it another way, not all vanilla is created equally. Compare Ben & Jerry's organic vanilla ice cream to your garden variety supermarket ice cream.

Personally I think the best combo is vertical depth coupled with fresh approaches to mythic-archetypal material. In other words, universal archetypes and themes in culturally relevant or fresh forms. But the emphasis is on the "deep structure," not surface novelty. But it is still always nice to see fresh approaches at old themes, so that the vanilla is subtly textured with a variety of flavors in infinite possible combination.

(You're allowed to jack your own thread, right? ;))
 

Yes, but not published. (And there's no 'yet' about it.) In fact, I've been doing so since the early eighties. Nothing very innovative, but various home groups have had fun with some of them. (Others got finished but never played, and more never even got finished.)
 

Remove ads

Top