How Much Do You Care About Novelty?

[Umbran]

I do count bennies as narrative-focused mechanics, yes.

Why?

The SWADE rulebook gives seven uses for bennies, only one of which exerts direct narrative influence, and that's one you could houserule away and have players not blink an eye. The other six are (in terms for folks who don't know the system):

Reroll a attempt to perform a task
Shed being Shaken (shake off a stun, basically)
Soak incoming damage
Get a better initiative
Reroll outgoing damage
Get some magic power back.

None of this is particularly "narrative". Some might call them "dissociated" mechanics, in that they are not clearly attached to some physical game-world action like drinking a potion, but their focus is not on the narrative itself.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why?

The SWADE rulebook gives seven uses for bennies, only one of which exerts direct narrative influence, and that's one you could houserule away and have players not blink an eye. The other six are (in terms for folks who don't know the system):

Reroll a attempt to perform a task
Shed being Shaken (shake off a stun, basically)
Soak incoming damage
Get a better initiative
Reroll outgoing damage
Get some magic power back.

None of this is particularly "narrative". Some might call them "dissociated" mechanics, in that they are not clearly attached to some physical game-world action like drinking a potion, but their focus is not on the narrative itself.

Fair enough. I tend to conflate "narrative" and "disassociated" mechanics in my head.

 

[Guest 85555]

RPGs usually exist in the same space as genre fiction, and genre fiction lives in this space between tried and true tropes, and innovative ideas.

So, when it comes to RPGs -- from your personal campaigns to published games/materials -- how much do you care about that relationship? Do you want comfortable tropes, or weird innovative ideas? Does the particular genre matter? Do you want that familiarity or innovation from publishers, or in your homebrew? Does the answer change if you are playing a campaign vs a one shot?

New and interesting can be fun, but tried and true is more my bread and butter as a GM. I like stock characters who fulfill certain roles for example. It is cool when you can put a new twist on something though

 

[Thomas Shey]

No, but if you can't find players who want to learn how to use a new hammer, what are you going to do?

Bluntly? Something else. I've said before if I was reduced to playing nothing but D&Doids I'd just find another hobby.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I do count bennies as narrative-focused mechanics, yes.

Then so are level elevating hit points unless you consider D&D characters to literally be able to take several times the punishment they could at first level by the time they're sixth.

And by powerful I mean creatures that are presented as powerful in traditional RPGs (dragons, demons, giants, etc).

Not all games consider those to do massive damage on every hit. Powerful covers a lot of ground.

 

[Anon Adderlan]

The only thing I hard-oppose is "weird dice", because literally there's nothing mathematically you can do with those that you couldn't just do with normal dice (or, if there is, I have yet to see it, I am open to seeing it if people have examples), and frankly every game I've played with them, they were just an excuse to get more money out of the group and maybe try and lock new gamers into their "ecosystem".

Nothing 'mathematically', but they can be more thematic and direct players to consider the things the game wants them to rather than raw numbers and probabilities. L5R 5e does a great job of this despite how overdesigned it may be. Genesys, not so much, and overloads you with so many variables per roll that it actually interferes with the flow.

It helps that they aren't trying to offload too many things on one die. When you have three or four special results you should read from a single die it gets a lot trickier.

Indeed.

Numenera 1e was a good example of this to me. I was REALLY sold on the concept; the art, the cyphers, the possibility of truly strange places to explore. But I was really disappointed by the surprisingly mediocre treatment. It felt like "standard" D&D with lots of one-use items that were mostly exotic grenades. I think my expectations were too high: I was hoping for Jodorowsky sci fi spirituality and Moebius crazyness. The Incal or Metabarons?

Monte Cook is one of the least imaginative designers I know of, yet he continues to produce games which have the pretense of the strange and weird. So much so he literally names his products after them.

I feel like maybe Cook just didn't like vibe with the genre to the degree he'd need to or something, but it was weird.

Shame it wasn't the weird he was going for.

Why?

The SWADE rulebook gives seven uses for bennies, only one of which exerts direct narrative influence, and that's one you could houserule away and have players not blink an eye. The other six are (in terms for folks who don't know the system):

Reroll a attempt to perform a task
Shed being Shaken (shake off a stun, basically)
Soak incoming damage
Get a better initiative
Reroll outgoing damage
Get some magic power back.

None of this is particularly "narrative". Some might call them "dissociated" mechanics, in that they are not clearly attached to some physical game-world action like drinking a potion, but their focus is not on the narrative itself.

Moreover, 'direct narrative influence' was never part of what defines Narrative RPGs in the first place, and is completely absent from the original game as thesis by Ron Edwards, Sorcerer. Of course these definitions change, but that may also mean many of the things you mentioned fit under that definition.

 

[Maxperson]

RPGs usually exist in the same space as genre fiction, and genre fiction lives in this space between tried and true tropes, and innovative ideas.

So, when it comes to RPGs -- from your personal campaigns to published games/materials -- how much do you care about that relationship? Do you want comfortable tropes, or weird innovative ideas? Does the particular genre matter? Do you want that familiarity or innovation from publishers, or in your homebrew? Does the answer change if you are playing a campaign vs a one shot?

Novelty is critical for me. Dark Sun wasn't so enjoyable to me because it was kitchen sink. It was the novelty that drew me. Same with Al-Qadim, Spelljammer, Planescape, Birthright, etc.

My answer does change for one shots. Not so much about whether I like novelty, because I enjoy campaigns set in Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realms, which lack novelty, but rather because I would play a one shot in a setting where I disliked the novelty for a campaign. I wouldn't play a campaign set in Xanth for example, because I don't like games that revolve around humor the way Xanth does, but I would have a blast playing a one shot of it, because I know it would be temporary and it's fun to do something like that once in a while.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Bluntly? Something else. I've said before if I was reduced to playing nothing but D&Doids I'd just find another hobby.

I'm glad you're lucky enough to have players who have no problem hopping systems.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Then so are level elevating hit points unless you consider D&D characters to literally be able to take several times the punishment they could at first level by the time they're sixth.



Not all games consider those to do massive damage on every hit. Powerful covers a lot of ground.

So if I can accept any narrative mechanic I have to be fine with all of them?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It is cool when you can put a new twist on something though

Tangential of that, in a supers game set in 1900 when I unleashed an Iron Man style villain with the suit that had a steam engine powering its hydraulics and a pair of arm-mounted flame throwers, the players’ eyes absolutely bugged out in amazement.