Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs

[Psion]

Man. It's getting hard to remember which site I'm on: enworld or rpg.net...

The RPGnet argument is hacking on Mearls' predictions more than Ryan's disdain for rules light games.

and, RPGnet is blue.

 

[mearls]

Not sure I know what you are getting at, but I'd be interested in what you have to say.

I've had trouble myself putting my thoughts together on this. This is a sort of first crack at it.

In RPGs, the interface is the "mental space" that exists between the player and the game. So, miniatures and battlemats are an element of the interface. It's easier for me to make a decision and apply the rules if I can see where my sorcerer is in relation to the terrain, monsters, and the rest of the party.

I think there are a lot of issues with the interface in D&D. To extend the above example, I can see where my character is but can I easily "see" and understand all his options - cast a spell, make an attack, try to trip a foe, and so forth. By the same token, when making a character can I "see" and understand the feats, spells, skills, and so forth that I can choose from to build my PC?

That step, that act of recognizing, understanding, and using the options within the rules deals wtih the game's interface. I'm increasingly convinced that the interface is the most important part of an RPG, because the act of choosing and employing an option is the act of playing the game.

I think this is related to the false light v. heavy dichotomy in that when people say, "I want a system that creates a 20th-level NPC in 20 minutes" that has nothing to do with the number of rules present, but rather the time and effort it takes to interface with a particular set of rules.

 

[diaglo]

Well, I can see your point, but there are just so many other little things in 3rd edition that don't exist in ... OD&D - the myriad spells, and things like DR, or counterspelling which can complicate combat.

say what?

that was in OD&D. you just had to have the right group.

i cast light. NPC casts Darkness.

i cast Tittle's Taunting tongue.


i strike the werewolf with my steel sword. now the Ogre strikes the werewolf.

 

[Gentlegamer]

In RPGs, the interface is the "mental space" that exists between the player and the game. So, miniatures and battlemats are an element of the interface. It's easier for me to make a decision and apply the rules if I can see where my sorcerer is in relation to the terrain, monsters, and the rest of the party.

. . . and the game regresses back into a tabletop miniatures wargame.

 

[rabindranath72]

That's completely beside the point, though, isn't it? Or did you read my response to your post? Your problem is amply illustrated in the other part of what I quoted. You make connections and conclusions that aren't there and aren't true, stir in ridiculous hyperbolic statements and anecdotal evidence, and then try to make some point about your statistical credentials. Since your entire argument is based on non-statistical anecdotes and hyperbole, I don't care if you're a freakin' mentat -- it has no bearing on the conversation at hand.

When I speak of "about an hour", I mean precisely that. It is a number. And it is borne of experience. Since (it seems) you are vastly better than me (less than five minutes on average), then kudos to you.
But my experience is as much valid as yours.
That's why my 3e books now take dust.

My whole point was simply to respond to the seemingly "scientific" answer of Mr. Dancey. As my (and tons of others) experiences prove the contrary, then something is amiss. And since we were speaking about "scientific" answers, I reported my experience on the field, which I had the "luck" of assessing statistically. And, I repeat, since I am not the only one who has thrown 3e out of the window, something is amiss with the system.
As someone wrote before, and I tend to agree on this, it may well be the case of a "bad interface design".

kindest regards,
Antonio Eleuteri

 

[mcrow]

. . . and the game regresses back into a tabletop miniatures wargame.

Exactly what I don't like about D&D/d20.

 

[fredramsey]

. . . and the game regresses back into a tabletop miniatures wargame.

Hmm. I agree with most of what you say, but "regresses" just casts a negative light on an aspect of gaming a lot of people enjoy. Not too many brownie points for that one.

 

[I'm A Banana]

(A good rule of thumb for any student of RPG design - frame a question about RPGs in terms of other game forms. I think that's a useful tool to burrow into whether a question is important or a red herring.)

Sweet, I graduated that class!

That step, that act of recognizing, understanding, and using the options within the rules deals wtih the game's interface. I'm increasingly convinced that the interface is the most important part of an RPG, because the act of choosing and employing an option is the act of playing the game.

I think this is related to the false light v. heavy dichotomy in that when people say, "I want a system that creates a 20th-level NPC in 20 minutes" that has nothing to do with the number of rules present, but rather the time and effort it takes to interface with a particular set of rules.

Yeah, my experience has been the same. Rules that you don't use and that get forgotten about are not successful interfaces -- they fall by the wayside. Likewise, rules that take too long to use, increase the distance between player and game, and also get trotted out as "bad fun." Too many choices with different mechanics, and some people do get overwhelmed, and then go looking for something simpler, with less choices, with similar mechanics.

I would, however, say that the essence of playing a game is making a choice, given random limitations on what you can choose. The game is in the random limitations and trying to make the best out of them -- drawing cards, rolling dice, "passing the torch" in a more narrative RPG -- the choice should have meaning within the limitations that random chance and previous choices have set up.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

. . . and the game regresses back into a tabletop miniatures wargame.

A. Your (B) does not necessarily follow Mearls' (A), nor is he (as far as I can see) necessarily implying that minis or a battlemat are an intrinsic part of a good RPG interface. They're an example.

B. Even if it did and he did, 'regression' is arbitrary in this context. Some gamers might prefer that course.

C. You did, however, take my advice about dropping the video game argument in favor of the miniatures one. Kupo!

 

[diaglo]

. . . and the game regresses back into a tabletop miniatures wargame.

it never left.