Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs

[buzz]

Remember your article "Hit Points suck?" Alternity has a diverse wounds system that is simple to use and has it over hit points in spades, when you're seeking something that allows dramatic wounds as well as accounting for body armor. Even aimed shots have a concrete and positive benefit in this system that is more difficult to pull off, but worthwhile enough to try once in a while on the battlefield.

Psion's Alternity reviews over at RPG.net also point out some of the game's unique characteristics. One was the step die mechanic, which produces a trapezoidal "curve", sort of the best bits of curved and linear distributions mixed together.

Though whether that's an advantage for Joe Gamer is debatable.

 

[RyanD]

Alternity has a diverse wounds system that is simple to use and has it over hit points in spades

Hit points are a D&D feature, not a D20 feature. WotC did 3 varient D20 games (SW, CoC and Wheel of Time) and they all used different wound systems & assumptions.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I can't agree with that. Isn't it possible to believe your game should have a given level of rules complexity for its own sake, rather than because "Gee, I wanted it to be as thick as D20, but we didn't have time to test all that?" I think the latter qualifies as a "dig".

He's not talking about rules complexity. He's talking about "We can't playtest our rules effectively, no matter how complex / simple they are, and therefore will instead state that rules are inherently bad."

 

[SweeneyTodd]

Hit points are a D&D feature, not a D20 feature. WotC did 3 varient D20 games (SW, CoC and Wheel of Time) and they all used different wound systems & assumptions.

Look, I think this whole Socratic method thing you're doing is neat, and it generates discussion, but just state your point already.

If the argument is that almost any kind of simulation-based party-play "group of adventurers" game can be run with D20, if you tweak it enough, then yes! It's true! Heck, with enough addons, I could probably run Nobilis with D20. Granted it'd be unrecognizable except for rolling a d20, but hey! I'm using the system!

So if the question is, should people design and run their games by:
- Taking D20, and adding/removing features until it supports the style of game they want
- Taking some other system, and adding/removing features in the same way
- Designing their own system

That comes down to personal preference, especially when we're talking about "What I run with my buddies on Fridays".

I still don't see what benefit in the market someone gets if their game is d20 in terms of resolution mechanic, but the rest looks entirely different. Are there still reasonable network externalities?

 

[buzz]

I can't agree with that. Isn't it possible to believe your game should have a given level of rules complexity for its own sake, rather than because "Gee, I wanted it to be as thick as D20, but we didn't have time to test all that?" I think the latter qualifies as a "dig".

It certainly is possible. Thankfully, Mearls' comment has nothing to do with what you're implying here. He's talking about bad design, not rules-lite design. IOW, Sometimes "lite" is used as an excuse by less-than-scrupulous companies to justify a lack of design rigor, as it's obviously easier to put on one's balck turtleneck and hide behind "lite" than it is to fake rigorous crunch. The former just takes less effort.

Parallel: it's really easy to plug a guitar into a rack of effects and make interesting sounds and claim you're a "texturalist" or "avante pop". That doesn't make you The Edge or Andy Summers, and it doesn't mean that either of them are not jaw-droppingly talented. It simply is.

 

[mearls]

He's not talking about rules complexity. He's talking about "We can't playtest our rules effectively, no matter how complex / simple they are, and therefore will instead state that rules are inherently bad."

Precisely. It's aikido marketing - turn a competitor's strength into a disadvantage (whether perceived or otherwise).

 

[BryonD]

Pfft. It's an observation about bad designers. Ease up.

It also happens to be a true statement.
A discussion can not go very far if true statements regarding one side are expected to be censored in the interest of avoided the perception of making "digs".

 

[buzz]

If the argument is that almost any kind of simulation-based party-play "group of adventurers" game can be run with D20, if you tweak it enough, then yes! It's true! Heck, with enough addons, I could probably run Nobilis with D20. Granted it'd be unrecognizable except for rolling a d20, but hey! I'm using the system!

Seeing as Nobilis is not a "simulation-based party-play 'group of adventurers' game", I'm not sure that what you're saying makes any sense. Also, given that it is diceless, it's already counted out at step one of Dancey's list, ergo not a d20 candidate.

 

[buzz]

It all happens to be a true statement.

If the statement in question was the assertion that Mearls' comment was a dig against rules-lite RPGs as a concept, then it is not true.

 

[BryonD]

If the statement in question was the assertion that Mearls' comment was a dig against rules-lite RPGs as a concept, then it is not true.

Sorry, I meant Mearls statement was true. I was agreeing with you.