Jon Peterson: Does System Matter?

D&D historian Jon Peterson asks the question on his blog as he does a deep dive into how early tabletop RPG enthusiasts wrestled with the same thing.

Based around the concept that 'D&D can do anything, so why learn a new system?', the conversation examines whether the system itself affects the playstyle of those playing it. Some systems are custom-designed to create a certain atmosphere (see Dread's suspenseful Jenga-tower narrative game), and Call of Cthulhu certainly discourages the D&D style of play, despite a d20 version in early 2000s.

Does System Matter?

Dungeons & Dragons started out as a game with such an adaptable and open-ended set of rules that early adopters questioned whether any fur...

playingattheworld.blogspot.com

 

[TheSword]

I'm not convinced you understand agency, how a system apportions it a a table, or what the various signifiers are in a game that indexes a particular division.

What an odd comment. More than a little condescending. Is that your intention?

 

[pemerton]

I understand Agency. There are degrees of it. Not everyone needs to have it to the extent you personally expect.

On this I agree with @Fenris-77.

Sorry Permerton. You didn’t answer my question. Or certainly not in a clear way. How does your suggested system help increase horror/fear factor?

Here are some reposts that answer that question:

Another thing about splitting up the party in Classic Traveller: most of the PCs are carrying communicators, which means that the players can talk to one another not only at the table but in character, which means that when one PC is running screaming the other PCs know what is happening and so there can be a sort-of party play even though the party is separated.

This also supports the way in which the narrative experience of a RPG differs from that of a film: when a player's PC runs screaming, and then we at the table establish that the screams will carry over the PC's communicator, the other players don't just have their personal real world reaction of wondering what's going to happen to the running PC; they can also have their playing their PC reaction, of declaring an action in response for their PC.

This interplay of the equipment list, the ingame capacities of the PCs, and how these support the players at the table feeding their reactions back into their game play <snip the rest>

* Classic Traveller is quite non-Star Wars in its fiction - the main weapons are firearms, the most common armour is ballistic cloth, etc, ships can travel FTL but can't cross the galaxy in hours or days, and not even in a single longer voyage. This means that the system, played in accordance with the spirit and genre that it presents, won't generate action declarations from the players that are radically out-of-context for Alien.​

​

* Classic Traveller easily generates PCs whose main field of expertise is not fighting, and indeed who are not very impressive physically at all. And this isn't just about "fluff" descriptions - it feeds into the resolution framework. It is not hard to generate a Traveller PC who will fall down unconscious or even dead if shot; who is no match for a leopard in hand-to-hand fighting; etc. This is important for Alien because it means that there are some PCs whose players will recognise that they are no match, in combat, for the Alien. So they will have to run or call for help or something similar.​

​

* Classic Traveller gives the referee a lot of authority to establish the initial fiction. In the context of this particular scenario, it is easy for me as referee to decide that the abandoned ship the PCs are investigating has Aliens on board. It's also easy for me to introduce elements of the framing that give clues and establish the "feel" of the possibility of some sort of "unexpected" threat.​

​

* Classic Traveller has pretty good rules for determining encounter surprise and encounter range which mean that, once I decide that the PCs encounter an alien on the ship, things move out of the realm of GM fiat and into the realm of mechanics. This allows PC expertise to factor in (eg one player had his PC spend money to train in Tactics, which gives her a benefit to avoid surprise), and generally reduces the sense of GM-choosing-to-hose-the-players.​

​

* Classic Traveller has player-side morale rules, which would help establish some feel, but on this occasion I forgot to use them! It didn't matter because we had fleeing PCs due to rational player choice without the need for any help from the dice!​

Here's one thing which I think is crucial to Alien but doesn't really have a system element in Classic Traveller to support it: the PCs split up.

<snip>

Given the lack of mechanical support for this, in a group that was far more determined to "never split the party" I think there may not have been so much of an Alien feel to the scenario. Though maybe under those hypothetical circumstances I would have remembered to use the morale rules which might have forced a party split at some key moments.

 

[Fenris-77]

What an odd comment. More than a little condescending. Is that your intention?

Not at all, I said I wasn't convinced, not that you dont. Nothing in your posts really suggests it, but I'm not going to assume based on that. Pemerton made a bunch of excellent points about agency and system that you just ignored, but that were actually a pretty key part of rhe discussion.

The division and constraint of agency by different systems is important enough that I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

 

[TheSword]

On this I agree with @Fenris-77.


Here are some reposts that answer that question:

Thank you for the posts, particularly copying them out again for ease of reference.

I think you have identified great elements that would add to the horror of a game.

I would think that the following elements were system agnostic nay?

• Communicators
• Low power weapons and Armour
• Setting the scene
• PCs abilities to avoid surprise

I’ve yet to see a game that doesn’t have some form of alertness ability for instance. Again equipment is fairly system agnostic.

Physically weak PCs and the morale system I agree fully. Many systems including 5e are not good at portraying physically or emotionally weak characters. I think there is a reason for this. Probably that players as a general rule don’t really enjoy playing weak characters that die easily or run away. To be honest I don’t really see that as a problem as we very rarely see protagonists in fiction, even action horror fiction run away screaming for help. That is usually left for NPCs. I would distinguish between being weak and running for help as different to tactically trying to avoid a more powerful enemy or achieve a different objective to fighting.

My greatest surprise is that the fiction first element that you have praised so highly isn’t really mentioned at all.

 

[Campbell]

I think without direct experience of playing (or especially running) a game like Apocalypse World, Burning Wheel, Dogs in the Vineyard, Hillfolk, Moldvay B/X, Quietus or Sorcerer in the way you are instructed to by those games its almost impossible to fathom just how different play feels from modern D&D. I know really did not understand it. It's like playing poker when you have only ever played card games where you take tricks. It's like playing Diplomacy when all you have ever played are games where you roll dice to move around a board. It's like playing Among Us when you have only ever played first person shooters.

Take Sorcerer for example. Sorcerer completely does away with the concept of GM prepared story, cooperative play groups, and world building as we think of it. In Sorcerer you start with the characters who have just undergone a dramatic change in their lives and build a cluster of NPCs around each of them. Play revolves around a set of bangs for each character - situations that force a character to act without any regard for how things should resolve themselves. For each session the GM is supposed to prepare a bandoleer of bangs, but keep them in reserve, only pulling them out when needed to keep play interesting. The story of the game is the story of these individual characters striving to cope with dramatic change in their lives. Usually their stories will intersect in some way, but it's not required. Some Sorcerer games will complete with the characters never even meeting.

Once a character's dramatic life change (called a kicker) is resolved either we develop a new kicker together, they create a new character, or play is done. No prepared story arcs. No plot hooks. No adventures. Just some dynamic characters going through some stuff while summoning demons and stuff.

 

[chaochou]

I would think that the following elements were system agnostic nay?

• Communicators
• Setting the scene

Absolutely not.

How is a scene set in The Pool? By who? How about Shab al hiri Roach? How about Apocalypse World? In a Wicked Age? Sorceror?

Communicators assume the ability to communicate over distance? Can a player introduce new elements into the game at the point they use a communicator, or can they only talk to GM established things?

As for the 'Alertness' ability - cite me the rules for that in Trollbabe. The Mountain Witch. How is surprise handled in Apocalypse World?

 

[Campbell]

Framing scenes or establishing situations is in no way system agnostic. One of most crucial differences between games is what sort of situations the GM or other players are expected to frame, how they go about that process, and what sort of material they should prep.

 

[TheSword]

Absolutely not.

How is a scene set in The Pool? By who? How about Shab al hiri Roach? How about Apocalypse World? In a Wicked Age? Sorceror?

Communicators assume the ability to communicate over distance? Can a player introduce new elements into the game at the point they use a communicator, or can they only talk to GM established things?

As for the 'Alertness' ability - cite me the rules for that in Trollbabe. The Mountain Witch. How is surprise handled in Apocalypse World?

I’m not engaging in discussion regarding games are aren’t even available to buy or in print. If you have to go so avant garde it isn’t even on DTRPG or Amazon marketplace then it’s probably not a good example. I wasn’t willing to pay £75 for the last copy of Sorcerer to find out.

 

[chaochou]

I’m not engaging in discussion regarding games are aren’t even available to buy or in print. If you have to go so avant garde it isn’t even on DTRPG or Amazon marketplace then it’s probably not a good example. I wasn’t willing to pay £75 for the last copy of Sorcerer to find out.

So you're willing to make claims about things which are 'system agnostic' and then when proven wrong to shift the goalposts to 'RPG systems readily and conveniently available to you'.

Except even that's an attempt to mislead - The Pool is a free download, top result on Google. Apocalypse World is available. Sorcerer is available from the publisher. But you didn't even look, just barfed out the easiest way you could think of to reject the clear evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.

In other words, you've been exposed as making false (and ignorant) claims and you're now sticking your fingers in your ears going 'nah, nah nah, not listening.'

 

[TheSword]

So you're willing to make claims about things which are 'system agnostic' and then when proven wrong to shift the goalposts to 'RPG systems readily and conveniently available to you'.

Except even that's an attempt to mislead - The Pool is a free download, top result on Google. Apocalypse World is available. Sorcerer is available from the publisher. But you didn't even look, just barfed out the easiest way you could think of to reject the clear evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.

In other words, you've been exposed as making false (and ignorant) claims and you're now sticking your fingers in your ears going 'nah, nah nah, not listening.'

No problem. Thanks for sharing. If it’s winding you up, I’ll happily bow out. I don’t believe you’re discussing in good faith. I’ve had more than my two pence on the subject and the goal posts move too fast in this thread.