Let's Talk About "Intended Playstyle"

[Smackpixi]

Generally, I think this is more a player approach situation. There’s a large contingent of TTRPG tables that think of every game as rules optional. Whether the game says, “these are the rules, period” or “these are the rules, but…” they aren’t hearing either and absent of a square board with round pieces in front of them, everything is on the table.

From a designer standpoint, if you want to make a medieval magic fantasy game, you have to go intended playstyle these days to distinguish your game from all those that have come before. What does your game bring? It’s gonna have to bring a new way to do it, or why would anyone get it? Even if you’re trying to make the most customizable hackable system ever, you need a new intended base to hang everything on.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Generally, I think this is more a player approach situation. There’s a large contingent of TTRPG tables that think of every game as rules optional. Whether the game says, “these are the rules, period” or “these are the rules, but…” they aren’t hearing either and absent of a square board with round pieces in front of them, everything is on the table.

From a designer standpoint, if you want to make a medieval magic fantasy game, you have to go intended playstyle these days to distinguish your game from all those that have come before. What does your game bring? It’s gonna have to bring a new way to do it, or why would anyone get it? Even if you’re trying to make the most customizable hackable system ever, you need a new intended base to hang everything on.

That's a good observation. There are so many RPGs out there now, that if you are not just checking an item on your bucket list but actually want people to play your game, you really need to explain why it has to exist. And I think, "It's sort of like a bunch of other ones, but it combines all my favorite rules and innovations" is a really hard way to make it stand out, because not very many people are going to share your exact preferences.

But if you can explain it not just with rules you like, but with a coherent "feel" that is unlike anything else out there...that makes sense to me. For example, what is appealing to me about Nimble is the "tactical, but fast" thing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's a good observation. There are so many RPGs out there now, that if you are not just checking an item on your bucket list but actually want people to play your game, you really need to explain why it has to exist. And I think, "It's sort of like a bunch of other ones, but it combines all my favorite rules and innovations" is a really hard way to make it stand out, because not very many people are going to share your exact preferences.

But if you can explain it not just with rules you like, but with a coherent "feel" that is unlike anything else out there...that makes sense to me. For example, what is appealing to me about Nimble is the "tactical, but fast" thing.

If you want people to buy your game, I agree with you. If you just want people to play it, then it's a matter of finding folks willing to try out your bundle of house rules. That's what I do.

 

[GrimCo]

Another game that "does it good" is Ten Candles. Now, i admit, it's a bit gimmicky. But it does what it says on the tin. There is only one way to play it. The playstyle is defined by a "lose-to-win" mentality. Character death is guaranteed, so the focus shifts from survival to telling cinematic story about how you spend last few hours before world ends in darkness.

Now, to defend Vampire a bit. It get's lot of flack, specially first edition, for promising personal horror a la Vampire Chronicles, but it plays more like Blade or "supers with fangs". Part of that is rpg culture of early 90s and people who came from D&D background into it. They played it similar to how they played D&D. You know what you know. Part of it was due to that eras design philosophy - rules are there for stuff you can't do in real life. Like disciplines and combat. Social stuff was viewed as "player skill" not "character skill". Part of it was splatbooks. Like all splatbooks, it just cranked power levels higher and higher. Oh and that metaplot. In VtM (i played Revised for good chunk of time), rules don't hinder intended play style, they just don't enforce it. Mechanics and narrative are completely separate. It was rectified in VtR 2ed where they actually built in mechanics for social manouvering. But, with right group, even old VtM Revised was played as intended. What VtM promised was actually best portrayed when you moved away from ttrpg and stepped in into Mind's Eye Theater (LARP). VtM ttrpg was at it best when you played it with people who never played D&D or any other ttrpg before and were heavily into vampire lore.