Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
On completely artificial restrictions
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="loverdrive" data-source="post: 8965438" data-attributes="member: 7027139"><p>Maybe, but you won't, if you don't just mash a bunch of mechanics together.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think it's pretty self-evident, especially in the context of TTRPGs.</p><p></p><p>The "baseline" form of a roleplaying game, slovesochka, freeform roleplaying, negotiated imagination, whatever you may decide to call it, allows for absolute freedom. Anything can be achieved there. A ruleset can only subtract from that absolute freedom, and by doing so, creates a space where players can interact with each other with intentionality, plan, strategize, engage with the game.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Beyond combat, some, especially storytelling-oriented, games place completely artifical restrictions on what can and cannot be done.</p><p></p><p>Ten Candles pretty explicitly state that there's nothing the PCs can do to survive or die before the game ends, and that is a large part of what makes Ten Candles work.</p><p></p><p>Alice is Missing forbids PCs from ever meeting up in-person, a game of Reflections must end in a duel, and I'm sure there are more examples, but those popped into my mind immediately.</p><p></p><p>Returning to combat, in games that have a dedicated combat sub-system, it's, for all intents and purposes, a separate minigame, and I think that minigame being fun is pretty important. I have a pretty limited experience with 4E, but I've played Strike! praised for its tactical gameplay, and I can't say I've ever had an experience with a dedicated combat system that didn't degenerate into a single algorithm with minor variations within two or three sessions.</p><p></p><p></p><p>There's not really that much to talk about, but....</p><p></p><p>All of those were played with 2 players, each controlling 2 PCs to the total party of 4.</p><p></p><p>Experiment #1: characters (both PCs and NPCs) can only move like a queen in chess. Ranged attacks, similarly, can only be made if the target is on the same line horizontally, vertically or diagonally. The only way to move in a more complex way is to move then dash in other direction.</p><p></p><p>It made positioning much more important, allowing some massivebrain plays that would be completely pointless if every character could equally threaten a whole radius around them, thus making even simple combat encounters that would otherwise boil down to "I HIT HIM WITH MY SWORD" more engaging.</p><p></p><p>Experiment #2: there's a deck of cards, each representing a possible action in the base game (attack, dash, cast a spell, drink potion, etc.). When the initiative is rolled, everyone draws 3, and refills to 3 at the start of each their turn. At the end of the turn any number of cards can be discarded. When the deck is exhausted, the discard pile is reshuffled. If you play a card, you make an action written on it, otherwise you can only make a single attack (regardless of multiattack stuff) or dodge.</p><p></p><p>It was less cool than #1, but maybe that was because the cards themselves kinda sucked. It still added another layer of mindgames to the process, where everyone is mentally keeping track of opponent's cards.</p><p></p><p>Both resulted in more engaging combat with surprises (that weren't completely random) and some friendly trash-talking, which resulted in players taking more risks and being generally more excited, and that excitement spilled over to non-combat breather scenes. Cool plays and stupid blunders added to characterization of the, well, characters, and made at least me care about them a tad more.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="loverdrive, post: 8965438, member: 7027139"] Maybe, but you won't, if you don't just mash a bunch of mechanics together. I think it's pretty self-evident, especially in the context of TTRPGs. The "baseline" form of a roleplaying game, slovesochka, freeform roleplaying, negotiated imagination, whatever you may decide to call it, allows for absolute freedom. Anything can be achieved there. A ruleset can only subtract from that absolute freedom, and by doing so, creates a space where players can interact with each other with intentionality, plan, strategize, engage with the game. Beyond combat, some, especially storytelling-oriented, games place completely artifical restrictions on what can and cannot be done. Ten Candles pretty explicitly state that there's nothing the PCs can do to survive or die before the game ends, and that is a large part of what makes Ten Candles work. Alice is Missing forbids PCs from ever meeting up in-person, a game of Reflections must end in a duel, and I'm sure there are more examples, but those popped into my mind immediately. Returning to combat, in games that have a dedicated combat sub-system, it's, for all intents and purposes, a separate minigame, and I think that minigame being fun is pretty important. I have a pretty limited experience with 4E, but I've played Strike! praised for its tactical gameplay, and I can't say I've ever had an experience with a dedicated combat system that didn't degenerate into a single algorithm with minor variations within two or three sessions. There's not really that much to talk about, but.... All of those were played with 2 players, each controlling 2 PCs to the total party of 4. Experiment #1: characters (both PCs and NPCs) can only move like a queen in chess. Ranged attacks, similarly, can only be made if the target is on the same line horizontally, vertically or diagonally. The only way to move in a more complex way is to move then dash in other direction. It made positioning much more important, allowing some massivebrain plays that would be completely pointless if every character could equally threaten a whole radius around them, thus making even simple combat encounters that would otherwise boil down to "I HIT HIM WITH MY SWORD" more engaging. Experiment #2: there's a deck of cards, each representing a possible action in the base game (attack, dash, cast a spell, drink potion, etc.). When the initiative is rolled, everyone draws 3, and refills to 3 at the start of each their turn. At the end of the turn any number of cards can be discarded. When the deck is exhausted, the discard pile is reshuffled. If you play a card, you make an action written on it, otherwise you can only make a single attack (regardless of multiattack stuff) or dodge. It was less cool than #1, but maybe that was because the cards themselves kinda sucked. It still added another layer of mindgames to the process, where everyone is mentally keeping track of opponent's cards. Both resulted in more engaging combat with surprises (that weren't completely random) and some friendly trash-talking, which resulted in players taking more risks and being generally more excited, and that excitement spilled over to non-combat breather scenes. Cool plays and stupid blunders added to characterization of the, well, characters, and made at least me care about them a tad more. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
On completely artificial restrictions
Top