Out with the old (Game design traditions we should let go)

[overgeeked]

It's all about the brand recognition. I think the glut of licensed games is targeted at fans of the source material who aren't very much into RPGs and are not familiar with the rules systems that are out there.
These games exist because people will buy the brand, not because developers have ideas for a new system.

Sure. Bad example on my part. It’s what popped in there when I was thinking about it. The general point is that we don’t need more and more game systems. There’s already more than anyone could ever hope to use. And they’re increasingly minor variations on already common themes. I’d like to see more settings and genre books without attached systems.

 

[Reynard]

Sure. Bad example on my part. It’s what popped in there when I was thinking about it. The general point is that we don’t need more and more game systems. There’s already more than anyone could ever hope to use. And they’re increasingly minor variations on already common themes. I’d like to see more settings and genre books without attached systems.

Have any of these ever sold well, besides maybe Harn back when "systemless" just meant "for use with D&D"?

 

[Endroren]

This is where I land. There are no game mechanics that the hobby as a whole should remove from consideration. Some game-designer somewhere could eventually find anything useful.

The OP's question is frankly bizarre to me. It's like asking, "what instruments should musicians just not use anymore when composing new music?"

The question wasn't what should we permanently delete. It also wasn't a question of value or quality. To put it another way, it's asking what are things that are included in RPGs in a knee-jerk sort of way where we might benefit if we try removing those things. It's easy to overlook some really fantastic options because one has already filled the need with something else. There are also things that people become so used to, that they never consider NOT having.

A somewhat similar example is smoking in old scifi novels. Ingenious authors with amazing creative minds never stopped to wonder if maybe people would stop smoking in the future. SOME authors did, but many (or most IMO) did not.

The whole point of the question is "what is our 'smoking'" in games? And if we pulled those things out, what creative solutions might we fill the gap with. It's a creative exercise.

 

[overgeeked]

Have any of these ever sold well, besides maybe Harn back when "systemless" just meant "for use with D&D"?

Depends. There’s versions specifically for games. Hero System and GURPS have put out some of the best genre books. I haven’t a clue how well they sell. Monte Cook is putting some out. There’s also semi-related stuff like the Osprey books on armies, battles, and weapons of war, that, while meant for wargames and mini collecting, are also useful for specific historical interest and research…and RPGs. Then there’s the whole universe of non-gaming books, fiction and non-fiction. Any history book or novel could be the source for ideas and settings. Gamers interested in emulating stories in their games would do well to study the same books and manuals novelists and screenwriters are pointed to, re: craft and genre.

So, to answer your “do they sell” question. Most of them, yes. Quite well in fact…when they’re not targeted at gamers. The stuff targeted at gamers, not so much.

Maybe that’s more the thing I’d like to see. Gamers getting out of the rut of “what system” and becoming voracious in their inspirations again. Yes, you see more of this in indie games, but a lot still seems like minor variations on a theme. And most online discussion seems laser focused on the boring bits…builds and maths and systems.

 

[Reynard]

Depends. There’s versions specifically for games. Hero System and GURPS have put out some of the best genre books. I haven’t a clue how well they sell.

Those aren't generic so i don't know how many people pick them up for general use. As a Hero fan, i have a ton of their genre books from various editions and they are great, but I don't know that i would have bought any of them if I wasn't already into the system. Granted, I never really played GURPS but did buy some of their more esoteric books just because they were often the only place to find books on some subjects or genres.

 

[John R Davis]

Way too many PC races.
Dice pools.
And mostly "opposed rolls".

 

[kenada]

Dice pools.
And mostly "opposed rolls".

Not a fan of opposed rolls. Especially with dice pools (glares at Shadowrun). Let’s make resolution take longer.

 

[John R Davis]

Eek..hadn't thought off opposed dice pool rolls. Yuck

 

[overgeeked]

Not a fan of opposed rolls. Especially with dice pools (glares at Shadowrun). Let’s make resolution take longer.

Eek..hadn't thought off opposed dice pool rolls. Yuck

While I completely agree about dice pools, I love opposed rolls. It's the single best way to remove the referee putting their thumb on the scale of target numbers, and if you happen to get into PVP it's not suddenly weird that you're making opposed rolls. Or have the referee roll for the DC then have the player roll against that. Like say 1d10+15 is the DC. But then that's just an opposed roll by another name.

 

[MGibster]

That's not what I'm talking about. As per the post you quoted, I'm talking about PCs whose paths cross and whose "stories" interact without having to be part of the same team.

I don't know what that means.

Edit: i.e. What does that look like in game play?