Play Is Paramount: Discuss

[SableWyvern]

Rolemaster is great! I love Rolemaster and I agree with you. BUT there are some occasional parts (XP, potential stats, the versions that average three stats to determine the stat bonus) where the simulationism has taken priority over the playability. A very small part of a fantastic whole, though.

There are certainly parts of the system I felt needed improving and which I have changed for my own needs, but that's a matter of my preferences, not any objective truth about excessive simulation. There's no objective line where a rule or system moves from playable to cumbersome -- it's a fuzzy zone where we each set our limits based on our interests and inclinations.

Regarding your three examples: The default EP system I find overly cumbersome these days, but in the past I experienced genuine enjoyment when doing those calculations. Potentials I've always been a fan of and I'm surprised to see you list them as a problem (I prefer the RM2 generation method, but the RMSS advancement method). Averaging three stats is the way I ran RM2 and we didn't find it too cumbersome, although the addition of three stats method in RMSS is an improvement, IMO.

 

[aramis erak]

There are certainly parts of the system I felt needed improving and which I have changed for my own needs, but that's a matter of my preferences, not any objective truth about excessive simulation. There's no objective line where a rule or system moves from playable to cumbersome -- it's a fuzzy zone where we each set our limits based on our interests and inclinations.

Regarding your three examples: The default EP system I find overly cumbersome these days, but in the past I experienced genuine enjoyment when doing those calculations. Potentials I've always been a fan of and I'm surprised to see you list them as a problem (I prefer the RM2 generation method, but the RMSS advancement method). Averaging three stats is the way I ran RM2 and we didn't find it too cumbersome, although the addition of three stats method in RMSS is an improvement, IMO.

The Temp/Potential is realistic to a point, and kind of assumes a younger start than we think of today...
but it's cumbersome.
I found averageing three stats realistic but cumbersome - hence the spreadsheet.
Automatic calculations makes RM so much more playable. Especially with modern, "Blank isn't axiomatically equal to 0" spreadsheets.

The problem with MERP/RM/SM is getting to the play portion of the experience. For many of my players, the excellent ease of play wasn't worth the character gen hassles.

 

[SableWyvern]

The Temp/Potential is realistic to a point, and kind of assumes a younger start than we think of today...
but it's cumbersome.

To be honest, one of the best parts of Temp/Potential for me is simply that the players enjoy seeing their stats go up when they level (and, to be honest, a stat occasionally dropping makes for an interesting wrinkle). The degree to which it accurately simulates anything is a lesser concern, IMO. In any case, rolling stat gains once per level isn't that much of an issue (although, perhaps more so if you're averaging stats in RM2 and using paper sheets).

I found averageing three stats realistic but cumbersome - hence the spreadsheet.
Automatic calculations makes RM so much more playable. Especially with modern, "Blank isn't axiomatically equal to 0" spreadsheets.

We used paper back in the day, with ridiculous 8 page character sheets when I was running RMSS. For whatever reason, it was never a problem, although now I struggle to comprehend how we did it back then.

These days, my RM character sheets are by far the most complex spreadsheets I've ever created, but they work wonders. Our group tends to use spreadsheet character sheets for every game now, even simple ones.

In my current game, I also have all my attack and crit tables set up in Obsidian with quick links between pages. I was always fairly good at managing all the combat stuff (the one time I experimented with sharing the load around the table, I found that actually just slowed things down), but it's even faster now,

The problem with MERP/RM/SM is getting to the play portion of the experience. For many of my players, the excellent ease of play wasn't worth the character gen hassles.

Which takes me back to my main point -- these trade-offs are a personal matter, and we're all entitled to set our limits wherever we're comfortable. There is no single, true, correct ratio to be aiming for.

 

[Fenris-77]

I don't agree with that. It conflates game design with game prep.

The DM is prepping the game for group play, which is part of his job as DM and so is part of his game play. The DM making rules changes to adapt a system to the setting isn't prep for group play. It's different from creating an NPC or dungeon. Design and prep are two different things.

This doesn't follow at all. Just because the GM needs to do some stuff to facilitate play does not make that activity play as well. You say you disagree but then conflate those same two ideas yourself.

GMs reading and designing for future play is not itself play, nor does it need to be. GM prep isn't entirely a writing and design thing (especially not for purchased adventures) but much of it is writing and design - of scenarios and situations. That's why when people do that work and then sell it as a published adventure we call it writing and design, not play. We don't ask who played Isle of Dread, we ask who wrote it.

 

[Maxperson]

This doesn't follow at all. Just because the GM needs to do some stuff to facilitate play does not make that activity play as well. You say you disagree but then conflate those same two ideas yourself.

GMs reading and designing for future play is not itself play, nor does it need to be. GM prep isn't entirely a writing and design thing (especially not for purchased adventures) but much of it is writing and design - of scenarios and situations. That's why when people do that work and then sell it as a published adventure we call it writing and design, not play. We don't ask who played Isle of Dread, we ask who wrote it.

Prep isn't inherently game design. I'm not for the most part creating any rules for the game. No rules creation, no GAME design. Designing an encounter is not game design, it's simply game prep. There was no conflation on my part. The only mistake I made was in not considering that sometimes you will have to make up rules to fit your game prep like @SableWyvern mentioned. In those cases, though, you are doing both separate things. Game design AND game prep.

 

[Fenris-77]

Prep isn't inherently game design. I'm not for the most part creating any rules for the game. No rules creation, no GAME design. Designing an encounter is not game design, it's simply game prep. There was no conflation on my part. The only mistake I made was in not considering that sometimes you will have to make up rules to fit your game prep like @SableWyvern mentioned. In those cases, though, you are doing both separate things. Game design AND game prep.

You see how you needed to use 'game' to get to game design? I'd agree there, lots of GM prep isn't game design, it's encounter design, or scenario design, or NPC design, or magic item design. What it's not is playing the game. Prep isn't a carefully defined term, just a catch-all for the work the GM does outside of play and includes all the things I just mentioned as well as reading, thinking, doodling, cartography, and all manner of other things that also aren't 'play'.

However, if we need one word to capture what the GM is doing when 'prepping' then that word is design or possibly the more general writing if your definition of design is super narrow. My main issue here is with people calling GM prep 'play' which is needlessly confusing in addition to being contrary to common usage.

 

[Maxperson]

You see how you needed to use 'game' to get to game design? I'd agree there, lots of GM prep isn't game design, it's encounter design, or scenario design, or NPC design, or magic item design. What it's not is playing the game. Prep isn't a carefully defined term, just a catch-all for the work the GM does outside of play and includes all the things I just mentioned as well as reading, thinking, doodling, cartography, and all manner of other things that also aren't 'play'.

It is playing the game, because encounter, scenario, NPC, adventure design exists within the rules of the game, not outside of it. And I'm not the one who brought up game design. Even so, game design and game prep(design) are two different things. The latter is the DM playing a solo aspect of the game as per his role in the game. His role when playing the game is adventure creator, rules interpreter, etc.

However, if we need one word to capture what the GM is doing when 'prepping' then that word is design or possibly the more general writing if your definition of design is super narrow. My main issue here is with people calling GM prep 'play' which is needlessly confusing in addition to being contrary to common usage.

I generally refer to it as prep, but it's still the DM playing a solo aspect of his role in the game. Prep is a part of playing the game, like setting up a board game is often part of playing the game.

 

[Fenris-77]

It is playing the game, because encounter, scenario, NPC, adventure design exists within the rules of the game, not outside of it. And I'm not the one who brought up game design. Even so, game design and game prep(design) are two different things. The latter is the DM playing a solo aspect of the game as per his role in the game. His role when playing the game is adventure creator, rules interpreter, etc.

I generally refer to it as prep, but it's still the DM playing a solo aspect of his role in the game. Prep is a part of playing the game, like setting up a board game is often part of playing the game.

That definition doesn't even make sense, sorry. Perhaps your contention here is that RPG rule books only contain the rules to play the game? I think it would have to be. However, this falls apart completely when you look at pretty much any RPG rulebook. There you see sections called sections like playing the game, and things called examples of play, none of which have anything to do with prep. You also have sections for the GM about what they have to do between sessions and none of them call that stuff 'play'.

We also have many examples of books designed specifically for solo RPG play. In those books that solo player plays a character with the usual GM role of describing the setting to some extent offloaded on random tables and dice rolls of various sorts. You know what we don't have though? Solo games where you play the GM and the player side is automated. I suspect this has a lot do with how most people use the word play in reference to RPGs and that they aren't talking about GM prep.

You, of course, can call prep anything you want, including play. You can call it snot stacks if you like. But this doesn't mean it is play by any usual definition of ther word.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I hope you are at least getting some significant unholy power for that!

Now that I think about it, sacrificing people is the wrong term.
I mean, for the TTRPG world to reach its full potential, we must remove the weak from it. I estimate that would cut at least half the population, but what would emerge from the ashes would be unstoppable! We could then form an entertainment empire that would stretch across the entire planet!