Playing THIS with THAT. . .

[buzz]

For all intents and purposes, I've played Cthulhu with three different systems (BRP, GURPS and d20) and found the experience pretty much exactly the same. I've played Star Wars with three systems (d6, d20 and The Window and not found it really different, etc.

I'll go ahead and be a jerkwad and argue that this is quite likely due to the fact that BRP, GURPS, d20 and even the The Window are functionally quite similar. E.g., I've also played CoCd20 and found it pretty much the same as CoCBRP.

Now you play Star Wars with, say, Hero's Banner or Cthulhu with Dread, and the difference will be more dramatic.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I'm brewing a session set in the world of the CW's "Reaper" using Hero's Banner. Might run this at an upcoming Gameday.

 

[Engilbrand]

I'm in a Forgotten Realms Underdark campaign that uses the New World of Darkness rules. It's a lot of fun. Definitely low magic.

 

[jdrakeh]

I'll go ahead and be a jerkwad and argue that this is quite likely due to the fact that BRP, GURPS, d20 and even the The Window are functionally quite similar. E.g., I've also played CoCd20 and found it pretty much the same as CoCBRP.

I point this out on CM, after which Hobo flipped his position completely. He's just nay-saying what I post in attempt to peeve me off, he's not a real contributor to the thread and it's probably better to ignore his posts.

 

[Desdichado]

I'll go ahead and be a jerkwad and argue that this is quite likely due to the fact that BRP, GURPS, d20 and even the The Window are functionally quite similar. E.g., I've also played CoCd20 and found it pretty much the same as CoCBRP.

Now you play Star Wars with, say, Hero's Banner or Cthulhu with Dread, and the difference will be more dramatic.

Yeah, of course if you pick extreme opposite ends of the spectrum, then you'll start to see some difference; I made that caveat from the beginning.

Otherwise, though, you're saying that all games with the exception of some really bleeding edge indie games are fundamentally exactly the same. I don't agree with that at all. Besides, if that's true, that pretty much invalidates the entire discussion so far since otherwise, we've got "I played Star Wars with Runequest!" and stuff like that which is according to you and jdrakeh equivalent to not changing the system at all.

 

[Desdichado]

I point this out on CM, after which Hobo flipped his position completely. He's just nay-saying what I post in attempt to peeve me off, he's not a real contributor to the thread and it's probably better to ignore his posts.

Actually, I didn't flip my position at all; you simply tried to redefine the argument so that your prior assumptions were still true, when I said that in my opinion they weren't.

In any case, I'm not trying to peeve you off, and if you want to mention what discussion is going on at CM, you're best leaving it at CM rather than bringing your drama here.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Not quite what I'm talking about You're talking about using a generic system as-written to model another system -- the types of mods that you talk about are still built from the ground up using exclusively Hero rules, even if they were inspired by another system. I (and others) are talking about using one system to play in a setting typically reserved for another system.

Admittedly.

I have run Champions using the Freedom City setting.
I've used Rolemaster to adventure in the world of AErth that was written for Dangerous Journeys.
I ran a d20 Future game in the Spacemaster Setting.

My last post was just commenting on my current game.


I do find that system matters. There are things assumed by system, or allowed or denied (or less so make more difficult or less difficult) that spring form the design choices of the game designers. Using a setting from another system, where some of the details of that setting are tied to those mechanical assumptions can cause some problems. It takes a bit of thought to avoid those holes.

I have never in my life found a setting/game where I thought it was the best game and best setting, so I have always used other settings with games - part of the reason I prefer a universal system - easier to match a setting to it.

 

[buzz]

Otherwise, though, you're saying that all games with the exception of some really bleeding edge indie games are fundamentally exactly the same.

Well, I don't know if I would say "all," but I'm not going to deny a) that there are a lot of RPGs that look similar to me, and 2) the indies happen to be the main ones that are actually pushing the envelope right now, so, yes, I see greater differences there.

But, for the sake of argument, let me pick two totally mainstream RPGs and compare them: D&D (specifically, not d20 in general) and HERO.

In D&D, PCs advance by killing things; it's the primary—and most rewarding numerically—way to earn XP. D&D PCs also tend to be heroic and more powerful than Joe Commoner.

In HERO, PCs advance simply by participating; they earn EPs simply by being present in a scenario, and can earn more for "good roleplaying." The power-level of HERO PCs is very dependent on the campaign guidelines; they could be invincible, they could be easily killed.

I'd argue that a horror game, like CoC, will play out differently with each of these two systems. D&D players will have a huge incentive to "win," and will likely have the means to do so. HERO players may or may not have the ability to survive, and they will be rewarded whether they "win" or not.

Also, I've played a good amount of fantasy with HERO, and it doesn't feel like D&D to me at all. However, it did feel a lot like some old Rolemaster games I've played, which is more in the "sim" camp with HERO.

So, there you go.

The other factor in play is how the RPG in question is being used. You said in your original post that you're not big into rules. I'm going to assume that means you're happy to leave the rulebook behind and go with the flow. I.e., your "system" is your rapport with your group of players, and that trumps what's written on paper.

If that's true, then, yeah, different games are going to look very similar, precisely because your own free-form story/setting system gets ported to every RPG you use.

The HERO group I was in basically operated in this manner. The few times we played other RPGs felt almost no different, because, honestly, we were ignoring the rulebook no matter game we were nominally playing.

The D&D groups I play in, and most of the Gameday events I've played/run, are very different from this. In those contexts, Iron Heroes, e.g., feels quite different from D&D, which feels quite different from True20... and all of which feel absolutely nothing like Burning Wheel.

 

[Desdichado]

Well, I don't know if I would say "all," but I'm not going to deny a) that there are a lot of RPGs that look similar to me, and 2) the indies happen to be the main ones that are actually pushing the envelope right now, so, yes, I see greater differences there.

Ha! a) and 2) aren't compatible bulletted lists! I caught you on a technicality!

Still, my point is, though, that if you take that position, then there's not a whole lot of ground to have a meaningful discussion on the topic, is there? It sounds like the question really was, "have you ever played a mainstream setting with a decidedly non mainstream system that had a bunch of really unusual mechanics and how did that impact play."

If the question had been worded as such, it would have garnered very different (and a lot fewer, IMO) responses than it has.

So, there you go.

Where do I go exactly? I thought you were making the argument that all these systems were too similar to exhibit high degrees of difference in play? My argument is that 1) setting trumps system to quite a large degree (to use your example, I'm not very familiar with HERO, but the only game of it that I have played was in a D&D-like setting, and it felt just like playing D&D except that the mechanics were marginally different) and 2) the games I listed (d20, BRP, d6 and The Window) are significantly different, contrary to the claim made here.

The HERO group I was in basically operated in this manner. The few times we played other RPGs felt almost no different, because, honestly, we were ignoring the rulebook no matter game we were nominally playing.

But I don't ignore the rulebook. I'm talking about the "soft" elements of the game; the stuff that you decide to do, not because of the mechanics, but because that's what the setting is about. Cthulhu, regardless of system, is going to be about normal people slowly coming to grips with indescribable cosmic horror, for example, so even if I'm literally using the D&D rules to play Cthulhu or simple rock/paper/scissors for resolution, I'm still going to play it the same way.

 

[buzz]

Still, my point is, though, that if you take that position, then there's not a whole lot of ground to have a meaningful discussion on the topic, is there?

I dunno. The simple fact is that there are a lot of RPGs that are remarkably similar. I don't think that invalidates the discussion, because not all of them are similar.

Where do I go exactly? I thought you were making the argument that all these systems were too similar to exhibit high degrees of difference in play?

I'm saying that it would not surprise me, given the games you listed, especially if you're not prioritizing use of the rules themselves. E.g., CoCd20 was designed to deliver the same play experience that CoCBRP does.

Cthulhu, regardless of system, is going to be about normal people slowly coming to grips with indescribable cosmic horror, for example, so even if I'm literally using the D&D rules to play Cthulhu or simple rock/paper/scissors for resolution, I'm still going to play it the same way.

Well, this is exactly what I was getting at above. You're explicitly stating that you're going to prioritize "people slowly coming to grips with indescribable cosmic horror" above any themes or goals emphasized by the rulebook. D&D, played by the book, will actively resist you in this effort unless you largely ignore it, as heroism and solving problems with violence (both very un-Cthulhu) is hardwired into the system. Trail of Cthulhu, otoh, is likely going to emphasize investigation over personal horror. As so on , and so on.

What's interesting here is that you're providing an example of how the "system" in "system does matter" is more than just he rules in the book. It's also any procedures used by your group. E.g., "Rules questions generally get resolved by Larry, because Larry is way better at analyzing RPGs than the rest of us and always seems to be right," is part of "system," too.

Ergo, "setting always trumps rules" is obviously part of your "system," so it's going to impact your play experience as much as the text does—if not more so, given the similarity in experience you've seen across different RPGs in a given setting.

jdrakeh: I apologize if I'm drifting your thread too much.