Really, how important is the system/edition?

Group matters more than system. However some systems support certain playstyles and campaigns more than others, and groups tend to gravitate towards those that fit their styles best.

Sure I could run a Call of Cthulhu campaign using Ironclaw, or a Shadowrun game using 2e AD&D, but it would be more than a stretch in places. That said, I would be amused if someone did the former.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The base system is only as important as the players allow it to be. If the group can play the game they enjoy together by adding to, ignoring, or changing large parts of the rules then it doesn't matter at all.
 

For me, system is more important than genre and likely group. If a group decided to play a system I didn't like, I would likely not play.

For me the "character creation/advancement subgame" is as important to me as play at the table. Part of the reason I like high crunch games like Hero, 3.x and 4th.

If I have no mechanical fun with a game because it has chargen or combat elements I dislike, I won't have fun with the game. And as they say better no gaming than bad gaming.
 

The base system is only as important as the players allow it to be. If the group can play the game they enjoy together by adding to, ignoring, or changing large parts of the rules then it doesn't matter at all.
Hear, hear!

Though even just within D+D the group-vs.-system question is slowly becoming more relevant as the game becomes more and more divergent from its roots. And a corollary question is one of how willing the group/DM is to augment/change/ignore rules in any edition in those situations where the game is improved by doing so.

Lan-"they're not rules, they're just...guidelines"-efan
 

The whole "Edition Wars" thing has me thinking: How important is the system?

Its less important to me as a player than as a GM. There are several RPGs I'll play only if I'm a player- I'll never run them as GM.

As a player, the company I get to share is much more important that the particular game I'm playing.

That isn't to say that I'm happy playing any system. I've played a lot of GURPS, but only because I was playing with a great bunch of GURPSophilic gamers. I couldn't help but think, however, how much I'd rather be playing the same PC in HERO.

The same goes for 4Ed. Every PC I've designed for it felt "bleh" compared to 3.X versions. I'm in no danger of having to play it- nobody I game with even likes it, though- I'm the only one who even bought the Core 3.

So GURPS and 4Ed D&D sit on my game shelf, virtually unused. If, perchance, I wind up having to find a new game group, and they're GURPSophiles or 4Ed mavens, that's what I'll play.

I won't be running games in those systems, though.

My current group, though? Many of them are very system oriented. Several will only play FRPGs...and at least 2 have been D&D only up until 4Ed's release.

While they, too, rejected 4Ed, it did open a discussion as to what, if anything, we would play besides 3Ed/3.X. We've talked about True20 and Pathfinder- both of which will probably find their way into my collection, at least- and I currently have them playing a Mutants & Masterminds supers campaign set in 1912. They may even wind up trying Warriors & Warlocks down the road.
 
Last edited:

For me, system matters. Some systems accommodate certain play styles and character types that other systems do not. Frex, making a true skill-based or charismatic rogue in D&D was pretty much impossible until 3x rolled out, as earlier editions lacked cohesive rules for both skills and detailed use of charisma as a complex tool to be utilized in different social situations. 3x let me build a rogue who could specialize in things like bluffing or intimidation. I didn't have those mechanical options in earlier editions of D&D. I was thrilled when I got them in 3x.
 
Last edited:

I also can definitively say that if I am playing a modern game where I don't have superpowers or am not a Vampire or some other supernatural creature I am generally bored to tears and will be come less interested as the game progresses, regardless of the group.

I'm right here with you. There are some people in my group who just want the roleplay, no matter what they're playing. I'm already a normal human. I don't game to be just like myself. I game to do crazy things and have fun.
 

The whole "Edition Wars" thing has me thinking: How important is the system?

When it comes to what other people play and enjoy playing, I say "not at all". People should play whatever they enjoy.

When it comes to me and my group, system does matter, but it is not the only factor that matters, nor even the most important. I would rather play a system I don't like much with a good GM and players than play my perfect system (which actually doesn't exist) with a bad GM and players.

However, the system does matter. Every so often, I have a notion to run a BD&D, 2nd Edition AD&D or (most likely) 1st Edition AD&D campaign again, for reasons of nostalgia. This lasts right up until I look at the actual mechanics of the game - there are enough oddities there that I would just feel compelled to fix 'just one thing'... but as soon as I fix one thing, I'll want to fix another, and another, until I've just fixed 'one more thing' and re-written the whole game.

And 4e is not for me. I'll not go into why, but it's just not. Thanks, but no thanks.

(The reason 3.x is for me is largely down to my own mindset. I'm by nature extremely organised, and very good with numbers, structure and order. I don't do terribly well with lots of exceptions, special cases, and things being left undefined. And by this point I've pretty much cracked open the maths behind 3e - I like to think I understand it. 3e is just structured enough, and just complex enough, to be almost ideal for me. Now, if only it didn't take so long to actually prep a game...)
 

Does system matter?

The easy answer is: How much have you spent on new systems over the years? Over the last three years? Last year? Every design/tweak your own system? How much time did you spend doing that?

That is how much system matters.

Group matters, too....especially if it is a very good or a very bad group.....but that doesn't factor into whether or not system matters. Rather, it is similar to saying that the quality of your vehicle and the quality of the surface you are driving on both matter. If one really sucks, the trip sucks. If one is really great, it helps, but it is better to have the best of both.


RC
 

Group matters, too....especially if it is a very good or a very bad group.....but that doesn't factor into whether or not system matters. Rather, it is similar to saying that the quality of your vehicle and the quality of the surface you are driving on both matter. If one really sucks, the trip sucks. If one is really great, it helps, but it is better to have the best of both.

I agree RC, to a certain extent. I think though that it depends on how much the DM and/or players wanna modify the system they choose to use.

For instance with a car trip you can't pave your own road. With an RPG you can,analogously speaking. You can modify anything you want. You can pave or repave the road as you like.

Now the trick is, as others have said, do you wanna, and how much time and effort is that gonna require (out of the DM or GM, and/or the players)?

As a kid I didn't care how much time it consumed. I could work it as I liked. (You know the old saw, as a kid you'll trade time for money, cause you got plenty of time, as a man you'll trade money for time, cause you don't have nearly as much.) As an adult I don't wanna hav'ta reinvent the wheel, I got far more important things to do with my time. However sometimes in my spare time I rework things anyways, cause it is a fun distraction and for once I don't have to be doing anything serious or anything others really need to rely upon me for. Nothing is at stake, so it's just entertainment and relaxation. (Same reason I come here. Now I think gaming can be useful, very useful. As training. And even productive on occasion. But the big advantages with gaming, and even with training is, most of the time, nobody is gonna get hurt. So it's far from the most important use of your time, but it's also far from the most dangerous or taxing use of your time. And sometimes that's just plain good enough.)

But that being said, about limitations on my time, I personally still (iffin I had to make a choice) would choose comrades over games, and friends over systems. After all we can still always remake the system into anything we want, or even create our own (as you alluded to), so you can always modify a game. Within reasonable time constraints of course. You can't really approach the problem in the same way when it comes to other people.

Ideally though you'd want good folks and a good system. But if the system doesn't please me to every extent then I can always refinagle that. Without too much problem.

And there are of course games I wont play. But mainly cause I don't have time to, or because the subject matter (what the game is about) doesn't really interest me.

But I've never in my whole life, even going back to wargames and the earliest editions of D&D, ever played an unmodified, exactly as structured RAW game. I've never seen RAW in any system that I thought covered everything, or everything well. So I've always modified everything. Sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. Then again only once have I ever really played with
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top