RPGs, new games and originality

[Micah Sweet]

DCC is a great quality game, though it's not really my thing. I've never heard of ACKS, but I will check it out.

ACKS is a great game for me, but to be fair it is deeply simulationist and won't be for everyone.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

That's a VERY narrow survey. It may seem broad to you, but those terms are used mostly for a pretty narrow band of mechanics.
You're missing the following major categories of Mechanics:

• PBTA/AWE - the Apocalypse World Engine and the various games that, with a variety of fidelity to Vincent Baker's vision.
• The dicepool driven semi-trad - Orkworld, Burning Wheel, L5R 1e to 4e.
  All three have leanings towards narrativism.
• The symbolic dice games: FFG's WFRP 3e, FFG's Star Wars, FFG's L5R 5e
• The hybrid narrative/dicepool Storyteller system, most noted for Vampire, but I adapted it for Traveller, and WWG (Publishers of the original and second editions of the World of Darkness) also used it for the very fun Street Fighter: The Storytelling Game. They have a few concessions towards Narrativism, and their less than focused mechanics are part of the impetus for the Forge. They're still going. They incentivise certain
• The assorted YAPS (Yet Another Percentile System) -- Most of Chaosium's games; some older FFG RPGs, FASA Star Trek, Everything Palladium except Amber)
• Any of the dice-less point pushers: Warriors RPG, Marvel Universe
• Decision Trees: Theatrix, Amber, Some of CORPS.
• Roll for who decides: Just two games I've seen: Houses of the Blooded and Blood & Honor. Both by John Wick,

I focused on these three parts of my personal survey because they're very active spaces. The OSR space itself is more active in what it produces than many big official RPGs. However, I assure you, within what is possible for one individual with a job, I've touched to many things outside of that in the past four years, Burning Wheel and Vampire among them! I still have at least two dozen systems that I've read through but have yet to play.

I'm sorry, that's a harsh realization. Especially after putting lots of hard-earned (?) dollars into it.

It's all good. There's been many good finds too! I don't regret. It's not that the spaces are not innovative at all, just that they're not as much as I though they'd be.

The question for the OP is, what kind of innovation are you looking for?

It's my personal take on it, but I felt like the promise of the OSR was two folds: go back to a style of play which has some specific qualities over the more modern approach, use a common framework on which we can build and expand instead of reinventing the wheel constantly. What I seem to see in the several produces I've touched is exactly reinventing the wheel and very little creating new stuff on top of it. The same monsters come back in bestiary after bestiary, equipment lists that are almost identicals, slight variant on the same few rules; or sometimes the rules are exactly the same, but there's just a few different random tables sprinkled around.

If I go and spend 70$ on a big rulebook for a very different system from another publisher, I tend to find something quite different with at least a few interesting things to mull on.

 

[hawkeyefan]

What I’ve personally found to be innovating the past few years has been more about application. How mechanics are applied, or how they’re combined in interesting ways.

The DIE RPG has some pretty interesting mechanics. I don’t know if they’ve all appeared in games before, but the game certainly feels like something new. Even something as simple as each class being focused on one of the six primary polyhedral dice seems innovative. That each class uses their specific dice in different ways only enhances that.

Then there’s the structure of the game. The players are playing Personas (ordinary people with messy lives) who get together to play an RPG and get pulled into their fictional world, and become Paragons. It adds a unique element to the game.

With the amount of games that have existed at this point, I think it’s less likely that innovation will be all about mechanics. There will be new ways to innovate.

 

[Aldarc]

It's my personal take on it, but I felt like the promise of the OSR was two folds: go back to a style of play which has some specific qualities over the more modern approach, use a common framework on which we can build and expand instead of reinventing the wheel constantly. What I seem to see in the several produces I've touched is exactly reinventing the wheel and very little creating new stuff on top of it. The same monsters come back in bestiary after bestiary, equipment lists that are almost identicals, slight variant on the same few rules; or sometimes the rules are exactly the same, but there's just a few different random tables sprinkled around.

If I go and spend 70$ on a big rulebook for a very different system from another publisher, I tend to find something quite different with at least a few interesting things to mull on.

Yeah, I would check out WWN and its Atlas of the Latter World supplement, which I mentioned before. The character options innovate compared to other OSR games. It's also more Dying Earth so while it has some legacy ancestries and monsters for people who may want to use the game to run standard fare, it also has some weird and different creatures that tap into that more science-fantasy feel.

Also, check out Numenera, though it's not OSR. It's a science-fantasy setting that likewise has a lot of weird and unique monsters outside of the norm. The Cypher System is a more of a toolkit system that uses the same resolution system and character creation, and so it builds up and out on its offerings. I have used it to run more of an OSR style dungeon-crawl, albeit set in a crashed space ship.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

Also, check out Numenera, though it's not OSR. It's a science-fantasy setting that likewise has a lot of weird and unique monsters outside of the norm. The Cypher System is a more of a toolkit system that uses the same resolution system and character creation, and so it builds up and out on its offerings. I have used it to run more of an OSR style dungeon-crawl, albeit set in a crashed space ship.

I've lurked around Numenera for more than a year, but a few bad reviews from people around me are making me hold on for now. There's also so many supplements!

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've lurked around Numenera for more than a year, but a few bad reviews from people around me are making me hold on for now. There's also so many supplements!

Numenera reads to me as a very cool setting full of rules I either don't want or of which I do not understand the purpose. Would love to hear from someone who can explain the game however.

 

[Faolyn]

Numenera reads to me as a very cool setting full of rules I either don't want or of which I do not understand the purpose. Would love to hear from someone who can explain the game however.

I've only played a few sessions of it. What didn't you get; I might be able to help.

 

[Guest 85555]

Number always struck me as a cool setting. I haven't had an opportunity to play but got the rulebook when it came out. I love Arthur C Clarke and so was intrigued by a setting built around his quote about magic and science

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've only played a few sessions of it. What didn't you get; I might be able to help.

What's the purpose of the game? What experience are they trying to convey for the players and GM? It looks like a great setting for classic exploration/sandbox play, but the mechanics don't seem to support a lot of direct interaction with the cool stuff the setting offers; more like some kind of tourism.

I apologize if that sounds harsh. I guess I don't understand how the rules showcase the promise of the setting.

 

[Indaarys]

Chiming in to recommend Ironsworn and Star Forged.

Solo RPGs are a breath of fresh air, and those two in particular are great as they can be played solo or with a group or with a group + GM.