Should PCs from different RPGs be allowed to meet?

[Thomas Shey]

Under the right circumstances, sure. Now, how easy it'll be to express the characters from one system to another is a different question.

 

[MNblockhead]

I wouldn't bother with two completely different systems. Instead I would use complimentary systems for a genre hopping campaign. I've thought of doing a mini campaign with ICRPG, starting medieval then jumping to an old-west, and ending in far future sci fi. In the 80s we used to do with with D&D, Boot Hill, and Gamma World. If I were to do a more in-depth genre jumping campaign today, and wanted something more crunchy than ICRPG, I would create something from Cortex Prime.

 

[MarkB]

Trying to maintain continuity between two closely-linked campaigns without them stepping on each others' toes doesn't necessarily sound like it would lead to less prep. Could be fun, though.

I'm just imagining each group coming in, hearing about what the other set of PCs did to their campaign world, and saying "Augh, can't these guys clear up after themselves? Now we've gotta fix all this!"

 

[Eyes of Nine]

The Rule of Cool says yes.

This trumps all

But a consideration not revealed in the OP - are they the same players? Or different players?

Why not? You’re running them as NPCs on both sides, so it shouldn’t matter at all.

I agree with this. Especially if there is no overlap between the Players, then you don't even have to maintain any sort of detailed internal continuity. Except I guess for your original motivation of having to only prep one "game setting".

However, if it's the same group of players (or there's some overlap), you'll get interesting/funny/weird feels from the players when their PCs from one game interact with the other PCs.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Only if you know the core mechanics of the game...
For example, If I say Fred the Gunslinger is Pistols 75 and rifles 55, and his buddy Dobby Deadeye is Pistols 50 and rifles 50, both Dex 17...
who's the better shot?

Spoiler: Hint: Game system

Aces & Eights

Spoiler: Answer

Dobby. The system is roll high, and gives you the failure chance, not the success chance

There isn’t a scenario wherein a player takes thier existing character from CoC/D&D/whatever and puts them into another game…and doesn’t know the basic mechanics of the game that character is from.

 

[Distracted DM]

I've often toyed with the idea that different ages of my setting would use different rulesets- this could correspond, with grittiness, levels of heroism, magic weirdness, etc.

So my answer is yes they could meet; but you're asking about them adventuring alongside one-another or fighting each-other etc, that'd require, at some level, conversion in one direction or the other.

On the other hand, the idea of characters fighting a potent foe from another age who uses different rules, or maybe even inflicts different rules upon them... well, that's just a delightful idea- but it'd be quite a rare event, or it loses its weirdness and just becomes irritating.

 

[aramis erak]

There isn’t a scenario wherein a player takes thier existing character from CoC/D&D/whatever and puts them into another game…and doesn’t know the basic mechanics of the game that character is from.

Yes, there is... when the GM keeps the mechanics concealed from the players for whichever reason.
While I do consider that a form of toxic GMing, there's a guy on RPGG who claims to be doing so and getting good effects. (every group I've been involved in where that was being done, it's been GM with control issues.)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yes, there is... when the GM keeps the mechanics concealed from the players for whichever reason.
While I do consider that a form of toxic GMing, there's a guy on RPGG who claims to be doing so and getting good effects. (every group I've been involved in where that was being done, it's been GM with control issues.)

I’m not willing to take foolishly bad DMs into account when discussing how games work.

 

[GMMichael]

Trying to maintain continuity between two closely-linked campaigns without them stepping on each others' toes doesn't necessarily sound like it would lead to less prep. Could be fun, though.

My focus would be on shared assets more than continuity. One party can go through the dungeon, then the GM could restock it and let the other go through without drawing up a new one.

a consideration not revealed in the OP - are they the same players? Or different players?

Different players, because I'm not excited about players using more than one PC. (Having a backup character is a different story.)

On the other hand, the idea of characters fighting a potent foe from another age who uses different rules, or maybe even inflicts different rules upon them... well, that's just a delightful idea- but it'd be quite a rare event, or it loses its weirdness and just becomes irritating.

I'm fine with a foe having new abilities, but having new rules sounds like it pushes on the metagaming barrier. It could be cool if it worked, though.

 

[Starglim]

Sure. It may harm the verisimilitude of a character if their concept is fairly committed to the lore of their setting or the continuity of their life (levels, being alive or otherwise, specific gear) and they've appeared in play in a setting or situation that definitely contradicts it. Some other characters positively thrive on paradoxes.