Should PCs from different RPGs be allowed to meet?

[Distracted DM]

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.

The rules are how we engage with the world- the characters wouldn't be aware of the foe's different rules any more than they're aware of saving throws- but they'd know that things weren't right.
The players of course would be hearing "make a save vs wand" or an old version of cloudkill

And frankly off the top of my head with the exception of more lethal spells, I struggle to think of how an enemy using, say, 2e rules would have an advantage over 5e characters. Maybe flipped AC or their saving throws being terribly different

Oh, Time Stop and no concentration I suppose

 

[aramis erak]

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

Then perhaps discussing games shouldn't be done... because there are a lot of those.
Mostly due to ignorance and/or incompetence; rarely, but still often enough, due to malice and/or self-gratification.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Then perhaps discussing games shouldn't be done... because there are a lot of those.
Mostly due to ignorance and/or incompetence; rarely, but still often enough, due to malice and/or self-gratification.

Nope. Bad GMs are not at all a reason to not discuss games.

Bad GMs are a table problem, a social problem, not a game problem.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Nope. Bad GMs are not at all a reason to not discuss games.

Bad GMs are a table problem, a social problem, not a game problem.

I think you're trying to separate two things that don't separate that way. They're intermixed in a way a lot of people don't want to admit.

 

[overgeeked]

I think you're trying to separate two things that don't separate that way. They're intermixed in a way a lot of people don't want to admit.

Regardless of your stance on player vs referee entitlement, power, etc...in games with referees, the referee is indistinguishable from the game. They are the game. No tabletop RPG will ever be any better or any worse than the referee running it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think you're trying to separate two things that don't separate that way. They're intermixed in a way a lot of people don't want to admit.

And I think you’re conflating two things that are separate.

Toxic people don’t get less toxic because you switch from trad RPGs to Story First games, or vice versa, or go from rules light to heavy crunch.

Game design should never be held hostage by the specter of toxic participants.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Regardless of your stance on player vs referee entitlement, power, etc...in games with referees, the referee is indistinguishable from the game. They are the game. No tabletop RPG will ever be any better or any worse than the referee running it.

And on the inverse, it takes a very good GM to be able to make a game that's bad or just badly suited for the group work for them. The meme about "a good GM can make a good session out of anything" is doing a lot of heavy lifting with "good".

 

[Thomas Shey]

And I think you’re conflating two things that are separate.

Toxic people don’t get less toxic because you switch from trad RPGs to Story First games, or vice versa, or go from rules light to heavy crunch.

Game design should never be held hostage by the specter of toxic participants.

And I think you're conflating toxic and the simply problematic.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

And I think you're conflating toxic and the simply problematic.

Only as shorthand, bc the difference doesn’t matter in this context.

Bad GM, bad player, whatever, it’s a table and social issue. The game rules should never be changed just to try to deal with things that people problems and not mechanics problems.

 

[aramis erak]

And I think you're conflating toxic and the simply problematic.

Concur. Not to mention that systems can trigger problematic in inexperienced and/or incompetent.