Single System Monogamy

[kronovan]

I'm by no means system monogamous, but there's limits to how system polygamous I am. I tend towards homebrewing, so my preference is universal gaming systems. That said, of the 10 or so TTRPGs I own, despite giving them a college try, none of them have proven adequate for every genre. My current universal games systems and preferred genres for them are:

• SWADE - Use it for all Pulp subgenres, Cyberpunk, Steampunk, Dieselpunk, Action-Horror, as well as Military SciFi, Sword & Sorcery and Historical Fantasy which have a strong cinematic vibe.
• BRP/Mythras - Use it for all Historical Fantasy, Horror and Sword & Sorcery when I really want to turn up the grit (love Mythras for this.)
• CoC 7 - not so much of a universal system for me, it's the only TTRPG I now use for Lovecraftian/Cosmic Horror.
• True20 - Use it for Fantasy-SciFi and Epic/Heroic Fantasy settings and homebrews I originally brewed for d20. As well, with wounds instead of HPs and the frequent anxiety of Toughness saves Vs Damage, I've also found (via Shadows of Cthulhu & its sanity rules) that it can adequately support Cosmic Horror.
• 13th Age - Use it for any setting that was written for any flavor of D&D, including 1 of my own homebrews. Homebrewing monster/NPCs is IMO far from easy with the system, but reskinning is doable; just a challenge if a similar threat isn't available via some 3rd party settting.
• Traveller/Cepheus Engine - use them for Military SciFi, Hard SciFi, Space Opera as well as Sword & Sorcery (Sword of Cepheus) where the party of PCs will start as more seasoned. The knock against both is that its a big time sink to homebrew custom Careers. CE with its ever growing list of 3rd party settings though, is helping by giving career examples to milk & borrow from.
• 2d20 - While I've given a few of Modiphus' settings a try, my players and I have only liked it for Star Trek Adventures.
• AGE - I have my own MidAGE hack which combines elements of Fantasy Age with Dragon Age. I brewed it up to better support the AGE appendix in the original Midgard Campaign setting book and to smooth out some rough edges in DA. I've also used if for a DA campaign which went well. I own the Modern Age and Expanse books, but have only run 1-shot adventures. ModAge's concept of modes though is IMO worth the price of purchase; also has other good features among its pages.
• ICONS - Now using it for any Supers subgenre.

Of all the TTRPGS I use, none tops SWADE for ease of homebrewing. Due to the simplicity of its Extras, It's the only TTRPG I own where I can brew up NPCs on the fly. If I know I'm going to very limited on prep time, I tend to fall back on SWADE.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Context is a thing. I was talking about RPGs.

It's a pretty silly argument, though. Mork Borg is a runaway hit that has created a huge cottage industry of third-party supplements, entirely different games, etc. It's inarguably one of the big RPG successes of recent years. If you've played any version of D&D, it would be hard to take even 15 minutes to learn it. The fact that it's quick to pick up doesn't mean it's not a satisfying game.

And even going up the complexity scale a little, most RPGs, especially in the fantasy RPG space, take maybe 30 minutes to learn, at most. If you wanted to try Dungeon Crawl Classics, for instance, most of that 30 minutes would be flipping through the cool art or laughing at the random effects for some of the spells.

No one has to play any games they don't want to -- and it certainly isn't the mark of mental illness or any nonsense like that -- but "it's going to be too difficult to learn or, if it's not too difficult, the game will be terrible" isn't an argument that makes sense when talking about the vast majority of 21st century games.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It's a pretty silly argument, though. Mork Borg is a runaway hit that has created a huge cottage industry of third-party supplements, entirely different games, etc. It's inarguably one of the big RPG successes of recent years. If you've played any version of D&D, it would be hard to take even 15 minutes to learn it. The fact that it's quick to pick up doesn't mean it's not a satisfying game.

Either you're not understanding me, or you're making a statement that I pretty strongly disagree with. I'll try it again.

Not everyone finds simple games satisfying.

I don't. I can't think of a single game below what I'd call moderate complexity I find satisfying. So my statement is definitionally correct. I at no point said how many people feel that way.

And even going up the complexity scale a little, most RPGs, especially in the fantasy RPG space, take maybe 30 minutes to learn, at most. If you wanted to try Dungeon Crawl Classics, for instance, most of that 30 minutes would be flipping through the cool art or laughing at the random effects for some of the spells.

No one has to play any games they don't want to -- and it certainly isn't the mark of mental illness or any nonsense like that -- but "it's going to be too difficult to learn or, if it's not too difficult, the game will be terrible" isn't an argument that makes sense when talking about the vast majority of 21st century games.

At what point in my statement did I even imply I was talking about everybody, or even the majority?

 

[RareBreed]

I'm not suggesting your interest in a wide range of games is narrow-minded. I'm saying your inability to accept that some people feel differently is narrow-minded -- especially the fact that you think it is genuinely unhealthy for them to enjoy their hobby in a way that is different to you. The fact you are stating you would literally be concerned for someone's well-being simply due to them have an interest in only a limited range of movies is ... concerning.

As I said, I can't force someone to do more diverse things, but I believe I should point out that it's really not in their own best interests. Also, "lecture" can have two connotations. One as in scolding, or somehow making the person feel like they are a disappointment. The second, as in being educational and providing new information or insight. The former is not my intention.

I have learned that people aren't aware for example, that white rice has a glycemic index of 96 (table sugar is 100 as a point of reference), and didn't realize that overeating rice led them to become prediabetic. Some of these acquaintances are part of the Filipino community I sometimes hang out with, and when I tell them that their consumption of rice could be a factor, they say they can't stop eating so much rice and that "it's part of my identity", I will go deeper into how insulin response and sensitivity works, and the consequences of diabetes (my brother is type 2 diabetic). I've also talked to some other acquaintances at work who didn't even know other TTRPG's other than 5e existed. This lack of information...whether about glycemic indexes or not knowing other games existed was not their fault. One of the best ways to get someone to NOT listen to advice is to scold or chide them.

I also think there's an assumption here that "entertainment" is really not that important, and so therefore, because it's "just" entertainment, one should allowed to do whatever they please. Of course yes, you are allowed to do whatever you please, but I would argue that it's not "just entertainment we're talking about.

Entertainment can be a rather large source of learning and even a sense of identity. I would argue that roleplaying isn't just entertainment, it's a hobby, perhaps even a kind of way of life for some with our own subculture and in-jokes. How many people here cherish their identity as roleplaying game hobbyists? How much of your life has it taken up? How much of it has crossed over into other parts of your life? This is true whether you are a sports fan, an athlete yourself, a hunter, a woodworker, etc etc.

So, this hobby of ours not only gives us an identity, it helps shape how we see things...just as education in school does. Just as what we watch on TV or movies do. The games we play become a window into what we learn and how we imagine.

Furthermore, how fair is it to others in the gaming group who may wish to play something else, but the majority refuse? I have seen this so often on these forums it isn't funny. Things like "I wish I could play system X, but I know no one in my group will give it a chance". If 4 players only want to play X, and 2 want to play Y, is that fair to the group in the minority? Perhaps it even got to the point that they feel like they shouldn't even bring it up.

 

[SableWyvern]

As I said, I can't force someone to do more diverse things, but I believe I should point out that it's really not in their own best interests.

Ok, so if it's in my own best interests to watch a wide variety of movies, what are the minimum number of movies I should watch per year for good mental health, and how many different genres should I watch? If I only watch four movies a year, will that be unhealthy? Should I be watching a minimum of eight movies a year, across a minimum of four genres? How do you arrive at the numbers you've chosen, and what dire perils will I face if I choose to watch (shock horror!) zero movies?

Entertainment can be a rather large source of learning and even a sense of identity. I would argue that roleplaying isn't just entertainment, it's a hobby, perhaps even a kind of way of life for some with our own subculture and in-jokes. How many people here cherish their identity as roleplaying game hobbyists? How much of your life has it taken up? How much of it has crossed over into other parts of your life? This is true whether you are a sports fan, an athlete yourself, a hunter, a woodworker, etc etc.

So, this hobby of ours not only gives us an identity, it helps shape how we see things...just as education in school does. Just as what we watch on TV or movies do. The games we play become a window into what we learn and how we imagine.

Yet again, this is you arrogantly deciding you speak for everyone and telling us all what roleplaying can and does mean to us. You simply don't have that right, and I find it deeply disturbing that you genuinely feel that you think you can tell me that I would be better off if I treated roleplaying as "a way of life". I love sport, but I find it very concerning when people live vicariously through the teams they follow, to the point that they allow success in a game they are merely watching to dramatically impact their everyday lives. That's what's unhealthy, not the ability to understand it's just a game.

Furthermore, how fair is it to others in the gaming group who may wish to play something else, but the majority refuse?

This is a what's known as a strawman. At no point have I suggested that anyone should preventing other people from playing the games they wanted to.

However, based on your comments to this point, I find it not at all surprising that you would consider it unfair if a gaming group didn't bow to your demands to play a game that only you were interested in. "If I want to play Chasms and Chimeras, but my friends don't want to, it's totally unfair and they're bad, unhealthy people who should cater to my needs and preferences before any of their own. I shouldn't have to confirm to them, the should conform to me. But it's not out of selfishness that I want this. It's for their own good!"

 

[RareBreed]

I realize you might get more nutrients from
Multiple fruits…

But this quote is solely “bananas.”

What on earth then would you say to the population of people that have never tried an RPG?

I would say good for them

I am not saying everyone must play a variety of TTRPGs. But TTRPGs, are a combination of many things. They are part art, part entertainment, part hobby, and part education.
EDIT: The emphases should be must play. You can always choose not to play at all. It's a hobby and we all only have a limited amount of time to spend on a hobby

• If you are going to watch TV, should you only watch one show? or one genre?
• If you are going to eat pizza, should it only ever be with one set of toppings from the same restaurant?
• If you are going to read books, should it only ever be from one author, or one genre?
• If you are going to listen to music, should it only be from one artist or one genre?

You don't have to watch TV, or eat pizza, or read books, or listen to music. You can get information and entertainment from other sources. You could watch movies instead, or surf the web. Ok, so lets try that exercise again

• If you are going to watch movies, should it only be one franchise, or one genre?
• If you are going to surf the web, should it only be from one website?

Do you see the pattern yet?

I watch a variety of shows and movies. I listen to everything from classical to rock. I have books on my bookshelf from religion, philosophy, computer science, math, anthropology and diet and nutrition just to name a few. I play computer games from real-time strategy, to simultation, to roleplaying, to FPS.

In fact, I'd say there's something almost kind of unique about TTRPG'ers. It's about the only hobby I am aware of, where many of its hobbyists only want to participate in a single form of its expression. My mom loves gardening and loves lillies, but she also plants roses, dahlias, and many more. Most sports fans I know of love more than a single sport. PC and console gamers play all kinds of new games.

I'm not sure what it is why the TTRPG hobby has quite a few people who only want to play a single genre or even a single game system in a single setting. I honestly can't think of other hobby's with this (perhaps some art or music because it takes a very long time to build up skill with a single instrument, but even there, most musicians will play music from many periods).

 

[RareBreed]

I'm not sure what it is why the TTRPG hobby has quite a few people who only want to play a single genre or even a single game system in a single setting. I honestly can't think of other hobby's with this (perhaps some art or music because it takes a very long time to build up skill with a single instrument, but even there, most musicians will play music from many periods).

Ok, just thought of another. Most writers only write for a single genre like mystery, sci-fi, fantasy, etc. Of course, I'm thinking of professional writers, so perhaps hobbyist/amateur writers are different. A professional writer has to sell their work, so it might behoove them to get really good at a single genre.

Still, I wonder if there's a connection there. I swear, sometimes I feel like some game designers deep down really want to be authors. When I see 300+ page rule books filled with exposition and narrative story telling, and the rules could be condensed to about 30pages or less, I've become more and more convinced of this.

 

[SableWyvern]

I watch a variety of shows and movies. I listen to everything from classical to rock. I have books on my bookshelf from religion, philosophy, computer science, math, anthropology and diet and nutrition just to name a few. I play computer games from real-time strategy, to simultation, to roleplaying, to FPS.

And if you do it, everyone should do it!

This may come as a shock to you, but there are lots of people who only read on genre of fiction. You might be even more shocked to learn that some people won't read fiction at all, and will only read non-fiction.

Some people who play computer games limit themselves to one or small number of genres.

Some people do get their pizza from the same place, and order the same thing. (Everyone in my RPG group tends to do this; we only change when our preferred pizza place shuts down or goes down in quality. There is then a period of testing out new places, until we all settle into our new preferred pizza).

Many people only listen to a limited number of musical genres.

As much as you want your experience to be universal, the fact is that all of those things are perfectly normal, and ok, even though they don't align with your own preferences. If you insist on going through life lecturing people for their own good when they feel differently than you about these types of things, you are going to experience a lot of issues, and you will actually find people are less willing to play the game you want to play, because you've already put them off-side. If you treat people with respect, and don't act like you know better than them, you'll find they're far more likely agree to do something you would like to do, but which they're unsure about.

 

[Lanefan]

As I said, I can't force someone to do more diverse things, but I believe I should point out that it's really not in their own best interests. Also, "lecture" can have two connotations. One as in scolding, or somehow making the person feel like they are a disappointment. The second, as in being educational and providing new information or insight. The former is not my intention.

Yet the former will come across as the result, notwithstanding.

Furthermore, how fair is it to others in the gaming group who may wish to play something else, but the majority refuse? I have seen this so often on these forums it isn't funny. Things like "I wish I could play system X, but I know no one in my group will give it a chance". If 4 players only want to play X, and 2 want to play Y, is that fair to the group in the minority? Perhaps it even got to the point that they feel like they shouldn't even bring it up.

So you're suggesing instead that the majority should bend to the minority?

Last I checked, that ain't how democracy works.

 

[RareBreed]

As much as you want your experience to be universal, the fact is that all of those things are perfectly normal, and ok, even though they don't align with your own preferences. If you insist on going through life lecturing people for their own good when they feel differently than you about these types of things, you are going to experience a lot of issues, and you will actually find people are less willing to play the game you want to play, because you've already put them off-side. If you treat people with respect, and don't act like you know better than them, you'll find they're far more likely agree to do something you would like to do, but which they're unsure about.

Should we not inform people that there are benefits to new things and expand our horizons? Should we not challenge others to try something new because the argument is that only one way is good enough?

Is it now considered condescending to point out that there are other ideas in games (and hobbies in general) that they may not only enjoy, but broaden their views?

At work we try to be more diverse. At school, we try to have a broad and expansive education. Has it become offensive now to try to bring this to the pursuit of a hobby or other form of entertainment or even enjoyment?

One of the points I am trying to make, is that our entertainment, and especially our hobbies, become a part of us. They might even influence us more than what we learned in school (for better or worse). I credit roleplaying in my very young years with a lot of who I am today. Playing Twilight 2000 kicked off my interest in geopolitics and the military. Fantasy combat wanted me to try to find the answer of the age old question of, "who's better, a European fencer or a Japanese samurai" by taking a year of fencing and a year of aikido (and many other martial arts down the road). Playing Justice Inc, Gangbusters and Call of Cthulhu got me interested in the 1920s and 30s and the lead up to WW2. Being a GM I think helped me get over a lot of my shyness when I was younger. In other words, this isn't just entertainment, and it does (or at least can) have a big impact on people's lives.

My point is we should be broadening our horizons. It's your right to ignore my suggestions or not even hear me, and it's my right to point out the benefits of diversity and drawbacks of a single point of view. It's even ok to find what I am saying offensive. Challenge, almost by definition, requires discomfort and some kind of offense (to our bodies, our sensibilities, our beliefs, etc etc).

EDIT: My rights within the limits of the policies of the forum Since I am in danger of promoting a One True Way, I will respectfully stop on these forums