The Sort of TTRPGs You Want More (and Less) Of

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
I want a game that isn't afraid to make demands on the players and assumes that people who want to play it are both smart and dedicated to making the experience fun rather than looking to exploit every imperfection.

The game doesn't need to worry about being easy to run, because it is perfectly fine to make mistakes and get better with experience. And there are plenty of other games out there if you want to ease into it.

The game doesn't need to worry about not being overly complex. If you can achieve the same thing, then being simple is better. But if a little complexity adds to the richness, then this should not be shunned.

I want a game that goes in with eyes wide open that players who seek to destroy the experience may very well do exactly that, but the game isn't going to reign in the options of players who won't do that by adding rules simply designed to foolproof the balance.

I want a game that recognizes it can't cover every situation, so it creates a clear framework and then puts the burden on the players to work with that guidance to color outside the lines when needed.
Yeah, I can get behind nearly all of this. Your point about simplicity/complexity is bang on.

Perhaps the only things I'd prefer beyond this is that while the game isn't afraid to make demands on players, that it also remains playable when it doesn't make such demands, in order to allow for more casual types of play and-or players; and that the system be robust enough to be able to handle players who do try to exploit the imperfections (this probably needs a bit of rulings-not-rules ethos to allow the GM power to close loopholes as and when they appear).
 

DwarfHammer

Explorer
I want a game where the magic system is not meta. I like it to feel sword and sorcery and not magic mart. I like organic and natural rules opposed to meta rules.
 

BryonD

Adventurer
doesn't make such demands, in order to allow for more casual types of play and-or players
Yeah, this at all unreasonable to expect. I think we can already point to games which can be "complex" but a new player can run a relatively simple character and easily work with support from other players and the GM.

I think a perfect system would easily allow one person to be neck deep in designing their character exactly how they want, and the player next to him to just know what character they are playing, describe what they would like to do and then allow others to worry about the mechanics.

and that the system be robust enough to be able to handle players who do try to exploit the imperfections (this probably needs a bit of rulings-not-rules ethos to allow the GM power to close loopholes as and when they appear).
I can't argue with that, but if I had to choose between booting undermining players vs having rules that throat-punch undermining players but don't add to the game otherwise, then I vote for the boot.
 

dragoner

Dying in Chargen
You could look at Coriolis the Third Horizon by Free League. The system on the lighter side. It's an exploration game were characters own their ship from the start. They have to find jobs to pay their debt. Its comes with a complete and very original setting and space combat rules that gives a role to each character. Combat is very deadly so characters are always trying to avoid it or make sure they have the advantage. I did a mini-campaign of 7 games with it and it is easy to run.
I will have to look at it again. I liked the setting, though it didn't seem very rules light, hardish SF last time. Thank you.
 

Bedrockgames

Adventurer
Thought exercise: Take any single post that answers the OP. If that poster's desire became the norm in game publishing, how much would it please/displease you, and what proportion of gamers would be unhappy with that state of affairs?
 

Aldarc

Hero
Thought exercise: Take any single post that answers the OP. If that poster's desire became the norm in game publishing, how much would it please/displease you, and what proportion of gamers would be unhappy with that state of affairs?
Just to be clear, I'm not hoping that any answer becomes the monolithic norm in game publishing, only that people could find more of the sort of games they are looking for.

With Modern AGE you can select the level of lethality at the beginning of the game. Either Gritty (CoC), Pulp (Action Hero) or Heroic (D&D). Hit points and Healing are less generous at the two lower levels. Protection is Toughness. Armour is very rare - which makes sense in a Modern environment. The Companion book offers several alternate ideas to modulate damage vs protection. The simplest suggests adding +1d6 to every damage roll.
The Fantasy Age Companion throws out several ideas to combat the issues you mention. Most of them were pretty simple fixes as I recall (capping HP at a certain character level for example). I think it would address most of your issues (and I suspect the Companion material- or some of it anyway- will get rolled into the new book.
I have read the Fantasy Age Companion, but it kinda supports my point. The AGE system is somewhat shoddy due to its piecemeal design and likely needed more holistic testing for levels 1-20. The sense I got from a lot of people on the Green Ronin forums was that the AGE system could have used another pass of editing, balance rework, and the like. I still find it mostly fun and a good easy game, but for some reason the design feels slightly off for me. (I also prefer the Blue Rose AGE magic system, which is closer to how magic in True20 works.)

But the other issue some people have with AGE, myself included, is that support for the AGE system was so sluggish following its release that player support of the game likewise died. So many other systems released around that time took the wind out AGE's sails: e.g., Dungeon World, 5e D&D, Numenera/Cypher System, etc. And these games have greater official and 3pp support than AGE. So a part of AGE feels almost "too little, too late," which is sad.

Again, I am still interested in the new Fantasy AGE book, but Green Ronin has not been abundantly clear about whether this is just a new edition, a AGE patch, or just a repackaged core rulebook. We mainly have this blurb:
Since this year is also Freeport’s 20th anniversary, you know we had to do something to celebrate. And what brings people together like a marriage? This year we will finally wed Freeport and Fantasy AGE! Freeport is a setting I created, and Fantasy AGE is a game I designed, so it’s long past due that these two get hitched. This will begin at GenCon with the release of the Fantasy AGE Starter Set, a boxed introduction to both the game and Freeport. After that we’ll publish the Fantasy AGE Core Rulebook, a bigger, better rulebook for the game that features Freeport as its example setting.
I do think that AGE system is incredibly flexible, but I wish that Green Ronin would embrace AGE a bit more thoroughly and truly make a "TrueAGE" game that was a toolkit much as it had made True20 as one.
 
Thought exercise: Take any single post that answers the OP. If that poster's desire became the norm in game publishing, how much would it please/displease you, and what proportion of gamers would be unhappy with that state of affairs?
As far as (1) goes, I don’t care either way. I’m quite happy with the modern paradigm of gaming, with interesting design coming from all corners.

As far as (2) goes, I think the proportion of gamers that would be unhappy would be unbelievably remote regardless of what design impetus is catered to. Except perhaps for games that are unbelievably inaccessible because the rules are so weighty or opaque.

From all I’ve seen in real life, the overwhelming % of gamers are extremely casual and they just want a gaming culture that isn’t hostile, a greater culture that isn’t hostile to their gaming culture, and a game that isn’t brutally inaccessible so they can enjoy a relaxed leisure activity with friends.
 

schneeland

Explorer
From all I’ve seen in real life, the overwhelming % of gamers are extremely casual and they just want a gaming culture that isn’t hostile, a greater culture that isn’t hostile to their gaming culture, and a game that isn’t brutally inaccessible so they can enjoy a relaxed leisure activity with friends.
Quite accurate. Even one of my friends who I play with for 20 years now, commented "you know, it's mostly you who's bothered by these design problems" when I talked some perceived deficiencies of a new system we used for our play style. As long as the GM bends the rules a bit to suit the group, most players will not complain.
 

RSIxidor

Explorer
I want more of two types of RPGs.
1. Narrative focused RPGs (the sort where the fiction is put first, and rules are secondary)
2. Tactically-focused RPGs (the sort where character optimization can be fairly detailed)

Each of these scratch a particular itch of mine. Setting can be anything for either sort.
 

DwarfHammer

Explorer
I'm curious. Would you mind expanding what you mean by this?
first. No company will ever make the game or magic system I want. That’s cool because what I want isn’t marketable or what other people want. So I’m cool with people not wanting that.

I don’t like magic systems that feel like superheroes using their energy blast or hear vision. That’s fine for Superman, firestorm, and captain atom.

I like material components to be important and need to be located or foraged for. I like sigil and magic diagrams, constellations and the positions of stars being important. Summoning spells are either making pact or binding another creature to your will.

curses and the evil eye and hexes are to be feared.
Magic takes so much to learn that you don’t just decide to pick a level in wizard or cleric next time you level up.
 

JeffB

Legend
a bunch of good stuff
Totally agreed that the game needs some tweaking, but I believe the overall play merits far outweigh the cleanup needed.

And also totally agree with you on the lack of FAGE support. With Owen K.C Stephens now heading up the line (last I heard), I am hopeful we will see more FAGE materials.
 

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
Quite accurate. Even one of my friends who I play with for 20 years now, commented "you know, it's mostly you who's bothered by these design problems" when I talked some perceived deficiencies of a new system we used for our play style. As long as the GM bends the rules a bit to suit the group, most players will not complain.
Yup. I'm that guy in my group, too. It's why I'll rant about my pet peeves in game designs but we play pretty much bog standard by the book games without a lot of house rules. Not worth the effort for the return. The house rules I do have are flavorful and tuned to the specific game I'm running to emphasize a theme.
 

Aldarc

Hero
I don’t like magic systems that feel like superheroes using their energy blast or hear vision. That’s fine for Superman, firestorm, and captain atom.
At first glance, this seems like Blue Rose, where there is a prevalent lack of blasting magic. It's typical magic covers things like psychic powers, divination, elemental shaping, animism, and meditation. Blasting magic does exist, albeit as dark, corruptive "sorcery." However, it is a setting where is magic is more akin to talents or powers, so it is "at-will," but cast against fatigue checks.

I like material components to be important and need to be located or foraged for. I like sigil and magic diagrams, constellations and the positions of stars being important. Summoning spells are either making pact or binding another creature to your will.

curses and the evil eye and hexes are to be feared.
I get this. One of my favorite summoning mages I have seen has been in Invisible Sun by the Goetic "class." Every time that you summon a creature (e.g., demon, spirit, angel, fey, etc.), the summoner has to negotiate the cost and task. I too would enjoy - for certain settings and/or games - a greater weight to the magical process and distinctions between magical types.

For one campaign setting idea that I brainstormed, I wanted to toy with a world where the constellations embodied divine figures, astrology was real and suggestive of a person's nature, fate, and divine favor. And star priests served as astrologers and astronomers who divined the future, portents, and divine will from the stars, used astrology to play matchmakers, and called upon the astral heavens for blessings.

So I also would definitely be interested in something other than just repackaged D&D-style spell slot magic.

Totally agreed that the game needs some tweaking, but I believe the overall play merits far outweigh the cleanup needed.
I do agree that it remains a solid game. What I would probably prefer is something more akin to a True20 version of the AGE system. Blue Rose (AGE) is probably the closest version, as its magic system most closely harkens back to how it was in Blue Rose/True20, but I don't see FAGE going in that direction.
 
First what I want more of is games like Monsterhearts (although please not exactly like Monsterhearts!) that take a genre that I'd never have thought of setting anything in and show me, in a highly playable game, why the entire genre of fiction is a good one I should be interested in and why I would want to play in that setting.

Contrary to those who'd like to see system and setting tied together, I'd like to see the exact opposite.

Why?

Because given the complexity and time involved in learning most RPG systems, system-learning is something I only want to do once. Ever. I most assuredly don't want to have to learn a new system every time I want to change the tone or type of game I'm running or playing.
On the toher hand I find much more tightly focussed rules tend to be a whole lot easier to learn than e.g. D&D with far fewer edge cases.

Which leads to the second thing I want more of - games where you do not need to look anything up in the rulebook in play.
 

Advertisement

Top