Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5615311" data-attributes="member: 54877">There is a concept that I've been mucking around with for some time now, that I think may help in this quest, which I call, "specialization is its own reward." Or since it is meant to be prescriptive, more formally, "specialization should be its own reward, and only its own reward." This is based on real-world expectations, and the Adam Smith economic concept that, given a sufficiently open market (and "sufficient" isn't a very high bar), the most productive course (for the group) is for everyone to do what they do best. In game terms, or in the OPs terms, the analogue would be for Timmy, Johnny, and Spike to all do what they do best. Nevertheless, people often remain somewhat generalist in outlook, if only to understand how to cook their own dinner or pursue hobbies or simply a felt preference to broaden ones' experience. That is, some people aren't brain surgeons because they have other specialties. And some people aren't brain surgeons because they don't have the ability. But a non-neglible set of people aren't brain surgeons because dedicating yourself to that kind of career implies a cutting off of other things that, on balance, the person isn't willing to give up. The opportunity cost of, "Having a life," for example, is a constraint on specialists that doesn't exist, usually, in roleplaying games. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> So one way to let all three types play together is to design a system that will be somewhat self-regulating at the table. The more things are pushed, the harder they get--and this escalates as choices are made. When you push to be the greatest mage in this century, you aren't only hitting a set number in a game, but pushing the definition of what "great mage" means. GURPS is, I believe, aiming for a bit of this with the way skills rapidly escalate in costs, but fails to achieve it in that it is fixed in the game system, and not tied appropriately to the rest of the game to give feedback results. (In effect, what GURPS does is apply an effective cap, that moves within a narrow band, for given point totals. I'm not sure if 4E changed this or not.) What you want, then, is that all three play styles are optimum--up to a point--and the point has lots of wiggle room, but it is there. Timmy is encouraged to go for the big bang by the system. And then because he is Timmy, he pushed a bit beyond that, and becomes not so efficient anymore. OTOH, if Spike is really all that worried about staying efficient, then he becomes somewhat of a generalist, but never gets the big result without ad hoc combinations. You can't do a game that has lots of niche protection and encourages rabid specialization, and cover all three guys--not within the system. (You can have a game that encourages that style and lots of handwaving to keep them all going.) If you want them all to sit at the same table, make the generalist the most efficient character, but the specialists still do meaningful things that the generalist can not. Then specialization will be its own reward, and the players can pick their sweet spot.</blockquote>

Verification