Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 2517429" data-attributes="member: 3192">First off, I'm no expert in game design or game theory even. While I do enjoy playing a lot of different games, RPGs are my favorite. So when I try all the different systems, old and new, I notice things that others probably already have a strong background in and language for. What I'm looking for is a discussion or a written work about the pros and cons of unified game system rpgs and organic rpgs. What follows are my own definitions of what these are to me; sort of where I'll be starting from when I read these (presupposed) articles. Unified mechanics are best exemplified by games like D20, D6, and Rolemaster. I don’t think a game with unified mechanics necessarily has to be for all genres, but it does have to have one (maybe two) core dice mechanics (maybe even diceless?) These are used in almost every situation. D20 uses the 20-sider + modifier vs. target number. D6 does something similar, but with dice pools. Tables tend to be scalable and linear. Separate systems (like jump & attack) mesh in mechanically predictable ways. This makes learning and extrapolating these systems simple and easy. It also allows for far less memorization of the rules. Organic systems are more like 1st edition AD&D. Older computer systems like DOS were built in the same manner. Instead of having a consistent, often repeated set of operatives, organic systems create entirely new rules for every common situation. So jumping gets its own completely unique set of rules, magic another, grappling a third, and so on and so on. The benefit of this system is every ‘effect’ is compartmentalized and potentially highly accurate. Jumping rules can be removed and replaced in whole without affecting any other part of the system. Also, because there are no predetermined resolution mechanics, the potentially best mechanic can be used in each and every situation. This allows for a great deal of customizability for the the user. But it also requires of them a lot of work too. While I haven’t listed any ‘cons’ of the game styles I presented, I did want to bring up another which sort of stands outside this theory. I’ve heard a lot of talk about what I’ll call Object-Based systems. If you know object based programming, then you probably know sort of what I’m referring too. I have seen this style a lot in optional magic systems like in Ars Magica, but GURPS tends to use it too. It’s sort of a hodge-podge, point buy where any type of character or magic can be created by combining pre-created rules packets. These don’t have to follow a unified mechanic per se, but they generally offer any manner of grouping the user can think up.Again, my question is whether there is anything out there that gets a little deeper than this? Perhaps a thread here or somewhere else? Maybe a comment? I don’t propose these are the greatest definitions for game theory, but I thought I would put them out there.</blockquote>

Verification