What do you Consider to be a "Unique" Mechanic?

[Hussar]

I was having a discussion the other day about D&D and I mentioned, (as I've mentioned on these boards before) that I thought that 4e and 5e share a lot of mechanics. My conversation partner disagreed and I brought up the notion of short and long rest. The whole two step recovery system, while slightly different in the in-game time requirements) work exactly the same way. They're the same mechanic, just with a minor variation. The other person totally disagreed with me and stated that the change in time requirements made the two systems completely different.

I've run into this sort of thing elsewhere too. Talking about classes and how the classes don't really have any new mechanics - it's all X abilities/Y time period. The effects might be different, but, the mechanics are the same. Being immune to X or Y isn't two mechanics, it's just one mechanic (immunity to ) with a different effect.

Do you consider each spell to be a unique mechanic? Or, are the underlying mechanics (level, casting time, etc) pretty much the same for all spells, which only differ by effect.

I guess my basic question is, is effect enough to make for a completely new mechanic? In my mind, it doesn't. A sword and a dagger deal different damage, but, the mechanics of both are identical. 3e skills and 5e skills work exactly the same - roll a d20 plus a modifier vs a DC. There are differences of course, the DC's in 5e are capped by bounded accuracy, but, the mechanic is the same.

Or, am I stuck on too narrow a definition?

 

[aramis erak]

Well... let's just look at dice rolling for a moment...

1. 1d, roll over a TN
2. 1d, roll under a TN
3. 1d, roll a specific number or number-range. (usually but not always equivalent equivalent to #2).
4. Xd, roll and total for TN+
5. Xd, roll and total for TN-
6. Xd, roll and count individual dice for N+
7. Xd, roll and count individual dice for N-
8. Xd, roll and count number of dice that match
9. Xd, roll and count how many are needed to exceed a TN
10. Xd, roll and count how many fit under a TN
11. 1d, check symbol for result or compare on chart
12. Xd, total symbols for result or chart comparison
13. Yd Y≥2, read sequentially for TN+
14. Yd Y≥2, read sequentially for TN -
15. Yd, Y≥2, read sequentially for a table lookup
16. Yd, Y≥2, read symbols (or tables) in sequence for sequential results.

Note that N+ vs N- is often considered equivalent... but there is a difference in the experiential result for a great many people, even if the odds are identical.

For all the dice pools above, the question of "how do I get the dice"

1. Fixed number of dice for all rolls
2. Dice by abilities of character
3. Dice by difficulty
4. Dice by expendable spend
5. Dice by assignment (party or GM)
6. mixture of the above types.

there are several variations on the table/symbol modes

part one: the individual dice

1. Good results only
   1. only one result type
   2. multiple result types
2. Bad Results only
   1. only one result type
   2. multiple result types
3. Mixed results on a single die
   1. Good results and bad results on separate faces (Fudge/Fate)
   2. Good results with some having bad results (FFG WFRP3)
   3. Bad results with some having good results
   4. Both with some overlap

Part 2 symbolic dice systems

1. baseline
   1. Good dice from abilities only, TN by one symbol type
   2. Good dice from abilities, bad dice from difficulty
   3. Bad dice from difficulty, no good dice
2. How many symbol sets per die
   1. only one outcome type per die. (At this point, it may as well be a count success on n+ system, possibly with multiple n+ thresholds)
   2. Multiple outcome types per die.
3. How many dice types?
   1. Only one -
      1. not common with symbolic dice, but Modiphius' 2d20 system effect dice are thus. They're also straight good dice.
      2. Fate and Fudge both use a net neutral die, and it's always 4 of them.
   2. some good, some bad
   3. multiple, all good
   4. multiple, all bad.
   5. Multiple, some good, some bad, an a type that's neutral.
4. how many symbol families
   1. Success/Fail
   2. Side effects good/bad
   3. crits good/bad
   4. resource depletion
   5. damage accrual

Take L5R 5e for example
2 dice types, both are 3 good and 1 bad result, all bad results are on faces with good results, no cancelations. Axis 1: Success 1 or 1+Reroll. Axis 2: opportunity - beneficial modifiers to the success, beneficial side effects, or failure mitigations. Axis 3: strife - essentially mental damage.

And Fate/Fudge: 1 die type, always rolled 4 at a time, all dice neutral, with cancellation of Good and Bad results across the dice. Net range, +4 to -4, nice bell.

Advanced Heroquest - two symbolic dice types... one for heroes, one for monsters. Both are specifc faces and could easily be replaced entirely by N- or N+, as you're only looking for one type at a time... but the thematic feel of the dice is more than just the math.

And, for comparison, Modiphius system
The basic success failure is Xd20 each individually for Att+Skill or less, with nat 1 or Focus or less generating a second success on the die, 20 generating a complication (even if a 20 is, for some reason, a success). The number of dice is 2, plus more if expendables expended...
The effect dice have two axises damage and effect; both are good; which you want is variable by the situation and your narration.

I've seen almost all of the above at one point or another in the 350+ RPG games I've read and 200+ I've run or played. A few I've not. And I've seen multi-axis results out of numeric dice... but can't remember the specifics of the One Roll Engine's dice... how many dice in the kept set, how big the number is. And I seem to recall something about how many sets are formed.

And I've not even touched on how opposed rolls are to be made. And only one offhand reference to open-ending.

There's a lot of room, but I'm hard pressed to think of any that haven't been tried between tthe various storygames and more traditional storygames...

So, for me, anything on the lists above are novel... but there are some novel combinations left... tho' many of those would not be good combinations.

 

[Leatherhead]

3e skills and 5e skills work exactly the same - roll a d20 plus a modifier vs a DC. There are differences of course, the DC's in 5e are capped by bounded accuracy, but, the mechanic is the same.

Bounded Accuracy and the Skill Point system are different mechanics, even if they both ride on the core D20 resolution mechanic.

For a better example, lets consider how many mechanics go into healing spells. Specifically Cure Wounds VS Healing Word.

The concept of healing damage requires the separate mechanic of dealing damage. Though directly related under the umbrella of hit points, they are different.

Firstly. The concept of a spell. Spells are multi-mechanical things. You have class spell lists, spells known, spell level, spell slots, spells prepared, and spellcasting ability modifier. (which also requires the mechanics behind the stat system). That's 7 mechanics just to tell you what a spell is.

Next we have to know how to use a spell. You have Casting Time, Range/Area, Targets, Components (arguably 4 mechanics), Duration, Concentration, School, Saving throws/Attack Rolls (which also requires the mechanics behind proficiency bonus). That's at least 8 more and we haven't even broken down what the spell effect is.

Finally there is the spell effect. Which is where the magic happens, literally. In the case of both these spells, you also need to know the mechanics of rolling a die, creature types, and upcasting.

Now, out of all of these mechanics. The spells in question only differ on 5 points: Spell lists, Action, Range, Components, and the Die used (arguably not a different mechanic, but still). They have far more in common than different. You could argue that they are the same mechanic. But in practice they do not produce the same game-feel at all, even when used for the exact same purpose of healing people (one requires you to put yourself in danger on the front line, the other lets you attain a similar end result from the comfort of range while you do something else). And this makes them undeniably distinct mechanics.

This leaves the question: "How Distinct does something have to be in order for it to be considered Unique?" For me, I would consider anything distinct enough to produce a different playstyle while using the same background mechanics, especially when used for the same purpose, to be "Unique enough." Which means I would consider Healing Word and Cure Wounds to be unique mechanics.

Likewise, I wouldn't consider a motorcycle and a pickup truck to be the same machine, even if they both powered by internal combustion engines and use tires to get around. Even when both are used for simple commuting, they just don't operate the same.

 

[Hussar]

@aramis erak It would be rather rare, however, to find multiple die mechanics in the same game in modern RPG's. Other than AD&D, most games used one, maybe two different die mechanics for the game.

 

[Hussar]

Bounded Accuracy and the Skill Point system are different mechanics, even if they both ride on the core D20 resolution mechanic.

For a better example, lets consider how many mechanics go into healing spells. Specifically Cure Wounds VS Healing Word.

The concept of healing damage requires the separate mechanic of dealing damage. Though directly related under the umbrella of hit points, they are different.

Firstly. The concept of a spell. Spells are multi-mechanical things. You have class spell lists, spells known, spell level, spell slots, spells prepared, and spellcasting ability modifier. (which also requires the mechanics behind the stat system). That's 7 mechanics just to tell you what a spell is.

Next we have to know how to use a spell. You have Casting Time, Range/Area, Targets, Components (arguably 4 mechanics), Duration, Concentration, School, Saving throws/Attack Rolls (which also requires the mechanics behind proficiency bonus). That's at least 8 more and we haven't even broken down what the spell effect is.

Finally there is the spell effect. Which is where the magic happens, literally. In the case of both these spells, you also need to know the mechanics of rolling a die, creature types, and upcasting.

Now, out of all of these mechanics. The spells in question only differ on 5 points: Spell lists, Action, Range, Components, and the Die used (arguably not a different mechanic, but still). They have far more in common than different. You could argue that they are the same mechanic. But in practice they do not produce the same game-feel at all, even when used for the exact same purpose of healing people (one requires you to put yourself in danger on the front line, the other lets you attain a similar end result from the comfort of range while you do something else). And this makes them undeniably distinct mechanics.

I would argue that it's one mechanic - spell casting. The effects are irrelevant to the mechanics. My mechanics don't change based on what spell I cast - all spells use the same mechanics - on my turn (or possibly as a reaction), I take an action to cast a spell. Fell is also irrelevant to mechanics. I would argue that you have one mechanic - spell casting - that covers multiple effects. It's no different than saying that swords and bows use the same mechanics. They do. Deal the same damage, although one can be used at range while the other in melee, the mechanics don't change - roll a d20, add modifiers, see if you deal damage. In this case it's Take an action, heal X damage. Everything else is largely irrelevant to the mechanic.

This leaves the question: "How Distinct does something have to be in order for it to be considered Unique?" For me, I would consider anything distinct enough to produce a different playstyle while using the same background mechanics, especially when used for the same purpose, to be "Unique enough." Which means I would consider Healing Word and Cure Wounds to be unique mechanics.

Likewise, I wouldn't consider a motorcycle and a pickup truck to be the same machine, even if they both powered by internal combustion engines and use tires to get around. Even when both are used for simple commuting, they just don't operate the same.

But, there are no "motorcycle" or "pickup truck" mechanics (heh, you know what I mean). They are real world objects. Mechanics have no real world analogues at all. They are game abstractions.

So, to me, a spell point system is a different mechanic to the standard D&D Vancian system, because they don't actually share any mechanics. But a cleric or a wizard use the same mechanics - vancian casting. Warlocks might be different enough, although, really, the only difference is in number of spells, rather than any difference in how those spells are used at the table.

Now, I'd argue that Paladin Lay on Hands is different from Cleric healing spells, since Paladins use a point pool and healing spells are tied into the casting mechanics.

 

[Leatherhead]

So, to me, a spell point system is a different mechanic to the standard D&D Vancian system, because they don't actually share any mechanics.

That's an interesting example to bring up. Because they are nearly the same mechanic as filtered through a different UI. They would be exactly the same if you had the ability to cast Fireball with a 5th level spell slot and get a 2nd level spell slot back as change, and combine lower level slots into a higher level slot.

 

[pemerton]

@Hussar, I think some spells introduce their own mechanices - consider eg the classic AD&D Maze spell, which uses a distinctinve INT-based mechanic to determine how long the target is trapped in the extra-dimensional maze.

But I agree with you that once we have (a) a damage-type mechanics, and (b) a bolt spell mechanics, then Lightning Bolt and Fire Bolt are just two variants of the same mechanic. The 4e DMG (I thikn it is) gives a similar example in its discussion of house rules and making stuff up as a GM, of a fire lizard and an ice lizard.

Likewise I tend to agree with you that changing the rest duration is just a mechanical variant givn that the game already includes the idea of durations, including recovery durations, that vary by ingame time.

My rough criterion would be is this just varying a parameter of some existing system element along an established axis of variation. I think this is true for some spells but not all. It's certainly true for most weapons (like your sword/dagger example). And many class abilities but maybe not all - eg I think hunter's quarry/warlock's curse were a new mechanic with 4e. (But not two new mechanics - they're two variations on the same basic thing.)

 

[pemerton]

A follow-up to the above: a new effect can certainly in some cases be a new mechanic.

Eg in Burning Wheel each player character has a Circles stat, which can be used for a check like any other ability/skill. The DC is determined by the sort of NPC the player wants his/her PC to meet, and the effect of a successful check is that the PC meets the desired NPC.

From the point of view of PC build rules, and basic resolution method, there is nothing that distinguishes Circles from (say) the Speed atrribute or the Sword skill. But in terms of purposes and resolution outcome, it is very different. In the RPGs I know (far fewer than @aramis erak upthread) the only one I can think of that has something similar is the Streetwise skill in early versions of Traveller (later versions, including the 1981 edit/reprint, changed the skill description to reduce the element of player authorship).

 

[Ulfgeir]

Regarding spell-casting, I see the following as different mechanics:

• Vancian - Once cast, the spell is expended and cannot be cast again, until prepared anew. Subtypes of this would be using spell slots, where you cast any spell you know of a certain level, and expend the slot and spell points.
• You have to spend mana or similar energy to cast a spell, but you can cast as many spells you like as long as you have mana to spend (which can come from mana stored in crystals or similar - in effect "external batteries"). Dresden Files rpg, and Call of Cthulhu are two examples.
• You can gain exhaustion/wounds (can be seen as a subtype of the mana-version). When you cast a spell, you may get exhaustion/wounds, but depends on how well you roll when casting the spell, as long as you have the ability to take more exhaustion/wounds. Examples would be Shadowrun.

And then we have 2 different types of casting (Dresden Files uses both):

• Short-timed things done in combat. Takes 1 or a few rounds to cast.
• Long-time rituals. These often have a more narrative effect.

And different effects of magic:

• Combat - use magical energy to damage someone. The specifics such as fire/electricity/force is irrelevant.
• Healing - Infuse the target with magical energy that heals it/even brings someone back from the dead. Might involve transferring part of your/someone elses life-force.
• Manipulation - use magic energy to animate objects/use force to keep someone from moving
• Mind control - using magic to take control of someone mind. Charm person/gease/illusions etc.
• Summon/create a creature/object. Often lasting only a short time, but can be extended though certain means.
• Utility - create light/purify food and water/repair objects, divinations, luck-things, temporary ability increases.
• World-changing - things that affect the world or changes a being, such as Time stop, Wish, Curses, transformation spells.

 

[Lanefan]

Timing and sequence-of-events determination (a.k.a. initiative) seems to have a different set of mechanics in every game, with each being largely unique to that game.