Aldarc
Legend
LoL. The term "neotrad" first came out of Free League Publishing, which they used to describe their Mutant Year Zero game.
What Do You Think Of As "Modern TTRPG Mechanics"?
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Reynard
aka Ian Eller
This is a thread about mechanics, not game theory or philosophical sniping. Please take this line of discussion elsewhere.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
It might be hard to narrow it down to individual mechanics, because there have been many games and many things tried.
I think a "modern" or "contemporary" game often have a certain level of intentionality in how the game will be played a the table, typically with a goal to emulate a certain genre.
It feels "older" games sometimes would tried more to use a kind of physics simulation, and would find that their physics doesn't really lead to the kind of game play they expected. ´
Like a Call of Cthulhu game were the characters get loaded with heavy weapons to beat the horrors that attack them - while you actually wanted to play investigators that enter a world they are unprepared for, there is no mechanical incentive for doing so. Or a D&D 3rd Edition game where the Cleric heals people after battle with a wand of cure light wounds and will use buff spells to out-fight the fighter during combat, and the all go to rest after 15 minutes of adventure. Even 2nd edition AD&D's where everyone is running with 10 ft pole sticks to trigger traps from hopefully safe distance, which isn't what you were looking for if your association with fantasy is LotR or Conan (but nowadays might be if your inspiration for fantasy is D&D).
A lot of the times, a lot of fun could be head, or gentleman's agreements could be made. But "modern" games try to ensure that the gameplay you get from using the rules to their logical extremes matches what they intended. Whether they always succeed is of course another matter. And the biggest drawback might be that it can make them more specific - even a gentleman's agreement might not really work to turn it to work for a different genre.
I think a "modern" or "contemporary" game often have a certain level of intentionality in how the game will be played a the table, typically with a goal to emulate a certain genre.
It feels "older" games sometimes would tried more to use a kind of physics simulation, and would find that their physics doesn't really lead to the kind of game play they expected. ´
Like a Call of Cthulhu game were the characters get loaded with heavy weapons to beat the horrors that attack them - while you actually wanted to play investigators that enter a world they are unprepared for, there is no mechanical incentive for doing so. Or a D&D 3rd Edition game where the Cleric heals people after battle with a wand of cure light wounds and will use buff spells to out-fight the fighter during combat, and the all go to rest after 15 minutes of adventure. Even 2nd edition AD&D's where everyone is running with 10 ft pole sticks to trigger traps from hopefully safe distance, which isn't what you were looking for if your association with fantasy is LotR or Conan (but nowadays might be if your inspiration for fantasy is D&D).
A lot of the times, a lot of fun could be head, or gentleman's agreements could be made. But "modern" games try to ensure that the gameplay you get from using the rules to their logical extremes matches what they intended. Whether they always succeed is of course another matter. And the biggest drawback might be that it can make them more specific - even a gentleman's agreement might not really work to turn it to work for a different genre.
Similar Threads
