What Do You Think Of As "Modern TTRPG Mechanics"?

[Thomas Shey]

What is a modern mechanic = is 100% not GURPS so... we are discussing what then it might be.

Though I think you can't write-off generic systems as a group as "not modern" when things like Cortex exist. But that also may not have been your intent.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I think what's happened is that new ways of using mechanics have been found and refined, thus essentially creating new playstyles that were previously unsupported and perhaps unimagined. I'm comfortable therefore saying that game mechanics as a field has improved because there are simply more tools and solved problems now. But I would agree that for some traditional types of game (and I'm a big Rolemaster fan) the pre-modern era already solved a lot of problems effectively and modern design has less to say to it.

Yeah, its probably more accurate to say that the modern period is not so much represented by better tools (which only makes sense from specific postures) as more tools (which I think is much harder to argue against, and when done is every bit as much a specific agenda thing).

 

[soviet]

Yeah, its probably more accurate to say that the modern period is not so much represented by better tools (which only makes sense from specific postures) as more tools (which I think is much harder to argue against, and when done is every bit as much a specific agenda thing).

That's a nice way to put it, I agree.

And I suspect that some critiques of older games that appear to be arguments for better tools are really arguments for more tools. Now that we have those 'more tools' it's easier to see that no, Rolemaster isn't bad, you just want something different.

 

[Thomas Shey]

That's a nice way to put it, I agree.

And I suspect that some critiques of older games that appear to be arguments for better tools are really arguments for more tools. Now that we have those 'more tools' it's easier to see that no, Rolemaster isn't bad, you just want something different.

Yeah. As I noted earlier, Monsterhearts is a good example: I'm not quite sure what someone trying for something like that would have done in 1985, but at best they'd have had to be inventing a lot of mechanical scaffolding almost entirely from the ground up. But that doesn't mean everyone wants Monsterhearts (in fact, I suspect that at least within the normal RPG hobby, pretty few do) so that isn't going to matter to them and the lack of those tools is largely irrelevant.

 

[mamba]

I was talking about specific things. Implementation, presentation, selection of mechanics, open discussion about the reason for mechanics... these things have generally improved quite a bit.

I mean, offer some examples that show otherwise.

as I wrote in another post, much of that is personal preference rather than some objectively measurable improvement.

I agree that OSE’s rules are clearer and better organized than Gygax’s (not that hard…). I am a lot less sure that leaning a lot more narrative, giving the players a lot more control over the fiction / world, or making everything flexible with no downsides / consequences (changing weapon masteries after a long rest, having spectral wings for convenience) are automatically improvements for everyone

 

[mamba]

I don't follow. Nobody is claiming that any given game should be able to accommodate anyone's full totality of wacky ideas. So there isn't really any point or value to the above statement.

you say that strongly themed games are better at mechanically representing their theme than more generic games. Sure, they probably are, they certainly better be, otherwise they have no reason to exist.

My point was that this does not necessarily mean that strongly themed games are better. If all you want to do is covered by that theme, go ahead, but I generally find them rather constricting and prefer wide themes that give me a lot of space to mix things up within them over narrow ones. More generic games accommodate for that while the narrow ones fight you on it.

I’d rather play a generic action adventure game than a Lara Croft of Indiana Jones one. I’d rather play some SciFi over Bladerunner, etc.

 

[Campbell]

Yeah. As I noted earlier, Monsterhearts is a good example: I'm not quite sure what someone trying for something like that would have done in 1985, but at best they'd have had to be inventing a lot of mechanical scaffolding almost entirely from the ground up. But that doesn't mean everyone wants Monsterhearts (in fact, I suspect that at least within the normal RPG hobby, pretty few do) so that isn't going to matter to them and the lack of those tools is largely irrelevant.

Thing is Monsterhearts is not a tool - it's a game. Someone say using a Cortex Drama hack to play a game with a similar premise is not engaged in the same activity. Situations are framed differently, GM and player roles are different, the interface the player is operating off of is phenomenally different. It's a difference of kind.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Thing is Monsterhearts is not a tool - it's a game. Someone say using a Cotex Drama hack to play a game with a similar premise is not engaged in the same activity. Situations are framed differently, GM and player roles are different, the interface the player is operating off of is phenomenally different. It's a difference of kind.

I know that. I was giving it as an example of a game made with a toolset (PbtA) that previously didn't exist

Also, I suspect strongly here that your assertation here is not something everyone would agree with, and its largely because the parts you focus on are very different, so how "different" they'd consider the two examples to be would vary considerably. That's where you get back to the eye of the beholder elements that have made this thread difficult.

 

[Aldarc]

I’d rather play a generic action adventure game than a Lara Croft of Indiana Jones one. I’d rather play some SciFi over Bladerunner, etc.

I don't follow your point, mamba. You seem to be conflating a "themed game" with an "IP-based game."

For example, Outgunned Adventure is a themed game designed for playing Lara Croft, Indiana Jones, and The Mummy style stories of pulp action adventure. Masks isn't a Young Justice or Teen Titans game. Masks is a themed game designed for playing Teen Titans, Young Justice, and Young Avengers style stories about teen superhero proteges and sidekicks. Both are themed games but neither are set in a particular preexisting IP.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

...

I’d rather play a generic action adventure game than a Lara Croft of Indiana Jones one. I’d rather play some SciFi over Bladerunner, etc.

The purpose of this thread is not what you would rather play.

The purpose is to discuss the possible criteria that describe what appears to be a concept of "modern mechanics".

We have given examples of what games have done to create "modern mechanics."

We re discussing how the mechanics of how free leagues' Bladerunner is using modern mechanics to create a very Bladerunner style game, and that is juxtaposed to things like how GURPS can not do this with its "old" mechanics - certainly not as strongly themed as Bladerunner will.

Again, please refrain from taking this as 'what is better' in the qualitative concept of what you are asked to enjoy. It's not, so drop it.