What does "Support" for a play style mean to you?

[ExploderWizard]

Support for a playstyle means that using a given system and running adventures with it requires less work than using a different system as a base.

 

[pemerton]

I chose options 1 and 3 (before reading the elaborations in the OP - oh well!).

What I want is for the game to not impede what I'm trying to do with it. Given my current preferences, that means I want it to support scene/encounter-based play with strong dramatic pacing that doesn't require GM force to achieve.

That's means (at a minimum) no (or minimal) duration tracking that crosses scene boundaries, no minutiae of healing and equipment handling that distract from the core focus of the scene at hand, and action resolution mechanics that highlight and reward choices made in the course of play and not just choices made before the resolution of the scene actually commences (eg no scry-buff-teleport).

Plus non-process-simulation pacing.

I don't think that this means I want the mechanics to discourage other styles. But in order to achieve that, I think some of the mechanics might need to be "double coded", or involve some sort of dial or switch, so that those who want a more process-simuation experience can use the same game elements (the same spells, the same hit points, etc) but do different stuff with them from what I'm most interested in.

 

[chaochou]

I went for a tentative option 5, because option 5 is my ideal. That doesn't mean I don't play in games which don't meet that ideal. I do. However, I only GM games which do.

I think 'support for a playstyle' from an rpg returns to the whole 'system matters / system doesn't matter' debate.

If I say I want a 'grim and gritty' game of feuding Samurai you could call that a playstyle. But if that's all I want then I can play any one of Bushido, AD&D + Oriental Adventures, L5R, Burning Wheel + The Blossoms are Falling or The Mountain Witch and be equally happy.

However, if I also say my playstyle is this...

...I want it to support scene/encounter-based play with strong dramatic pacing that doesn't require GM force to achieve.

...then I can see that the rules of Burning Wheel and The Mountain Witch are written to provide this specific thing - they are written assuming that this is exactly how you will play. The rules don't just 'support' drama-based scene-framing and lack of GM force, they require it. The same can not be said of L5R, Bushido or OA.

The difficulty is that 'playstyle' can mean 'the tone of language we use at the table' (contrast Aftermath and Apocalypse World.) It can also mean 'zero to hero play' (a game supporting steadily increasing power - contrast how D&D is built on this, while FATE is not).

It can refer to ideas of pacing (ie, what method are we using to begin and end scenes?) but it can also mean 'the GM will (or will not) use force'. (Contrast oWoD with The Dresden Files.)

The problem is that each of those distinctions (and others I no doubt haven't mentioned) in 'playstyle' is a seperate aspect of designing an rpg. So when I see claims that 5e will support 'a range of playstyles' I honestly don't know what that means.

I am curious, however, to see what happens next.

- apologies if this all went a bit off topic -

 

[Ahnehnois]

I'm not sure what "play style" means in this context.

Play style discouragement would seem to be the one clear wrong answer, but even that could be interpreted in different ways. For example, lower hit points, more save or dies, and more PC mortality overall "discourages" risk-taking, which can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how far you take it and what your goals are.

 

[Mengu]

The rules will discourage certain play styles. This is unavoidable. It is why there are different game systems. If one doesn't suit you, you play another. If you like to change things up, you play different games. I would hope D&D rules would provide me with a style I might enjoy. But that is doubtful at this point, as my play style tastes have changed over the years, and D&D wants to go back to styles I no longer enjoy.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

The rules will discourage certain play styles. This is unavoidable. It is why there are different game systems. If one doesn't suit you, you play another. If you like to change things up, you play different games. I would hope D&D rules would provide me with a style I might enjoy. But that is doubtful at this point, as my play style tastes have changed over the years, and D&D wants to go back to styles I no longer enjoy.

Indeed. While I could run AD&D again, or some DDN variation thereof, it wouldn't scratch the itch(es) I have now, and there would thus be little reason to switch to a DDN that was designed that way, even if it grafted on a few '4e-isms' or whatever. I'm not even exactly sure it would be worth spending a bunch of money on it even if that WAS exactly what I wanted if I can run that sort of game with all the 1e and 2e books I have (and heck, my FLGS has a rather complete set of mint 2e books that have been literally sitting on their shelf since the late 90's, brand new stock never sold if I need to pick up something I'm missing).

 

[mlund]

Supporting my play-style means punishing everyone who plays in a style that detracts from my fun so they will conform in a way that maximizes my enjoyment of the game. People playing fighters should know their role and caddie my wands already.

- Marty Lund

 

[Tony Vargas]

I answered something, but - what is a play style actually? We throw this word around so much, but it seems something very nebelous and ill-defined. Maybe that's actually enough, because play styles are varied much, but what really define a play style? What are the elements? Is the term really that useful?

That is a murky question, and a potentially fascinating topic.

For purposes of this poll, though, 'play style' can mean whatever works for you - whether that's GNS or CaW/CaS or roll vs role or even just "the way I play the game" without examining what that 'way' is.

I'm interested in what people mean by 'support,' when they complain that a game doesn't 'support' what they want to do.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

The game works smoothly when I play it in my prefered style.

This is all I really need a system to do. I agree with others that my playstyle is both ill-defined and changes based on mine and my players current wants. I want the system to run smoothly no matter what direction we take it in.

Others can play in their styles at the same table without getting in the way of my style.

I did not vote for this only because I think each table develops its own playstyle together. I don't think one person is playing one style while rest play another.

The game mechanically rewards my play style.

Don't need a reward. I'm rewarded by the system running smoothly with my current playstyle.

The game mechanically discourages play styles I dislike.

Unnecessary. We've formed the playstyle as a group and are unlikely to diverge from it singly as mentioned above.

Playing the game by the rules-as-written naturally leads to playing it in the style I prefer.

Do not want. My style changes and others should feel supported in theirs.

Optional rules allow me, as a player, to customize it to better fit the style in which I play.

Maybe its my time as a DM, but I respect where the DM wants to take his game and I try to mesh with his vision. I don't need anything individually as a player.

Optional rules allow me, as a DM, to customize it to encourage the style I prefer my players to use.

Nice to have, so I voted for them, but not necessary if the first bullet point is working.

The system is rules-light enough for me, as a DM, to impose a style upon it by adding and modifying rules on the fly.

Not anymore. I don't have time to devote to modifications.

The system is open to modification, by the DM, to support a style in one or more of the above ways.

See above.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm not sure what "play style" means in this context..

Whatever it means to you is fine. Even if it's just 'how you like to play.'

If you've ever had the experience that you felt a game 'supported' (or didn't support) how you wanted to play, I'd be interested to hear what 'support' means to you.