What Games do you think are Neotrad?

[GobHag]

...Or at least played in a Neotrad way?

I'm very, very interested in discussion in regards to this playstyle because I'm invested in it becoming more developed and mature despite it already being such a dominating force in TTRPGs

I'll copy the definition for Neotrad from the lbog wholesale(edit the original article in full; Six Cultures of Play):

This[OC/Neo-trad] is the only one of the terms that isn't fully an autonym, tho' "OC" can be appended to a "looking for game" post online to recruit people from this culture consistently, so it's closer. I also call it "neo-trad", firstly because the OC RPG culture shares a lot of the same norms as trad, secondly because I think people who belong to this culture believe they are part of trad. You also see this style sometimes called "the modern style" when being contrasted to the OSR. Here's an example of someone who calls it "neo-trad" elaborating a very pure vision of the style (tho' I disagree with the list of games provided as examples of neo-trad at the end of the article). On Reddit, "OC" is often called "modern" as in "the modern way to play" or "modern games".

OC basically agrees with trad that the goal of the game is to tell a story, but it deprioritises the authority of the DM as the creator of that story and elevates the players' roles as contributors and creators. The DM becomes a curator and facilitator who primarily works with material derived from other sources - publishers and players, in practice. OC culture has a different sense of what a "story" is, one that focuses on player aspirations and interests and their realisation as the best way to produce "fun" for the players.

This focus on realising player aspirations is what allows both the Wizard 20 casting Meteor Swarm to annihilate a foe and the people who are using D&D 5e to play out running their own restaurant to be part of a shared culture of play. This culture is sometimes pejoratively called the "Tyranny of Fun" (a term coined in the OSR) because of its focus on relatively rapid gratification compared to other styles.

The term "OC" means "original character" and comes from online freeform fandom roleplaying that was popular on Livejournal and similar platforms back in the early 2000s. "OC" is when you bring an original character into a roleplaying game set in the Harry Potter universe, rather than playing as Harold the Cop himself. Despite being "freeform" (meaning no die rolls and no Dungeon Master) these games often had extensive rulesets around the kinds of statements one could introduce to play, with players appealing to the ruleset itself against one another to settle disputes. For the younger generations of roleplayers, these kinds of games were often their introduction to the hobby.

I think OC RPG emerges during the 3.x era (2000-2008), probably with the growth of Living Greyhawk Core Adventures and the apparatus of "organised play" and online play with strangers more generally. Organised play ended up diminishing the power of the DM to shift authority onto rules texts, publishers, administrators, and really, to players. Since DMs may change from adventure to adventure but player characters endure, they become more important, with standard rules texts providing compatibility between game. DM discretion and invention become things that interfere with this intercompatibility, and thus depreciated. This is where the emphases on "RAW" and using only official material (but also the idea that if it's published it must be available at the table) come from - it undermines DM power and places that power in the hands of the PCs.

These norms were reinforced and spread by "character optimization" forums that relied solely on text and rhetorically deprecated "DM fiat", and by official character builders in D&D and other games. Modules, which importantly limit the DM's discretion to provide a consistent set of conditions for players, are another important textual support for this style. OC styles are also particularly popular with online streaming games like Critical Role since when done well they produce games that are fairly easy to watch as television shows. The characters in the stream become aspirational figures that a fanbase develops parasocial relationships with and cheers on as they realise their "arcs".

I have a few disagreements on this(Power fantasy/Tyranny of Fun isn't needed--tragedy and such are very much common as long as that's what the player is looking for) but it's where the term come from so eh.

What I think are examples of Neotrad games:

1. DnD from 3e onwards basically sets the baseline for how most people think of 'Modern' TTRPG play, while NeoTrad crystalized during 5e let's not forget that CharOp is where it all started and the culture of discussing 'builds' and 'broken powers' puts a focus on putting the RAW over the DM's authority. I don't quite think they fit as NeoTrad games but many of them are certainly played in a very neotrad way
2. Fabula Ultima is the most recent example I can think of a game that's very much designed with NeoTrad assumptions in mind, It's High Fantasy supplement exemplifies this the most with it's suggestion on how to design it's settings(especially since Fabula Ultima has collaborative world-building) to be reflective of the characters and the optional quirk system being mechanized 'story moments' that's in the players hands.
3. Chuubo's Wonderful Wish-Making Engine is perhaps the most unique examples of a NeoTrad game system but I'd argue it's Arc system exemplifies the 'Player-led railroading' that NeoTrad is going for.
4. Chronicles of Darkness and Exalted(and the new classic World of Darkness), these two are interesting because they show how mostly Trad systems develop into this new TradOC style. One could argue that the superhero with fangs playstyle is an example of NeoTrad play, something I very much agree with.4.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Chronicles of Darkness and Exalted(and the new classic World of Darkness), these two are interesting because they show how mostly Trad systems develop into this new TradOC style. One could argue that the superhero with fangs playstyle is an example of NeoTrad play, something I very much agree with.4.

Interesting point re: "superheroes with fangs", because I don't think there's anything inherent about that which would suggest to me a dilution of DM authority, more player input, nor necessarily OC culture nor realizing player aspirations particularly. What is it you feel about that playstyle that makes it NeoTrad? I'm especially interested because this playstyle has existed for as long as Vampire has existed (arguably longer but some of the earlier supernatural being in a modern setting games were more intentionally superheroic). My brother and I first ran Vampire in like, 1992 or so, and immediately engaged with it in a way that was more "superheroes with fangs" than anything else (I suspect our ages - 12 and 14 - factored in, but I don't think that was uncommon).

For me, "superheroes with fangs" is a subversion of what the designers allegedly wanted from the game (albeit, often so extremely workable within the rules and even apparent intention, though, that it's hard to argue it was entirely unintended - plus I'm not sure the difference between Lestat and Magneto or Louis and, say, '80s/'90s takes on Angel is necessarily as huge as some people might imagine). Certainly playing in games like that at the time, we didn't see the Storyteller's role as diminished in any way, nor our characters as "OCs" or wish-fulfilment any more than characters in AD&D 2E or HERO or GURPS - less so even in many ways. I will say, I definitely saw the rise of the "OC"-style character in WoD games towards the end the '90s (especially online), where a certain proportion of players could be guaranteed to have remarkably wish-fulfil-y characters who didn't really jive with the setting and often didn't really match the rules, being more heavily inspired by non-human characters in anime and videogames.

The first time I remember "superheroes with fangs" becoming a huge point of discussion rather than something casually (and not always pejoratively) referred to was when Vampire Revised came out in 1998, and the designers commented that was intentionally meant to stop "superheroes with fangs"-type play (along with a couple of other disfavoured styles - including, seemingly, the Anne Rice-esque style envisioned by Mark Rein*Hagen and his collaborators with Vampire 1E) in favour of basically just "body horror and intrigue", as if that was some kind of social ill to be addressed. Then they of course undercut that by releasing a number of sourcebooks (particularly Combat) which made little sense outside of that context!

I ask this mostly so I can feel like I've got a firmer grip on what you would see as NeoTrad in order to answer the question. Because as obvious as it seems to you, this aspect seems to me to broaden things out considerably re: what is "NeoTrad" - like if that's NeoTrad, an awful lot of things are. But I suspect that I'm missing something!

 

[TwoSix]

The three "Cs" of Neotrad, to my mind, are Characters, Combat, and Crunch. Fabula Ultima is a great example of a game that is, to my mind, almost pure neotrad.

But, if the rules spend a lot of time building up a specific setting, it's probably more of a trad game. Likewise if it spends a lot of effort making adventure paths. PF2 and 5e are both games with strong neotrad leanings, but are still focused on having the DMs build a setting and creating a storyline.

4e and 13th Age are probably the D&D family games that are closest to the neotrad ethos. The setting elements are primarily concepts to use in character building, rather than primarily used as a DM tool for worldbuilding.

90s era White Wolf (like Vampire) are super-duper trad, totally focused on the PCs being present to explore the heavily detailed setting and factions found in the core book. The newer Chronicles of Darkness is much more of a neotrad evolution of its heavy trad progenitor, I agree.

 

[GobHag]

I ask this mostly so I can feel like I've got a firmer grip on what you would see as NeoTrad in order to answer the question. Because as obvious as it seems to you, this aspect seems to me to broaden things out considerably re: what is "NeoTrad" - like if that's NeoTrad, an awful lot of things are. But I suspect that I'm missing something!

IMO Fundamentally, Neotrad can be described as 'High GM Authority but bent towards the players aspirations/desires with rules system as a 'check' for that authority'. So yes, that was Neotrad or at least a playstyle that's under the umbrella of Neotrad.

Wish fulfillment and power fantasy are an important part of neotrad but the culture is now trying to find techniques, advices, and systems that help with fulfilling different kind of wishes and fantasies of power:

-Fabula Ultima literally does not allow the GM to kill player characters when they reach 0 HP when they choose tp surrender and can only die when they make a heroic sacrifice(the bolded words have specific mechanics in the system)
-There's a common advice in 5e space of 'shoot the monk' because the Monk has deflect arrows which increases their dfense against ranged physical attack, so you should put situations and enemies that highlight how cool it is that the Monk can parry arrows.
-Class tier list in PF1 and 3.5 aside from satisfying nerds need for categorisation also helps with making sure that no player in a table feels useless or outclassed by someone else that chose to play a higher tier class.

 

[Reynard]

It would be really cool if people who decide to define terms could do it in a concise and effective way, rather than rambling incoherently for a few hundred words. I honestly can't form an opinion on "neoTrad" because that quoted description makes very little sense and does not actually define the term in an meaningful way.

Can someone distill it more precisely? Is it just "D&D where the Gm lets the players direct the action"? Because, if so, that has been around since 1974.

 

[GobHag]

It would be really cool if people who decide to define terms could do it in a concise and effective way, rather than rambling incoherently for a few hundred words. I honestly can't form an opinion on "neoTrad" because that quoted description makes very little sense and does not actually define the term in an meaningful way.

Can someone distill it more precisely? Is it just "D&D where the Gm lets the players direct the action"? Because, if so, that has been around since 1974.

Do you make the world revolve around the player or do you want the player to be part of the world?

That I think is the main differentiation between Neotrad and Trad.

 

[Reynard]

Do you make the world revolve around the player or do you want the player to be part of the world?

That I think is the main differentiation between Neotrad and Trad.

Ah. Thanks.

So how does that reveal itself in system, specifically? I understand how the GM can decide whether the world moves even if the PCs choose not to act (which is the way I try and do it), but I am not sure how the game system can make that happen.

 

[pawsplay]

Fabula Ultima. Champsions Now. Vampire: The Masquerade. Discworld. Those are all things I would be comfortable calling neotrad.

No version of D&D. If D&D is neotrad, then everything is.

 

[Campbell]

I tend to view neotrad play as play that primarily either reinforces the players' conceptions of their characters and/or puts a strong focus on the individual stories of each character in a GM directed fashion.

The games I think most encourage this sort of play are Legend of the Five Rings Fifth Edition, Chronicles of Darkness (particularly Vampire - The Requiem Second Edition), Fabula Ultima.

As an example, Vampire - The Requiem Second Edition places characters goals/aspirations front and center as the best way to gain experience, puts a strong emphasis on what keeps them connected to humanity through touchstones, reinforces character personality through Willpower gains for your Mask and Dirge and has a much more individualized approach to its Humanity mechanics.

 

[payn]

Whats it called if you are a trad GM, but also like when your players are neotrad? I see the distinction, but it very often feels like splitting hairs to me.