Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="resistor" data-source="post: 4728043" data-attributes="member: 9142">I'm not sure one can define a &quot;good system&quot; in the abstract.&nbsp; A good system is one that supports the game I want to run/play, whatever that may be at the moment.Sometimes that means quirky, weird systems for quirky weird games.&nbsp; Sometimes that means rules lite systems for cinematic games.&nbsp; Sometimes that means genre-specific systems to games where the feel matters.&nbsp; And sometimes it means highly meta-level narrative systems when the story is all I care about.Any system that fulfills a niche in my gaming spectrum is a good system.----------I think a lot of what people have been pointing out are what I would call &quot;aesthetics&quot; of games: design points that serve to differentiate games within a niche from each other.For instance, &quot;balance&quot; only matters in games with a decent gamist element.&nbsp; It's irrelevant in strongly narrativist systems, at least in the normal sense.&nbsp; (Narrative balance remains important.)&nbsp; In strongly simulationist systems, it's practically antithetical.Similarly mechnical elegance and/or weight.&nbsp; Lots of crufty systems do good jobs of fulfilling their niches in the gaming spectrum.&nbsp; Rifts and older versions of D&amp;D come to mind.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="resistor, post: 4728043, member: 9142"] I'm not sure one can define a "good system" in the abstract. A good system is one that supports the game I want to run/play, whatever that may be at the moment. Sometimes that means quirky, weird systems for quirky weird games. Sometimes that means rules lite systems for cinematic games. Sometimes that means genre-specific systems to games where the feel matters. And sometimes it means highly meta-level narrative systems when the story is all I care about. Any system that fulfills a niche in my gaming spectrum is a good system. ---------- I think a lot of what people have been pointing out are what I would call "aesthetics" of games: design points that serve to differentiate games within a niche from each other. For instance, "balance" only matters in games with a decent gamist element. It's irrelevant in strongly narrativist systems, at least in the normal sense. (Narrative balance remains important.) In strongly simulationist systems, it's practically antithetical. Similarly mechnical elegance and/or weight. Lots of crufty systems do good jobs of fulfilling their niches in the gaming spectrum. Rifts and older versions of D&D come to mind. [/QUOTE]

Verification