Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6843614" data-attributes="member: 4937">I think 5e is one of the most innovative systems I've seen in the last 15 years.But I remember back to system design in the '80's and how almost everyone was pursuing the false goal of 'realism' based on a theory that if you had a system that was 'realistic' that a whole host of other goals would be simultaneously achieved.  For example, it was I think widely assumed that the source of many table arguments was the feeling that the system had produced an illogical result, and so if you had a system that consistently produced more realistic results there would be more focus on play and less negotiation of play.  It was assumed that realism equaled emersion, that realism equaled depth of characterization, that realism equaled greater excitement, and greater literary or cinematic value to the stories that were being produced at the table.  In short, 'realism' was seen as a cure all for whatever ailed your table, and as such game designers seemed to pursue the idea that you couldn't have too much realism and that there job was to figure out mechanics that would handle issues realistically.  I can remember evaluating mechanics on that basis, "Oh, that's more realistic.  Yeah, that's good."Looking back on it now it seems sort of silly.I feel much the same way about some of the panaceas that I see being advanced in RPG design right now: 'rule light', 'one single mechanic for everything', 'player narrative agency', and so forth.I'm sure I can't tell you what the next big thing is going to be.  But I can tell you what it's not going to be: doubling down on something we've already got.If I had to guess, I'd say the next big thing will be the recognition that different sorts of tasks benefit from different mental models of the task and so benefit from different mechanical models.  As someone whose design interests spread across all sorts of games, I often look at new RPGs and imagine them translated to a cRPG.  I then often think to myself, "Did the RPG designer really understand what they were building, or would they be surprised by what the visual model of their system would look like?"If I had to guess, the next really BIG thing after that would be electronic tools that seamlessly integrate with traditional PnP play to automate aspects of PnP play that are otherwise tedious and repetitive, allowing you to have designs that meet the goals of both the 'rules light' and 'rules heavy' factions.  So far, electronic tools have tended to increase GM prep rather than decrease it, but I can foresee a turning point in technology where that problem stops being true.</blockquote>

Verification