Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did mixing editions become unusual?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7528047" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>A lot of people have already hit on what I think is the problem. It's fashionable now to produce systems that have a single pervasive resolution mechanic that pervades the entire system. This produces a tightly coupled system where it is difficult to make modifications or to move subsystems in or out of the game.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I think this is a huge mistake. No one resolution mechanic elegantly models all the challenges that you may wish to include in your story. Since all RPGs are actually a collection of mini-games, game designers would do well IMO to consider their game to be a platform for joining together disparate mini-games right from the start, privileging the outcome of resolution over the mechanical elegance thereof. </p><p></p><p>A good example is how 3e does a decent job of being a tactical skirmish game, but a lousy job of simulating chases out of the box. However, consider something like the system outlined in 'Hot Pursuit: The Definitive D20 Guide to Chases' as an example of what I consider good design. While neither 3e combat nor Hot Pursuit are in any way perfect mechanical systems for what they simulate, the combination of both of them is vastly more powerful than either one is alone and a good GM will not be bothered in the slightest (IMO, obviously) to declare by fiat that one set of rules applies in this situation, and not in another, and transition between them as the needs of the scene demands. </p><p></p><p>The same would be true of needing to incorporate a Mass Combat scenario or complex role-playing scenario into your game. Adopting a new mechanical framework is generally vastly superior than trying to kludge a mechanical framework that does something well into a situation that doesn't share the primary features of the circumstances the framework handles. A good example of this is just how badly most systems that try to simulate social conflict using the same rules that they use for physical combat fall on their faces and fail to actually achieve their primary goals in having a social combat system in the first place.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7528047, member: 4937"] A lot of people have already hit on what I think is the problem. It's fashionable now to produce systems that have a single pervasive resolution mechanic that pervades the entire system. This produces a tightly coupled system where it is difficult to make modifications or to move subsystems in or out of the game. Personally, I think this is a huge mistake. No one resolution mechanic elegantly models all the challenges that you may wish to include in your story. Since all RPGs are actually a collection of mini-games, game designers would do well IMO to consider their game to be a platform for joining together disparate mini-games right from the start, privileging the outcome of resolution over the mechanical elegance thereof. A good example is how 3e does a decent job of being a tactical skirmish game, but a lousy job of simulating chases out of the box. However, consider something like the system outlined in 'Hot Pursuit: The Definitive D20 Guide to Chases' as an example of what I consider good design. While neither 3e combat nor Hot Pursuit are in any way perfect mechanical systems for what they simulate, the combination of both of them is vastly more powerful than either one is alone and a good GM will not be bothered in the slightest (IMO, obviously) to declare by fiat that one set of rules applies in this situation, and not in another, and transition between them as the needs of the scene demands. The same would be true of needing to incorporate a Mass Combat scenario or complex role-playing scenario into your game. Adopting a new mechanical framework is generally vastly superior than trying to kludge a mechanical framework that does something well into a situation that doesn't share the primary features of the circumstances the framework handles. A good example of this is just how badly most systems that try to simulate social conflict using the same rules that they use for physical combat fall on their faces and fail to actually achieve their primary goals in having a social combat system in the first place. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did mixing editions become unusual?
Top