Where Complexity Belongs

If the complexity is the ritual itself then you end up staking a ton of effort on at most a few die rolls.
Im not sure what you even mean.

What is the effort you are referring to?

Who says the ritual cannot, in cases like big magic, involve the same amount of actions and resources and cleverness as a conflict scene?

And where it involves less than that...okay? Every type of challenge can scale from a couple rolls to half a dozen rounds of "encounter". Why is it magically a bad thing for this one type of challenge?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I haven't posted here for a little while (decade/s?) but here goes - this topic looks worthwhile rolling around in the head.
For me there is an intermeshing of a few different contexts. Complexity can come from a process or procedure being unfamiliar, or it can be because the process is finicky, requires a few interactive loops, or possibly generates a result that is indirect, or unaligned with the narrative. I think it was Monte Cook who described RPGs as: the best hour of fun you can have across four hours... or something similar. If you like, complexity at the table is more often in that three hour component, than the one hour.
And so the question becomes what complexity in a games becomes part of the fun hour? Complexity is really about time at the table.
I think this is very much related to how time is being treated in-game - what frame or mode of play is being used.

1) If it's much real time: 6 seconds gametime - in other words encounters or combats where everything slows right down - then you want to keep complexity out of this, or at least have a lower tolerance. If three players are using their "paper buttons" and achieving an in-game result with minimal adjudication or GM interference, then this keeps things flowing in an environment where your turn is only one amongst the many. If the fourth player is negotiating or playing mother-may-I with a more complicated ability or process that colours outside the lines, this is where complexity bites.
2) If it's 6 seconds real time: 6 seconds gametime, such as in scene or "roleplaying" with NPCs, then this is where you want ZERO complexity. You don't want mechanics pressuring the players out of this mode of play - you want it decided by the narrative.
3) If it's 6 seconds real time: much gametime, such as exploration, through to montages, then to "downtime", then I think this is where you can spend most of your complexity budget. I think the two you mention (magical rituals and crafting) are excellent examples. Personally, I would differentiate between rituals (one exploration "turn" up to an hour), works of magic (several hours to possibly several days - or ongoing), and crafting permanent magic (several days to several decades). However, as has been seen in this thread, this is player/game dependent. An OSR crew will most likely be in their happy place if they have to manage intricate resources and follow smart procedures to survive. Others just need to hear the word encumbrance and they're up and away from the table. If a complex procedure vibes with the style of game - then it's most likely worth it as it's the type of game the players have already bought into.

For myself, I like complexity with certain exploration activities. Disarming traps, unlocking strange locks/devices and anything where focusing on the in-world stuff is important (and can't be procedurized into let's do macro one for this, or macro two for that). I would love more complexity with healing wounds - treatment, surgery, and so on as it fits in with a grittier game (rather than a hand-waivy heroic style). I would love tracking to be more involved than a simple check. Discerning, identifying and understanding magics and spellcraft deserves far greater complexity. Haggling or bartering as a more complex procedure. For me, such things are juice worth the squeezing.
 

Im not sure what you even mean.

What is the effort you are referring to?

Who says the ritual cannot, in cases like big magic, involve the same amount of actions and resources and cleverness as a conflict scene?

And where it involves less than that...okay? Every type of challenge can scale from a couple rolls to half a dozen rounds of "encounter". Why is it magically a bad thing for this one type of challenge?
"Who" would be the people who've created the mechanics for the ritual magic you're describing in RPGs.

Like Pathfinder 1E's Occult Rituals, where all preparation does is increase/remove a decrease from the ritual's difficulty.
 

Clocks arent simple, though. Precision required, lots of moving parts moving in sync.
Same with Skill Challenges. The comparison is resolving the task with a single binary roll.

A slight aside - I have come across terminology that I find helpful.

If a thing has a lot of moving parts, it is complicated. If it is hard to predict the result of a thing, or hard to describe the results, it is complex.

So, a mechanical clock is complicated, but it is not complex.
The three body problem is not complicated, but it is complex.

Legos are typically complicated, but not complex.
The game of Go is not complicated, but it is very complex.
 

Who says the ritual cannot, in cases like big magic, involve the same amount of actions and resources and cleverness as a conflict scene?

Well, that depends.

In a pretty traditional game, the answer to, "Who says it cannot?" Is, "The Rulebook".

As in, look at how much you've written of stuff for conflict scenes. Write as much again for rituals, and they can be equivalent. If, in D&D terms, you have as many abilities, powers, feats and skills that players might choose to apply, then they will be similar.

The level of complexity in traditional play largey comes from the choices the player has to make. With fewer detailed options, there are fewer choices.
 

Remove ads

Top