Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7573402" data-attributes="member: 42582">My apologies, then, for misreading.I think a literal toin-coss game may be a bit weak for serious RPGing, because the outcomes of action resolution would seem not to be connected enough to the character. (Even allowing for the fact that the character will have some degree of expression in the player's choice of actions to declare.)Of games I know, Cthulhu Dark is the closest to that &quot;weak&quot; edge while maintaining character differentation in mechanics as well as &quot;concept&quot;. (Each PC has an occupation - not chosen from a list, but specified by the player based on his/her knowledge of real world occupations - so when I played we had an investigative reporter, a longshoreman and a legal secretary. If the action that is declared falls within occupational expertise then a die is added to the pool, thus increasing the odds of a good roll.)Trying to relate this back to the OP: given that complexity isn't necessary for comprehensiveness, nor even for the effective expression of character, what is it for in RPG design. One answer could be: to bring the fiction to life via the experience of rolling dice and engaging with mechanics rather than via sheer narration.I'm playing a fair bit of Traveller at the moment, and I think some of its subsystems probably fit this description.I personally find it a weakness in 3E/PF design (based on reading as much as play, especially for PF) that its complexity doesn't seem to have any clear purpose other than serving as mechanical input into further mechanical processes. Its connection to the fiction - which is pretty crucial in a RPG - can often seem rather tenuous.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7573402, member: 42582"] My apologies, then, for misreading. I think a literal toin-coss game may be a bit weak for serious RPGing, because the outcomes of action resolution would seem not to be connected enough to the character. (Even allowing for the fact that the character will have some degree of expression in the player's choice of actions to declare.) Of games I know, Cthulhu Dark is the closest to that "weak" edge while maintaining character differentation in mechanics as well as "concept". (Each PC has an occupation - not chosen from a list, but specified by the player based on his/her knowledge of real world occupations - so when I played we had an investigative reporter, a longshoreman and a legal secretary. If the action that is declared falls within occupational expertise then a die is added to the pool, thus increasing the odds of a good roll.) Trying to relate this back to the OP: given that [I]complexity[/I] isn't necessary for [I]comprehensiveness[/I], nor even for the effective expression of character, [I]what is it for in RPG design[/I]. One answer could be: to bring the fiction to life via [I]the experience of rolling dice and engaging with mechanics[/I] rather than via sheer narration. I'm playing a fair bit of Traveller at the moment, and I think some of its subsystems probably fit this description. I personally find it a weakness in 3E/PF design (based on reading as much as play, especially for PF) that its complexity doesn't seem to have any clear purpose other than serving as mechanical input into further mechanical processes. Its connection to the fiction - which is pretty crucial in a RPG - can often seem rather tenuous. [/QUOTE]

Verification