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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ezekielcroe9" data-source="post: 9765701" data-attributes="member: 7053359">I second this point. I venture to guess that veteran TTRP-Gamers will prefer crunch over rules-lite as rules tend to generate more interesting outcomes outside of player/GM fiat. But I think a lot of older crunch tended to be very granular and act as a separate sub-system that doesn't contribute to the core gameplay, and therefore the core fiction.I jokingly call it the "Craft-ification", where crunch-loving GMs go the way of the crab, and increasingly trend all their games into a Crafting simulator. I observe a lot of GMs in my circle, who have some experience running games, tend to want to write up a sub-system to manage peripheral things; the most common being crafting mechanics. The hope being that this system will add crunch by creating more structure, and allow for more interactions between other subsystems (like scavenging/looting etc.) which therefore leads to more possible outcomes and pathways to engage with.The thing is, while this system may be fun to design, it's not that fun to play in a game that's ultimately not about those rules. The rewards and the fiction of most games may not lend well to these new rules.To me, I see the new trend of (i) games coming out calling themselves "rule-medium" and (ii) add back crunch, is more of the TTRPG space becoming more mature (outside of D&D) and being more thoughtful about how that crunch impacts the overall feel/usefulness for the game's fiction. For example, although it is not necessarily to my taste, I really like Daggerheart's Hope and Fear mechanic. I see it as an elegant form crunch to their system. You can technically still run the system without Hope and Fear (replace them with some other default meta-currency), but it adds exactly the right kind of flavour to the games it wants to run.</blockquote>

Verification