|
Post by Stu Venable on Aug 14, 2012 14:10:02 GMT -8
If I had to use a music analogy, which I don't think is very applicable, I would say an RPG is like a garage band.
You all get together and say, "we're going to be a X band." X being whatever genre of music you all decide on, then you start putting your own mark on it, either making it unique or hackneyed.
X at an RPG table would be an agreement on a system.
I do not think calling the GM the system is accurate, however. I would say the GM is the *gatekeeper* of the system. It is the GM who decides when and where the system is applied to the collaborative story.
I (like many others here) have run entire sessions where game mechanics didn't actively enter the game (ie, no dice were rolled). In these situations, I could have applied game mechanics at dozens of instances during the session, but chose not to, since one result or another seemed right for the story that was unfolding.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Aug 14, 2012 14:22:05 GMT -8
Just so long as the GM doesn't become the Kurt Cobain to the Players Nirvana (Either way don't leave him/her alone with a shotgun or a psycho partner)
|
|
|
Post by henryhankovitch on Aug 14, 2012 14:32:12 GMT -8
There's a term for that, which I'm sure you've heard: LFQW (Linear Fighter, Quadratic Wizard). But surely that issue wouldn't affect your ability to run a pulp detective game. "You walk into the grimy bar. The local snitch glares at you across his beer glass. You get the feeling he knows what you're looking for, and doesn't feel like sharing." "I cast Charm Person." --- "The young widow is crying into her handkerchief, and you only get the story in bits and pieces as she tells you how her child has been kidnapped, and how she fears for her life if she goes to the pol-" "I cast Divination." --- "Five heavyset thugs get up from the card table, knuckledusters and pistols in ha-" "I cast Color Spray."
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Aug 14, 2012 15:18:59 GMT -8
If I had to use a music analogy, which I don't think is very applicable, I would say an RPG is like a garage band. You all get together and say, "we're going to be a X band." X being whatever genre of music you all decide on, then you start putting your own mark on it, either making it unique or hackneyed. X at an RPG table would be an agreement on a system. I do not think calling the GM the system is accurate, however. I would say the GM is the *gatekeeper* of the system. It is the GM who decides when and where the system is applied to the collaborative story. I (like many others here) have run entire sessions where game mechanics didn't actively enter the game (ie, no dice were rolled). In these situations, I could have applied game mechanics at dozens of instances during the session, but chose not to, since one result or another seemed right for the story that was unfolding. But you're saying you only run one (a/the) system at a time? So X is the system because we all agree we want a real estate game? It’s Monopoly then, but not Risk. Does this answer actually hold true under scrutiny for RPGs? What is house ruling? Is a game's system not changed by house rules? Could we not start a game with a theme and blank sheet of paper (with massive player involvement)? It seems to me Tappy’s Cosplay convention game did just so and was enjoyable. The system is holding you back, man! I am defining a “system” as something that does not design its success around player input. A system is hermetic. And I am saying there is no system in RPGs without player input. I will say it is deleterious to the hobby to present otherwise. Thus, players matter more than system is 100% true. System matters only within the context of the players – it is not hermetic. RPGs can be run like a program from RAW, or like a piano roll will play music; but it is not the art and not the way it was intended to be played (cf Gygax AD&D 1e DMG Preface). Does Thousand Suns qualify as a system? It has a distinctive 12 Degree mechanic but is the mechanic an immutable system? “As a game, Thousand Suns requires rules, of course; but they are not its focus. And you should always feel free to alter or even drop any rules that get in the way of your having fun.”- James Maliszewski, Thousand Suns Rulebook, page 17 If you say because rules exist ergo sum a system exists your argument is circular. The rules of RPGs is: there are no rules. Players negotiate that together – the blank sheet of paper. A self-serving publisher publishing “RPGs for Dummies” may obscure that understanding in its volume of printed pages but the practice of house ruling is too widespread in the hobby to be considered a narrow focus of a few; and it has been encouraged from its inception. Must I pick up X-game to play theme-X game? If no, then system does not matter and I argue GM matters. If I create my own version of X game at the table, unique to my set of players at the place and time I have them, then system does not matter. If a system cannot guarantee a systematic player experience, let’s say to remove Douchey DM practice from a standardized player experience from the equation as an example, then systems do not matter. This lack of system is an incredibly unique experience to role-playing games where outcome is more important than actual process and trust is paramount.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Aug 14, 2012 15:42:58 GMT -8
My System X is good for 2 - 12 players, or as many players as I can accommodate at my table. If I publish this system, this system x is a reflection of my group at a place in time.
This does not say your experience will be the same as mine because you use my system. In fact, it won't be the same because of the different player conversation - that table dialogue I had with my players (play testers) before I published my system.
Since it is the experience you and your players desire, rather than a dry night of boardgaming, you most likely will flavour to taste based upon the conversation you have with your players. Thus, as GM, your system emerges.
|
|
|
Post by kaitoujuliet on Aug 14, 2012 15:48:12 GMT -8
There's a term for that, which I'm sure you've heard: LFQW (Linear Fighter, Quadratic Wizard). But surely that issue wouldn't affect your ability to run a pulp detective game. "You walk into the grimy bar. The local snitch glares at you across his beer glass. You get the feeling he knows what you're looking for, and doesn't feel like sharing." "I cast Charm Person." Er, you're assuming a pulp-detective-style game in a fantasy universe, complete with magic users. A proper pulp detective game (without mixing genres) wouldn't be set in a fantasy universe, thus no magic users.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Aug 14, 2012 15:51:07 GMT -8
Must I pick up X-game to play theme-X game? If no, then system does not matter and I argue GM matters. If I create my own version of X game at the table, unique to my set of players at the place and time I have them, then system does not matter. If a system cannot guarantee a systematic player experience, letÂ’s say to remove Douchey DM practice from a standardized player experience from the equation as an example, then systems do not matter. This lack of system is an incredibly unique experience to role-playing games where outcome is more important than actual process and trust is paramount. And with that realisation there is felt a tremble in the foundations of WoTC Valhalla, the workers at SJG startle and run about in a directionless silence, Piazo's machines of industry begin to groan and protest and fail when they never have before . . . All across the RPG landscape a chill wind blows and they fear the end of days for the horsemen ride and rumours abound of the resurrection of the one called Arneson and the second coming of the Gygax to judge them all . . .
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Aug 14, 2012 16:00:41 GMT -8
"You walk into the grimy bar. The local snitch glares at you across his beer glass. You get the feeling he knows what you're looking for, and doesn't feel like sharing." "I cast Charm Person." Er, you're assuming a pulp-detective-style game in a fantasy universe, complete with magic users. A proper pulp detective game (without mixing genres) wouldn't be set in a fantasy universe, thus no magic users. Fuck yeah . . . Marlowe Magic Users . . . Hot lead wielding Peter Gunn Rangers (urban) . . . Drunken Clerics who have lost their faith despite the fact their God's avatar regularly visits local strip club on Friday night . . . Bootlegging Rogues who drive enchantment powered jalopies at breakneck speeds instead of climbing walls . . . Jazz Club Bards who know just which cat is which in this hot city daddio . . .
|
|
|
Post by stork on Aug 14, 2012 17:32:41 GMT -8
Er, you're assuming a pulp-detective-style game in a fantasy universe, complete with magic users. A proper pulp detective game (without mixing genres) wouldn't be set in a fantasy universe, thus no magic users. Fuck yeah . . . Marlowe Magic Users . . . Hot lead wielding Peter Gunn Rangers (urban) . . . Drunken Clerics who have lost their faith despite the fact their God's avatar regularly visits local strip club on Friday night . . . Bootlegging Rogues who drive enchantment powered jalopies at breakneck speeds instead of climbing walls . . . Jazz Club Bards who know just which cat is which in this hot city daddio . . . I'm so stealing this and playing it Oh wait.....that's Deadlands noir! Urban Rangers and Jazz bards.....gotta love it!!
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Aug 14, 2012 23:27:47 GMT -8
The rules of RPGs is: there are no rules. The rules of RPGs is: there are no hard and fast rules. This makes every GM a different system for the rules he or she implements at any given time in any given game. RPGs is the most obvious, collaborative form, of McLuhan's "audience is content" aphorism.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Aug 15, 2012 5:58:57 GMT -8
But would a hit point attrition system interfere with telling a gritty, street-level story? I would say both yes and possibly no depending on things like the average level of the game. For example, a gun that does 1d12 damage isn't particularly scary when you have 75 hit points, but when you have 4 it's very scary. In general terms I find d20 to be less gritty than GURPS (duh), Hero (duh) and Savage Worlds (Really honest and for true). But that's my assessment, other people may have wildly different ideas. JiB
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Aug 15, 2012 10:25:37 GMT -8
But would a hit point attrition system interfere with telling a gritty, street-level story? I would say both yes and possibly no depending on things like the average level of the game. For example, a gun that does 1d12 damage isn't particularly scary when you have 75 hit points, but when you have 4 it's very scary. In general terms I find d20 to be less gritty than GURPS (duh), Hero (duh) and Savage Worlds (Really honest and for true). But that's my assessment, other people may have wildly different ideas. JiB Or change the HP system like they did for d20 Star Wars . . . Still d20 but flavoured differently. I'd also imagine that reliable firearms properly (ie gritty) implemented would be the great equalisers they are in 'real' life . . . I'd imagine a properly aimed Ruger Blackhawk Magnum would rip several very large holes in anybody regardless of their armour or hit points (if it can crack an engine block at several yards . . .)
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Aug 15, 2012 12:27:19 GMT -8
If system doesn't matter, why do we have preferences then? Why do we chose one system over another? Why do we house rule to make it "our" system? Why will my one player refuse to play Savage Worlds? The system sure seems to matter to him...
If the GM is the system, why am I not just giving people sheets with little descriptive words and making up a collaborative story? Why is following the system within a rulebook so much more interesting than just telling a story around a table?
Do people outside of NJ use the word deleterious instead of harmful?
I see a system as being hermetic in and of itself without the need of players. It is set up to do what it does. I do not look at my car and insist it is not a car simply because no one is driving it. I do not factor my typing at the keyboard when regarding whether or not I consider Windows an operating system.
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Aug 15, 2012 12:38:41 GMT -8
In regards to the band mentality, I would consider the instruments the system. You pick the instruments you feel will best get the results you want. There are reasons certain instruments are associated with certain types of music, because they fit better with how the style is represented. You don't see many classical groups made up of 2 distorted guitars, a bass, drums, and a lead singer.
Now, can you use something that is not common, absolutely. I have heard some wonderful piano music that was Iron Maiden covers ("Ah, such beautiful slow pian - hey, this is Number of the Beast!")
However, the instruments were chosen to specifically represent exactly what those people wanted out of the band, much like certain systems are chosen to get a specific mood or feel out of a game.
Mostly I am a GM, but as a player I am discovering that I much prefer to have my character described by words and phrases rather than numbers. Sure, STR 14 gives me an idea of an aspect of my character, but having an aspect called "EVERYTHING UNDER CONTROL SITUATION NORMAL" is so much more fun, and in terms of system really helps give an understanding of all the characters at the table by their descriptiveness. In a game that is character driven, this system matters because it is far easier to get a feel for the characters by looking at the sheets (You know, Unknown Armies was good for that too, and for very scary combats. Very, very different from d20 Modern)
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Aug 15, 2012 12:55:21 GMT -8
Nope. If the band is the gaming group, then the instruments can't be the system ... because that means everyone at your table is playing a different system.
BTW, in this analogy min-maxers are lead guitarists. Just sayin'.
The the GM is the fucking bass player. Yeah!
|
|