RPG smithing
Quite frankly, who amongst us hasn't memorized the mass majority of the rules of 3.5 Dungeons and Dragons? I sure as hell have, and everybody's got their own problems with it, and some deal with it differently than others.
In seventh grade, way before I got into D&D, I made up a game I can't remember the name of. Pretty much, you would play it in groups of two, and each person would have a character. In the one game I played of it, I was a black sorcerer (and I looked an awful lot like the dark magician from... Yugioh. (groan)), and my opponent was a dwarven warrior, mounted upon a firebreathing dragon. Pretty much, each of us would take a turn, stating what awesome looking move we'd use to try and kill our opponent, and then they'd counter in a similiar way. By the end of the game (which actually lasted about a month, since we'd do it during track practice), I was riding a giant zombie bat, and I had nuked the island we had started off on.
The game was fun because it had absolutely no game mechanics beyond the existence of turns, and we pretty much made up cool spells and awesome techniques. Unfortunately, if you want to have a game of D&D, it can't be that simple. Game mechanics have been thought up that quite frankly only do a lackluster job of making things well thought out. How often have you thought to yourself "Man, I wish I could do Such and such a Move from Insert video game name Here." Quite frankly D&D in its current mechanics only allows for oh so much development. Ryugu's new Quicksilver (from what I know is in it), takes a good step in improving 3.5's mechanics. My rules are much simpler, and quite frankly don't do as much, but also improve a few small things. Hell, I occasionally go to my Inquisitor Rulebook (games workshop) for ideas for rule changes, and also think up ways to improve that games mechanics. There are so many different game systems, with mechanics emphasizing different aspects of gameplay, that its quite difficult to make a system that fast, easy, or fun, let alone all three.
Wouldn't that be great? If you could just roll one die, see if you hit, and then just not have to roll any more dice? Wouldn't it be great if you could have a character who could melt into shadows and shoot energy blasts from his hands, without having to kill five bajillion orcs and multiclassing in thirty prestige classes? How about being able to make a game that has a average playthrough time of forever? I've evolved from game system to game system, slowly gaining better insight into the ideal gaming experience. Unfortunately, I'm not there yet. I started with video games (which lack flexibility in gameplay and story), I've played table top wargames (too expensive, too long to roll the dice), And I've played Tabletop RPGs (Inquisitor, too expensive, too difficult, but good gameplay and an emphasis on RP instead of balance, which actualy works), and from freshman year in high school I've been in D&D.
Within that I've made steps foward, first as a reader, then a player, and then a campaign setting creator and DM/GM. Whats the next step? I'd say its making new game mechanics, and thats gonna be a long one. Ryugus already up to his elbows in it, so we can all only really wish ourselves the best of luck in our own ventures into RPGsmithing.
In seventh grade, way before I got into D&D, I made up a game I can't remember the name of. Pretty much, you would play it in groups of two, and each person would have a character. In the one game I played of it, I was a black sorcerer (and I looked an awful lot like the dark magician from... Yugioh. (groan)), and my opponent was a dwarven warrior, mounted upon a firebreathing dragon. Pretty much, each of us would take a turn, stating what awesome looking move we'd use to try and kill our opponent, and then they'd counter in a similiar way. By the end of the game (which actually lasted about a month, since we'd do it during track practice), I was riding a giant zombie bat, and I had nuked the island we had started off on.
The game was fun because it had absolutely no game mechanics beyond the existence of turns, and we pretty much made up cool spells and awesome techniques. Unfortunately, if you want to have a game of D&D, it can't be that simple. Game mechanics have been thought up that quite frankly only do a lackluster job of making things well thought out. How often have you thought to yourself "Man, I wish I could do Such and such a Move from Insert video game name Here." Quite frankly D&D in its current mechanics only allows for oh so much development. Ryugu's new Quicksilver (from what I know is in it), takes a good step in improving 3.5's mechanics. My rules are much simpler, and quite frankly don't do as much, but also improve a few small things. Hell, I occasionally go to my Inquisitor Rulebook (games workshop) for ideas for rule changes, and also think up ways to improve that games mechanics. There are so many different game systems, with mechanics emphasizing different aspects of gameplay, that its quite difficult to make a system that fast, easy, or fun, let alone all three.
Wouldn't that be great? If you could just roll one die, see if you hit, and then just not have to roll any more dice? Wouldn't it be great if you could have a character who could melt into shadows and shoot energy blasts from his hands, without having to kill five bajillion orcs and multiclassing in thirty prestige classes? How about being able to make a game that has a average playthrough time of forever? I've evolved from game system to game system, slowly gaining better insight into the ideal gaming experience. Unfortunately, I'm not there yet. I started with video games (which lack flexibility in gameplay and story), I've played table top wargames (too expensive, too long to roll the dice), And I've played Tabletop RPGs (Inquisitor, too expensive, too difficult, but good gameplay and an emphasis on RP instead of balance, which actualy works), and from freshman year in high school I've been in D&D.
Within that I've made steps foward, first as a reader, then a player, and then a campaign setting creator and DM/GM. Whats the next step? I'd say its making new game mechanics, and thats gonna be a long one. Ryugus already up to his elbows in it, so we can all only really wish ourselves the best of luck in our own ventures into RPGsmithing.
posted by Thomas at 8:45 PM
2 Comments:
"Ryugus already up to his elbows in it, so we can all only really wish ourselves the best of luck in our own ventures into RPGsmithing."
yeah... There is an ugly fact about game mechanics that no one ever tells anyone else. When you are just looking at a rule set (say D&D3.5) and you work WITHIN the rules. You are mostly protected. You are given things taht work within the rules and stepping outside the rules...mostly doesn't happen. You have guardrails to stop you...but once you decide to entirely revamp a rule set... "abandon hope all ye who enter here"
It is a totally different experience. I have come up with obscenely complicated and frankly embarrassing rules that are just stupid when I look back on them. For instance, My current project i fraught with all sorts of shit. I've had the idea to give over all the power of character building over to the play....holy shit that started to giveme a headache affter a while.
All Rule sets attempt to balance two things:
Realism (Game Balance, and belivability)
Playability (Execution of the rules, and adjucation of rules)
A good rule set balances these two(Or four if you count the abstracts). ffrankly D&D isn't that bad, but it also comes up short, but then again whhat doesn't?
Analogy:
Imagine you are creating software(A D&D Adventure). But after a few porducts ship, you decide to revamp the software engine you use(The game mechanics). You are now using tools built by the Software to fix code in the software...
Okay I didn't even understand what i just said...oy vey
Yeah, you really have to jump off the tracks to really get things done, and from there there's nothing but hard work ahead of you.
The only thing worse though than working on new game rules is working on new game rules with restrictions. Inquisitor is actually surprisingly well done, mainly because of two factors- 1: There's no concern about balance, but it can be if you have to. 2: The book clearly says the following to the GM: Don't follow the rules if it will be awesome. In Inquisitor, any sort of particularly complex action (such as diving over a guard railing to avoid a gunshot while simultaneously shooting a sniper rifle at a dodging beserker) has a realistic, but impossible to roll DC, but the GM has full power, and is advised to let people do stuff if its interesting, or really just kickass. Also, Inquisitor doesn't have HP, which makes the unrealistic damage buff character more realistic.
Long story short, certain games have some of what you want, but no game has everything everyone wants. Good luck finding the ultimate game system.
Oh, and if you couldn't tell, I like Inquisitor a lot, but its just way too expensive to play the way its intended.
Post a Comment
<< Home