SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

To lay out the Rules:

Started by Spike, October 26, 2009, 05:23:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Spike

I've been spending a bit more time exploring various alternative rule sets over the last couple of years and a re-occuring problem has come up. I think I have a solution of sorts I'd like to run past you.

In most cases the 'basic dice mechanic' is fairly straight forward and easily graspable, with a few exceptions (Cthulutech, for example, requires frequent re-readings during play to remember it runs like a poker hand with dice...until it finally sticks), and character creation rarely seems to suffer from complexity issues.

However: Most games are far more complex than a simple dice mechanic and a few rules on how to create a character.  Let me tell you: Nothing is more frustrating as a GM than running a combat only to discover that you don't actually know how to inflict damage on a character... and you can't actually find it in the book!

If you are like me and 'collect' game systems this is shockingly far more common than you might expect. Its not always damage either, though that is a common one I've found.  It is rather amusing to run through the entire gamut of actions (initiative, attack, defense, calculate armor and... um... guys? I can't figure out what I've done to this guy!....)...

Anyway:

Most of the time its not really a fault of design or even reading comprehension, but... if you will... layout, possibly occluded by the problems of unspoken assumptions by authors.

It seems to me that there is a very standard idea of how a rules chapter should actually be laid out that more or less 'solves' the problem. Rules layout should essentially follow the flow of actions at the table.  Bear with me:

A GM, hoping to introduce his players to a new game (or a new version of an older game) is not necessarily going to have the benefit of 'mastering' the rules ahead of time.  He'll have read them, certainly, and tried to grasp the details.. but he's not going to know everything.

Using the idea of Combat, for example:

When the fight starts the first thing the GM is going to know how to do is determine who goes when.  Thus, sensibly, the first thing he should see in the combat chapter is, in fact, 'initative' or whatever you want to call it. Even if this is a refresher comment repeated from character creation (I have seen this: Games that explain a vital 'combat' rule during character creation and then fail to repeat it anywhere else.... redundancy is useful by the way...)

Once he knows who goes first their first action is probably going to be an attack: Thus the second set of rules he encounters should be 'attacking'. I've found that dividing range and melee combat into sub-chapters (Shadowrun does this) is actually counterproductive. Among other things it makes it harder to follow the flow of the chapter and, further, creates an artificial divide between the two sets of 'sub-rules' that makes it play as if there are two incompatable mini-games... and since players rarely consult rules before attempting this only adds to stress when the GM must attempt to re-intigrate these.

Obviously after attacking there is some sort of defense, even if its entirely passive we need to know our options if someone wants to avoid being hit

then damage. Again: too often it seems this is assumed to be easily understood.


I dunno. I feel like I'm stating the obvious, but I can recall way to many frustrating sessions where I tried to figure out something that had seemed so obvious when I wasn't sitting in the GM's chair but was utterly opaque when I was at the table.

Mostly I just want to tell y'all how to do your jobs 'cause I'm that sort of asshole.
For you the day you found a minor error in a Post by Spike and forced him to admit it, it was the greatest day of your internet life.  For me it was... Tuesday.

For the curious: Apparently, in person, I sound exactly like the Youtube Character The Nostalgia Critic.   I have no words.

[URL=https:

Halfjack

This is not so much an issue of layout as organization. Following some basic rules (and you hit on some already) of organization can solve this. Fewest possible forward references is one. Follow order of usage is another.

Good thoughts -- thanks Spike!
One author of Diaspora: hard science-fiction role-playing withe FATE and Deluge, a system-free post-apocalyptic setting.
The inevitable blog.

Spinachcat

You are absolutely right.  Organization in RPGs is a major issue.   Every RPG needs a detailed example of the rules in action - especially the combat rules.

And complex systems really should have a GM cheat sheet that breaks down everything they may need during most play situations.