This thread was created to collect remarks from other boards on the work on TAYDS, debating its substance matters and style. The thread is started as a meeting place of people already involved in the discussion on different boards, but everybody is welcome

The game is the long-awaited WIP of what was long ago a set of GURPS house rules and GM advice. The goal is to provide a flexible game that puts focus back on experimenting with story concepts in roleplaying, rather than being based almost entirely in rules. Most of the current work in the TAYDS OC (Original Concepts) is composed of guidelines on GMing (or 'Narrating'), with some rules added to make it a stand-alone work. The first actual game book is still in production; the OC is a 'philosophy behind the design' book, and very dense (no pretty pictures).

I hope to see the current discussion participants be drawn here to The RPGSite!

I found it an interesting piece, but it's pretty dense in both layout and info, so it needs some work.

What's TAYDS' system?
In essence its game system is simple: basically you have traits and skills rated at whatever level, and roll 3d6 to get under them. Combat is one character's weapon skill against another, and your margin of victory (the difference between your roll and your skill, if they failed to defend properly) is how many points of damage you did.

That's more or less it. The hundred or so pages he spends on that are skil descriptions, examples and so on.

The rest is general discussion about roleplaying, and GMing and play advice. It's pretty good, but isn't light reading. I already gave advice on making the thing mroe readable here, so will just say that I've given him that advice, but people should try to read the thing in the meantime anyway.


Why have a game system in TAYDS?
I think it'd be good to focus on the system part of it. I say that you ought to decide which you really want here: a book of roleplaying game advice, or an rpg book? At the moment it's game advice with a system tacked on almost as an afterthought. That's the reverse of most rpgs, of course, but...

I always reckoned that if something was an afterthought it was simpler just to forget it. If you're not really interested in it, don't put it there. But assuming that you actually do want a game system in the thing, let's talk about that. The first thing I'd suggest is to have the system as a separate book to the roleplaying advice stuff. 2x 100 page books are more readable and digestible than 1x 200 page book.


Where TAYDS is lacking
As to the system itself, I think you need to flesh out conflicts. I think it's fair enough to take an approach of "we'll have the same mechanics for all kinds of conflicts, physical or social - the winner has the loser at their mercy." But we're not seeing that in TAYDS, we're seeing, "um, here are some simple combat rules, and there aren't really any social conflict rules." You've got all this talk in the book of how important it is to really roleplay your character, but then you've got almost no rules for social conflicts and interactions.

There are two reasons for combat rules in a roleplaying game - fun, and a way of resolving stupid arguments.

The first is that it adds to the "game" feel of the thing, to have miniatures and tactics and dice rolling, which people often enjoy; some people will use this "game" feel of combat to argue against having rules for it, saying it should be roleplayed, or not important. It's my impression this is why TAYDS' authour made combat rules so light, he felt the "game" aspect would detract from the roleplaying. The second reason to have combat rules is that without rules, we just get, "I hit you!" "You didn't! I ducked!" like when we were kids.

There are two reasons for  social conflict rules in roleplaying games, the same as for combat - fun, and a way to resolve stupid arguments. Some people don't want to give a "game" feel to social conflict, and feel that it takes away from the experience. "Mate, put down your dice, just roleplay it!" But the second reason, to have a way to resolve things without stupid arguments, still applies. "So, I seduce the barmaid." "No, you don't, you're ugly." "No I'm not! I have Strength 16!"

Now, what I think is that "just roleplay it" is fine, except that it assumes everyone's a good roleplayer, and that no-one has any self-interest, and that we have infinite time to deal with every interaction. And of course that's not true. Certainly to have everything determined by rules and dice would suck the life out of a game session. But to try to roleplay everything would make things grind to a halt, as people stumbled and stammered and hogged the spotlight and we had to roleplay every single interaction, rather than assing over with a quick dice roll the ones which weren't interesting.

So what you need is a middle approach - have the rules for physical and social conflicts there, but make it clear that roleplaying things gives you a bonus to the rolls. You want to encourage good roleplaying rather than to make it mandatory.

What do you lot reckon? Reckon, that is, after having a look at his system.

This is good stuff. As I told you on the SJG board, what you read is, in fact, the TAYDS OC, the Original Concepts book. It will continue to be very packed. But what you are describing here is PERFECT for the upcoming Core Game Book(s?).

Reading your thoughts on the need for conflict rules, I was thinking of making the core books a Game Book and a Rules Book. The GB would have all the stuff about running games, handling players, designing adventures (skeleton plots, the whole enchilada), and a very sketchy rules section outlining the basics. The RB would have rules, rules, RULES, on a host of topics, and a quick guide on making adventures (kinda like the old GURPS Basics 3E). One could play the game entirely with either book, but if only the GB is used, rules will be very simple, focusing on creative adventures (and Thespian/Brain gamers), whereas using just the RB would be an orgy of dice, stats, clever calculations, etc., worth the salt of any Real Man gamer or D&D munchkin (no offense, D&D has lots o' cool stuff). I have also long considered a handbook on how players can gain more from the game by knonwing their own interests better and thinking more about what they can do. That might be a third book.....

Thoughts?

(PS: Loonie gamers can use any book. Or strawberry pudding)