What's your opinion on powers without rules?

To explain, with a simple example. In Vampire the Requiem (and it was similar in Masquerade) with the Obfuscate "Cloak of Night" discipline:

It simply says you fade from sight. You appear as nothing to those trying to observe you or you are simply unnoticed. There is no roll involved. How it works exactly is left up to in game description. There's also no systems in place to counter it, just a few suggestions and a note that it is not totally foolproof (which is up to the ST discretion).



I'm personally a big fan of powers without without rules. Exalted, WoD and plenty more of my favorite games make use of these kinds of abilities and I love them more for it. For me, not having the rules to follow leads to more interesting situations, as someone who tries to run more character and story focused games it's not so much what the powers do but what you do with the powers.

Quote from: KrakaJak;286454What's your opinion on powers without rules?

To explain, with a simple example. In Vampire the Requiem (and it was similar in Masquerade) with the Obfuscate "Cloak of Night" discipline:

It simply says you fade from sight. You appear as nothing to those trying to observe you or you are simply unnoticed. There is no roll involved. How it works exactly is left up to in game description. There's also no systems in place to counter it, just a few suggestions and a note that it is not totally foolproof (which is up to the ST discretion).



I'm personally a big fan of powers without without rules. Exalted, WoD and plenty more of my favorite games make use of these kinds of abilities and I love them more for it. For me, not having the rules to follow leads to more interesting situations, as someone who tries to run more character and story focused games it's not so much what the powers do but what you do with the powers.

If I'm running modern or science fiction, then I'm happy with unexplained powers. I run Heroes Unlimited and Nightbane from time to time... Nightbane is actually my favorite game. There are more than a few unexplained powers in it and suggestions for GMs to go one way or another when it comes to interaction.

Modern games just ask for more drama. Fantasy ones are kinda stupid, in my opinion, when you get rid of the rules. I like dnd. I don't like d20 modern. I like Vampire. I'm not sure that I like Exalted, though I've played a lot of it. I think fantasy asks you to be smarter, while modern asks you to be more creative... it's just the nature of the beast.

My magic systems are all like that. Very open ended. In Blood Games II, for example, Esotericist spells are just a name, like "Walk Between the Raindrops" or "Like a Balloon." You determine the interpretation within the group. Witch skills are limited by the need to not cause harm. Otherwise your poetry determines the effect. Etcetera.

-clash

Quote from: KrakaJak;286454What's your opinion on powers without rules?

To explain, with a simple example. In Vampire the Requiem (and it was similar in Masquerade) with the Obfuscate "Cloak of Night" discipline:

It simply says you fade from sight. You appear as nothing to those trying to observe you or you are simply unnoticed. There is no roll involved. How it works exactly is left up to in game description. There's also no systems in place to counter it, just a few suggestions and a note that it is not totally foolproof (which is up to the ST discretion).



I'm personally a big fan of powers without without rules. Exalted, WoD and plenty more of my favorite games make use of these kinds of abilities and I love them more for it. For me, not having the rules to follow leads to more interesting situations, as someone who tries to run more character and story focused games it's not so much what the powers do but what you do with the powers.

I always loved that power of Vampire. Even if you don't have to roll dice, it works well because the die roll is substituted by common sense.

If you have specific rules governing a power, then the Players are going to try to get around those rules or abuse them.
On the other hand, if you keep the rules vague, you have more control and can avoid rules-lawyering but the players will constantly try to push you as to what they can get away with using their powers.

Either ways, the lesson of the day is: Players are bastards.

RPGPundit

Not explaining in favor of creativity is just an easy trick to avoid doing a lot of writing.

This used to be fairly common with one of a kind magical or mystical items/events.  Not knowing exactly what would happen was part of the fun.

Quote from: flyingmice;286479My magic systems are all like that. Very open ended. In Blood Games II, for example, Esotericist spells are just a name, like "Walk Between the Raindrops" or "Like a Balloon." You determine the interpretation within the group. Witch skills are limited by the need to not cause harm. Otherwise your poetry determines the effect. Etcetera.

-clash

Take it back to the Forge, freak.

Errr...  I mean...  Sounds pretty cool, Clash.  

Quote from: Claudius;286495I always loved that power of Vampire. Even if you don't have to roll dice, it works well because the die roll is substituted by common sense.

Absolutely.  However, whose 'common sense' do you use?  

It seems best to find the happy medium here.  Ditching all dice rolls speeds things up, but then you have to endlessly describe what every power does.  Maybe not at the start of a campaign, but when it is time to pick a new one, or upgrade a current one.  "Ok, what does this one do?  Ok, what does this one do?  Can I do this?  What about two ranks in this one?"  On the other hand, too many mechanics spoil the broth; it does make it somewhat easier to game the system.

I think Tim posed a similar question not too long ago.  Can a system of magic/powers really function well when tied into mechanics; are they just too vague in their application to comform to a set of rules?

powers without rules requires too much GMing, and every player is going to be pissed off that his/her power doesnt work the same way each time.

If the powers are loosely defined, than a lot will rest on the GM's interpretation. Unsurprisingly, many GM's think that is just fine, the players not so much.

If the powers are defined in great detail you end up with a complicated, possibly slow system, encourage for min-maxing behaviours and arguments over rules.

A third way is to give up on simulation altogether which is what a game like octaNe does. Basically in octaNe something like escaping from a prison cell might have a Hazard rating; whether you sweet talk the guards, pick the lock with a hairpin or cast a spell to teleport out makes very little difference mechanically, which sort of makes sense but is kind of bland.

I don't think the is any perfect solution. Every choice has its pro and cons, it just figuring out which works best for you.

I wrote a superhero system that plain English can be used to describe how the power works for the most part, simply give it a rank so you know to what degree after explaining it and your done!

Same goes for magic in my FRPG--its detailed explanations of how it works; but its open ended, craft your own spells on the fly, kinda of system (and magic in the setting is not always consistent, on purpose.) Yet at the same time it will mostly work the same way from the players view mechanically--its just the exact details that will vary from spell to spell. The setbacks are pretty random: You cast a spell and it may turn all your bread to stone. Next time you cast it, your eyes may shed bloody tears. Same spell, but the penalties for them may change each time, because its magic, and magics price is costly and variable, that's what makes magic an art--and not a science.

I've run three Requiem games and played in one since it came out and ever single chronicle had someone, if not multiple someones, with that power. It has never been a problem. I don't think it's lazy writing. I think it's pretty self-explanatory. You fade from sight. Keep in mind, there's more of a write-up to the power than Krak included in his description (not that he needed to, since he made his point), but these involve how the character draws attention to himself after using the power and things of that nature.

Over-wordiness (um... proper English: goodbye me thinks) would create more problems than not regarding this power. What more do you need other than:the character literally disappears, rendering the character invisible for the rest of the scene? The combat section already has rules for swinging at people you can't see and the power does talk about how you can't accidentally bump into bystanders (the power doesn't let you), etc..

-=Grim=-

Quote from: GrimJesta;286750Over-wordiness (um... proper English: goodbye me thinks) would create more problems than not regarding this power. What more do you need other than:the character literally disappears, rendering the character invisible for the rest of the scene? The combat section already has rules for swinging at people you can't see and the power does talk about how you can't accidentally bump into bystanders (the power doesn't let you), etc..

Loquaciousness?  Multiloquence?  Verbosity?  

That sort of terse description is fine for what amounts to improved invisibility, but there are other powers that would suffer without a bit more definition.  Flight, for example, or just about any movement power.  How fast can one fly?  How much weight can one carry?  Is it physically tiring, or mentally?

I dig it, broad guidelines and let the GM adjudicate like they are intended.  Some powers do need a bit more clarification, but I don't think there is necessarily a formula for which.  It would have to be handled on a case-by-case basis, with provisions for winging it when required.

I've been wanting to try a magic system like True Sorcery, that seems to both quantify specific magic powers, and allow for creative mixing, which seems like it might be fun if it doesn't end up taking over game time to implement. Otherwise, I'd err on the side of more rules/less interpretation, but not to the extreme.