There are elements to RPG rules i find important, other gamers don't.

So, just curious, how important are some elements of rpg systems to you?

Hit locations: I usually see these as important even tho a game i like, EP, ignores them.

Criticals: I like these as in real live everyone has seriously flubbed something that seemed simple and had a howling success at something they thought would be hard. So crits are kinda important to me, especially if linked to skill levels. Clockwork crits like on a d20 i don't like so much as a skilled master gets the same crits as a noob.

At least a little realism. I played starfinder for a while, never could get over how a level 10 character could be hit with ordnance weapons and survive while a 1st level character could be killed by a pistol shot. Hey, a general may be a 20th level soldier, but a 7.62mm to the head kills him  as fast as it would gomer pyle. When a system gets as removed from anything resembling realty as rifts or d20, i just can' t feel right about it. Being able to suspend my disbelief instead of having to murder, dismember, burn the pieces  and scatter it's ashes is  kinda important to me.

Sanity rules/humanity rules. Not terribly important to me unless it's like call of cthulhu where  losing sanity is part of the game or star wars where doing evil things makes you shift over to the dark side. But i know they have uses in hardcore roleplaying. I knew someone who worked with some agencies i won't name here. He became a prime example of why some intelligence agents are called "spooks". he lived in a very shadowy uncertain world where his own side might set him up to be captured, tortured or killed as part of some scheme Machiavelli couldn't have followed. Sometimes you could see a little of the world he lived in reflected in his eyes. Yeah, it was a spooky place and living in it affected him, that 'thousand yard stare" thing is real. I can see them in some really gritty games where it's mostly "Choose your pain", but sure as hell not in all games.

To answer the question:

• I like player-options where a breadth of choice is not disguising a secret-optimization game. So, cool choices that are meaningful.
• I'm fine now with HP or some variation thereof. I feel like players get that. Everything else takes too long procedurally.
• Reasonable-length combat. I don't need it super simple (feels bland) but I also don't need hit-locations, bleeding, wounds, etc. I've found it just bogs things down and doesn't add anything to the game. IMHO of course.
• I used to be a generic system fanatic. I've changed my mind. I want classes, archetypes, or professions. I want people to pick a role and fit with the group. Generic systems allow too much leeway and it becomes a horrible mother-may-I wank-fest that serves to only ruin the game before we get started.

Re: Starfinder/d20/level/class systems and "realism"

Realism for the heroic game is stupid. It sucks the fun out of the heroic roleplaying experience. The bulk of the tropes, stereotypes, and themes are drawn from media. TV, movies, comics, graphic novels, fiction, video games... Most of these mediums don't care about realism - they care about awesome.

The primary goal of the tabletop RPG experience is to have fun. So, smart GMs toss out shit that isn't fun. Especially when numerous players tell us something is not fun. No fun? No dice. Toss it.

The PCs in a heroic game are not supposed to be easy to kill with an AK-47. Just like John McClane is not easy to kill with hundreds of bullets and multiple clear opportunities to the contrary. Explain it away as avoiding the blow, or that almost got you, or whatnot, but until you hit 0 HP? You're fine. It's an action movie trope. The goal here is to participate not to emulate.

The reason I say realism is stupid is not because realism is stupid. It's actually fine for certain games with certain themes. Instead, I say realism is stupid because of how stubbornly we cling to it -- like some benchmark in an administered GMing test. It's not. You generally don't need it. You may think you do, but the players in a Starfinder game don't want to wax poetic about their guts being re-installed by a robotic surgeon. They want to save the galaxy and look cool doing it!

You want gritty? Check out Traveller, I feel like it would be grittier. I like the CoD games as mortals. Can be pretty brutal without the armor of a supernatural. OSR games tend to be low HP, and with some easy to steal options, can be super gritty. But there's a time and place for it. You're average heroic fantasy/sci-fi/action game is not the place for it. You have to pick the game for the audience.

I've spent decades lamenting games for not fitting some imagined ideal (with "realism" being a crutch I loved to lean on...). It's pure folly. Find out what the group wants, pick the game that fits, and then focus on making that game fun. Realism is a suckers game in a heroic RPG like Starfinder. Get realism with a game designed for it with a group that wants it. Hopefully will save you some headache/heartbreak.

A simple unified system of making stat-rolls. It fills so many gaps in systems that lack them.

What I need are some equivalent of Health, Precision, Speed, Attack, and Defense.

Health - How resilient is the character?
Precision - What is the probability of hitting the mark?
Speed - How fast can the character move to attack or avoid attack?
Attack - What are the effects of a successful attack?
Defense - To what degree can those effects be mitigated?

If that's all I have, I still have a good amount of detail. There are multiple dimensions across which one can be a competent fighter.

From that alone, social conventions become implicit. If there are multiple dimensions of competence, even at combat, how do the various combinations affect a character's rise up the hierarchy? Which combination is "the best." And even then, that's no guarantee the character stays at the top. 2 or 3 lesser warriors could team up to take "the best" down, and so quickly social cohesion becomes a factor. And the different strategies for achieving that can be embodied by different personalities.

While it's probably desirable to have more recognizable skills and abilities, this simple scheme does lay out some minimum essentials by which I could run an RPG.


Regarding criticals. For the most part, I like them. But I actually dislike them in D&D. And here's my broader commentary. Gamers often confuse x for f(x). When I make a hit roll, the number I roll is x. Whether or not it hits, that's f(x). It's not x that matters. It's just an intermediary abstraction. It's f(x) that actually is of mechanical consequence.

I don't really have any systems that I consider essential to an RPG.  It's entirely genre-dependent.  I want systems that support the activities in the game performed in the appropriate style of the genre.  Even things that seem fundamental like a health mechanic may not be needed if there's no possibility of dying in the genre you're playing.

Quote from: The Thing on May 20, 2021, 10:22:48 PM
There are elements to RPG rules i find important, other gamers don't.

If you have not played them, you may enjoy for scifi Classic Traveller, for medieval and earlier RuneQuest (which can have all magic removed and loses very little in play), and for modern day my own Conflict.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on May 21, 2021, 02:12:17 AM

Quote from: The Thing on May 20, 2021, 10:22:48 PM
There are elements to RPG rules i find important, other gamers don't.

If you have not played them, you may enjoy for scifi Classic Traveller, for medieval and earlier RuneQuest (which can have all magic removed and loses very little in play), and for modern day my own Conflict.

I like the elements of classic traveller, but the mechanics of the early systems were way to granular for me. But I like the ideas of classic traveller with charactes not being superhuman or outside normal abilities in their society. A lot of modern rpgs are almost like the players are the justice league or the avengers, with traveller it was more like you were ocean's 11 or maybe the IMF team from mission impossible. Experts, maybe, but not supers.

You know i'd like to see a game that would be a traveller reboot called 'transhuman traveller" that mixed transhumanism in with some of the elements of classic traveller, like the jump drive and no ftl comm. The 'imperium' is more of a voluntary alliance between worlds that  often have radically different views and systems, some worlds might be heavily trans or post human, others might be more conservative, etc. You could have heavily cybernetic worlds, heavily gene modified, combinations, etc.

The solomani could remain mostly the same and we could still have the classic traveller aliens, but humanity went transhuman in a lot of ways.

So it might be a cross of eclipse phase and traveller, with some elements of EP like the fall taken out.

Concerning granularity: I think a realistic system is indeed granular. As Seth Godin put it,

QuoteInsignificant digits

Who's a better student? The one with a 3.95 GPA or the one with 3.96?

Neither or both, actually.

These metrics are foolishly and incorrectly precise. The decisions that led to this average had far more than a hundredth of a point of randomness and judgment calls along the way.

Who's richer? Someone with 3 billion dollars or someone with 3.1 billion?

They're both the same. They can buy anything they want and one won't run out of money before the other.

And the same goes for clickthrough rates, body temperature and most of the other 'measures' of our life that deserve air quotes around them.

Just because we can increase the digits doesn't mean we can see more clearly.

Many detailed systems are "foolishly and incorrectly precise."

Quote from: The Thing on May 20, 2021, 10:22:48 PM
There are elements to RPG rules i find important, other gamers don't.

So, just curious, how important are some elements of rpg systems to you?

A skill-based game mechanic. That's number one for me.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on May 22, 2021, 01:01:34 AM
Many detailed systems are "foolishly and incorrectly precise."

I tend to agree, but as an aside I think there's room for some types of precision, mostly in the versimultude category.

For example, I really do appreciate the way Palladium's Robotech lists out all the trivial equipment of the mecha; the precise sensors, air speed at differing altitudes, weapon calibers, parts manufacturers.

None of these have ANY mechanical effect in the system at all, but knowing you've got an IR camera or external audio pickup... or that your fighter has better relative airspeed than your opponent at a certain altitude (and not at others)... or that your laser has variable wattage (I work with a laser engraver, different intensities and focal distances can be the difference between vaporizing organic compounds for a clean cut or setting it on fire or barely warming the surface) can all come into play as part of roleplaying and unconventional problem solving.

Quote from: Chris24601 on May 22, 2021, 10:05:00 AM

For example, I really do appreciate the way Palladium's Robotech lists out all the trivial equipment of the mecha; the precise sensors, air speed at differing altitudes, weapon calibers, parts manufacturers.

None of these have ANY mechanical effect in the system at all, but knowing you've got an IR camera or external audio pickup... or that your fighter has better relative airspeed than your opponent at a certain altitude (and not at others)... or that your laser has variable wattage (I work with a laser engraver, different intensities and focal distances can be the difference between vaporizing organic compounds for a clean cut or setting it on fire or barely warming the surface) can all come into play as part of roleplaying and unconventional problem solving.

I'm not familiar with Palladium, but I 100% agree on the basic principle. There's a tendency in many RPGs to oversystematize, and to try to define everything in terms of game stats like powers or abilities, when it's often much simpler, clearer, and more precise to just say something like "a short wave radio with a 500 km range".

Quote from: Chris24601 on May 22, 2021, 10:05:00 AM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on May 22, 2021, 01:01:34 AM
Many detailed systems are "foolishly and incorrectly precise."

I tend to agree, but as an aside I think there's room for some types of precision, mostly in the versimultude category.

For example, I really do appreciate the way Palladium's Robotech lists out all the trivial equipment of the mecha; the precise sensors, air speed at differing altitudes, weapon calibers, parts manufacturers.

None of these have ANY mechanical effect in the system at all, but knowing you've got an IR camera or external audio pickup... or that your fighter has better relative airspeed than your opponent at a certain altitude (and not at others)... or that your laser has variable wattage (I work with a laser engraver, different intensities and focal distances can be the difference between vaporizing organic compounds for a clean cut or setting it on fire or barely warming the surface) can all come into play as part of roleplaying and unconventional problem solving.

Ok, while palladium's system makes me bleed from the eyes, i agree with what you said here 100%. Just giving the raw stats works for a combat game but not a rpg.

As to an example of why that stuff work in a rpg situation, remember that op of battlestar galactica with a raptor and a heavy raider show down on kobol? The cylons took their wrecked ship apart and began building an improvised missile launcher system with parts from it including the radar and the missiles?  That was something combat rules didn't cover but a rpg system might have happen.

So knowing you veritech has this sort of stuff that normally plays no role in combat works in some rpg situation, like using parts from a wrecked vertiech to make improvised weapons or add to defenses of a site you're holding. Which means it was meant to be a rpg, not just a combat game with character names.

Quote from: Pat on May 22, 2021, 04:55:25 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on May 22, 2021, 10:05:00 AM

For example, I really do appreciate the way Palladium's Robotech lists out all the trivial equipment of the mecha; the precise sensors, air speed at differing altitudes, weapon calibers, parts manufacturers.

None of these have ANY mechanical effect in the system at all, but knowing you've got an IR camera or external audio pickup... or that your fighter has better relative airspeed than your opponent at a certain altitude (and not at others)... or that your laser has variable wattage (I work with a laser engraver, different intensities and focal distances can be the difference between vaporizing organic compounds for a clean cut or setting it on fire or barely warming the surface) can all come into play as part of roleplaying and unconventional problem solving.

I'm not familiar with Palladium, but I 100% agree on the basic principle. There's a tendency in many RPGs to oversystematize, and to try to define everything in terms of game stats like powers or abilities, when it's often much simpler, clearer, and more precise to just say something like "a short wave radio with a 500 km range".

I'd say the key is to keep them obviously separate from the crunch. Having that stuff as fluff is cool - but it shouldn't clutter up the books when you're looking for a specific mechanic.

The issue is that if you have all that detail, then players will expect it to make a difference in play.

One element that I found very useful in that regard was that one of the bits actually included how many kN of thrust each of an Alpha Fighter's engines produces. The ones mounted on each forearm is 110 kN as I recall (so about half that of one of a 747's engines)... which became very relevant when I was looking for a non-lethal means of dispersing an angry crowd. I used one arm as a counter-thruster and the other to blast the crowd with jet backwash from about a 100' (much closer and I would have just bowled them over) the GM decided that a few seconds of deafening hurricane force winds was enough to convince the rioters to disperse.

It ended up being a little annoying for the GM in the long run though because there were no game mechanics for it because, as anyone who's ever McGuyver'd a cool solution that would be a one-off in a TV show does soin an RPG... it's going to become a signature move. Basically, I started using my mecha's thrusters as close combat weapons; because each forearm, foot and two points on the chest having a 110-150 kN plasma thrusters mounted on them is actually REALLY useful in melee when most of your opponents are bipedal with fairly broad surfaces and mass in the 6-20 ton range and roughly human-sized battle suits (that you really hate to waste your limited missile payload on).

All because of a bit of trivia about the Alpha's engine type and performance merging with that Mythbusters episode about 747 backwash. That's something that having the granularity of description was a huge plus and only really started needing mechanics once it became a regular part of my arsenal.

Spinning that over to fantasy games though... I definitely think a granular list of equipment, even if it doesn't have any mechanics associated with it, is extremely useful to have for a system. One of the biggest problems I've had with a lot of more abstract systems is that when gear doesn't directly matter, you stop looking at it as a way to solve problems. Just seeing "hammer, 6 pitons and 50' of rope" in your equipment list inspires trying to find ways to use them. By contrast "typical adventuring gear" doesn't inspire much of anything.

It's also worth remembering that equipment with crunchier descriptions in various systems probably is so mostly because the author experienced a particular ruling on that equipment's use often enough to feel it would be useful to actually write it out for posterity.