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.

Author Topic: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?  (Read 7947 times)

RebelSky

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • R
  • Posts: 208
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #60 on: January 12, 2022, 12:51:23 AM »
Setting gets my attention initially, but mechanics are the decider for me. I've walked away from cool settings that have crap mechanics (like Polaris) and I've flatly dropped a cyberpunk game when the GM decided two weeks in that he was going to switch from CPR to GURPS.

This for me as well.

It's why Shadowrun tops the list of great setting, bad mechanisms a lot of time. Sometimes the setting is good enough, and fun enough, to play in even if the rules are not the best.

Opaopajr

  • Señor Wences
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7768
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #61 on: January 12, 2022, 01:42:25 AM »
Setting, no question. I have more systems than I know what to do with. And only a smattering of them are truly novel, let alone helpful, to me running a game (or especially a campaign).

I hated the d20 glut, but I understood it. But then I got everything I thought I wanted from AD&D 2.5e wishlist in D&D 3e... until I played it. Then I hated it and went back hard to find out why I missed all those "warts."

Part of it was actual threat, stakes, you could not "win at chargen" because the setting pushed back harder. Further was ease of use; I thought I hated soggy cereal until Cap'n Crunch made a water resistant cereal so crunchy it cut up the roof of my mouth. White Wolf splatted the known ansgty universe and then granted ever increasing nut-punching in the name of self-tortured roleplay... and then I realized that wasn't truly my bag.

I loved ideas in youth that as an adult I found taxing in practice. Sometimes getting what you want is the best curative medicine. Disillusionment reminds you how fragile the magic of imagination really is -- it can bear only so much weight! Like sugar sculptures, you can take it to seriously great heights, but realize it is still just sugar in the end. Bloated or over-involved mechanics, or high-concept worlds, can both crush, but I find mechanics pops the dream faster, hence my system favortism yet setting exploration.

(edit: This means I am open to buying splats for system I know I will rarely use. /looks at my GURPS pile and sighs

The big stopper for me is bothering with system conversion math. But mechanical conversions for adventures are probably less of an issue than restructuring adventures into something sandboxy or even just coherent. If I have enough system mastery, and enough light & frothy enthusiasm, conversions are typically not so much of a problem.

As for a business... not riding the 5e train is gonna be a challenging sell at its best, even with my longstanding antipathy to WotC. If I was your money, I'd bandwagon AND provide conversion cheat sheets in the back  -- as much as I love small indies and support following your bliss. I guess I have less of an entrepeneur's risk taking sense. )
« Last Edit: January 12, 2022, 01:55:26 AM by Opaopajr »
Just make your fuckin' guy and roll the dice, you pricks. Focus on what's interesting, not what gives you the biggest randomly generated virtual penis.  -- J Arcane
 
You know, people keep comparing non-TSR D&D to deck-building in Magic: the Gathering. But maybe it's more like Katamari Damacy. You keep sticking shit on your characters until they are big enough to be a star.
-- talysman

Hzilong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #62 on: January 12, 2022, 02:45:02 AM »
I rarely use the default setting for a particular game. I might crib a detail or two, but I don’t have the time/attention to hold the mechanics from the ground up. At least, not a level that is creates a satisfactory result. I should mention that I have been my group’s GM for the past 4 years.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2022, 02:47:17 AM by Hzilong »
Resident lurking Chinaman

Mishihari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • M
  • Posts: 989
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #63 on: January 12, 2022, 09:14:25 AM »
Okay - for people that buy for mechanics.

Does this mean that you use those mechanics outside of the published settings? And do you GM? Do you ever convert other settings to these mechanics?

Usually no.  As I mentioned, it's important to me that the mechanics support the setting.  Though I could see maybe using the same mechanics for multiple settings in the same genre, tweaking as necessary.

Steven Mitchell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 3772
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #64 on: January 12, 2022, 09:17:06 AM »
A big part for me with mechanics or setting is how much "accounting" they take to adapt in any way.  That includes adding your own custom stuff to the setting in place.

Let's take the 5E monster development section in the DMG.  However well it works or doesn't, it's big drawback is that it is a lot of accounting for relatively little return. With a little experience, you can eyeball the monster's stats and simply write them down, given you something that will work a lot faster--that may even be more accurate to what the guidelines are trying to do.  As a "show your work during long division" kind of exercise, that subsystem may have some value in teaching people new to the system, but the faster you drop it, the happier you'll be.  It's biggest flaw however is that its over-complicated in pursuit of a mechanical answer substituting for GM judgment.  Someone more confident in the GMs would have produced a better system. (Not that any WotC game has been good at this particular thing.)

It's harder to provide a clear example, but involved settings can produce a similar effect.  The most valuable thing the setting author can do is get to the heart of the matter, as concisely as possible.  Then details need to radiate out from that as examples and/or things the GM can use until they get the hang of it.  So often, the critical parts are implied or buried in irrelevant detail.  It becomes a kind of accounting to master the setting in order to change it. 

None of that is to say that every thing needs to be simple.  There can be substantial mechanic or setting details, but they need to be key and deliver something if they are there to absorb.

tenbones

  • Poobah of the D.O.N.G.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6164
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #65 on: January 12, 2022, 11:35:57 AM »
Obviously like many I started out in basic D&D and it will always loom over me in terms of my tastes, though not so much any more.

I've played tons and tons of RPG's of different systems, tons of different settings - and I've come to like what I like, but I'm always looking for new ways both mechanical and narratively (setting concepts etc) to elevate my games.

Sometime around D&D3e I got into writing published material and I really dug deep into it, and kept hitting these mechanical walls that just did not make the game scale well. I tried many ways to fix it - and found some good ones, but after the d20 glut of that era post 3.x I really got tired of the mechanics bloat. I rediscovered the glory of MSH with my new group. Talislanta as well. It was a reframing of my views that you could get more with less. It kinda got me down this path of trying to figure out the scaling "Holy Grail" in a system that was "out there, somewhere".

Obviously very few games "do this" natively. But I kept looking at MSH, convinced (and I remain convinced) that it needs some tweaks but it could do down-and-gritty D&D-style fantasy, and scale up to crazy-town Exalted RPG levels of play (and beyond).

Somehow I got sidetracked - Deadlands. I'd owned Fudge, never thought much about it, I dibble-dabbled looking into FATE, came to not like it. But Deadlands was my very late introduction to Savage Worlds. And I'm still diving deep into it. It checks off a lot of the issues I have - that GURPS also fills (which is something I need to get deeper into) in that it's designed to work with any genre, and designed to be tuned up/down with fidelity.

I've also been looking at WEGd6, Mythras, Genesys, and a few others systems that can be "universal" in their expressions. What I find kinda odd is the reticence of many players from engaging with these systems either in a Homebrew unless it's some official version. I know Savage Rifts has definitely pulled in a lot of classic Rifts players, and the same with Savage Pathfinder.

But would anyone actually play a Forgotten Realms WEGd6 edition? Or Mythras Darksun? Genesys Ravenloft?


Steven Mitchell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 3772
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #66 on: January 12, 2022, 02:45:49 PM »
Specific combos is where it gets difficult to answer.  I'd run a Star Wars Toon game, because it is impossible for me to treat Star Wars as anything but a cartoon parody.  I can't take it "seriously" even on its own terms.  I like Toon a lot (mechanics and setting), can't stand Star Wars, but I'd run that combo.

I also like Lord of the Rings, but wouldn't run it with any mechanics.  I don't think it makes a good RPG setting (or rather, what you'd use as a setting isn't the part that appeals to me). 

Love Vance's Lyonesse, but had my doubts about the new game even before they decided to virtue signal on the initial launch.  Don't think an RQ style game is a good fit for what makes that setting interesting.  I can see doing it in a highly modified Ars Magica. 

Dying Earth is a terrible RPG setting--as is.  Marrying it with a story game like the latest did is even worse, since it's not playing in Dying Earth.  It's playing at being in Dying Earth.  However, I use Dying Earth inspired elements in my D&D games all the time.  They fit great when the setting is your own. 

VisionStorm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2184
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #67 on: January 12, 2022, 05:50:40 PM »
I've also been looking at WEGd6, Mythras, Genesys, and a few others systems that can be "universal" in their expressions. What I find kinda odd is the reticence of many players from engaging with these systems either in a Homebrew unless it's some official version. I know Savage Rifts has definitely pulled in a lot of classic Rifts players, and the same with Savage Pathfinder.

But would anyone actually play a Forgotten Realms WEGd6 edition? Or Mythras Darksun? Genesys Ravenloft?

I don't know about this board or how many would do it back in the real world, but over at the Pub I saw someone mention they've played Ravenloft using RQ or something to that effect just a day or two ago. The guy who loves Mythras even posted his Mythras Dark Sun notes (I was gonna check em out, but I think I misplaced them :P). I also mentioned I'd try Dark Sun with my own homebrew, a couple posts ago, also RIFTS (which I did heavy homebrewed stuff with ages ago). I would consider Spelljammer or Planescape as well, though, I'd probably try one of my own settings for world-hopping stuff, instead, since I have a couple of those on the works. WEDd6 would probably rock all those settings as well (it's one of the more versatile systems, really).

Question is: would players go for it? Some players won't touch stuff unless you show'em official books with flashy pictures on them. Granted, that depends a lot on the player and the GM's presentation. Savage Worlds seems to have opened the door for system hopping a bit, so that's hopeful.

Chris24601

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • C
  • Posts: 3326
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #68 on: January 12, 2022, 11:53:17 PM »
But would anyone actually play a Forgotten Realms WEGd6 edition? Or Mythras Darksun? Genesys Ravenloft?
Honestly? Probably not.

But then I consider Forgotten Realms to be a horror show of unfortunate cosmic implications that people mostly only play because it’s the most supported by non-rpg material and is the default setting for 5e and generally the most supported setting from 3e forward.

Similarly, I find nothing about Ravenloft as a setting that couldn’t just as easily be done (and likely done better) in a horror themed campaign using actual Dracula and other literary/classic film horrors. If I’m not using the D&D game engine I may as well use the originals for a home game instead of off-brand expys.

I might try Dark Sun using a different system, but then again, I actually really like 4E and consider it’s version of Dark Sun to basically be the high point of its design life cycle (themes were finally added and those in Dark Sun were highly thematic for the setting, inherent bonuses were in full effect to make magic items not required to make the game’s math work, and the monster math had been fixed so the monster book for Dark Sun was loaded down with interesting threats that weren’t the “padded sumo” of the MM1 & 2).

I think the main issue for me is that I’ve never found generic systems to work for anything other than rather generic settings.* The more thematic the setting (such as Ravenloft or Dark Sun) the more it benefits from a custom system (in addition to the above, 4E’s more survivable starting characters slotted nicely into the original Dark Sun’s better stat rolling and starting at higher than level 1 options).

Basically, none of those are particularly unique enough settings for me to want to both play them whole cloth and want to put in the effort of conversion rules or building a custom ruleset.

About the only table-top game property that’s actually had my interest enough to want to build a custom ruleset is Battletech (because every RPG add-on they’ve done sucks… they’re currently on their 5th attempt and each one was a “from scratch effort” rather than iterative refinements) and World of Darkness (because I find their dice pool mechanics rather clunky).

Everything else I’ve really desired to make custom rules for has been a media property of some kind; Robotech and Star Trek primarily… if Star Wars didn’t have the WEG ruleset it would probably be on this list as well.

* also, many generic settings… aren’t. They often carry the assumptions of whatever the first genre it was built to emulate with them into other settings; which is why d20/3e has always struggled outside of fantasy, why the HERO System and True20 have always worked best for emulating superheroes and why every Palladium game ultimately feels like a subset of Rifts (which itself is really just a refinement of Kevin’s actual gonzo Palladium Fantasy campaign that he toned down into Palladium Fantasy 1e).

Wrath of God

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
  • Fearful Symmetry
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #69 on: January 13, 2022, 05:10:09 AM »
Quote
But then I consider Forgotten Realms to be a horror show of unfortunate cosmic implications that people mostly only play because it’s the most supported by non-rpg material and is the default setting for 5e and generally the most supported setting from 3e forward.

What do you mean exactly by "horror show"?

Quote
Similarly, I find nothing about Ravenloft as a setting that couldn’t just as easily be done (and likely done better) in a horror themed campaign using actual Dracula and other literary/classic film horrors. If I’m not using the D&D game engine I may as well use the originals for a home game instead of off-brand expys.

Well but with actual Dracula, really any sense of mystery would be sooner gone. I mean presumably nowadays Strahd is in top 10 of recognized vampires, so you'd like to re-vamp them again I guess ;)
"Never compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.”

"And I will strike down upon thee
With great vengeance and furious anger"


"Molti Nemici, Molto Onore"

Chris24601

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • C
  • Posts: 3326
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #70 on: January 13, 2022, 07:14:41 AM »
What do you mean exactly by "horror show"?
The short version is that the supreme god, Ao, elevates extremely flawed mortals into gods then demands that people worship these ascended mortals on pain of eternal torment. Note: as written this includes every child who dies before the age of reason.

So the true god of the setting demands you worship lesser false gods (they only have power because Ao wills it) and even the supposedly good-aligned gods are okay with throwing children and those who refuse to worship ascended mortals as gods into a wall of eternal torment.

Throw in on top of that is that, best case, if you do go to your ascended human’s divine realm your soul and identity lasts maybe a hundred years before your essence dissolves into the realm (so your essence becomes a tree… or a brick in the god’s new palace wing) or, if you’re really “lucky” gets used to make a new celestial servant (which does not carry your memories or identity… it’s just been assembled out of your spirit-stuff).

Throw in on top of that that the wicked; murderers, rapists, etc.; just need to pick the right ascended mortal as their patron god and they get the same rewards as the virtuous who pick the ascended mortal with the portfolio of mercy and compassion. So do whatever the frak you want because there’s a patron for it who will reward you in the afterlife for doing it (until you end up as a lawn chair just like the virtuous man).

And yet this setting is supposed to run on the same basic echoes of Christian morality that the West has been running on for the last hundred years (though we’re finally seeing the Left embrace the logical end points of abandoning it… i.e. if there is no God, then might makes right… instead of pretending that Western morality is somehow intrinsic to humanity).

So it’s not only a cosmic horror show, it’s an illogical cosmic horror show.

So, basically, your default choices are eternal torment in the Wall of the Faithless or complete annihilation so your essence can be used as raw material for some ascended mortal’s whims. If you are someone who seeks truth and refuses to worship another flawed and limited being as your deity, you are punished for it.

It is thus a setting where becoming undead and converting as many willing mortals as possible into undead to evade either option is actually one of the more ethical paths and escaping via Spelljammer with every family member and friend they can convince to a more sane universe ASAP (stear clear of Eberron, it’s almost as bad, but another topic) is what any sane being who has studied the Realms’ metaphysics should be doing at the earliest opportunity.

Now it should be stressed that it’s likely none of this was intentional.* The whole thing proceeded in stages and it’s basically the unfortunate implications of a system of metaphysics set up piecemeal by multiple writers with basically no understanding of actual metaphysics and only a surface-level understanding of religion… but nevertheless for those who do have a deeper grounding in those things; the Forgotten Realms are basically a Hell Dimension.

At least that’s my take on it.

* Eberron’s while not piecemeal is basically the result of the same type of failures… specifically, in trying to devise an afterlife based pre-Christian understandings they didn’t look beyond the grey mists of Hades and so didn’t bother to include the Elysian Fields or Tartarus in the mix… everyone just ends up a disembodied spirit wandering without memories through an endless grey dimension… so again, zero moral structure to encourage goodness among mortals instead of indulging your every whim while you live (and every horror you commit to extend your life rewarding you with no metaphysical downside for your eternal soul) other than the generally proved false by human history belief that most people are intrinsically good (some surely are, but again… the logical end point of any moral system without just rewards the righteous and punishme for the wicked is going to end up with the majority following an ethos of “might makes right/whatever I can get away with”).

Steven Mitchell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 3772
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #71 on: January 13, 2022, 07:22:13 AM »
You will always have the divide between people who primarily want to enact the novels or source material versus people who primarily want to play in the world.  Setting material designed for one is bad for the other.  Mechanics designed for one is bad for the other.  There's a certain amount of the natural divide between those who favor style over substance and those who favor form over function, too.  It will frequently but not always have a strong correlation with the enact source material versus play in the world. 

There's a reason why we have the idea of some players don't really care about playing in the setting with appropriate mechanics as long as their character can wear a trenchcoat, carry a katana, and spout dialogue.

Vidgrip

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • V
  • Posts: 134
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #72 on: January 13, 2022, 08:32:13 AM »
Setting. I may not buy a game if it uses a mechanical system I don't like, but I wouldn't even be reading the product description if the setting didn't sound good.
Playing: John Carter of Mars, Hyperborea
Running: Swords & Wizardry Complete

Persimmon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #73 on: January 13, 2022, 09:38:19 AM »
You will always have the divide between people who primarily want to enact the novels or source material versus people who primarily want to play in the world.  Setting material designed for one is bad for the other.  Mechanics designed for one is bad for the other.  There's a certain amount of the natural divide between those who favor style over substance and those who favor form over function, too.  It will frequently but not always have a strong correlation with the enact source material versus play in the world. 

There's a reason why we have the idea of some players don't really care about playing in the setting with appropriate mechanics as long as their character can wear a trenchcoat, carry a katana, and spout dialogue.

This pretty much nails my critique of The One Ring.  The very framework of the game with its "Council," "Fellowship," & "Journey" phases essentially shoehorns you into replaying The Hobbit & LOTR over and over.  Then they bake in lots of other mechanics for flavor that again seem to prioritize roll playing over actual roleplaying like having the Loremaster (GM) make a bunch of rolls before the game starts to figure out how the party "feels" during their journey, which in turn has mechanical effects.  And of course party members must take specifically defined roles for the journey and again roll to see how they performed their role.  Even the combat is clunky with all kinds of stances, etc.  This despite thye fact that it's not supposed to be a particularly combat heavy or tactical game.

Now clearly some people really like this, judging from the huge success of their last KS.  But to me it strips away a lot of freedom and agency.  I know the setting well enough that I can evoke the mood I want without resorting to endless rolls and contrivances.  Just get me to Middle Earth and I'll find some orcs to kill and undead to rob of whatever.

Also, I appreciated your "Highlander" reference.  Remember that pseudo-Highlander RPG "Legacy: War of the Ages?"


tenbones

  • Poobah of the D.O.N.G.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6164
Re: Mechanics or Setting - What sells a game to you?
« Reply #74 on: January 13, 2022, 11:56:03 AM »
I've also been looking at WEGd6, Mythras, Genesys, and a few others systems that can be "universal" in their expressions. What I find kinda odd is the reticence of many players from engaging with these systems either in a Homebrew unless it's some official version. I know Savage Rifts has definitely pulled in a lot of classic Rifts players, and the same with Savage Pathfinder.

But would anyone actually play a Forgotten Realms WEGd6 edition? Or Mythras Darksun? Genesys Ravenloft?

I don't know about this board or how many would do it back in the real world, but over at the Pub I saw someone mention they've played Ravenloft using RQ or something to that effect just a day or two ago. The guy who loves Mythras even posted his Mythras Dark Sun notes (I was gonna check em out, but I think I misplaced them :P). I also mentioned I'd try Dark Sun with my own homebrew, a couple posts ago, also RIFTS (which I did heavy homebrewed stuff with ages ago). I would consider Spelljammer or Planescape as well, though, I'd probably try one of my own settings for world-hopping stuff, instead, since I have a couple of those on the works. WEDd6 would probably rock all those settings as well (it's one of the more versatile systems, really).

Question is: would players go for it? Some players won't touch stuff unless you show'em official books with flashy pictures on them. Granted, that depends a lot on the player and the GM's presentation. Savage Worlds seems to have opened the door for system hopping a bit, so that's hopeful.

It's not players that I'm interested in per se - GM's are who drive games. They're the ones that drop the most gold. They're also the ones that sell their campaigns at the table for their players.

I'm interested in people here (and the Pub when I used to post there) because I'm curious about what drives people to purchase AND use games to what degree. I'm very aware that the RPGSite is a very specific slice of the hobby - but I also think the 'Site probably has the largest array of actual diverse opinions on gaming and purchasing habits. A big part of this is because we skew much older and a lot of us have disposable income. I know if all this SJW bullshit wasn't infesting our hobby, and I was able to pick up games like in the 2e/3e era, there are *thousands* of dollars left on the table I'd otherwise have made gaming purchases on today.

So I'm interested in what people actually want vs. what they do in practice.