Though these games we play are called role-playing games, role-playing often seems to take a back seat--especially in D&D from 3rd edition on. However, the sessions and games I've enjoyed most are the ones most focused on the role-play element ("wut iz this ar pee!?"). But how does role-play even work? Is it correct to call D&D a role-playing game, or is it a game with role-playing?
If one is playing a card game, it has rules about cards. What rules does D&D or WoD have about role-playing? In AD&D, there was the reaction roll. Percentile dice, modified by your charisma score (per a chart) determined how positively or negatively an NPC reacted to you. There were also alignments that dictated moral roleplaying, and certain mechanical penalties for violating those alignments (loss of a level if your alignment changed, loss of special status for Paladins, Clerics and Monks).
In World of Darkness, there's an even greater array of "role-playing rules." Characters had three base attributes to tell us about their social abilities (presence, manipulation and composure), which tied into an array of skills (including persuasion, empathy, socialize, etc.).
Now, recall that, above, I said some of my favorite gaming memories stem from games focused on role-playing. The shameful truth is, I usually ignored or downplayed these role-playing rules. Sometimes I'd roll them and ignore the roll, or I would simply forget to roll in the heat of the moment. Instead of allowing the dice to determine the outcome of role-playing "encounters," I allowed success to stem from role-playing skill.
Now that I say it that way, it seems like a no-brainer. Why should the inattentive clown in the corner whose character has high manipulation and a good persuasion roll be able to convince the neighboring werewolf pack to assist against a greater threat? You don't win a hand of poker by rolling a seven and you don't succeed at role-playing encounters by rolling a twenty. You succeed by role-playing well.
What does this all have to do with my homebrew fantasy game? Well, it means that the emphasis is on role-playing, and this emphasis is to be achieved not by a long list of rules, skills and sub-systems, but, instead, by their absence.
You should expect to see a sub-system that rewards archetypal behavior, but this will affect the characters behavior in broad strokes, steering them towards a destiny negotiated between the player and the DM. However, if you want the Duke to send armed guards with you as you negotiate the dangers of the Dread City, it's time to get in character.
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Monday, February 23, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Design Principles
The following are my design principles for my homebrew fantasy game. Some may be added or subtracted as time goes on, but I hope to refer to these ideas as I plan. This should keep me grounded in reality and prevent me from wandering off into some horrific unplayable chimera of a game.
1. The math should be as easy as possible
Numbers should remain as small as possible, while still being intuitive. This means as little scaling as possible while maintaining a sense of growth and progress. It also means as few axes of growth as possible.
2. Character growth should take place in a limited space
Scaling should be more along the lines of AD&D than 4e. In AD&D, monsters were useful in one capacity or another for nearly the entire life of a campaign (in low-level modules, bugbears are powerful threat, in D1, bugbears are a relatively effective force in the Drows' armies). I do not want to have distinct tiers of play in which certain monsters are untouchable, or useless. This prevents the growth of an organic game world.
3. Character growth should be meaningful
This ties in to the point above--when characters grow too much, it becomes immediately apparent that you're playing the same game, relatively speaking, just with much bigger numbers.
4. There should be fewer mandatory awards
In 4e (and AD&D to a lesser extent), magic items are not a luxury, they are a necessity. The same is true of money. Money and magic items should be an exciting perk, not one more burden.
5. Reward the fun stuff!
In 1e, there is only one significant way to gain xp--find treasure. In 4e, you have to win in tactical combat. I find that I actually prefer the former (it encourages smart gameplay and creative solutions). XP rewards should be given for all elements of the game that the DM wants the players to partake in--roleplaying, questing, treasure and combat.
6. Customization should have a small mechanical effect
The greater of an effect customization has on a character mechanically, the easier it is to make a character who is incapable of doing his job. Further, too much customization leads to broken
"combos." Even if there are no broken combos, there are still unintended consequences and the difficulty of presenting adequate challenges to one min-maxed character, three average characters and one lousy character.
7. Customization should have a big effect on plot
There should be meaningful choices that a character makes that affect how he or she interacts in the world. When a game system is too much of a zoo, there's simply not enough time to focus on all of the issues created, so, instead, none are addressed. Since customization will not have a huge impact on mechanics, it should have a huge impact on the storytelling element.
8. There should be more storytelling
Rules should encourage an organic world that interacts with the PCs in a dynamic way. Where rules do not do so, they should step out of the way.
9. There should be more problem-solving
Good puzzles are great fun because the players can actively work together to overcome a problem which their in-game statistics do not affect.
10. There should be less combat, or at least it should be less time consuming
Ultimately, there are better mediums for tactical combat (more of you need to play WoW with me). Ultimately, combat is a mechanic for resolving whether or not the PCs are strong enough to overcome their foes. Combat needs to be long enough and meaningful enough for the players to exercise their characters' heroic capabilities. However, it should not be the primary focus of the game.
1. The math should be as easy as possible
Numbers should remain as small as possible, while still being intuitive. This means as little scaling as possible while maintaining a sense of growth and progress. It also means as few axes of growth as possible.
2. Character growth should take place in a limited space
Scaling should be more along the lines of AD&D than 4e. In AD&D, monsters were useful in one capacity or another for nearly the entire life of a campaign (in low-level modules, bugbears are powerful threat, in D1, bugbears are a relatively effective force in the Drows' armies). I do not want to have distinct tiers of play in which certain monsters are untouchable, or useless. This prevents the growth of an organic game world.
3. Character growth should be meaningful
This ties in to the point above--when characters grow too much, it becomes immediately apparent that you're playing the same game, relatively speaking, just with much bigger numbers.
4. There should be fewer mandatory awards
In 4e (and AD&D to a lesser extent), magic items are not a luxury, they are a necessity. The same is true of money. Money and magic items should be an exciting perk, not one more burden.
5. Reward the fun stuff!
In 1e, there is only one significant way to gain xp--find treasure. In 4e, you have to win in tactical combat. I find that I actually prefer the former (it encourages smart gameplay and creative solutions). XP rewards should be given for all elements of the game that the DM wants the players to partake in--roleplaying, questing, treasure and combat.
6. Customization should have a small mechanical effect
The greater of an effect customization has on a character mechanically, the easier it is to make a character who is incapable of doing his job. Further, too much customization leads to broken
"combos." Even if there are no broken combos, there are still unintended consequences and the difficulty of presenting adequate challenges to one min-maxed character, three average characters and one lousy character.
7. Customization should have a big effect on plot
There should be meaningful choices that a character makes that affect how he or she interacts in the world. When a game system is too much of a zoo, there's simply not enough time to focus on all of the issues created, so, instead, none are addressed. Since customization will not have a huge impact on mechanics, it should have a huge impact on the storytelling element.
8. There should be more storytelling
Rules should encourage an organic world that interacts with the PCs in a dynamic way. Where rules do not do so, they should step out of the way.
9. There should be more problem-solving
Good puzzles are great fun because the players can actively work together to overcome a problem which their in-game statistics do not affect.
10. There should be less combat, or at least it should be less time consuming
Ultimately, there are better mediums for tactical combat (more of you need to play WoW with me). Ultimately, combat is a mechanic for resolving whether or not the PCs are strong enough to overcome their foes. Combat needs to be long enough and meaningful enough for the players to exercise their characters' heroic capabilities. However, it should not be the primary focus of the game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)