The Caffeinated Penguin

Posted By matt on February 24, 2008

I've been thinking a lot about role playing game mechanics and such. One of the things I like about Spirit of the Century is the abstraction and narrative flow (aka “a narrativist role playing game). Now, on the flip side, one of the things I don't like about D20 games is the lack of realism in their simulations (as in, it is not “simulationist” enough). However, it occurs to me – when someone is wearing armor in SotC, it is basically the same as someone wearing armor in D20 – namely that this is largely abstracted to keep things playing nicely.

Why is it that it bothers me when it is D20, but not when it is SotC? I'd think that because it seems to me that players are more invested in the game with SotC – they are “writing a collective tale”, I am willing to accept it. With D20, it's basically a “tabletop video game” – hack and slash, shoot things, etc. It's kind of like the difference between playing games in “co-op mode” as opposed to “deathmatch” mode.

However, does it really matter? After all, the conflict resolution mechanism doesn't really determine the style of a game. If what I like about SotC is the use of fate points to alter narrative flow, and these rules are largely an addition to the core Fudge conflict system (which is, essentially what Fate is), then what is to stop us from using those rules on top of D20, SR4, or the WoD storyteller system? Hell, Shadowrun already has Karma points built into it – it just takes a little tweaking to make them more powerful.

Does this really have to be “narrativist vs. simulationist”, or can it be degrees of both? For example, a very crunchy rules system is heavily simulationist, but it can also allow a massive degree of narrative control – modifying rolls, declaring things to be so, etc.

So, then is it really a question of:
- How crunchy do you like your rules?
and:
- How much narrative control you want to put in the plans of the players?

Thus, is the ideal system recipe:

(1) Take whatever you like to use for conflict resolution (SR4, D20, WoD, diceless, whatever) for core game mechanics, ideally optimized for setting, with appropriate flare (the use of playing cards in original Deadlands was a fine example of this).

(2) Add in some variety of mechanics to alter those conflict resolution mechanics or influence game events outside of the character – essentially a “meta game” mechanic to allow for increased narrative control.

(3) (Optional) Add in genre specific elements to facilitate the game not dragging. My main thought here is that the Gumshoe system doesn't really fit into the above, but is still badass. For those unfamiliar, it is a selection of skills and abilities for investigation type games where, if used, they ALWAYS succeed. The reason is that, in an investigation game, finding clues IS NOT TREASURE, it is PLOT, and thus MUST succeed, else the game stalls.

Category: LJ Import
Tags: