The perfect game
The most important thing we have to keep in mind when creating an RPG is not going to create the perfect game. Is that a first-RPG for someone new to the subject of game design. It is very common (a lot) think that this game we're doing is the best in the whole world.
Get out of your head as to revolutionize the scene with your system role. The guys who made Call of Cthulhu and Vampire were not home one day and gave them to design a game and gave birth to the first. Its authors - Sandy Petersen and Mark Rein - are people who have been designing games for many years, and are not just kids. His experience in the industry are not limited to having a game table and perhaps write in a blog. Are People who make a living writing and writing well. Screening Act is simple: If these guys are there not because they are friends of the editor: it is because they are good designers.
can think to do a role playing game (a good role playing game) is just start writing these ideas that have emerged over time. Make no mistake. One thing is illusion, the desire, even the innate talent that can be, and another is the experience and trade that accumulates over the years and after publishing one or more professional games .
may someday designing a game as good as The Call, but not going to do on your first try: Conciénciate as much you aspire to play a game acceptable, that can compare with existing ones, not the best game all time.
Writing for others is not writing for colleagues
who only know one way to play it note read, that " amauterismo " leads very negatively on the quality of our product. Even using the same rules, two groups different game played in completely different ways. Some may have spent so much dice throwing, and others do not need them. Each group is a world game.
When writing for the "general public" have to make ourselves aware of it. Our way of seeing the role is just one of the possible, not only true : We must avoid the prospect of self-consumption , we are writing something to play with our colleagues.
The best way to do this is to think if a group of players that caught our text will be able to mount a game by themselves using their own and unpredictable style of play. If the answer is no (you can not play without doing this as it does in our table), is that we are not doing well. We must create a text can read any , is gothic, indie, munchkin, cthulhero or Martian. Do not think that there are obvious things that the player already knows because it has played the role of a lifetime.
There goes the text, but we think if we do something usable by everyone or just adapted to our playgroup. This really is what distinguishes an amateur to a professional game .
More complex is not better
Before categorically assure you of course, the best game is one that is more realistic ... Have you ever stopped to think if that is really true? Have you thought that if a game has no rules about overheating of arms is because you may not need ?
The role has a lot of psychology, and that almost no one has in mind. The readers of our game need the is pleasant reading, comfortable, and above all easy understand. The main failure of Redemption (an otherwise excellent game) was so cumbersome to your system (even using checksums) and how badly they were explained the rules.
About what to put in our game and what to ignore, we must prioritize . Classify each question that comes to mind on a level of abstraction . All you see that is beyond the level of abstraction we want to play, ignore it, put it as optional rule or leave it aside to see if we really need it or not.
There are several examples of simplification of rules that made their systems more playable: One of the best known is the system Runequest , which would evolve to that of Chaosium. Runequest has impact location, hit points divided by location, time of action, variable speed weapons and magic, ability group modifiers according to the characteristics ... All that was removed in Call of Cthulhu. Does the system improve? I will not say, but today is a game Runequest forgotten and the call goes for his sixth or seventh time.
As I say, more complexity is not necessarily better system.
The basic roll
So Far microscopy (our friend Scribble) has a basic roll quite complex, and that they only throw 2D6 (the only thing I see ugly the game, everything else I love). Another system that also complicates the roll is In Nomine Satanis , pulling 3D6 and using a table, or the Shadow System where 3D10 pull each serving for one thing.
If we look at successful games, we see that its core Basic is really simple: Vampire is throw a lot of dice and try to get the higher the better in each, The Call is to launch 1D100 and take less than the percentage that we have, the D20 is rolling a die and add modifcadores: Do not complicate more look no innovation in the basic roll : your system will not be better juggle the rolls.
Vampire Call or create fans and people play them because their systems are simple . Because the mechanics of the game means to the first because rules do not bundled with rare and because once the dice are on the table to see instantly if it was a good shot or no.
An example
My great action resolution system is pulling 4D10 and each die is considered an aspect of the circulation: one gives the degree of accuracy, speed other action, the other the expended fatigue and other states if we go experience.
Is this good basic circulation system because it takes into account many factors at once? Sounds interesting, but ... Do you stop and think if all that information is necessary?
yourself in the shoes of your readers, the people you play with your system and having to interpret chuck and use it all the time . Think of really need to throw and interpret four dice for each roll is made in the game?
internal cohesion, game rules and subsystems
All this complicates the game, and I mean in general not only AD & D . A game where each subsystem is done with a different mechanical needs to be learned more ways doing things. If the D20 and relegated to oblivion swept the D & D's past was precisely because everything was done by pulling a single type given that modifiers were added to him.
A sub-system gives the impression of being "made to pieces", of being a Frankenstein. Such systems are difficult to assimilate at all. When you think you understand how the game works in another part of it completely change the mechanics and have to re-learn how things are calculated. A good system is one in which everything is done by following a few basic guidelines can be explained in one page , and everything else be added based on these guidelines, and not new rules created from scratch. Rules
Intuitive
The best rule is to always remember
If you tell me to shoot I have a +0, intuitively I understood that I have no idea of \u200b\u200bshooting. If I have to "translate" that one is +0 actually have 5 points more than clueless, and therefore be a good shooter, I'm struggling against my own intuition: the game is very intuitive , we must interpret the mechanics and counter common sense to use it properly. That is counterproductive slows the game, and comprehension. About
modifiers, if you say "you have a -2 to fire" the first thing you think is that the switch is bad. Avoid if you can that really be beneficial -2 (as happens for example in Mechwarrior ), is counterintuitive.
Any rule that catches not following common sense is by definition not very intuitive, if a rule needs to constantly remind is not a good rule .
Such rules are more dangerous the closer the core of the system. If the same heart of the system is unintuitive, everything else by extension so is . If even the "basic throw is complicated, ill go.
negative numbers and algebraic sums
A common mistake is to assign negative values \u200b\u200bto several variables that must be constantly accumulate rolls ... If our attributes can be negative, also prevents the skills they are, and vice versa: If you have to subtract two times a number to the roll will be doing calculations unintuitive.
If you need a malus for being wounded and another due to poor visibility, groups all malus into one, or rather considered a single "general malus" to be all inclusive. Subtract spend time and if addition additions and subtractions alternate in the same shot (algebraic sum) then you need several seconds to see what is the roll. If you average two runs per player for assault and each takes addition and subtraction, you'll need at least five minutes just to interpret rolls a single assault, and we all know that in practice much more is needed.
A clear example of this is GURPS: You roll the dice and start to add and subtract things, if something more effective, if less something psionic, that if fewer something a disadvantage ... GURPS play by the rules to the letter is a real headache, just to be adding and subtracting all the time, many factors.
Large, two-digit sums
should be careful with the use of numbers larger than 25 or 30, and if we try to do math with them. Comes to my mind the MERP or Rolemaster , where you have to pull 1D100 and add a value of two numbers often for three-digit numbers. Worse is having to subtract -25 not know what to switch.
sin I myself use and abuse of large numbers, on my reverse D100 system, which goes from a couple of years ago hanging in my blog. More than one person has told me since that of add two digit numbers is a mess .
A good example of using the larger the number the call, just pull the D100 and compare, is it more? success, is minor? failure, and that's it. That does not prevent certain system problems exposed in the article that you just link, but face it: it is simpler than Belén Esteban , and is the secret of success Chaosium system.
lookup tables and mechanical tables
The other tables are mechanical tables, which are used during the game and use their values \u200b\u200bdirectly. The classic example is the Rolemaster critical tables. This type of tables if you look repeatedly during the game. Needless to say I think these tables slow down the game every time they need to look.
definitely should have any number you wish to query tables, but severely limit the use of mechanical tables. That does not mean that a pair of mechanical tables are counterproductive. The first Mutants in the Shadow uses a single table (to resolve actions) and the system is fast and ferocious. If you use a table that is to expedite the game, not to the contrary. Conclusions
tend to think that the only important thing in an RPG is the setting, the richness of it, leaving the mechanics in the background. With this article I wanted to see that mechanics is important, not its complexity, if not for the "greased" it is , how well they run and what to let players enjoy the atmosphere.
However, these tips are not an infallible guide to make good game. If you ignore them does not mean that your game will be horrible. It's just a reflection and self-talk of what I have seen him in this office (the game design) and "what she would say" someone who gets into this.
A greeting and thanks for putting up the billet.
0 comments:
Post a Comment