Quote from: Blazing Donkey;493641Honestly, I don't keep up with all the trends in RPGs at all and, quite frankly, I'm somewhat amazed at how many people do.

I tend to stick with the games I have played for years.

My take on it is: there's only so many variations on RPGs possible before new games becomes superfluous. I'm not trying to knock your thread, but really how many new spins on rules do we need? And also, pretty much every genre of fantasy / sci-fi has been exhausted, IMHO.

So is this, in your opinion, true?

For me, I'd have to say no. I've switched out my long term SF and Supers games of preference within the last year with new games that I like much better. (Icons for V&V; SBA for Traveller).

Quote from: Aos;493709So is this, in your opinion, true?

For me, I'd have to say no. I've switched out my long term SF and Supers games of preference within the last year with new games that I like much better. (Icons for V&V; SBA for Traveller).

Honestly, I don't keep up with all the trends in stories at all and, quite frankly, I'm somewhat amazed at how many people do.

I tend to stick with the stories I have read for years.

My take on it is: there's only so many variations on stories possible before new stories becomes superfluous. I'm not trying to knock your thread, but really how many new spins on narrative rules do we need? And also, pretty much every genre of literature has been exhausted, IMHO.

Apart from new movie games (eg. Babylon 5 RPG, etc), it seems me that many games are merely a slightly-different twist on older, existing games and attempts to create a 'perfect' rule system - which is futile because everyone is different and has their own preference.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;493713Honestly, I don't keep up with all the trends in stories at all and, quite frankly, I'm somewhat amazed at how many people do.

I tend to stick with the stories I have read for years.

My take on it is: there's only so many variations on stories possible before new stories becomes superfluous. I'm not trying to knock your thread, but really how many new spins on narrative rules do we need? And also, pretty much every genre of literature has been exhausted, IMHO.

For the most part, this is independent of the medium of choice.

(ie.  Whether books, television shows, movies, rpg games, fireside chats, open mic, lectures, live theater, etc ...).


EDIT:  Even some non-fiction is written in the same manner, such as biographies/autobiographies.

Some people treat RPGs like entertainment of their own. They like variety in playstyles, and finding new ones and experiencing them.

Some people treat RPGs like support structures for entertainment. They find one that supports their preferred playstyle and use it. Likely customizing it to fit them perfectly.

Neither way is better. I'm sure combinations of this, and perhaps other ways, exist.

Quote from: ggroy;493721For the most part, this is independent of the medium of choice.

(ie.  Whether books, television shows, movies, rpg games, fireside chats, open mic, lectures, live theater, etc ...).


EDIT:  Even some non-fiction is written in the same manner, such as biographies/autobiographies.

I was being sarcastic, but sure. This kind of complaint gets made about everything. It's whatchamacallit, "future shock".

I'm amazed at how thin a spin someone can put on an idea to make it seem fresh to me. My favorite example is Metal, Magic, and Lore. It's a few years old, but in my world, it's pretty new. It's a vanilla fantasy world with dwarves and elves and gnomes and whatnot. There's sword fights and magic spells and all that. Absolutely nothing new--in fact a deliberate avoidance of re-inventing those things. The designers wanted it to seem familiar.

The rules are at heart a very simple percentile system, not multiplicative, like Runequest, but additive, like Rolemaster. It's only different in that the usual percentages available to pcs in their skills are a fairly narrow band, added to a fairly narrow band of percentages for inherent difficulties of tasks. Very thin differences. Absolutely no reinvention of any wheel, and only marginal differences from existing systems.

But I like it best. The little differences they made are all things I like. The little bit more sense the rules make makes a big difference to me in play. The subtle things they do, like emphasizing what might seem like mundane, daily life details over gigantic whiz-bang wizardy wars make the game seem fresh and different.

It's the other side of the heartbreaker. Sometimes, a heartbreaker brings just enough to the table to truly improve the game at the table. Yes--it's harder to get people to play your game of choice now that it was when there weren't but a few games to choose from. But there are some pretty neat new games out there, even if they don't seem very ground-breaking.

Quote from: Kaldric;493724Some people treat RPGs like support structures for entertainment. They find one that supports their preferred playstyle and use it. Likely customizing it to fit them perfectly.

That right there? That's me.

But I don't begrudge other gamers their freedom to choose the other path. Some are looking for "the perfect system"... no matter if it takes a lifetime. Some just haven't found something that quite works for them, and so they keep looking/buying. And yes, some enjoy (maybe even require?) the novelty that "new" mechanics bring.

And, I must admit, I've been a stick-in-the-mud d100 gamer for years now. Who knows what I'm missing out on!

I feel like that there is a narrow range of genres and mechanics that have been done very thoroughly.  

However, there is a huge range that is rarely attempted, including basically anything outside of sci-fi/fantasy adventure fiction, for example.  There is some variety in game mechanics, but it tends to cluster very strongly around just a few models.  You don't see many diceless games like Amber, or card mechanics like Castle Falkenstein, and plenty more.  The vast majority of games will have 3-8 attributes, 25-100 skills, and some action resolution based on a die roll for success against skill.  They're designed for a party of 3-6 adventurers who go have action-y adventures.

Brother, I'm constantly finding out new things that interest me even though some of it may be "old".

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Aos;493709So is this, in your opinion, true?

For me, I'd have to say no. I've switched out my long term SF and Supers games of preference within the last year with new games that I like much better. (Icons for V&V; SBA for Traveller).

My experience is pretty much identical. I was mostly running old, often out of print games. I would buy newer games from time to time but on balance they didn't tend to stick.

In the course of the last 18 months or so that's all changed. ICONS was a huge success in my group and I'm very happy with both Barbarians of Lemuria and Bulldogs!  I can see myself sticking with these games for a long time.

Quote from: Aos;493709So is this, in your opinion, true?

For me, I'd have to say no. I've switched out my long term SF and Supers games of preference within the last year with new games that I like much better. (Icons for V&V; SBA for Traveller).

Quote from: David R;493752Brother, I'm constantly finding out new things that interest me even though some of it may be "old".

Regards,
David R

This and this.

I am always happy to try new RPGs. That said, I do find myself running simpler RPGs than more complex ones.

Quote from: Blazing Donkey;493714Apart from new movie games (eg. Babylon 5 RPG, etc), it seems me that many games are merely a slightly-different twist on older, existing games and attempts to create a 'perfect' rule system - which is futile because everyone is different and has their own preference.

I agree with you here, which is why I disagreed with your post in the other thread.

As John Kim says, it's surprising how narrow the genres covered are. If I want fairly mainstream fantasy then sure, there's a vast ocean of games doing it and the chances of a new one bringing something genuinely different to the party are low (though even there I'd argue that The One Ring rpg looks closer to getting Tolkien than anything else ever has).

The other thread though was about a modern day military rpg, with a realistic bent. How many of those already exist?

Let's see. Merc, I've played it and the rules don't work at all well. MSPE, great game but not easy to find now. Recon, great game but nothing to support a campaign set in the modern day (same could be said for MSPE actually). Corps, not that well known and again out of date. Millennium's End, very well done but very complex, out of print and again out of date.

Dogs of War is around of course, but isn't aimed at realism.

So, there isn't actually a single in print rpg I can think of covering that genre.

What if I want to run a Hill Street Blues/NYPD Blue/The Shield type game? There's nothing to support that. You might well find some game from 1983 that did it, but how well and is it in print?

So yeah, some genres are very well covered. Fantasy, supers, horror, space opera, Westerns I'd argue too. After that though it's not that great.

Nothing for crime based stuff really, very little left in print for historical gaming, cyberpunk I'd argue is very poorly served, I could go on but the point's there. Some stuff is so well covered that there's little point in looking out new games. That coverage though, while deep, is very narrow.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;493725I was being sarcastic, but sure. This kind of complaint gets made about everything. It's whatchamacallit, "future shock".

I thought it was a funny post on your part (funny in a good way). Before I made the switch to writing mostly non fiction and gaming material, I used to bang my head against a wall dealing with that exact mindset in genre fiction.