Which games do you like better? Narrow focus or wide focus?
Now, I think some people will consider the some games broad in focus, while other consider the same games narrow in focus.
I think it's good if games are narrow in focus, because then at least you know what you are supposed to do. Example: most fantasy games are narrow in focus. You are an adventurer and you fight monsters and bad people. The location might vary and so do the monsters, but the principle remains the same. That's great. It is certainly better than certain games with a lot of cool ideas, but I have no idea what to do with it.
Broad focus for me.
Even when I really like a narrow focus game, like The Whispering Vault, I almost immediately start kicking down the fences and looking for ways to roam free of the constraints.
Our DCC sessions have yet to visit a dungeon and my games of Call of Cthulhu have had a whole lot of adventures that had nothing to do with the Mythos.
As a Player I hate getting stuck in a rut of all the other Players following some expected path... like the Star Wars campaign where no one would seem to think of anything to do with the setting except join the Rebels and fight the Empire.
Would wide focus be generic/universal rule sets?
Quote from: RunningLaser;806128Would wide focus be generic/universal rule sets?
Those seem more like 'no focus' to me... or focus only as contained by the rules mechanics.
IMO 'broad focus' describes a setting of many possibilities... you could have urban adventures, travel around and explore, pick a specific faction to serve/attack, concentrate on building wealth/reputation/power/territory. Something like Traveller seems wide open.
'narrow' would be something where the rules and setting try to lock down a very specific sort of pursuit... not offering much support for anything beyond that. Shadowrun, at least what I've seen of it, seems to expect the Players to go on 'runs' for 'Mr. Johnson'.
Quote from: RunningLaser;806128Would wide focus be generic/universal rule sets?
I'd consider them tool kits for making games not games in and of themselves. The end results can have be either broad or narrow.
I love both. I write very narrowly focused as well as very wide focused games, and games in-between.
-clash
Quote from: jan paparazzi;806123Example: most fantasy games are narrow in focus. You are an adventurer and you fight monsters and bad people. The location might vary and so do the monsters, but the principle remains the same.
If you believe that most fantasy games (or Sci-Fi games for that matter) are narrow in focus, our experience of fantasy games is so alien as to make understanding of what you mean by a broad focused game difficult. in my expeirence OD&D/AD&D and Runequest are broadly focused fantasy games Even the old Melee/Wizard Fantasy Trip game (the precursor to GURPS) was broad in focus (including leadership and other skills applicable outside arena combat) though most people I know only played it narrowly. Similarly, Traveller and WEG Star Wars are broadly focused games allowing for a wide range of characters and play styles. FASA Star Trek (focused on Star Fleet Officers) is and Flashing Blades (focused on swashbucklers) are relatively narrowly focused.
In general I prefer a broad focused game/system/setting. Though in practice for a single group of players, a narrower focus is often better for getting everyone on the same page character and goal wise.
Quote from: Simlasa;806127Broad focus for me.
Our DCC sessions have yet to visit a dungeon and my games of Call of Cthulhu have had a whole lot of adventures that had nothing to do with the Mythos.
Those games are what I would call narrow focus. :D
I think DCC classics is about killing monsters and finding loot. Unless you deliberately not do that. Cthulhu is all about investigating the really weird (wether or not it is Lovercraftian) and hoping you survive with your sanity intact.
If you have a clear idea what you are supposed to do, then I find that narrow focus. I think it is easy to get into for newcomers.
For example look at this link (http://extra-credits.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=6415). I agree with "Fnord" the ninth post. Maybe, it's not really a good idea to bring in other fora. Well, I do it anyway, just to make clear with what I am trying to point out.
Quote from: Bren;806146If you believe that most fantasy games (or Sci-Fi games for that matter) are narrow in focus, our experience of fantasy games is so alien as to make understanding of what you mean by a broad focused game difficult. in my expeirence OD&D/AD&D and Runequest are broadly focused fantasy games Even the old Melee/Wizard Fantasy Trip game (the precursor to GURPS) was broad in focus (including leadership and other skills applicable outside arena combat) though most people I know only played it narrowly. Similarly, Traveller and WEG Star Wars are broadly focused games allowing for a wide range of characters and play styles. FASA Star Trek (focused on Star Fleet Officers) is and Flashing Blades (focused on swashbucklers) are relatively narrowly focused.
Well, again I consider Traveller not so broadly focused. When I read that game, I instantly knew (within five min of reading) that this game is about explorer and trading with some fighting in it. An ideal game to "Han Solo" your way through the galaxy. It has three focused gamestyles you can use.
Again I think this is positive. I know what to do with it. I like that.
Or maybe it is broad, but also very clear and focused in what it is trying to achieve? Broad, but straightforward?
Ok, maybe I should elaborate a little. When reading into some Savage Worlds settings and some other games the last couple of months I started to notice that most of those games start with what you as player are supposed to do. Of course you can do other things, but you know what I mean. Maybe I am too much brainwashed with all those WoD games, which always start with blathering about the setting and it's themes without ever mentioning what the players are supposed to do?
Quote from: jan paparazzi;806152Those games are what I would call narrow focus. :D
I think DCC classics is about killing monsters and finding loot. Unless you deliberately not do that. Cthulhu is all about investigating the really weird (wether or not it is Lovercraftian) and hoping you survive with your sanity intact.
That was my point... I prefer 'broad focus' games but will happily widen anything I otherwise like that tries to constrain me; though in our DCC games it has the Players, not I, who have constrained the adventures to the streets of the city... not that it strains the rules any.
CoC has all the bits I need to run Gangbuster games or low-level pulps... or most sorts of horror.
Quote from: jan paparazzi;806153Well, again I consider Traveller not so broadly focused. When I read that game, I instantly knew (within five min of reading) that this game is about explorer and trading with some fighting in it. An ideal game to "Han Solo" your way through the galaxy. It has three focused gamestyles you can use.
I still see Traveller as 'broad'... but, like most 'broad' games, if you read it and get a definite picture of what YOU would like to do with it then I'm sure you can turn it to a 'narrow' focus if you like.
I've never had that "but what am I supposed to do?" problem that I sometimes hear aimed at certain games.
Quote from: Simlasa;806155I still see Traveller as 'broad'... but, like most 'broad' games, if you read it and get a definite picture of what YOU would like to do with it then I'm sure you can turn it to a 'narrow' focus if you like.
Ok, I understand now.
Quote from: Simlasa;806155I've never had that "but what am I supposed to do?" problem that I sometimes hear aimed at certain games.
Yeah, I have that with some nWoD setting material. Right now I am reading both Demon the Descent (a spygnostic technocracy or whatever) and Agents of Oblivion (Savage Worlds) and I see a completely different way of both writing style and the way the books are laid out. Agents of Oblivion has all the skills and gear to support spy gaming and then some more for the supernatural. Demon is ... different. I don't know. Something is bugging me and I can't put my finger on it. Really annoying.
The extreme in narrow-focused gaming is stuff like Dogs in the Vineyard, My Life With Master; stuff that's not even considered an RPG by some around these parts.
Quote from: 3rik;806162The extreme in narrow-focused gaming is stuff like Dogs in the Vineyard, My Life With Master; stuff that's not even considered an RPG by some around these parts.
Both those games have interesting premises but I always assumed I'd have just as much/more fun with them in some less-focused fantasy/horror system where we could divert off to other sorts of adventures if we wanted to.
Am I allowed to weasel out by saying "It depends."?
I prefer to design wide focus settings. But the actual campaigns I run using those settings tend to be narrower in focus.
And the best games I've ever played were very tightly focused indeed.
I wear my glasses when I game....so I like to game "in focus", I guess.\
Beyond that, no idea what the fuck you guys are talking about.
Quote from: TristramEvans;806253I wear my glasses when I game....so I like to game "in focus", I guess.\
Beyond that, no idea what the fuck you guys are talking about.
Wide focus means being able to use a large number of different playstyles for the same RPG. Narrow focus means the opposite. You can't do a lot of different things with Little Fears for example, but what it does, does it well.
Anyway if the books are not very practical in use and not very supportive to a certain playstyle, then it becomes hard to figure out what to do with it. This can apply to both wide and narrow focused games.
Quote from: jan paparazzi;806274Wide focus means being able to use a large number of different playstyles for the same RPG. Narrow focus means the opposite. You can't do a lot of different things with Little Fears for example, but what it does, does it well.
Anyway if the books are not very practical in use and not very supportive to a certain playstyle, then it becomes hard to figure out what to do with it. This can apply to both wide and narrow focused games.
I see. Well then, I guess the most I can say is that I like games that cater to my preferred playstyle, and dislike any system that interferes with my preferred playstyle, but otherwise it doesn't matter to me what other playstyles a game accords.
Its been over a decade since I read Little Fears (first edition), so I cant really react to that. When I think "narrow focus" (in the way you intend), I would think games like Marvel Heroic, Dungeonworld, and Fiasco. But then, I suppose one could say even Paranoia enforces a specific style of play, but I'm not certain on that. This is very close to the distinction I make between storygames and RPGs however.
Yeah, well, you have me doubting right now. Some games have a default playstyle. If you play Delta Green, you are a member of Delta green, you will get a mission and you will investigate it.
That's good, because it saves a lot of time. It's clear and you can dive into right away. It doesn't focus so much on what Delta Green is, but more on whatever weird shit is out there.
Ok now I don't even know where I am going with this topic. :o
I get back to this later.
Edit: I know it. Agents of Oblivion gives you spygear and spyskills and generally crunch that support a spy playstyle. Demon the Descent rather discusses the spygenre like a literary essay. Talking about it's themes (morally grey, distrust, paranoia etc.) and basicly padding pages full. Very unpractical. That's why every WoD book is political, but none have actually mechanics to back up a political playstyle. Like for example Song of Ice and Fire RPG has mechanics for Intrigue, which rocks my world. Amen.
I think of what you're calling focus as premise. Most games have them but they usually not so limiting that you can't do something else in the setting if you want (the degree of effort will vary). Though that's not necessarily true of some more narrative or "story games" since their mechanics can be intimately tied to their premise.
Quote from: Nexus;806351I think of what you're calling focus as premise. Most games have them but they usually not so limiting that you can't do something else in the setting if you want (the degree of effort will vary).
Do many folks play Shadowrun without the 'runs'? Paranoia with a more serious emphasis on mystery, intrigue and exploration (I could see it as an earthbound Metamorphosis Alpha)?
Quote from: Simlasa;806354Do many folks play Shadowrun without the 'runs'?
Playing anything diarrhea is pretty difficult!
But seriously, I couldn't say. I've been in some Cyberpunk 2020 game that got away from the "elite team of mercenaries doing gray and black ops for shady clientele" model though. I'm going to be running a game like that myself
QuoteParanoia with a more serious emphasis on mystery, intrigue and exploration (I could see it as an earthbound Metamorphosis Alpha)?
Actually, Didn't one edition Paranoia have suggestions for dropping the comedic tone and playing it straight?
Quote from: Nexus;806351I think of what you're calling focus as premise. Most games have them but they usually not so limiting that you can't do something else in the setting if you want (the degree of effort will vary). Though that's not necessarily true of some more narrative or "story games" since their mechanics can be intimately tied to their premise.
I am talking about playstyle. What is the default one? What do you actually do? In Traveller there are three: merchant, explorer, soldier or a mix. Song of Ice and Fire RPG has a few playstyles: adventurers, nobles, the nightwatch etc. The more playstyles, the broader the game. But ... some games totally skip this part.
Quote from: jan paparazzi;806358I am talking about playstyle. What is the default one? What do you actually do? In Traveller there are three: merchant, explorer, soldier or a mix. Song of Ice and Fire RPG has a few playstyles: adventurers, nobles, the nightwatch etc. The more playstyles, the broader the game. But ... some games totally skip this part.
I know but I have a different term for it, that's all. :)\
It's becoming sort of a rant, but anyway...
I am reading through the God Machine Chronicle and suddenly it hits me. With all the gamemasters advice there is one thing missing. The players. It is never mentioned what the players are supposed to do. All the stuff a bout the theme and the mood and the scope of the game, the story arc and whatever more. Not a thing about the players. Vampire Requiem simple asks the question "What sort of character do the players want to play?" talks a little bit about a previous profession like police officer and then leaves it open-ended. That isn't really helpful, is it? Holy cannoli, that's been bugging me for years now! :rant:
/rant
It might be fair to say there are narrow focused games and wide focused games, but there are also unfocused games. The focus of such a game is completely individualised and depends on the pc's goals. I prefer something more straightforward.
Wide focus. Narrowing the focus is the job of the GM, not the designer.
Robotech was the first game I GMed. I used it more as a generic post apocalyptic game than as RDF v Zentreadi.
I've run way more DnD of whatever edition than all other rpgs combined, but have never run a straight megadungeon or hexcrawl.
Star Wars of whatever rule set hits second on my list of games run, but usually have nothing to do with Rebels v Empire.
Deadlands games have never been about lowering the fear.
Call of Cthulu has been as much about '20s gangsters or pulp as about madness and insanity from the infinite beyond.
DC Heroes had nothing whatsoever to do with comic book tropes in my games.
Been eyeing Psi World some lately to play straight modern day without any psi.
All in all, suspect that I do not care whether a game has a specific focus or not. It will be molded to whatever I desire.
When something has a narrow focus and that narrow focus is laser perfect for what I want, its probably the best thing ever.
But the moment any one little thing doesn't line up, it starts falling apart, ESPECIALLY if the rules tie strongly into the focus.
So basically: Narrow focus is awesome if its perfect, but that happens so rarely I tend to play wide focus games, which are actually more useful.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;807014When something has a narrow focus and that narrow focus is laser perfect for what I want, its probably the best thing ever.
But the moment any one little thing doesn't line up, it starts falling apart, ESPECIALLY if the rules tie strongly into the focus.
So basically: Narrow focus is awesome if its perfect, but that happens so rarely I tend to play wide focus games, which are actually more useful.
Do you recall any that were perfect?
Quote from: TristramEvans;807039Do you recall any that were perfect?
I ran Leverage for a cinematic heist/con game and it was exactly what I wanted.
It is super rare that something matches perfect though. I can't think of any more off the top of my head.