Quote from: Levi KornelsenWell, sure.  
I mean, I've run freeform - but it can be hard to make it gripping.
I like have a set of rules to do the heavy lifting.  
And if those rules can spur the players to do it with me, all the better.
I'm lazy that way.

That why I said, the system is a tool. It makes it easier to keep it all together.

Yamo is utterly right.

The whole point of Forge-style narrow games is so that the "stupid" gamers will run the game the way the designer intended it. None of these ignorant evil DMs being able to use the game for different purposes. The "Theme" will be what the genius designer TELLS YOU the theme is, and no other.

It is, at its core, part of the movement to disempower GMs, and make sure that the gaming is what the "intellectualoids" want it to be.

RPGPundit

Y'know, I'm seldom put in a position of defending the Forge - I mean they're just not my style - but it works for some people, and I can ignore the gushy stuff from the fanboys, and rip off... I mean "creatively adapt" any cool stuff they do if it fits my games. I say more power to 'em. It's no skin off my nose. Nothing they do can hurt me, and some things they do can help me, so let 'em explore - and occasionally fall off - the bleeding edge. It's a tough job, but somebody's got to do it!

-mice

Quote from: RPGPunditNone of these ignorant evil DMs being able to use the game for different purposes.

Which makes them a lot like the old Dixie Riddle Cups.  You pull one out, read it, get the joke, and toss it in the garbage when you are doing drinking from it.  

At some point, that one purpose it's designed for is going to get old and then what?  Are you sure it's not a scheme to keep selling new games because you'll need to buy a new game if you want to do something different, a way to avoid the problem with complete RPGs which is that once you buy the rulebook, you really don't need to buy anything else?

Quote from: S. John RossReally. I know it's sane and comforting to assume that everyone realizes the scale of things, but I know people with a bedroom/den/basement/garage stacked floor-to-ceiling with boxes of unsold books because they honest-to-god managed to publish an entire game without having a single fucking clue about how big their print run should be. More than just one such case, in fact.

Look at the bright side.  They'll never be in want of a doorstop -- or kindling.  That's a common problem with vanity publishing of all sorts.

In theory, print on demand will solve the problem and make the world safe for authors who write books that nobody wants to buy.

Actually, while "system matters" can be seen as Levi says, a statement that "how you play matters", it's also a fact that the Forge (including Ron) has a thing about writing game texts in such a way as to make it possible for the reader to reproduce the intended game experience without having to be "taught". If you get nothing else from that Story Games thread on "stakes", this much should be clear. The ideology is also visible whenever somebody claims that the good stuff your group brings to the table (particularly GM) should be able to be codified in rules.

Personally I think it's a useful thing to bear in mind, to guard against lazy writing, but it also smacks of vanity in more ways than one to believe that it's a fully-achievable or even universally-desirable goal.

Quote from: John MorrowWhich makes them a lot like the old Dixie Riddle Cups.  You pull one out, read it, get the joke, and toss it in the garbage when you are doing drinking from it.

One of the Pundit's favorite people in the whole world agrees with this view: he calls it "consumerist gaming".

(Of course the supplement treadmill is the same thing.)

A tightly focussed game can have specialised mechanics and a get-up-and-go feel to it where everyone knows more definately what they're doing in the game and how. The mechanics can be a much better fit and special mechanics to emphasise part of the game's point can be crafted.

A broader game will do a lot more things but generally do them less well.

Every game is specialised to a degree, that's why you get so many objections to  d20 being used as a universal system when it's really suited to one particular style of play, even GURPS isn't a good fit for everything.

Sometimes you can use a rock to do the job, sometimes you need an electron microscope.

Quote from: pigames.netThe way I see it, the system is a tool. And like any tool, it depends on who wields it. The GM can make or break a game.

"It's not the tool, it's the tool using the tool."

Who really gives a shit about mechanics? Seriously? I mean, I sometimes design shit, and if a rule is in the way of fun, I'll suggest that it be broken or modified.

Fuck the rules, lets have fun.

People who say that the system matters are usually more in love with the system than the game.

I've committed the atrocity of using Rifts mechanics to play Gamma World, and D&D mechanics to play "Adventures of the Horny Pumpernickle."

Who really gives a shit about mechanics?

Let's face it, when you get right down to it, most of us make shit up on the fly when we're gaming, telling the rules lawyer to sit down, shut the fuck up, and roll up a new character, and have fun playing "Let's Pretend" rather than giggling over a percieved 1% edge that some obscure shit gave us.

Realistic systems blow, because they are as complicated as reality.
Cinematic systems blow, because they're too unrealistic.

There won't be a happy medium until VR, and that's when we'll all be out of a fucking job.

Want to know why WoW does so good?

Because you don't worry about the fucking system, you play the game.

Quote from: John MorrowIn theory, print on demand will solve the problem and make the world safe for authors who write books that nobody wants to buy.

Egads; you've just summarized my entire business plan for Uresia 2nd Ed

I'm making my first tentative steps into design with some modifications on the existing d20 Modern rules for crafting and social interaction, making them larger scale.  Subsystems for large scale group projects and interactions between factions within a group, basically

My goal is something that empowers both the GM and players, giving them both ideas for sessions:

"People are getting sick due to the bad water.  Yep, a better filter and sterilisation would help.  Is there someone in the party who knows how to build one? (that'll be Knowledge (Earth and Life Sciences) and/or Craft (Chemical)).  Right, there might be materials lying around that can be adapted, but make a Knowledge (Current Events) check. There's that rich suburb just outside of town.  Lots of swimming pools - lots of water filters, lots of sterilisation chemicals.  Of course there's the pack of Feral children in that area so the Raid won't be that easy.  You plan the raid and how you're going to convince the Haven that this is a good idea while I pull some NPC stats together."

The thing is, before I started work on YotZ, I hated d20.  Taking 10 and taking 20 helps a lot, but I still don't like how variable it is.  But system only really matters when it's getting in the way of fun.  Which is why I've concentrated on keeping the rules out of the way as much as possible - so if I have stuffed something up it's easy for people to ignore or tweak

Back in the day I put forward a theory of RPG Nominalism which stated that system doesn't matter as much as the attitudes and skills of the GM and players.  This is because everyone reads a rule book and walks away with something different from it.

System only really matters in so far as it requires people to expend time dealing with it.  So if you have to spend your time rolling shit-loads of dice then it WILL make for a slow game.  Similarly if your game requires a lot of book-keeping or looking up pow3rz then it will similarly slow things down.
I believe that the best system is one that stays the fuck out of my way.

Weirdly, the only exception I can think of to this rule are that the sharp focus of a lot of the Forge games tends to make them feel like boardgames.  For example, My Life With Master... it's like a board game where you roleplay out the dice rolls and the decision making.

"So I head to my bank and pick up the cash... head down to Baltic avenue and make the landlord an offer he can't refuse!"

Much as I like MLwM, I think it would have made a better board game.

System definitely can matter, I mean it's hardly the only thing that does but it can.  For example, for the 1770s Naples game I ran I wanted minimal combat but lots of scheming.  I chose CoC as the game engine.

First session, a character gets in a pistol duel with an NPC duellist.  The character has 80% pistol, so he's pretty cocky, and he has first shot.  He missed.  The NPC hit, rolled max dam and killed the character instantly.

After that, people were not so keen to get in fights.  The system directly helped me run the game I was trying to.  I wanted in that one, and may pick this up in other games actually, to give the impression that what made the more dangerous NPCs deadly was not necessarily their leet skills, it was their willingness to risk death over relatively small matters.  They were dangerous because they were willing to use deadly force.

However, had I wanted a more three musketeers feel that would have been a disaster.  Instant kills on one missed roll?  Hardly going to encourage swashbuckling bravado.

So for me, systems are tools, picking the right one can help and sometimes picking the wrong one can be a real problem.

One more concrete example, a year or so ago I ran a game of Slaine, the d20 Celtic fantasy game.  One player played a witch, and one spell was so overpowered compared to the rest that it pretty much killed the game.  They used it in every encounter, it was just too good not to.  I don't know how the hell it got through playtesting but system mattered then, system got in the bloody way.

But at the same time, players matter a hell of a lot more.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalI believe that the best system is one that stays the fuck out of my way.

Amen, though more often than not when I say something like that on rpg.net I get someone basically lecturing me that it's because I don't yet understand how the right system will really help my play.  Most annoying.