rpg

3003 readers

1 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

Do not distribute pirate content
Do not incite arguments/flamewars/gatekeeping.
Do not submit video game content unless the game is based on a tabletop RPG property and is newsworthy.
Image and video links MUST be TTRPG related and should be shared as self posts/text with context or discussion unless they fall under our specific case rules.
Do not submit posts looking for players, groups or games.
Do not advertise for livestreams
Limit Self-promotions. Active members may promote their own content once per week. Crowdfunding posts are limited to one announcement and one reminder across all users.
Comment respectfully. Refrain from personal attacks and discriminatory (racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc.) comments. Comments deemed abusive may be removed by moderators.
No Zak S content.
Off-Topic: Book trade, Boardgames, wargames, video games are generally off-topic.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Avogadro@ttrpg.network

sirblastalot@ttrpg.network

TripHammer@ttrpg.network

Primarch@ttrpg.network

BrentTaylor@ttrpg.network

How do systems matter? (discuss.tchncs.de)

submitted 3 months ago by copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de to c/rpg@ttrpg.network

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Here are two blog posts in response to a video and it's all about the old discussion if systems matter.

Here the question is slightly different: How do systems matter?

If an RPG system puts a great focus on combat (like 5e), does that make the game focus on combat? Alternatively, does it relieve the GM from combat simulation and instead let's them focus on other aspects (roleplaying, drama, improv, story, exploration, etc)?

top 3 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Archelon@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The discussion around the “Fruitful Void” and Brennan’s initial comment made me think specifically of this story from Chocolate Hammer where a highly-random, highly-lethal small-scale cowboy wargame ended up being an extremely fertile ground for interesting stories despite having no narrative mechanics of any kind.

A system specifically focused entirely on combat gave the GM room to weave a vast web of intrigue and personality based on how everyone knowing the power of violence in the system and trying to avoid getting near it while using it to threaten everyone else.

[–] copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Wow, awesome story!

It seems the GM brought a lot to the setting ("I already knew quite a bit about [Tombstone, Arizona]"), so most people would not be able to create such an experience with just the game document.

[–] copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 months ago

I looked up the rules. According to my understanding, here is roughly what happens in a pistol duel:

There are three checks, quite similar to D&D. Who goes first (initiative), hit determination, and wounds. I can see the shared heritage.

For each of these, you have a base number from your stats. Then various modifiers are applied depending on range, movement of shooter, movement of target, wounds, weapon type, and more (e.g. hipshooting is +5 for first shot but -10 for hitting). Collecting and adding all the modifiers is what makes it complicated.

Initiative does not require a roll. Hit determination takes one percentage die roll (d100). The wound takes two d100. Example from the rules: "A first roll of 49 would indicate a wound in the left shoulder, and a second roll of 72 would mean that the wound there was a serious one." A serious wound means -7 to your strength attribute and shows up in later bonus calculations.

Such a serious wound will take seven weeks to heal assuming proper medical treatment.

Fun fact: The rules contain more than five pages of stats for historical figures like Billy the Kid. :)