Does it matter which TTRPG you play?

• "You shouldn't use DnD... : the Questin Beast video "You shouldn't use DnD for narrative campaigns."
www.polygon.co... : The polygon article
In this video, we will take some time to discuss how much does the system affect on the tabletop roleplaying experience.

[@stephengilbert8166]

I guess I come at it from a different angle. I`ve been playing rpgs (and wargaming) since I was a kid.. actually years before D&D came out in 1974. So over the last 50 years of gaming I started with a few of the early games around atr the time (Tunnels and Trolls, original D&D, Runequest, Paladium, MERP and Harn, etc) and then, after a few years, I started making up my own game system.. and I have used it ever since, adding to it as the years went by, until now at this stage it is the one and only system I use, as its mine and works for me (when playing solo) and my gaming group, as they have played in my world and in my system for decades now (my player group campaign has run for over 19 years at this stage). I think its too easy to switch and change every year, buying each new thing that comes out, rather than develop ONE core system and immersw into that game with complete heart and soul.

[@stephengilbert8166]

.... and MYTHIC enhances everything beautifully :-))

[@stephengilbert8166]

PS I enjoy a lot of the boxed games out there (those `game in a box` offers that come with tons of miniatures and terrain etc) like Necromunda, Cursed City, AoS, 40K etc etc, but I never use the rules that come in the box, I use all the wonderful elements contained in the boxes, but I use my own rules every time, and if I need to create a few new rules, or make up my own characters to better fit the theme..., I do this within the same rules system (i.e. mine) :-)

[@CRP-Waltteri]

I appreciate your dedication! I definitely have the game designer mind as well and love to tinker. Time will tell if I have ever the focus and dedication to just start creating one ultimate system for myself :D

[@matthewconstantine5015]

I absolutely believe that if the whole table is happy with how it's working, then that's fine, whatever mechanics you're using or not. However, I agree with Matt Colville's video from a couple years ago about how figuring out what a game is about comes down to what it rewards you for doing. In the case of D&D, it rewards you for killing monsters and taking their stuff. CAN you do other things? Sure. But that is, at its heart, what the game is about. Doing other things with it means you're not using it as directed. Generally, in the broadest of strokes, I think system absolutely matters. Mechanics are built for certain things. It doesn't mean you can't use them for something else or put in house rules to make them work the way you want. However, as the old saying goes, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. D&D is that hammer for many folks in the hobby. They just can't imagine using anything but that hammer to bash everything, even if maybe a wrench or a scalpel might be better. I see it with a lot of KZbin channels, where folks put out hours of content about using D&D to do X or how they'd convert idea Y into D&D. But, why? There are already well crafted games that do X or Y very well. It's like the hyperloop in Las Vegas. Subways already existed, but they brute forced their way into the niche that would have worked for a subway, and filled that niche with a far inferior alternative. Does it work? Sure. But a subway would have been much better. Can you run a 1920s Horror game with D&D? I guess. But Call of Cthulhu, or a handful of other, similar games, would do it much better. I've heard so many times over the years that it's "not the game; it's the people you play with" that is important. But I've played D&D with people who I've loved gaming with, and I've still hated the system, because we always tended more toward the narrative, story side of things, and you've got to fight the system to have that in D&D. I remember in the 90s, our group decided to play a "retro" game, so someone decided to run what is now referred to as the BECMI edition D&D. It absolutely sucked, because none of us wanted to just kick open doors and kill monsters, and anytime we tried to do other stuff, the system either failed or actively got in the way. I'm sure, if we all sat around and played it for weeks on end, home-ruling our way around all the various rough spots, we'd eventually find a way to make it work for us. But why? Even then there were dozens of systems that did what we wanted, rewarded our style of play, and did what I think systems should do...got the hell out of the way.

[@CRP-Waltteri]

Yeah I totally agree on your points. And Matt Colville is amazing I also follow his channel!

[@CabelCabelCabel]

What a complex subject to address. Amazing job at breaking down the moving parts of roleplay systems. 👌

[@CRP-Waltteri]

Thank you!

[@DJH47]

Funnily enough, LANCER has extremely robust narrative rules as of the Field Guide to the Karrakin Trade Baronies supplement, and some of our group's sessions have been backroom political wheeling and dealing. 😅

[@CRP-Waltteri]

Yeah thats true and it has its own narrative systems...but it is also the extreme example of having differentiated combat rules and narrative rules :D

[@dirkvoltaar]

As a graphic designer my understanding is that all design (game, product, system) is created for a specific purpose, to produce specific results or outcomes. D&D is designed with a focus on character customization (or optimization) to do allow players to do cool things in tactical combat. This is not a criticism of D&D. It’s one style of play that is very popular, but that is the basic foundation of the game’s design. This is not to say you can’t play games in as many different ways as their are players, but different types of games are designed to create a different set of outcomes in play. Hillfolk and FATE are good examples.

[@CRP-Waltteri]

This is true! And while design can be layered to hold many purposes and goals (and while one game can hold many design elements) this holds very true. And while you have the right to go against the design of any game (and even enjoy the experience) it's funny that people will go their way and try to "fix" so many things in DND which are all just design choices. Yes you can play the game without going into combat and add bunch of homebrew to make up for it, but then you have to fill like 70% of the game. And like I have said before, that can be fun and if you enjoy it, go for it. But there are other games like you mentioned.

[@juauke]

Really great conversation and I'm more on your side with having unified system of resolution I completely agree with Questing Beast's interpretation at the end of his video But I also like simple mechanics and make rulings on the fly with those simple mechanics (as with Electric Bastionland which I am running currently) Completely agree with your take about the importance of the goodness of a group: a group makes or breaks a session whereas a system can be adjusted if it considered bad or even changed if everyone agrees on this PS: The comma in the title feels weird

[@CRP-Waltteri]

Thank you for the insight! And thanks for catching that comma it was actually a typo but I fixed it.

[@juauke]

@@CRP-Waltteri (You're welcome)² 😁

[@ekurisona663]

no one should be using any one system for all their rpg needs anway - isnt everyone chopping out what they want from any number of systems and just building their own frankenstein rpg?

[@CRP-Waltteri]

Agree on this one. I also feel like there are two types of groups (and then all other people trickle down in between) But there are groups that feel like they really enjoy to have a different system for every setting and feel. And then there are people who feel like they don't need anything but one system which they can tinker as much as they need.

[@Drudenfusz]

I would say Brennon employs there some post hoc rational, to keep playing D&D. Since let's be honest, most people know only D&D and thus every other system might hurt the watch time. Even Critical Role seems to have trouble to get the same attention for their new systems.

[@CRP-Waltteri]

You definitely have a point. And to continue that, I think critical role has been losing its long time audience, so the people who are there to watch critical role are not sticking around, and now also the people who are there to watch 5e are obviously not sticking around.

[@bobsavage3317]

☮