Condenced knowledge of roleplaying games
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 2:05 pm
After prowling through the forum, it is apparent to me that there is several years’ worth of arguments and information on this board. I have spent hours reading arguments, and while I have learned a lot, I feel that there is more to be known. I am looking for some "general principles" that should apply to games, not things as vague as "they should probably be fun", but more like "feat taxes are dumb, skill points are not a class balancing point, making muggles matter at high levels of power always pisses SOMEONE off, etc.”
There is a wealth of information in the TOMES, and I feel that the members of this board (yes, even shaz) could make an incredible gaming system if they just agreed on some design goals.
This post is a little directionless, but basically I want people to post basic principles that they believe are good to have in any system. I'll start with some examples:
-Taking away an option from someone, even if it is obsolete, really pisses people off.
-If you are going to have rules for non-combat stuff, like stealth and diplomacy, ether make a complete subysystem that works well or just magic tea party it. Patchwork systems like the 3.x bluff/intimidate/diplomacy where you can make the king give you his kingdom at level 1 with a die roll is just stupid.
-Having different classes use different resource management systems makes balance hard, but also makes it easy to make classes that "feel" and play differently.
-Giving players more than three or four choices of attacks/whatever on their turn leads to decision paralysis and makes the game really slow.
-Giving the players plot abilities (things that can actually do something out of combat) can make it hard to be a DM, but generally allows players to feel more involved in the cooperative story thing.
-Feat taxes are dumb/classes should actually be able to do what they are designed to do.
-Making magic items like +x longsword that just give incremental number boosts is a really lame way to do magic. A flaming sword should actually be on fire, not a typed +xd6 damage to your attacks.
-Crossclassing/monster levels/challenge rating fuckery is almost always a clusterfuck. Giving people level appropriate abilities becomes hard as they add different levels of different shit. Horizontal power advancement is probably best handled with feats.
-Having a class that is only OK at three things is not OK when there are three other different classes that are GOOD at one of each of those things. Being able to suck at several things at once is a bad character concept (looking at you bard). If a class can’t do something well, it is not really a feature of that class.
-Magic weapons/armor/dildos should scale with the character's level, because swapping equipment for a extra +1 every three levels is dumb.
-Classes should not be dependent on one specific type of weapon. Feats/abilities should apply to general weapon types, like "slashing", "bows with or without cross", or straight up "melee weapons". This keeps the DM from having to play Santa and give out specific items to characters least the character becomes underpowered.
-Interrupts/extra actions is a fucking mess. Avoid or reserve for super spells/abilities.
-Leveling up should mean more than adding a +1 to everything.
-Monster design should have a good variety of puzzle, PK, character and etc. monsters. Said monsters should also tell the DM what they are and how to play them well. A paragraph or three about their society/eating habits/mating rituals is fine too.
-You cant have races "mean something" while at the same time not having a "correct race" for each class. Pick your poison.
PS: I know that some people will list things that others disagree with, but instead of making this thread an argue-about-anything thread, just say "i disagree with this." We can probably find the arguments for and against in other threads on the board. (Linking to said thread would be helpful.)
There is a wealth of information in the TOMES, and I feel that the members of this board (yes, even shaz) could make an incredible gaming system if they just agreed on some design goals.
This post is a little directionless, but basically I want people to post basic principles that they believe are good to have in any system. I'll start with some examples:
-Taking away an option from someone, even if it is obsolete, really pisses people off.
-If you are going to have rules for non-combat stuff, like stealth and diplomacy, ether make a complete subysystem that works well or just magic tea party it. Patchwork systems like the 3.x bluff/intimidate/diplomacy where you can make the king give you his kingdom at level 1 with a die roll is just stupid.
-Having different classes use different resource management systems makes balance hard, but also makes it easy to make classes that "feel" and play differently.
-Giving players more than three or four choices of attacks/whatever on their turn leads to decision paralysis and makes the game really slow.
-Giving the players plot abilities (things that can actually do something out of combat) can make it hard to be a DM, but generally allows players to feel more involved in the cooperative story thing.
-Feat taxes are dumb/classes should actually be able to do what they are designed to do.
-Making magic items like +x longsword that just give incremental number boosts is a really lame way to do magic. A flaming sword should actually be on fire, not a typed +xd6 damage to your attacks.
-Crossclassing/monster levels/challenge rating fuckery is almost always a clusterfuck. Giving people level appropriate abilities becomes hard as they add different levels of different shit. Horizontal power advancement is probably best handled with feats.
-Having a class that is only OK at three things is not OK when there are three other different classes that are GOOD at one of each of those things. Being able to suck at several things at once is a bad character concept (looking at you bard). If a class can’t do something well, it is not really a feature of that class.
-Magic weapons/armor/dildos should scale with the character's level, because swapping equipment for a extra +1 every three levels is dumb.
-Classes should not be dependent on one specific type of weapon. Feats/abilities should apply to general weapon types, like "slashing", "bows with or without cross", or straight up "melee weapons". This keeps the DM from having to play Santa and give out specific items to characters least the character becomes underpowered.
-Interrupts/extra actions is a fucking mess. Avoid or reserve for super spells/abilities.
-Leveling up should mean more than adding a +1 to everything.
-Monster design should have a good variety of puzzle, PK, character and etc. monsters. Said monsters should also tell the DM what they are and how to play them well. A paragraph or three about their society/eating habits/mating rituals is fine too.
-You cant have races "mean something" while at the same time not having a "correct race" for each class. Pick your poison.
PS: I know that some people will list things that others disagree with, but instead of making this thread an argue-about-anything thread, just say "i disagree with this." We can probably find the arguments for and against in other threads on the board. (Linking to said thread would be helpful.)