RPG Systems

[Erik L (OP)]

Not sure how many of you play RPGs, but I've been pondering a question. Is a "universal" system better than separate systems for each game?

To me, the advantages are:

• Ability to mix-and-match sourcebooks for additional materials.
• Only need for one core rule book.
• Ability to purchase only source/world books that are of interest.
• Once you know the rules, you know the rules.

The disads I see are:

• Is another "universal" system really necessary?
• The "been-there, done-that" factor.
• System needs to be flexible enough to account for each genre written without overpowering others.

[mavikfelna]

I play alot of GURPS and over all I like the system. I do have some complaints and I'd prefer a slightly different ruleset, but having a universal system is nice. And the amount of material out for GURPS is pretty huge, giving you lots and lots of options for what you can play.

I dislike class and level systems and I really dislike the new D&D 4.0E. The attempts to turn those kinds of systems into universal systems have usually been pretty poor.

I like the versatility of universal systems and I'm all for seeing more of them as long as they are well done and can get some interesting settings.

What I'd really like to see is something with the add/disadd system of GURPS/HERO System with a few more stats, I generally like 8 or 9, and a percent based system with difficulty modifiers helping set target levels. Of course, I've been working on such a system (Open Generic Roleplaying Engine, or OGRE System) for twenty five odd years off and on and not gotten any closer to finishing it.

--Mav

[Erik L (OP)]

I've been doing a lot of work on Via Astrum lately, and I've been contemplating pulling the core mechanics and concepts out of the system into a universal system. This would allow me to create source/worldbooks without reinventing the wheel as it were.

The base system has 9 stats, Strength, Agility, Stamina, Appearance, Intelligence, Sense, Willpower, Charisma and Luck. The system is d10 based with exploding dice (not literally ). For most rolls, if you roll a 10, you get to reroll and add, and continue as long as you roll 10's.

Character generation is a bit unlike most other games. Each race has a set value on their stats, and characters get a number of points (3-4) to add to stats as they see fit. Characters also receive talents. Talents are similar to feats (D&D 3.5+, NWP D&D 2). Characters gain a limited number of these at creation (1-3 usually), and may purchase new ones with experience. Talents could be considered analogous to advantages also. They fill a similar role. Stats & skills are also raised via experience purchase. I don't have disads, mainly because the base system is not point-oriented.

I do have classes in the system, but no levels. Classes are similar to the old-school Traveller professions, adding to skills and stats. Again, similar to Traveller, you don't progress through your class, it's more of a "This is what I did before I started adventuring".

Combat is a simple 1d10 + skill + stat vs a Target Number. Meet or exceed the TN, and you succeed in the attack. This is also how skill resolution works. Opposed rolls both parties roll and compare. The higher total is the victor.

Combat is fairly deadly in the system. A light pistol can kill a person on a lucky damage roll. This of course, assumes no armor. Since Via Astrum had its genesis in Astra Imperium, there are 3 basic damage types; Kinetic, Thermal, and EM. There is a fourth, non-typed damage which is reserved for situations where the damage does not fit one of those categories. Armor protects against one or more of the damage types. Health is the non-lethal aspect of taking damage. In a simple sense, every 10 points of Health damage does 1 Wound, which is counted against Stamina. Zero Health = Unconsciousness, Zero Stamina = Death.

There are a couple additional derived stats, Stress and Morale. These make combats more on the gritty realistic side of things. When Stress is reduced to zero (opposite of the logical way), the character is basically in a combat paralysis, shell-shocked, etc. Once Morale has depleted to zero, the character has broken and will attempt to flee.

In all, I can see additions, mainly through classes, talents and skills to make any variety of RPG genre, fantasy, sci-fi, superhero, modern, horror, etc.

[sluissa]

I voted undecided. I like the idea of the universal rule sets, but I've never seen one that works without causing significant problems somewhere.

[AndonSage]

I voted No. I have yet to find a Universal system that I liked more than a specific system.

[Erik L (OP)]

I voted No. I have yet to find a Universal system that I liked more than a specific system.

Out of curiosity, what makes the specific systems better than the universal?

[boggo2300]

I personally lean towards a house system more than a generic universal system, like GDW did with the house system culled from 2nd edition twilight 2000 that they then used for Traveller:New Era (shudder)

Keeping the same basic mechanic, but actually fully tailoring the game for situation seems to work much better than universal systems, I like GURPS, but it's rules are only usable because they started off so simple (as the fantasy trip, based on the original pocket game melee) even coming from such a simple background because it hs to be everything to everybody it's just gotten unwieldy.

So use the same basic mechanic, that comes in very useful as it lets you move game components from one system to another when it is needed (like a TL7 army we had to deal with in TNE which was actually equipped as a US army division from T2000) but if you're not trying to cover every eventuality in the rules you can focus on the ones you need for THIS setting and reduce the rule load somewhat


Hope that actually made sense, my heads a bit congested and not working 100%

Matt.

[Erik L (OP)]

I personally lean towards a house system more than a generic universal system, like GDW did with the house system culled from 2nd edition twilight 2000 that they then used for Traveller:New Era (shudder)

Keeping the same basic mechanic, but actually fully tailoring the game for situation seems to work much better than universal systems, I like GURPS, but it's rules are only usable because they started off so simple (as the fantasy trip, based on the original pocket game melee) even coming from such a simple background because it hs to be everything to everybody it's just gotten unwieldy.

So use the same basic mechanic, that comes in very useful as it lets you move game components from one system to another when it is needed (like a TL7 army we had to deal with in TNE which was actually equipped as a US army division from T2000) but if you're not trying to cover every eventuality in the rules you can focus on the ones you need for THIS setting and reduce the rule load somewhat


Hope that actually made sense, my heads a bit congested and not working 100%

Matt.

That's similar to what I'm leaning towards.

But this brings up another question. Suppose you buy Game X, a sci-fi game. Then you go out and buy Game Y, a fantasy game. Both are based on the same system, however to make each as self-sufficient as possible, a lot of the rules are similar, if not the same between the two games. Would you feel cheated at this point or not?

[boggo2300]

That's similar to what I'm leaning towards.

But this brings up another question. Suppose you buy Game X, a sci-fi game. Then you go out and buy Game Y, a fantasy game. Both are based on the same system, however to make each as self-sufficient as possible, a lot of the rules are similar, if not the same between the two games. Would you feel cheated at this point or not?

Personally I'm happier getting a system as a self contained working game, rather than the world book, game rules method of Gurps (mind you if you play a lot of different games on the same system, and I mean a lot, then the GURPS method is obviously a saving)  

I would much rather get everything I need to start playing in one go, leaving other purchases for expanding things.

Matt

[AndonSage]

I voted No. I have yet to find a Universal system that I liked more than a specific system.

Out of curiosity, what makes the specific systems better than the universal?

For me, a specific system tailored to a genre just works better than a generic universal system. I just prefer, for example, AD&D 2nd Ed. vs. the D20 system. Or Rolemaster and Spacemaster vs. GURPS.

[ZimRathbone]

I voted No. I have yet to find a Universal system that I liked more than a specific system.

Out of curiosity, what makes the specific systems better than the universal?

For me its the background stuff that tends to sell a game, and universal games, by their very nature, give less attention to this.  Its kind of why I liked early editions of Starfire (up to 3rdR), and couldnt get enough enthusiasm to buy the later editions even (or maybe especially) after reading the rules - the later works may well have been better balanced, but did not generate sufficient emotional interest to get me engaged. (BTW I'm not keen on chess either)

[Andrew]

I like RPG Backgrounds so I buy games for background and if a game has a system which is specifically fitted to its background(Earthdawn, Shadowrun, Ars Magica) I approve of that however there are other games which have a background I like (Traveller(paritucalrly TNE) WH40K RPG's, WFRP(All versions)) where I find the system to be a bit of a barrier to the game and run using a preferred system GURPS , Runequest(BRP), HERO System.

[Erik L (OP)]

I think I will create a generic framework, and adapt that on a per-game basis; rather than doing source/worldbooks.  This allows me more time for setting work over mechanics.

[Gilferedir]

Sorry for posting on an old topic, but I'm new to Aurora and happened to come across this while browsing the forums and it's new to me.   Anyways, I've been playing RPGs my whole life and to me an RPG is all about the system, sure a good story can make a good game, but I think it's the system that makes a great game.

[Maou Tsaou]

As this is right up my alley, and I need a few posts to qualify as a person, I'll babble to an old thread for a bit.
. . .
It takes a very abstract game to break out of the universal concept altogether, tic-tac-toe for example, while RPG's rely on universality by nature.
Skywalker, Bond, and Baggins all share the same gravity, that is 1g with occasional tweaks for dramatic effect.

The problem I find with many genera specific games is one of translation.
What they focus on tends to be very detailed and complex but other areas tend to get glossed over or ignored.
That glossing over process is actually important to what I call "framing" a game.
A swords and sorcery dungeon crawl doesn't require much in the way of large scale structure, just the randomly populated hole in the ground and the town to spend the loot in, but the more "open" the game the less you can gloss over.
Genera specific games can be excellent within their given frames but still require quite a bit of additional "system" for more open approaches and the detail and complexity can cause headaches when trying to add additional systems such as a playable economic system.

The problem I find with "universal" systems is the tendency toward oversimplification.
IMO a good RPG "system" provides two main things; simple, fair, and FUN tools for deciding the "BANG! Got you!", "Na uh, you missed!" question, and tools that help to focus all the players on the same imaginative page so to speak.
My "universal" RPG of choice is a highly tweaked version of TFT.
It's a d6 system with 3 stats and a movement allowance on a 1. 3m hex-grid over 5 second turns.
In the magic system a Wizard can spend ST points (as fatigue) to cast a given spell.
For a Fireball a Wizard can do x-dam per 1pt ST in a simple, straight forward manner that mechanically works well.
I used this for years before I thought to start asking my players what it was they saw when using a fireball.
It was actually quite interesting the many varieties of fireball "visuals" I've collected once I bothered to ask.
For all I know every person at the table had a different mental image of a fireball when I was just using the mechanic with no detail.

So for open campaigns I have a simple but playable universal system for anything not framed out specifically.
If the campaign is the course of one characters life and its a medieval fantasy setting then I don't need to sweat space travel but I should have something better than a price list for economics, something better than a hex-map of terrain with some boarders for politics, etc.
I then let the players determine what to make more complex through their play.
For example, I have been using Civilization as a kind of campaign manager for years now.
If players get focused on an area around a particular city and start building strongholds and whatnot then they've popped the quantum into a SimCity presentation for that city.
Players that dabble in politics (Illumaniti) and get to be mayor get to run the interface over their term.
Generals get to see the battle-map, railroad tycoons get to dabble in Railroad Tycoon, etc.
In other words an open RPG campaign should take place in a gameworld that works universally, more or less.
It's the sandbox of RPG's where story results from play.
None of which says that genera specific systems can't be incorporated into the mix, I'm just saying I've seen too much genera specific stuff that has huge chunks of obvious system stuff missing.
Not long ago I came across most of the GURPS WWII supps at a second hand store.
I was interested to find that there wasn't much of anything at all for handling actual battles from a command pov.
It was suitable for an Inglorious Bastards type thing but being in field command meant little except some skill rolls.
I managed a playable system using a combo of the WWII 1937 scenario in Civ IV, Squad Leader, and TFT with a lot drawn from the GURPS books.
Now if a player had tried to go awol and become a war profiteer that would have been interesting but it wouldn't have changed the need to keep track of the war in game terms.
The sandbox lets players go "off script" without screwing up things the way it would for a "plotted scenario".