Generic Gaming Danger

[Darkness_The_Sinless]

In my short time as a gamer (six years) I have bought, owned, played and thrown into the pile of never touched again more overly generic games than non-generic. This is usually due to the rules trying to extend too far and fall short, or are so generic that to play in it has only a slim amount of control to it. Now I don't want to assume too much, but over-complication and under-complication seem to be two sides of the same coin. Its super important to find the middle ground, loading a game up with sixty different modules with a paragraph about each and a line of description won't make the game more generally exciting but more like ERWTW, it'll be in pain due to trying to reach up.

I suggest we look at the bigger over reach modules and give those a type and then focus more with there:

For example we could do:

Future:
Cyberpunk
Space Conquerors
Post apoclypse

and build a major sphere with these focus's within it.

[fodigg]

If you're suggesting we try to make it out with as few modules as possible, encouraging mixing and matching module elements for more elaborate or for cross-genre settings, I aggree whole-heartedly. If you're suggesting we restrict e20 to sci-fi, I disagree. From the beginning, I wanted a game system where I can sit down and play whatever genre allowed me to shanghai players into showing up at the table.

[JaredGaume]

In a similar thread I advocating building the basic game around one genre. I picked modern for sake of argument. The basic rules are cross-genre, however. Allowing for the text to support 1) a number of additional genres or "modules" and 2) a GM section that gives you the tools to craft additional "modules". The "plug and play" nature of the design supports simultaneously adding and playing as many modules as you want.

[ronin]

I also think the modern setting should be the baseline. We choose a few additional "modules" to define in the core book and mix these elements to create any number of different games we like.

[fodigg]

If we're looking for a baseline, I wouldn't do "modern", I would do "historical, non-magical".

Edit: This would give us a baseline of weapon types from sticks and rocks, to swords and axes, to crossbows and grenades, to muskets and rapiers, etc. This would give us a baseline for enemies from dinosaurs to shaggy prehistoric beasts, to less prehistoric beasts on upward to tanks and harrier jets.

It would essentially cover any setting, especially if this timeline extends forward into "futuristic" (sci-fi) tech. Modules would then add elements like "magic" or "psionics" or "superhero" or "western" with more typified elements and any unique rules sets.

[ronin]

I think of modern as the "middle". To me a historical game is a modern game without all of the technology. Come to think of it, I think of anything that isn't DnD, or doesn't have "magic", to be a modern game. The only difference is the level of technology involved and perhaps some additional rules to cover things like sanity, horror, and the like.

The logic may not be sound but I've always looked at it this way for some reason.

[jazzencat]

We could also leave modules and setting/genre specific stuff out of the core book all together and put all of that in an online searchable format, say a database or wiki or something similar. Allow for individual pages to be printed off and you can mix and match your own genre splats. I have seen one other game system do this for magic spells. The system itself is also adaptable to other genres but they chose to release their first edition rule book with a fantasy focus. We have a large space resource even in free or low-cost hosting that only gives 50 GB or so to make a very extensive set of databases for skills, feats, enhancements, talents, equipment and setting modules.

[JaredGaume]

I would like the core book to have something to play with sans internet or databases. Even if the book describes a truely generic game, at least include one setting as an example.

[Imagist]

I would like the core book to have something to play with sans internet or databases. Even if the book describes a truely generic game, at least include one setting as an example.

Agreed.

I am already seeing a mechanical difference between "heroic talents" and "FX talents" that will cover magic, psionics, and super powers. I believe we should have at least one module to cover those basic elements in hard print with the rest of the rules and mechanics in the core book to help ease people into the modular idea. If they can see how adding magic into their game or adding psionics into their game is done while flipping the pages, it will make it easier for them to get behind the idea of adding newer modules later. Plus, if Gary writes the book from front to back with the modular mechanic in mind, the text should give places where you can add module mechanics or check your module to see if new feats or talents are available.

[Stacie_GmrGrl]

Oh, I think the core rules should be designed as generic as possible with NO Baseline at all, or that defeats the very purpose of it being Genreless... I mean, how can you have a genreless game with a baseline genre as a core focus??? Uhhh, contradiction anyone??? and false advertisement to boot...

However, I think we give players and gamemaster the tools in the core rules, and then in the back of the book, we have 3 to 5 setting examples of different genre's that really showcase what is possible in this game, similar to what True20 did with its first release. I'd aim at 5 myself.

[jazzencat]

Well a good genre for that would a Space Opera setting with some mystical elements or something like RIFTS: you can showcase the game's mêlée, ranged, vehicular, tech and mystical element mechanics. There are more than a few settings that are SF but involve swordfights at some level or another (SW has Jedi & Lightsabers, essentially Warrior-Mages), The Okal-Rel books do something similar with the different levels of genetic types, and the high-level genetic characteristics have the ruling class solving disputes between nations or groups by means of formal sword duels.

[GMSarli]

The reason to use a modern setting as the "baseline" is just a matter of convenience: We all currently live in a modern setting, and as such it's easy to relate to. It's fairly easy to grasp the differences in each genre by looking at what changes relative to the "default" of our real-life experience.

When you think about it, saying that "modern" is the default genre is really saying that the default is no genre. (No publisher would ever describe a line of novels as being "modern," right?) It's just a neutral background of common experience that serves as the starting point for translating real-life concepts into game mechanics -- nothing more, nothing less.

[Stacie_GmrGrl]

The reason to use a modern setting as the "baseline" is just a matter of convenience: We all currently live in a modern setting, and as such it's easy to relate to. It's fairly easy to grasp the differences in each genre by looking at what changes relative to the "default" of our real-life experience.

When you think about it, saying that "modern" is the default genre is really saying that the default is no genre. (No publisher would ever describe a line of novels as being "modern," right?) It's just a neutral background of common experience that serves as the starting point for translating real-life concepts into game mechanics -- nothing more, nothing less.

Sorry for arguing the point, but "Modern" is a specific genre. It is a genre where there are preconceived notions and ideas based along a certain set of expectations that are assumed to be within the genre... and you can not have a genreless game where you are setting it up to have a baseline of "modern." Modern is a genre. It's just as much of a genre as Space Opera, or Fantasy, or Horror, or Swashbuckling, or Supers...

[jigsawjones]

I look at it like this. Vanilla Ice Cream. It's the most basic, plain ice cream you can get. It has a flavor, to be sure, but it is so ubiquitous, so universal, that it is the easiest thing to use as a baseline. Most flavors of ice cream take vanilla into account when they're being created -- many even build upon the flavor of vanilla, adding new flavors to enhance the experience. Other flavors may remove vanilla and add in something else.

Very rarely will you find anyone willing to buy Plain Ice Cream without any flavor whatsoever. If you were trying to describe ice cream to somebody who has never had ice cream, you would probably start with vanilla, knowing that they, being intelligent gastronomes, would be able to imagine what it'd be like with different flavors. You wouldn't give them plain ice cream, which nobody ever eats, and tell them "Okay, now picture this with vanilla, or chocolate, or raspberries!" and expect them to buy a carton.

So, while I agree that Vanilla is a flavor, I also see it as a necessary step in getting people to eat the Ice Cream we're offering.

[Imagist]

The reason to use a modern setting as the "baseline" is just a matter of convenience: We all currently live in a modern setting, and as such it's easy to relate to. It's fairly easy to grasp the differences in each genre by looking at what changes relative to the "default" of our real-life experience.

When you think about it, saying that "modern" is the default genre is really saying that the default is no genre. (No publisher would ever describe a line of novels as being "modern," right?) It's just a neutral background of common experience that serves as the starting point for translating real-life concepts into game mechanics -- nothing more, nothing less.

Sorry for arguing the point, but "Modern" is a specific genre. It is a genre where there are preconceived notions and ideas based along a certain set of expectations that are assumed to be within the genre... and you can not have a genreless game where you are setting it up to have a baseline of "modern." Modern is a genre. It's just as much of a genre as Space Opera, or Fantasy, or Horror, or Swashbuckling, or Supers...

Trying to create a "genreless system without modern as the starting point" is like trying to create an alignment table (think 3.X D&D) without beginning with a Neutral alignment as the starting point. All modern is for e20 is a Neutral alignment (animals are neutral because it is the baseic survival instincts of the natural work; so too is modern neutral because it is the basic mode of the natural work... right now).

Using this metaphor, lets treat alignments like modules (Ethical - Law = Past, Neutral = Modern, Chaos = Future; Morale - Good = Magic, Neutral = no-FX, Evil = Psionics). You can combine the modules in any way you like, creating a past campaign with no-FX (Lawful Neutral), a future campaign with no-FX (Chaotic Neutral), or even a Modern campaign with no-FX (Neutral Neutral/True Neutral). You could also make an urban arcana campaign (Neutral Good) or a psionic agents campaign (Neutral Evil). You could get crazy and make a high magic campaing (Lawful Good) or a historically psionic campaign (Lawful Evil). You could mess around and make a Star Jammers campaing (Chaotic Good) or maybe even a technological future where psionics rule supreme (Chaotic Evil).

Either way we NEED modern as a starting points because no matter how awesome your calculator, you need a starting point to make a graph that is anything more than just theoretical.

[jigsawjones]

My metaphor tastes better.

edited to add: …though yours is less fattening.

[Imagist]

My metaphor tastes better.

edited to add: …though yours is less fattening.

Thank you?

[Stacie_GmrGrl]

My metaphor tastes better.

edited to add: …though yours is less fattening.

I do like the Vanilla analogy, I can see why a bit better now...

I want strawberry in with my base vanilla setting please

[j0lt]

Oh crap, she got Psionics in my Modern!

[bigblackafrica]

I would like the core book to have something to play with sans internet or databases. Even if the book describes a truely generic game, at least include one setting as an example.

Agreed.

I am already seeing a mechanical difference between "heroic talents" and "FX talents" that will cover magic, psionics, and super powers. I believe we should have at least one module to cover those basic elements in hard print with the rest of the rules and mechanics in the core book to help ease people into the modular idea. If they can see how adding magic into their game or adding psionics into their game is done while flipping the pages, it will make it easier for them to get behind the idea of adding newer modules later. Plus, if Gary writes the book from front to back with the modular mechanic in mind, the text should give places where you can add module mechanics or check your module to see if new feats or talents are available.

I would like to 3rd this line of thinking. It is very important that variant rules for alternate genres be included in the physical core book.

[jazzencat]

The main reason I proposed adding the net/database element to e20 was that even if we provide a "Vanilla" setting in the core book we will have to leave out all sorts of permutations of things that can be done with a modern setting. What modern setting? Noir, action movie, supernatural thriller, ghost story? Do we only list feats, talents, skills and enhancements that are present in the real world? I can enhance my laptop by swapping the 7200rpm HD for an SSD? Feats are things like multi-tasking and endurance for playing Chopin pieces on the piano? Or do we add the improbable aiming skills of Spike from Cowboy Bebop or his stunts that while humanly possible just barely avoid needing wires in a live-action. Do we use as the baseline a character like the journalist from the Ring or a rural village boy on the order of Tony Jaa's characters from Ong Bak and Tom Yum Goong? No wires, but the vast majority of people can't hope to pull those moves off. GURPS 3e Basic Set uses modern as a base line, but because it is generic it has to toss in Psionics and Magic as well. Space constraints (GURPS 3e Basic Set is about half as long as e20 Core will end up being) and because of space that needs to be taken up with things like graphic designs and eye-candy we are going to have to chose a. a very limited selection of feats, talents, skills and enhancements because we need room to also describe the rules of how they work and examples of play in addition to providing a short usable list that could be used in actual play with e20 Core as a standalone product (à la Basic Set). What about this: while we give tables and rules for advancement up to level 30, restrict the detailed trees and feats etc to something like 3rd or 5th level as the Basic D&D set does, and provide the extended rules either in another book (if there is enough interest) or as optional PDFs or in the form of an online database. The main problem with the Basic Set was while you could use it alone to run an entire campaign world, you have to house-rule so much that it was almost easier to go and houserule something like d20 SRD. Has anyone here looked at the ORE toolkit? It doesn't provide a setting (which shortens it), and e20 Core can't completely follow that method because ORE Toolkit assumes prior experience with RPGs and is intended to help in converting existing RPGs and/or settings to use the ORE engine.

I'm just concerned that with the amount of detail I see being put into the mechanics of e20 and extending the capabilities of the d20 system that we are either going to end up falling into the the trap that GURPS Basic Set does where you almost need 3 books to cover the skills, advantages and items in enough depth that it is useful as a generic system. Indeed GURPS actually split the Basic Set into multiple volumes for their 4th Edition. Wildside Gaming System, while a universal system that has been used for games running space opera to wartime adventures in Sarajevo to Fantasy, chose to release their first Core rulebook with a bent towards fantasy, and described it as such. Now any enterprising GM can tweak and houserule the basic game system to work in other settings, but it really seems like you'd need to add more books for that. I just don't want to see e20 Core fail because people look at it and go "too many options, not enough detail" and go buy & houserul d20 M and D&D 4E and Pathfinder etc... So maybe just have detailed trees for up to 3rd-5th level range for the 6 classes and anything beyond that is supplemental PDF territory or a wiki or something. Then you can learn to play, use it for starting campaign in just about any setting you can envision because the lists of capabilities are small enough not to end up crowding the needed rule descriptions.

[Darkness_The_Sinless]

Realistically this system has to not only decide detail but level of detail per setting per module. I mean is Power attack really a useful feat in an age were laserguns that disintirgrate human flesh from any range useful? I suppose. now would it be the same usefulness as in say medieval times. No. I mean I'd have to see more to know but if we go TOO generic than its like buying flavorless gum. if it is TOO specific we lose the generic any-gameness we crave from it. its a difficult balancing board.

[jazzencat]

There is a reason D&D splits the core books into Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master Guide and Monstrous Manual. They have a lot of ground to cover even in a very limited setting. If e20 Core is supposed to be usable as a guide for new players, then it will need a section on GMing as well as the requisite selections of talents, feats, skills and enhancements for a base setting AND will have to provide guidelines and methods for easily building your own talent trees and feats and how to balance them. Add in the requisite little bits of setting fluff, gameplay examples (something GURPS 3e's Basic Set did, but to a very limited degree and no fluff besides the solo adventure in the 200-odd pages) and graphics and we are eating up space that could be used for rule and mechanic descriptions and design ideas. Many who looked over the GURPS basic set went out and spent the money on a source book because, while the basic rules framework was there to create any genre you could imagine, the selection of things like equipment and setting-specific skills were not and making that up is a TON of work. In the end having a default setting in the e20 core might end up being a detriment because it uses up space that is needed for things like helping people with design of their own worlds. The other option would have been to target it as a tool for designing worlds and settings like ORE's Toolkit and target experienced GMs and players familiar with RPGs and d20. This, if I recall, has been nixed as a design goal by the head designer. So now we are faced with the significant challenge of providing a useful setting, talents, skills, equipment, feats and enhancements, the tools to make your own settings and balance them, GMing advice and reference, and player reference as well as provide the frame work to design paranormal abilities like Magic or psychic abilities for settings where it's relevant. In addition to character design we need section on monster/adversary design, rules for vehicles and vehicular combat and so forth. This is quite a tall order to get into 400 pages even if we're not killing space with graphics.
I suppose my question to Gary is this: how do you propose laying out the book to meet all these diverse needs so that e20's core can do what it says on the tin and be a truly universal core book that provides everything needed to create your own world and settings and not run into the same problems of GURPS's Basic Set? How is the book going to be split up and layed out and how much art are you going to include to break up the blocks of text?

[GMSarli]

I suppose my question to Gary is this: how do you propose laying out the book to meet all these diverse needs so that e20's core can do what it says on the tin and be a truly universal core book that provides everything needed to create your own world and settings and not run into the same problems of GURPS's Basic Set? How is the book going to be split up and layed out and how much art are you going to include to break up the blocks of text?

Re: art, I'd like there to be something to break up the blocks of text on every two-page spread if at all possible. However, I'd guess that about half the time it will be a large table or sidebar or the like. So, off the top of my head, I'm expecting to have some sort of illustration on an average of maybe 1/4 of the pages. (There will be the occasional larger piece, of course, but this is just meant as rough ballpark.)

As for page allocations, let's think in terms of "module units" (32 pages). At 384 pages, we'd have 12 MUs to play with. Let's say, hypothetically, that we're able to put essentially all the player stuff and the core rules engine (combat chapter, etc.) into the first half of the book, filling 6 MUs (192 pages). As a comparison, the GM section starts on page 238 in the Saga core rulebook, but the Force, Droids, Prestige Classes, and Gazetteer chapters -- 72 pages total -- would be in genre-specific sections for us, so that means Saga only used 166 pages for character building and the rules engine; I have an extra 26 pages allocated right off the bat, so this is certainly doable.

Now, that leaves 6 MUs for the GM sections and genre-specific stuff. If we give the GM section (including a "toolbox" with the stuff you need to build your own monsters and such) a full 3 MUs (96 pages), we could still devote a full 32-page MU to each of three genres and/or modules. That's really not bad.


That said, it would certainly be a tight fit ... and that's the part where I absolutely love being in charge as opposed to being a peon freelancer. If I decide I absolutely need another 100 pages, I can just freaking do it.

[JaredGaume]

(...)
That said, it would certainly be a tight fit ... and that's the part where I absolutely love being in charge as opposed to being a peon freelancer. If I decide I absolutely need another 100 pages, I can just freaking do it.

That's totally awesome!

[jazzencat]

I suppose my question to Gary is this: how do you propose laying out the book to meet all these diverse needs so that e20's core can do what it says on the tin and be a truly universal core book that provides everything needed to create your own world and settings and not run into the same problems of GURPS's Basic Set? How is the book going to be split up and layed out and how much art are you going to include to break up the blocks of text?

Re: art, I'd like there to be something to break up the blocks of text on every two-page spread if at all possible. However, I'd guess that about half the time it will be a large table or sidebar or the like. So, off the top of my head, I'm expecting to have some sort of illustration on an average of maybe 1/4 of the pages. (There will be the occasional larger piece, of course, but this is just meant as rough ballpark.)

As for page allocations, let's think in terms of "module units" (32 pages). At 384 pages, we'd have 12 MUs to play with. Let's say, hypothetically, that we're able to put essentially all the player stuff and the core rules engine (combat chapter, etc.) into the first half of the book, filling 6 MUs (192 pages). As a comparison, the GM section starts on page 238 in the Saga core rulebook, but the Force, Droids, Prestige Classes, and Gazetteer chapters -- 72 pages total -- would be in genre-specific sections for us, so that means Saga only used 166 pages for character building and the rules engine; I have an extra 26 pages allocated right off the bat, so this is certainly doable.

Now, that leaves 6 MUs for the GM sections and genre-specific stuff. If we give the GM section (including a "toolbox" with the stuff you need to build your own monsters and such) a full 3 MUs (96 pages), we could still devote a full 32-page MU to each of three genres and/or modules. That's really not bad.


That said, it would certainly be a tight fit ... and that's the part where I absolutely love being in charge as opposed to being a peon freelancer. If I decide I absolutely need another 100 pages, I can just freaking do it.

That clears it up somewhat for me and gives me an idea of how you want to go about it. I would submit that art larger than maybe 1/2 a page shouldn't be used considering all the material we have to cover. For the art style I'd love to see stuff done in graphite/greyscale drawings. Kind of like what the art in Mage: The Sorcerer's Crusade is like. My one other concern is that because of classes and limited number of talents/feats allocated that making some of the more versatile characters that are possible in systems like ORE or Storyteller might be difficult with the setup that e20 is using.

As an example from Star Trek: Science, Security, Medical, Engineering these are clear enough. Science and Engineering would be Savant class variants (maybe something like an AD&D kit, or just have more than one tree for Savant class in Star Trek), Security has options of Vanguard, Dreadnought, Corsair, depending on what division they work in, but might actually have to be multi-classed. Medical is pretty clearly Sentinel class. Command: here's the rub: command staff can come up through any of the other Starfleet Divisions. So Command would have to be at least a 2-class multi-class combination if not more. They would almost by definition be Envoy-$CLASS combinations. Say coming from Engineering to Security to command would mean that character is a Savant/Corsair/Envoy. The problem becomes the XP cost climbing through the roof for these characters due to the demands of multi-classing, and losing a fair chunk of capacity because of retraining if we follow the retraining idea in 4e. Would it be possible as part of the world-building modules in e20 core to include one for designing new classes, or on how to make e20 classless?

[fodigg]

Is this game going to be entirely fluff-free?

[jazzencat]

Given the material to be covered, I'd guess nearly fluff free. Maybe confine the fluff to gameplay examples for different mechanics.

[fodigg]

I would think we would need explanations on the various genres and combining genres. Also, enemy types.

[jazzencat]

Will have to wait for the various sections to be outlined as this project progresses. Hopefully Gary has time to be able to make up lil quick alpha-bits of the rules and distribute them to patrons and then examine feedback etc. Maybe a Wiki setup for development where we can add comments and edits and have these edits tracked through the process.

[JaredGaume]

So far e20 lite looks like it may be inclusive, but deffinately not generic.

[jazzencat]

Yeah, looks like at this point.

[Orion]

There's no such thing as "genreless." Believe me; I've spent a lot of time researching the basic nature of genre. As soon as you're telling a story, it has a genre, or at least a mode. The base genre of most RPGs, the kinds that devote multiple chapters to combat, is "action/adventure." Start from there, use the contemporary world as a base line (no sci-fi, no magic), and then add bits on top of that. Every genre book, if it really follows the genre it's based on, should alter the rules slightly, otherwise it won't capture the soul of that genre. There's a world of difference, for example, between Space Opera and Cyberpunk. You need two different damage/save systems to replicate those genres correctly. A genuinely modular system would allow you to, for example, pull out HPs and insert a Condition Monitor.