Why Migrate The Game?
Posted by Keith Baker in UncategorizedSep 14th, 2010 | 11 responsesOn my last post, David S. asked:
If we are all gamers and system does not matter, why do you feel the need to move your adventure to other systems? Why not just play 4E? If the table is a 4E hating OD&D Grognard group, I would think your ‘there is no right way to play’ argument would trump their old school position, no?
It’s a good question. For the last year, I’ve mainly been running it in D&D 4E, and using Over The Edge when I run into people who really dislike 4E. When I went to LA this weekend, I converted it to 3E, and plan to polish it to Pathfinder. I mentioned that I want to convert it to Savage Worlds in the future, which prompted the question.
One way to look at it is that the “There’s no right way to play” statement suggests that people should be willing to play any system. Actually, I meant the opposite. Different systems are best for different playstyles. I don’t think that 4E is better than 3E/Pathfinder, or vice versa; I believe that each one has different strengths and weaknesses, and that these support specific styles of play. Over The Edge is an awesome system for people who focus on storytelling, creativity, and intrigue… but it isn’t designed to support tactical combat well, and it’s a terrible system for a dungeon crawl. I’ve found that OTE is a good system of a lot of new gamers precisely because it’s very abstract and simple, with few numbers to track and a lot of room for creativity; there’s no pressure of “If you do that you’ll draw an attack of opportunity” or tracking bonus (as Rich Burlew sums up so well in this comic). On the other hand, an ex of mine hated OTE and loved 4E precisely because in 4E she knew EXACTLY what her character options were; she found the open-ended nature of OTE intimidating.
So that’s the point – looking at the people I run for on a regular basis, I know some who love OTE and are very uncomfortable with any form of D&D, and I know others who love D&D and are uncomfortable with OTE. It’s not a grognard I-hate-you-and-yer-new-fangled-paper-MMORPG thing; it’s simply that the mechanics of the game system interfere with the player’s enjoyment of the game. And in that case, I’d rather run with a system that suits people’s play style than force them to use a system they are uncomfortable with.
Personally, I like 4E. I think the game runs well in 4E. I’ve run it in 4E 90%+ of the time, and at the moment, it’s still what I’ll use as the default. It’s what I generally run at conventions. But I think there’s value to playing with people in the system they are most comfortable with, because as I said, I don’t think 4E is BETTER than 3.5; I think it’s better at certain things and worse at others, and your personal experience will depend on which of those things are more important in your game. Ultimately, the game is successful if you have fun playing it. If changing systems is the best way to meet that goal, I don’t have a problem.
This does come back to the “Why can’t we all get along” point of the previous post. Edition wars annoy me precisely because I see both sides. 4E isn’t better than 3.5/Pathfinder, and vice versa. They are each better FOR DIFFERENT PEOPLE… and for others, Savage Worlds is better than any form of D&D. Find the game that suits your style, and let others enjoy the game that suits theirs. If they like 4E and you hate it, it doesn’t mean they’re idiots who don’t understand real gaming; it means they are looking for something different than you are.
So if you don’t have a strong preference, I’ll run in 4E. If you’ve never played 4E but just don’t like the sound of it, I’ll urge you to play it with me, because most people’s idea of what 4E is (“It’s a minis game! It’s WoW at a table!”) is nothing like the experience you’ll have with me as a DM. But if there’s people who have played 4E and really don’t like it – if playing it in 4E is going to make it less fun for them – I’d rather use a system that they’ll have fun with than force them to play it my way. As a GM, I feel that my goal is to ensure that the players have a good time – and choosing the right system for the group is the first part of that.
11 Responses to “Why Migrate The Game?”
Leave a Reply
About Me
Just got one idea. You are searching for stuff to post here and/or to work. What about a top down Eberron system? Could be as cool as an new setting or some generic Eberron articles. The process of building a rule system with Eberron in mind from ground up.
It’s a possibility. The problem is that at the end of the day I don’t own Eberron. I can’t create any new official content for it. I can’t write a novel in it on my own. So there’s a certain level at which I’d rather create an entirely new setting that I can take anywhere I want… that if I want to write a story for it or base a card game around it, I can. So we’ll see.
Amusingly, at the moment I’m considering running one campaign in multiple rule sets for similar reasons.
I’m running an Eberron campaign in 4E. I think 4E is great for all sorts of things… but the party is about to hit Sharn and start wandering around doing more intrigue & investigation stuff and less tactical combat for a little while… and I just don’t think 4E is going to be my best rule set to model that. There’s only so much you can do with skill challenges, after all.
So, at the moment I’m looking at making FATE style “alternate” sheets for my PCs. They’ll be a rough parallel for the 4E sheets – and those will still be available if it comes down to it. However, I think the FATE system might be a better model for the feeling I’m going for in those scenarios.
Perhaps I’m not really considering everything 4E can do? Will getting player buy-in for two sheets and systems to keep track of be problematic? Or perhaps there is an even better system for modeling intrigue and investigation?
We’ll see how it works out!
Actually, the skill system is one of the things I really like about 4E, because of the more abstracted nature of it – the fact that players are encouraged to think of creative uses for the skills that they have, and that it’s relatively easy for characters of any class to have a useful selection of noncombat skills. My games typically spend more time out of combat than in it. I just think that the 4E rules don’t do a great job of highlighting the things I like about the system.
So you can play a skill challenge like a combat:
DM: What do you do, Bob?
Bob: Um, I’ll use my Athletics skill. 22.
DM: That’s a failure. Two failures, guys, you’re almost screwed.
Personally, I keep it more abstracted. Sometimes, people don’t even realize it IS a skill challenge; we just talk about what they want to do to approach the situation, occasionally I hit the person suggesting an action with a skill check, and I discuss the impact of the success or failure as part of the story, meanwhile keeping track of successes and failures on my end. I’ll warn them if they are getting close to failure – better come up with a better plan, folks – but it’s about the story, not checking off tick marks.
This is probably worth a full post, so I’ll do that later in the week. In any case, I think there’s nothing wrong with a dual system game. I’m just saying that the skill aspect is one of the things I really like about 4E, but I think it’s something a lot of people don’t see or use in the same way that I do.
I really like 3.5 and 4e. I have not played 3.5 since 4e came out, though. One system I still wish was around, was the old D&D Saga system. The card aspect just worked well. I have tried to implement it in 3.5, and it worked… ok.
Generally, when running a game, I like to give bonuses (positive/negative) depending on player action with skill checks. Skill checks are fun to see how well/poorly someone does, but not at the expense of the story itself.
I have never played OTE. I have a ton of systems, and don’t really need one more, anymore. That being said, I DO have savage worlds, and like it QUITE a bit. It is probably my favorite generic system. Of course, I learned the system when playing the old Deadlands.
Hey there,
I couldn’t agree more that game system strongly impacts the game experience based on style of play. There has been an argument made that a good DM transcends the system, and that’s probably true, but they do it by adapting the system to the play style.
Our group has gone through the gyrations of 3.0, 3.5, 4E, Savage Worlds, RuneQuest and homebrew and we are heading now into a Pathfinder Eberron game. I enjoy 4E and I think it suites Eberron’s cinematic theme well but it didn’t resonate with the players, they needed more simulation to enjoy their game. This group would be hopeless in a more story oriented system, although story still plays a big part in the game.
I agree with Keith, that no system is right or wrong, but systems are definitely more or less fun based on the style of your group.
thanks, matt
Skill checks are fun to see how well/poorly someone does, but not at the expense of the story itself.
Absolutely, and I’ll post more detailed thoughts on this when I do a more extended skill entry later this week.
One of the things I really like about 4E is along the lines of what you have been saying. The rules are explicit for what is important and needs to be detailed (combat) and more abstract for everything else. As a player and GM, I think the combat system gives the flexibility to be creative and to use tactics while at the same time it is easy to use and not prone to a lot of mistakes.
At the same time, the skills are generic enough that it is easy to roll play them or role play them, depending on the players’ choice. Case in point: 2 years ago I had a skill challenge at KublaCon that involved being whisked into a confessional and having to convince some disembodied voice of your intentions. Half the players chose to role play this, and we had a darn good time and I didn’t bother to roll the dice. The other half, well, we did success/failure rolls.
However, in the end it’s more about the people you play with than the system. I just personally think that 4E is the one for me that gets in the way of my story the least.
I try not to say “4e is better than 3e.” That may be how I feel, but I understand that what I feel is actually best expressed by the words “I prefer 4e to 3e” so I’d rather say that instead.
I loathe Edition Wars as well, but you probably gathered that when you came to visit. I’ve had no problems telling a story in 4E and I thought that the game you ran had a great story.
Then again, I have a tolerance for a lot of RPG systems others dislike. And yes, a lot of my players are now hooked on Savage Worlds but they love Eberron in 4E.
I always say: each to their own!
For the interested check out the 4/29/09 DnD podcast on creative uses for skill challenges, it really illustrates the RP potential of skill challenges & how to tailor them to the players.