In his weblog last Sunday, Greg Costikyan wrote:
The 300 Games Every Game Developer (and Gamer) Should Know
I've been thinking about writing a book with this title. There are several reasons why I think it would be useful. For one thing, I (and everyone who comes into contact with game design wannabes) am often shocked at how ignorant such people often (not always) are--how limited their experience with games. In some cases, they don't even seem to play games at all; in others, their experience is limited to a very narrow range of games.
.
.
.
I spent some time today hacking together a list--it's a lot short of 300 (and maybe we wind up with 200, or some other number--it's not that important)....Please do comment--suggest games I'm missing, criticize choices I've made, and so on. With some help, I think we can put together a pretty solid preliminary list."[/list:u]And he has it broken into categories like "folk games" (tic-tac-toe, dominoes, poker, etc.), and mass market games (Candyland, Scrabble, Monopoly, etc.). He has categories for various kinds of computer, console, and arcade video games, and also for roleplaying games. Here's his complete list for "hobby games--RPGs":
Dungeons & Dragons
Call of Cthulhu
Vampire: The Masquerade
Champions
GURPS
Toon
Shadowrun
My Life with Master[/list:u]Of course, I'm pleased to see My Life with Master on his list. But what I've been ratcheting in my brain the past couple of days is the inclusion of Shadowrun. The comments functionality on his weblog seems to be broken, so I turn to The Forge. Why do you think he included Shadowrun?
Paul
p.s. If you're curious, you can pull up his full list here
Oops...might help if I didn't forget to copy over his inclusion criteria:
What are the criteria for including games? There are a bunch of them. Some games are historically important. Some games are highly innovative, landmarks in design. Some games are miserable failures, but the ways in which they fail miserably are important and informative. Others are obscure, but interesting and innovative attempts that may point the way to fruitful future development. Some are perfect examples of a particular design idea, or a particular design flaw.[/list:u]Paul
The mix of high-tech and monsters/magic is still relatively unique, isn't it? Was there some game that did that before SR? What about the Priorities system? (I'm pretty clueless about games before 91-92 or so).
I dunno. I dig SR, Incoherant or not, and would put it on such a list just because of that. ;)
Was Shadowrun the first genre mixing RPG (i.e. does it predate Rifts, TORG and so on) - or could it be the metaplot thing?
Not familiar enough with Shadowrun to make with more than these vagueries.
Hm.
I never played SR. I suspect he's included it because it was, itself, a *fad* for awhile. Or, perhaps more accurately, managed to attach itself to a popular meme (cyberpunk) in a way that gave it a certain synergy with people. It was certainly popular in the gaming groups I knew when it came out, although it never did anything for me.
As for his RPG list. It's awfully short. I'd at least put Over the Edge in that list. But it sounds like he's going for a sort of general survey of Games as opposed to a general survey of RPGs, so perhaps the briefness is to be expected.
I think it's interesting that he selected Toon, of his own work, as opposed to Paranoia or Star Wars d6, both of which I think are better games. Not that Toon is bad. And not that the point is necessarily to get the best of the best in the list, as it sounds like he wants negative examples, too.
I think a key thing missing from this list is context. Why were any of them included and why were others excluded? At the very least, we need to know which he intends as positive examples and which as negative.
Huh, this sounds familiar. Wonder where I've heard this line of reasoning before?
;-)
Mike "Proud to think like Costik" Holmes
P.S. SR is the third most played game, IIRC, after D&D and Vampire. Believe it or don't. Actually battles with GURPS for third often.
Quote from: Ian CharvillWas Shadowrun the first genre mixing RPG (i.e. does it predate Rifts, TORG and so on) - or could it be the metaplot thing?
Well, SR was certainly not the first Genre mixing in RPGs.
The 1e DMs guide had conversion rules for Gamma World(SF) (and Boot Hill(Cowboy), if I recall correctly).
AD&D1e module S1, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, took place in Greyhawk and involved exploring a derelict module of a damaged starship.
Worlds of Wonder included a core generic set of rules, with specific 'expansions' for Superheroes, SF, and Fantasy all in one box.
Champions fissioned into Fantasy Hero (Fantasy); Justice, Inc. (Pulp Adventure); Star Hero(SF); and several others before getting reunified with 4th edition.
Mercenaries, Spies, and Private Eyes (Pulp Adventure) was effectively Tunnels and Trolls (Fantasy) in the modern day.
Both Tekumel and Skyrealms of Jorune are basically 'fantasy' games that have an SF back history. Actually, so did the 'default' setting in The Fantasy Trip.
And, of course, GURPS was designed to specifically take advantage of cross-genre play. At least, it was marketed that way when it first showed up.
I guess I'd say it was quite common to include SF elements into Fantasy (ie, D&D) games, and slightly less common to use Fantasy elements in an SF setting, which I gather Shadowrun does. But it's certainly not revolutionary IMHO.
I think Shadowrun's there because it represents cyberpunk-style RPGs for a great many people, even if there are alternative systems.
I also remember thinking (when it came out) that its dice mechanic was pretty original. I'm not sure if that's actually true, or if I just hadn't seen its precursors.
Quote from: AnyaTheBlueI never played SR. I suspect he's included it because it was, itself, a *fad* for awhile. Or, perhaps more accurately, managed to attach itself to a popular meme (cyberpunk) in a way that gave it a certain synergy with people. It was certainly popular in the gaming groups I knew when it came out, although it never did anything for me.
Well, Shadowrun is quite popular. It was 5th in the 1999 Wizards of the Coast survey (which I think is the best-statistics survey to date). More importantly, I think it had a huge influence on later games in terms of glossy layout, dice pool mechanics, and colorful PC archetypes. Shadowrun really set the standard in terms of what all the cool 90's games would look like: from Vampire and all WW games to Feng Shui to Deadlands. Arguably, the 90's games are imitating Vampire more than Shadowrun directly, but SR itself was a huge influence on Vampire.
As influential landmarks in design, I think Ars Magica should be on there. It was the first game of Jonathan Tweet and Mark Rein*Hagen, who each went on to have huge influence in different ways. It's basic resolution (attribute + stat + single die roll vs difficulty) was a landmark.
Personally, I'd also include James Bond 007 as a landmark game, which pioneered level-of-success mechanics as well as hero point mechanics.
The question of failures is a very interesting one. I'd put Everway in this category, though I guess that is controversial. It had a lot of things going for it: a top designer, a cash-rich company for marketting, great artwork, and significant promotion. People can argue why it was a failure, but presumably there should be lessons learned there.
Interesting alternate approaches is really a personal choice. Over the Edge and Amber Diceless are two obvious choices.
Just some random comments on my own reactions to the list.
I knew lots of people who played Shadowrun, but the system's popularity baffled me - I was never even tempted. It was not the first genre mixing game - Lords of Creation, which mixes genres far more thoroughly, predates it, and other good examples have been given. (Oh, and I wrote a time travel game in 6th grade that was multi-genre and pre-dates it. Nyah nyah.)
Ars Magica was great fun, and the game in which I ran my last serious campaign (from 1993-5) before giving up serious roleplaying (other than when I met up with old friends - I still roleplayed, but it wasn't a focus of my life) for chess for several years until late '99. But I wouldn't call it a landmark design in terms of resolution, though the magic system was a wonderful new development that deserves great credit. (And I suppose troupe-style play was a new idea too, to many.) But anyway, the task resolution did not seem to me to have fundamentally new ideas, though maybe I was just too ignorant to notice them. What's the big deal about hitting a difficulty number on skill plus stat? It was elegantly put together, but difficulty levels, skill numbers, and stat modifiers were all long since in the mix.
James Bond 007 was a major landmark in game design, though - it was a narrow-genre game with a system designed explicitly for that genre (before or after Paranoia? I can't remember), and its task resolution mechanics fell on me like a revelation at the time. It was a big advance.
As to GURPS, I would maintain that from a design point of view it ought to be counted as a disimprovement on what may be the most elegant design in gaming ever, The Fantasy Trip. I realize that I'm saying this among my theoretical betters, and wouldn't mind being corrected, but the more I've analyzed TFT over the years the more I have come to regard it as a rare and precious Jewel. I have quibbles with TFT, over the cost and division of skills and spells for example, but there is nothing major there that one could improve without designing an entirely new game.
Quick side note, 'cause I don't have much to say on the main topic - Sean (Calithena) you have an ally, who would be me, regarding The Fantasy Trip and its relationship to GURPS.
Best,
Ron
Count me in the FT over GURPS faction as well.
Although I've played a lot of GURPS over the years, I have always felt it would have been better if it had somehow been more like FT in the first place. Although I haven't had much of a chance to test this out with actual play, I get a similar vibe from BESM/Tri-stat -- it's a cleaner GURPS than GURPS, if that makes sense. It feels like a good stab at what I think GURPS 4e ought to look like. Well, I lie. It's what I thought G4e ought to have looked like before I read Sorcerer, Paladin, The Riddle of Steel, and Burning Wheel. Now I'm not as convinced.
(John Kim's bigass list ( http://www.darkshire.org/~jhkim/rpg/encyclopedia/ ) gives Paranoia as coming out in 1984 and James Bond 007 in 1983)
Sort of back on topic, I wonder if we as a group would agree on the Milestones of RPG design, in terms of both Good and Bad examples?
Shadowrun would also be historically important as one of the first games to feature a metaplot. The layout and design of the supplements for first and second edition was also highly regarded, at the time.
Best,
Adam
Quote from: CalithenaArs Magica was great fun, and the game in which I ran my last serious campaign (from 1993-5) before giving up serious roleplaying (other than when I met up with old friends - I still roleplayed, but it wasn't a focus of my life) for chess for several years until late '99. But I wouldn't call it a landmark design in terms of resolution, though the magic system was a wonderful new development that deserves great credit. (And I suppose troupe-style play was a new idea too, to many.) But anyway, the task resolution did not seem to me to have fundamentally new ideas, though maybe I was just too ignorant to notice them. What's the big deal about hitting a difficulty number on skill plus stat? It was elegantly put together, but difficulty levels, skill numbers, and stat modifiers were all long since in the mix.
While it may seem mathematically simple and obvious, I'd say that going from subtractive to additive is a significant shift. Virtually all prior systems were based on having a skill number and rolling under that skill number on dice. Afterwards, most new non-dice-pool systems switched to AM's way of doing things: add attribute, skill, and the die roll (i.e. Interlock, Unisystem, Fuzion, d20, CODA, Action!, etc.). The subtractive approach makes it awkward for the player to announce his result without first knowing the difficult (one word: THAC0), and similarly harder to do contests.
In addition, Ars Magica introduced Whimsy Cards as a storytelling device together with troupe-style play.
Numbers added vs a variable target number goes back to Traveller, I'm guessing it's the specific skill+stat thing, which in a broader sense is also a big influence on the Vampire et al.
Quote from: Ian CharvillNumbers added vs a variable target number goes back to Traveller, I'm guessing it's the specific skill+stat thing, which in a broader sense is also a big influence on the Vampire et al.
Well, there's always precursors to everything. I'm not saying that AM was the only game to ever use addition instead of roll-under -- but it was influential in setting this as a standard. While it was additive in a sense, Traveller didn't have an explicit concept of target number as difficulty. For example, in combat, you must always roll an 8+ on 2d6. Skill, range, weapon, etc. were all lumped together as die roll modifiers (DMs). There wasn't any generalized skill roll mechanic: just places where it would say "Roll 10+ to do this." and skill would sometimes be a modifier.
While it was additive, very few games imitated Traveller's way of doing things in the 1977-1987 period. However, post-1987 lots of games took up an explicit universal mechanic of attribute + skill + a die roll , with the total then being compared with a difficulty number for the task. Oh, I should note that this mechanic includes the option of mix-and-match of attribute and skill (i.e. Guile + Com to tell a lie, Guile + Per to detect a lie).
Back to the original question:
I think he included Shadowrun for several reasons:
1. It was one of the very first games with metaplot. Whether you like metaplot or not, that's an innovation - a changing setting.
2. The sci-fi/fantasy mix isn't unique, but it is the most popular of the genre. (Well, argubly. There is Rifts.)
3. Depending on what edition you play, it's actually a really good game. I was amazingly shocked. I played it a few times in high school and thought it was absolute balls. I re-played it recently, though - what I think was second edition - and it was a masterpiece of fun. It was highly Gamist in play, as you'd expect, but the resource allocation of the pool system (especially the Combat Pool) was intricate and actually lent itself to some dramatic moments.
If I have any conception of GNS, then Shadowrun is GNS incoherent. I have played with three different groups of people and had three very different games. The first game was about 6 years ago, I was 19.
GAME #1 Either 2nd or 3rd Ed
Rev. Illuminatus Mindfreak (Human Street Mage- Cemendur)- Favored activity is mindfreak (Freaking the Mundanes) I played this as a Crowley-influenced Discordian Mage. Grew up lower-upper class son of a corporate board member. Has a wealth of obscure magick books. The father, mother and younger sister was killed in the midst of an attempted whistle blowing. The Rev. escaped, lived with a Magician tutor for a while before escaping another assassination attempted that left the mentor dead.
Brett (Human Rigger- Brett)- Played as an Avatar. Rebel Northern Confederate without the racism (we all have seeming contradictions). Libertarian capitalist. Anti-corp. Mechanic-Rigger-Mercenary.
GM (James) a strict actor-stance, simulationist GM, which I generally love in RPG, but not in this instance.
This game played out as a series of mercenary missions with one Mr. Johnson who obviously was going to set us up. We went for the bait anyway. A fun time except for the horrid die mechanics. It took a 1/2hr to 1 1/2hrs to complete 3-5 seconds of actual game time. I found this daunting.
Game #2 2nd and 3rd edition mixed with house rules
Cemendur Rhana (Earthservant the Wanderer; Pinkskin Shaman/Monkeywrencher- Cemendur)- Started the game before the shaman ceremony. A megacorp Synthsoy producer was dumping toxic waste on tribal lands. Destoyed the factory as "questing mission", followed by a vision quest. I don't remember the totem spirit. Other totem spirits appeared to the character attempting to "convert" the character. Created spells to mimic some of the cyberwear. Eats organic food or at least real food, a very expensive luxury. No cyberwear or biowear.
"Big" Dick McGee (Troll Cagefighter/Pornstar/Revolutionary- Scott) - Background as a punk "gang"/crew leader. Fan and collector of rare underground Troll Thrashcore music. Accidental pornstar. Became NW champion cagefighter. This included a lot of interesting side intrigue where the other players won a series of bets, a final confrontation with the owner where we won the cagematch court. Later we sold it back to them. In one encounter, he was running from the fuzz or rent-a-cops and hid in a dumpster. A homeless person, dumpsterdiving in it asked, "Aren't You Big Dick ****arenfntnfgee**" "Shut up!" which ran into an ongoing gag, esp. in moments of intense danger.
Spidy (Don't remember his name, but a Spider-Gimmicked Virtual Adept- Sean) NPC with a mysterious past and mysterious face.
GM- (Sean) Very flexible with the play style and interests of the players.
Other characters- Short roles for couch-surfing friends who made interesting short-lived/used NPCs.
Started off as a #1 with mercenary shadowruns with very boring fight scenes. Developed into Actor-Stance, Author/Director/Producer-Stance (I don't remember the difference) Fortuneless Narrativist-Gamist play. The development of Relationship Mechanics in the game text, although simple, lead to further exploration of character-made NPCs and scenery. For instance, the players wanted a speak-easy, Kroptkin's, with back rooms with White Noise generators, a revolutionary hangout. We also contributed to details in a Strip Club and an Industrial Club. The definition of anarchism changed to reflect the real political philosophy and was interspersed with other libertarian movements. We used no plot or city sourcebooks. This became a revolutionary vs. corporation (terrorist vs counterterrorist; freedom fighter vs. terrorist) game.
This was probably the best play I have ever seen. The two other prominent players and the GM still reflect back on it as a prime game.
GAME #3 2nd and 3rd edition
Same Characters as #2, different GM. Spidy is gone.
This game followed the traditional rules. We decided to give them a go at it with the GM's insistence. Long very boring fight scenes. Very obvious Mr. Johnson is going to turn on us plot device. We went for it anyway, because we weren't taking any of the other very obvious plot devices.
This is an Illusionist GM. The game can be interesting if he has modules, we take the bait, and the battle mechanics are ignored.
Analysis: Innovative in Relationship Mechanics. Would be nice with Personality Mechanics. A back step in dice mechanics and overall fighting rules. Hinting at Author/Director/Producer stances incorporated into an overall framework of Actor Stance. The early access to the Astral Realm was fun, but too powerful too early. I also enjoyed the template system. It approaches a point-based system, without the generic allotment that games like GURPS have.
I'm surprised Pendragon didn't make it in. Still, for my money, the best example of genre emulation ever published.
Quote from: Ian CharvillNumbers added vs a variable target number goes back to Traveller, I'm guessing it's the specific skill+stat thing, which in a broader sense is also a big influence on the Vampire et al.
I believe Mekton II beat SR with this by two or three years, IIRC.