RPGs for Modern, Simulationist (?), "Realistic" Adventures

[Luther]

Hi folks,

I want to try something different from GURPS, CORPS and EABA. I've a lot of ideas about how my ideal game should play, but I think it would be wiser first to try what other accomplished game designer have done. I'd like to use some non traditional game that's suitable for modern military/espionage games. We like horror, misteries and weirdness, but not much -- something Ken Hite labeled as low-cospiracy games (magic and paranormal abilities should be subtle). My group likes to explore a "realistic" world, and live a coherent story, so I guess our primary creative agenda is Simulationism (of a reality similar to ours). Gritty, as opposed to cinematic.

With traditional games the burden is all on the GM shoulders (mine), and now I don't have the time and the will to do all the work. We are open to every option, we will dedicate the next months trying different non-traditional games, mostly with one-shot (or really short) adventures.

What games should I try?

[dindenver]

Hi!
  Savage Worlds is supposed to be a decent game for modern campaigns.
  I've heard good things about "SpyCraft"
  WitchCraft/Buffy/Angel/AFMBE are modern, thematic and fun!
  BESM might be narrative enough for you and is definitely modern...
  Scion is modern, but I think its kinda crunchy (going to be playing it soon)
  There might be better games for Modern settings that are more Indie. But I haven't played it...

[Luther]

dindenver, thanks for the reply.

Anyway all the games (except for Scion, which I don't know) you mentioned seem pretty traditional designs. Also they are on the cinematic side of the axis, where I'd like a game that emphasize gritty reality. We are looking for radically different games, that share GM powers across the players and require very little preparation.

I would love to play in a "Tom Clancy" type adventure. Maybe that's impossible.

[David Artman]

Universalis

David

[Vulpinoid]

No offence, but you can't just say "Universalis".

That's like me coming along and saying "d20".

Universalis may be an innovative and dynamic system that oushes the envelope of roleplaying to new extremes, but it encapsulates everything, and for someone after a gritty modern game I think that Universalis has too much scope to break beyond the confines of such conventions. Unless you were going to lay down a whole bunch of ground rules first which sort of defeats the purpose of playing "Universalis" in the first place. If three players want gritty realism and two players actively oppose them with a high fantasy storyline running through the narrative, the final product definitely won't be in the style hoped by Luther.

If I were going to indicate some of my preferred options, I'd suggest things like the "Ghost Dog" sourcebook for the BESM/Tri-Stat system, that's pretty dark and gritty but not so overly crunchy that it destroys narrative flow.

Just remember that you can easily generate a non-traditional gaming experience using traditional tools. It just takes a little imagination, and that's what the hobby is all about. 

V

[Moreno R.]

My group likes to explore a "realistic" world, and live a coherent story, so I guess our primary creative agenda is Simulationism (of a reality similar to ours). Gritty, as opposed to cinematic.

This, by itself, doesn't mean that your group has a simulationist narrative agenda. I mean, you could have one, but that wouldn't be tied to the description above, that doesn't show any agenda at all. (there's nothing in the narrativist or gamist agenda description that say that they have to be any less "realistic and with a coherent story")

And even asking for a simulationist game like that, you could receive a list of hundreds of different games. For somebody "realistic" means CORPS. For others, it means RISUS. For others it means The Window. Everybody has a different definition of what "realism" is in rpgs.

My advice is to close this thread and start another in the Actual Play subforum, writing a description of a game situation that you enjoyed and that you see as the kind of gaming you want to get from your system, explaining not only what happen in the "story" but even what the players do. And explaining what you would like to change.

In this way people could see the kind of game you play now and what you want to change about it, and so they could give you much more precise advices and examples.

[David Artman]

No offence, but you can't just say "Universalis".

OK, then....

Universalis, byatches!
:^P

----
Seriously, though, the OP seems 100% certain of what he wants (or, at least, what he doesn't want) so why hunt for a game that does it "perfectly" when he could run a game that defines it "perfectly" in Universalis Tenets and be done? Further, as a knock-on effect, he will be able to play a bajillion other games and game types with the same investment in buying and learning rules.

The only other suggestion I could offer is HERO and take a bit of time with the game type definition sheet (approving or disapproving of powers, specifying how some powers must be defined, capping Active Point Cost and Character Points, etc).

Of course, I am a Forgite Heretic, because I favor generic and universal systems over genre-bound systems. Those two games above are pretty much all one *really* needs to play in any game genre or with any play agenda, seems to me....

But, hey... folks can keep on firing shots over the wall in the hopes of blindly hitting the "ideal" game for him....
David

[Luther]

Moreno I think you missed the explore in "My group likes to explore a realistic world". The word realism/realistic is totaly irrelevant in regard to my proposal of a simulationist agenda -- we focus and enjoy exploring the world and give it life for the sake of it.


David, now I fully understand your suggestion. Well it could be a really fun and different experience using Universalis, I think I'll give it a try. Thanks for your feedback.

Anyone have tried to use The Pool for a swat/military game?

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Luther,

My suggestions are Dread by Rafael Chandler and Dead of Night. Both of them rely on a certain intensity of back-story and discovery of "what's going on," yet with mechanics and procedures to make that content which are not at all like the classic games you mentioned.

You can check out my review of an earlier version of Dread in the Reviews section, Rafael's recent thread about playing it which includes dialogue with me, and my threads about Dead of Night. These games really put the boot into the widespread and false belief that design discussions here, and my views in particular, are unsympathetic to Simulationist preferences. They also taught me how to enjoy it for myself, which historically had not been the case before then.

Best, Ron

[Valamir]

No offence, but you can't just say "Universalis".

That's like me coming along and saying "d20".

Universalis may be an innovative and dynamic system that oushes the envelope of roleplaying to new extremes, but it encapsulates everything, and for someone after a gritty modern game I think that Universalis has too much scope to break beyond the confines of such conventions. Unless you were going to lay down a whole bunch of ground rules first which sort of defeats the purpose of playing "Universalis" in the first place. If three players want gritty realism and two players actively oppose them with a high fantasy storyline running through the narrative, the final product definitely won't be in the style hoped by Luther.


V

Actually Universalis doesn't encapsulate everything...a game only includes what the players specifically put in.  If three players are looking for gritty realism while 2 others want high fantasy...there's no game that's going to handle that well.  Best case is you have 2 players who are utterly disatisfied with play and suffer through in silence...worse case they actively disrupt the game.  Uni isn't any more vulnerable to this than any other game.

In fact, Uni is LESS vulnerable to it because player to player signalling is so closely built right into the mechanics.  And it doesn't require a whole bunch of ground rules to set the parameters.  I say "This game will be about gritty real world realism" and plunk down a Coin.  If nobody Challenges that, then they've agreed that this is what the game will be about...they could try to add high fantasy elements later, but it will take them twice as many Coins to overrule anybody who doesn't want that...so chances are slim if they're out numbered 3-2.  And if they aren't outnumbered...then perhaps a gritty realistic game isn't what everyone really wanted to play in the first place.

And establishing tighter parameters is just as easy, one can simply say "Everything in XXX Movie (or book, or sourcebook) is a Fact for this game) 1 Coin. 

As long as the players are largely on the same page as to the tone and overall feel they're looking for in the game, the rest is just negotiating out the details, which Uni does pretty seamlessly.

[Luther]

Thanks a lot guys and Ron. I've read the review, and still reading some threads. I've downloaded the core rules, and definitely have a handful of RPGs to try. This thread has been very productive too me, so again thanks to the Forgities!

[Japo]

Hi,

Just registered because I'm designing a system of my own, and now that I see this thread I feel like letting Luther know that my system is after nearly the exact same goals he lays out here. Specially the gritty quality as opposed to cynematic and the hard-core simulationism, slash realism. Well except that I intend the system to be universal (no specific or default setting), but by no means in detriment of its suitability for a modern setting.

I guess I'll be posting in the Playtesting forum sooner or later, so see you there.

[Luther]

Have someone tried Unsung.

Yeah, it's narrative, but it seems built for cops/soldiers games. It could fit the bill.

[rekyl]

Theres thousands of good games out there that would fit the bill but modern (non-supersnatural) games are... well kinda few. Unsung kinda creeped me out (I dont like the myth and glorification that seems to be surrounding the armed forces and police in the US) but its probably a great game though.

I dont wanna be annoying or antyhing but couldn't you and your friends try to make your own game? And get it the way you guys like it exactly? I mean it would mean, for one thing, that it would be cheaper (you wouldnt have to buy your own game) plus the creative process in itself could be a way for everyone to simple flow in with the rules without having to try to access them during the game...

/Jens

[Luther]

Making a game is a really time consuming activity. I did in the past, and I would do that again if I had time, I love to design things. But I also think it's worth to see what other guys have done before you so to not reinvent the wheel. Here at the forge most of you are so much more rpg-literate than me, I can only learn.

Sorry to repeat myself: what about Unsung?