Heavy on the Metarules: Good thing?

[DevP]

The way my project has been involving (the Great American Space-Western, at this point), much of the rules I'm considing are "metarules" compared to what most would consider the fundamental rules of play. That is, I'm sketching out structured ways of designing planets, retconning on-the-fly jargon, proper crew and ship building, assigning crew roles, etc. That is, there are lots of steps that happen, as a group, BEFORE any individuals characters are made or even conceived, almost to the point of some crunchiness.

To some extent, all this is doing is enforcing some overt consideration of Social Contract. (These questions of crew and ship will frame the game-experiences you will ultimately have, etc.) And yet, much of the "neat" content of my product could be these metagame consideration I've discovered are helpful for a cohesive game theme.

Do others feel there are pitfalls to making rules/encoding these "metagame" considerations this way? Are there other games that have heavy pre-game/meta-game considerations for the play-group at large? (I expect there are many other ways of doing this sort of thing.)

On a different note, what of the possibility of leaving out individual player considerations out altogether, allowing a play-group to choose whatever individual system they want in conjunction with this product? I personally feel that, if I was a player, adequate space would be expected for the player's point of view - character hooks and the like, if not full-fledged mechanics. But if there is enough metasystem (and since I'm trying to make this multisystem anyway), it's a possibility.

[Andrew Martin]

On a different note, what of the possibility of leaving out individual player considerations out altogether, allowing a play-group to choose whatever individual system they want in conjunction with this product?

If you feel that you can switch parts of the system without making much difference, it's _probably_ a sign that there's a part of your system that needs trimming, removing, refactoring or expressing in a better way. When your system is exactly right, removing a part leaves a "gaping" hole, that doesn't allow anything else to fit. Like removing a Porche's engine leaves a hole that only a Porche's engine can fit. If one trys fitting a Caterpillar diesel engine instead, you'll end up with a Porsche that breaks it's suspension, can't steer properly, and only runs on diesel. :)

[Mike Holmes]

I think there might be room for a completly "meta" sort of thing Andrew if I get him correctly.

Are you thinking like a supplement like Guns, Guns, Guns? One which isn't really a game engine, but a way to make up a setting for use with another game engine? A not only generic setting, but a toolkit for designing one?

If that's what you're talking about, it's at the very least intriguing. I'd look more into it for sure.

Mike

[Andrew Martin]

I think there might be room for a completly "meta" sort of thing Andrew if I get him correctly.

I agree, but then it doesn't need a character generation system. Which means that there is no "hole" in the game. :)

[Mike Holmes]

What about a meta character generation system? Say that you're playing GURPS in the new setting that the supplement creates for you. How do you know what kind of character to make? I could see a supplement having a "lifepath"-ish sort of system or something that would tell you the general stuff about characters, but leave the mechanical system to the underlying game. Doesn't sound easy, but then what worth doing is? ;-)

Dev, any of this have anything to do with what you're talking about?

Mike

[DevP]

First, sorry for not getting back right away; school just ended & imploded & etc...

Are you thinking like a supplement like Guns, Guns, Guns? One which isn't really a game engine, but a way to make up a setting for use with another game engine? A not only generic setting, but a toolkit for designing one?

My thinking was as follows: players want to play a genre (low-fi space-opera); there are several tenets that need to be established for the genre play (how did space expand, who's the Evil Empire, why is there lawlessness, how do you go from X to Y, how do you make a living, etc.), and there are also specific dials that need to be decided (power level, tone of play. kind of ship, interactions). So this work ideally embodies some specific choices for Tenets, a clear framework for these dials, and stitching it together with a self-consistent narrative.

So: I want to make it a specific setting (certain Tenet choices, like No Psychics) but leave frameworks for specifics to be defined by individual play-groups. Does this make sense?

So why would I leave character creation / task system out? Or why do I see it as interchangeable? I go into it in a previous thread (link) but basically (1) there are lots of great RPG systems out there, and I'm personally happy using any of them, (2) I want to provide support material for these systems, (3) different systems appeal to different group-playing styles, and I don't want to lock out those styles by tying this to a system. That is, I can see my game being played with Dust Devils, D20 or FATE.

What about a meta character generation system?

To a large extent, yes. My framework concept has players deciding their shipwise roles/specialities, stylistic cliches and intercharacter relationships ahead of time; a list of possible "hooks" for characters could also be there, but still...

I think there might be room for a completly "meta" sort of thing Andrew if I get him correctly.

I agree, but then it doesn't need a character generation system. Which means that there is no "hole" in the game. :)

I feel somewhat odd having a few pages of "making your character" and then having two lines saying "Okay, stop here, check out that other book for more work to do", even if that's what I want to do. This may be traditionalism speaking, or my worry that I'm cheating my audience out of something.

One option is haviing a uber-simple charcter creation method (i.e. list whatever traits you want) with a short resolution system that fits on a page. If nothing else, you then have a character basis you can convert into more in-depth systems (as anything greater that this baseline system will have more depth).