The Forge Archives

After the game design thread I started (that was VERY helpful thanks guys! :) ) Ive been working on my stuff, the only problem is, that now I have 6 RPGs pretty much fleshed out (world/storyline/enemies etc.) to varying degrees, and i'm just kind of stuck.
Im having trouble finding the inspiration to work on them as designing the world and so on is the easy and fun part, but getting the game system in is a real headache (for me anyway).
Anyone have any ideas to make it easier?
All I could come up with was to use an existing game system (like D20) so I would avoid the problem altogether........ obviously im very good at taking the easy way out :D

Man, I feel for you, Spawn.

I mean, my game is so out there it's little more than a loose set of rules and I still have trouble finishing it.  Ha Ha

For you problem, you could do one of a couple things.

You could use a pre-existing system.  I suggest you use one that you legally can use, like d20.  Were you to use GURPS and then market it, SJG may shut you down as they're licensing GURPS IIUC.  In either case, it's a good idea to do your homework on the game in question, at least if you're planning to market it.

Another thing you can do is find yourself a collaborator.  Someone good at coming up with mechanics in your case since you have at least three worlds fleshed out.  The drawback here is that the game will cease to be just yours, but be yours and another person.  Another stumbling block if you're planning to sell it.

A third option is to simply bite the bullet and make a system yourself, then share it here or other forums and we'll give you advice on it.

I suggest you at least attempt option 3 and only go with option 2 if you meet someone you really want to bring on board your project.

Quote from: Spawn
After the game design thread I started (that was VERY helpful thanks guys! :) ) Ive been working on my stuff, the only problem is, that now I have 6 RPGs pretty much fleshed out (world/storyline/enemies etc.) to varying degrees, and i'm just kind of stuck.

You could just release your game world.  Make it systemless, and maybe provide a list of rpgs that would emphasize different aspects of your world.

Or we could hammer out a system right here.  So, pick ONE of your worlds, and tell us _in one sentence_ what the roleplaying experience in that world should be.

You could just release your game world.  Make it systemless, and maybe provide a list of rpgs that would emphasize different aspects of your world.


Has that ever been done? I actually did think about that, but figured noone would be interested!


As for D20, can ANYONE use that system? I figured you would have to pay them for a license to use it etc? Its not the easiest system to use, but at least it would let me get the game system part done with the least amount of hassles!

Spawn,

I point to the Jared Sorensen school of game design: If it's a good idea, post it as is. Even a fragment is okay, if it's a good fragment. Then, you can work on it at your own rate or pick new ideas for development. Ron calls this the "mad scientist approach. All you really need is a site where you can post your catalog.

I for one would be very interested in seeing any material you may have come up with for a setting, especially indepentent of mechanics. One of the things I'm looking to do is run The Pool with a fantasy game type setting, and I don't want to use Forgotten Realms or something else as familiar to the players.

need a system? you're in the right place.


pick one of your settings, tell us all about it, and in 2 weeks (probably less), you'll have a system.


unheilig.

Actually, I think Ill go with the "design the world and put it on the internet" bit for a couple of them, it solves a LOT of problems!
The other one I might use D20 for I guess, presuming there is no license or anything I have to pay for to use it?

no, doing it d20 is free.

BUT there are a lot of sticky points to using OGL. Look at the license on the WotC site, (www.wizards.com), and you should probably get a lawyer.

unheilig.

Hello,

The clear, simple, and necessary solution to the problem is to play.

That's right, I know, the game is "not done." It's not perfect. You're not totally sure you have it right. Etc, etc.

But the only solution is to play. Run it. Try it out. Get someone else to do it.

Best,
Ron

Ron makes a very good point.  The play's the thing.  The more you play it, the more things will fall into place.

Furthermore, new ideas will most likely find their way into your product, making it all the more robust.

Quote from: Ron Edwards
Hello,

The clear, simple, and necessary solution to the problem is to play.

That's right, I know, the game is "not done." It's not perfect. You're not totally sure you have it right. Etc, etc.

But the only solution is to play. Run it. Try it out. Get someone else to do it.

Best,
Ron

Yep, sadly that seems to be the only foolproof way :o)

*Looks around for some friends* Oh crap, im in trouble now.......   :o)

Hey Logan,

I point to the Jared Sorensen school of game design: If it's a good idea, post it as is. Even a fragment is okay, if it's a good fragment.

I've got this notion that all fragments aren't created equal. The internet, and online discussion forums are rife with clever (and not so clever) system mechanics...not games, but incompletely realized tinkering with dice resolution, combat, and character attribute mechanics...things that aren't games, and that no effort of mechanical analysis or wrestling with concept seem to turn into games. Whether the idea grabs me or not, I've noticed that those of Jared, and of Zak and Vincent and Paul Elliott and Scott Knipe, and others as well, are in some way I can't quite pinpoint, different. There's some ingredient or group of ingredients that makes them more of a game than a lot of other stuff that even seems sometimes to be superficially similar. I actually started a thread about this thought in "RPG Theory" prior to Christmas, but despite Jared's reply, I'm still at a loss for what differentiates the non-game fragments from actual and nascent games.

Paul

Paul, I appreciate the mention.  But man, I for one feel like I'm just beating a dead horse.  And I'm not sure, but I think others feel the same way (see the discussion that Jared and I had down in his Sex&Violence thread).  

You guys haven't seen a lot of game design from me lately.  I'm concentrating on the stuff I know is good...WYRD, maybe a Sorcerer mini-supplement, maybe this new idea I had last night while purging some frustration with Jared.

For once I'm working on games that I want to play, and that makes finishing them so much easier.  I think that's why Jared's and Vincent's games are so damn cool...they seem like something you would sit down and play.  They seem like something their authors are interested in.  I'm not sure that comes across in all of my games, which are often more like thought experiments than actual games, at least in my own mind.

So there you go.  Seems obvious, but make a game that you would like to play.  And then, like Ron said, play it.

- Scott

You have a point, Paul. Maybe "fragment" is the wrong word. Maybe "treatment" is a better word. I'd say that's an accurate way to describe a lot of Jared's stuff. It seems to me, each "game" starts out as a treatment for a game - a concept document that points out where the game is going and what it's going to do. Some of it, he finishes. The rest of it dangles, waiting for someone else to come along and put it to use.

As far as I can tell, Scott and others do a good job of concisely explaining how their games work and using language (temrinology for attributes, etc) appropriate to their subject. They present surprisingly complete games that establish flow of play and methods of resolution supporting their premise and/or genre in about the same amount of space required to explain an average board game. It's impressive, especially when you consider that the much-vaunted 3E Player's Handbook neither teaches the reader how to play the game nor presents its material in a concise manner.