Greetings,

I was just working on my own rpg system. It's my first so I'm rather new to the subject of rpg design.

I was reading several articles on the net and I found something lacking.

When it comes to actual system development (you have decided why you want this new system, etc, and are ready to create the factual system) there is no real aid out there to setup a system.

Everything is somewhat inspiration based. I've also come across several "structured" articles, but they are still far to specific into examples to be of real structural help.

So I started working on a meta-model. A model that creates a framework for others to model their games in.

I actually came upon 3 real seperate systems, but would like to have your input. Perhaps together we can make something out of this.

I have come upon:
1. Character System
2. Metaphysical system
3. Battle System

Meanings:
1. Character system
This one describes how a character is setup. THis one addresses the questions one needs to ask to create a character according to the system. (Even if it lacks any real set rules, there is still a basis to make sure all players are on the same page).

2. Metaphysical system
THis describes the Magic, Religious, psionical, quantfum-physicial, power-out-of-my-thumb things. Everything that is not physical.

3. Battle System
All RPGs seem to have some sort of battle-arena, be it diplomacy or open war. THere are rules that describe 'battle'.

I am quite sure I am forgetting more of these "system-components" so I would like to ask your input.

The names of the components are arbitrary, they are not really defined more indicative of what the "branch" represents.

I would welcome ALL input!

Respect!

Kevin

A few comments...

First, not all games have magic or "power out of nowhere" of any sort. Daniel Solis' PUNK doesn't, nor does the Wuthering Heights RPG -- both admittedly minor examples, but still perfectly legitimate.

You're right about the "battle system", but as you note, it's not necessarily physical combat. Perhaps a more descriptive name would be "conflict resolution" since that is universal component -- and additionally, allows for such things as skill use, which are also usually present in some form.

Or, essentially, "characters + conflict = game". I'm not sure this can really be called a model of anything...

Gordon

Hmm isn't this more of an RPG Theory thread?

Gordon makes a good point about calling it conflict resolution system.

Following Gordon's thought that not all systems have magic or whatnot, the 2nd category perhaps could be called environment, or even lining up with literary terms, setting.

This is pretty basic stuff (not really a model as Gordon suggests), but is something people often forget: that each rule needs to have a well thought out place in the system, so each rule should either help define how the system works in one of these areas, or how you combine the areas (which is where most rules really are - D20's Base Attack Bonus is a character attribute, which is applied to the conflict resolution system).

Frank

Is this for an actual game your working on, or is this more a general thread on system components? If it's the former, than you're all good. If it's the latter, than like Frank said it should be in the Theory forum. No biggie, just remember it for next time.

Have you read MJ Young's article Applied Theory? In it he divided system design into 5 areas:

• Character Creation
• Resolution Mechanics
• Credibility Distribution
• Advancement
• Rewards


It's a good article, you should check it out if you haven't already. While I do agree with the basic idea, I will say that the 5 components are often inter-mingled, meaning the 5 components are not always clearly seperated.

Hey Timfire,

Aye.. I am using this for an actual Game. In fact I was working on the game while coming across this little challenge.

Which added to my goals the goal: seting up a universal applical meta-model that makes it easier for new and old system developers to create a system, within a framework to enable speed and quality control to the development.

Thanks for the article, I haven't read it yet. But will do immediately.

Respect,

Kevin

Lathan wrote: A few comments...

First, not all games have magic or "power out of nowhere" of any sort. Daniel Solis' PUNK doesn't, nor does the Wuthering Heights RPG -- both admittedly minor examples, but still perfectly legitimate.

Gordon