It’s an active time of year. With Thanksgiving over and done, the holidays are upon us in full, and that means busy chaos. In a good way, because having just released Chimera, I’m looking forward to peeling myself away from the computer screen and reuniting with the Earth People. And, with another December starting anew, it means that it’s my birthday, which I’ll use as an excuse to be self-indulgent.
Here are my Thoughts, which are mine. My Thoughts that belong to me are as follows. These are how they go.
Are We Ourselves?
It occurs to me that we RPG bloggers are our own audience. Mostly. If you look at many RPG blogs, you’ll see links to other RPG blogs. And those blogs link to other RPG blogs. There’s a lot of material out there, written by a host of creative people, all promoting their points of view with sound and considered rationale. If there’s a common theme (and if the sheer variety of content is any suggestion) it’s that we practice an infinitely subjective hobby.
The volume of diverse content is a key indicator of that subjectivity. On the plus side, it points to a vibrant hobby of passionate and dedicated practitioners. On the downside, it means that just about everything we post is about success on our own gaming tables. It’s good material, but it can’t be universally applied. What works brilliantly for one group will fail appallingly for another. So, no more flamewars about alignment—no one’s right anymore.
At least, not in the empirical sense. At worst, even the most outlandish house rule is food for thought. That’s an important point, and easy to forget as you champion your sparkling insights in public. And we all have them. Except they always sparkle brightest within the limited sphere that surrounds the author’s gaming table. Some concepts do pierce the bubble and gain popularity with other groups, but it’s not typical, and it almost never happens without some tweaking.
It’s OK. This isn’t a criticism of anyone’s ideas, game of choice, or house variants. Instead, I’m pointing out what the RPG Elders all suggested: something about using the rules as guidelines, and customising mechanics to suit one’s own style of play. And that’s advice that, if we stop to realise it, we’ve all pretty much taken to heart.
Does Anyone Stick to the Actual Rules?
I would love to hear from someone saying, “I play <some game> 100% as-written, with not one house rule or variant.” Why would I love this? First, it would mean that there’s actually a game out there sufficiently well-written and thoughtful enough to preclude the need for house rules or variants. Second, it means that all discussion about this game comes from an objective viewpoint. Which is ironic, because that common perspective would make writing house rules really easy.
I think that, intuitively, we can all agree that no such game exists. And, given the volume of RPG material in the blogs, it’s clear that no one appears to be very much bothered by it. It’s significant that, although there can be 100 different campaigns based on B/X or the Rules Cyclopedia or LL, no one of them is likely to be governed by precisely the same rules. It’s a fact that, as soon as a given game is set before a group of players, it starts to take on the characteristics of the group (or, rather, it is adapted to that group’s preferences).
This means that we all get to play what and how we want to. As this trend becomes more entrenched, successful RPGs won’t be about clever mechanics. Instead, successful RPGs will be those most easily adapted to an individual group’s preferences.
The Myth of Simplicity
There’s a logical association between a game’s adaptability and its simplicity. Rules-lite has become synonymous with simple, with the implication is that simple games are easier to learn, faster to play, and (on the downside) short on realism.
That last bit is tricky, because it turns out that realism is in the eye of the beholder: It varies from group to group. Some players like their games crunchy, so it doesn’t matter how many modifiers go into a die roll. Other players want quick-and-dirty outcomes without consulting charts or tables. Hell, some players don’t even use dice (gasp!).
By extension, “simple” is subjective. Simple doesn’t mean simplistic, or easy. Depending on who’s playing, “simple” may not even mean simple.
Instead (in this context) I think simple really means “flexible.” And this fits with “rules-lite.” I’m not sure that we, as gamers who like to blog about our variants and house rules, really want simple games. I think we want flexible games: games whose mechanics are easy to learn and produce good results without bogging down play. Games that may even incorporate vagaries that beg interpretation. Games that play just fine as written, but which can be adapted to better suit the expectations of our respective playing groups.
The RPG Life Cycle
Given the above, here’s a breakdown of what we all know about the RPG Life Cycle:
- Original Official: this is any game straight out of the box. Everyone has read the rules, rolled up their characters, and understands how to do things in the game. This is what you see on the gaming table the first time the game is played.
- House Variant: after a session or two, house rules creep into the game. Maybe you tweak combat modifiers, healing rates, spell point allocation, saving throws, skill rolls, whatever. This is the natural outcome when the Original Official collides with the subjective tastes of the group. Importantly, each set of house variants is itself varied, and the ease with which the variants are applied is directly proportional to the game’s flexibility. This is the crucial point in the Life Cycle at which different “versions” of the game branch out.
- Hybrid: after the group gets comfortable with the House Variant, more significant and wide-reaching rule changes are introduced, typically by incorporating mechanics from other games. You might incorporate another game’s combat initiative, or adapt spell-casting rules from a different system. At this stage, and because grafting bits from other games can cause a ripple effect of systemic change, the Original Official is probably less than half recognisable.
- Innovation: the infusion of mechanics at the Hybrid stage frequently breaks unforeseen elements of the Original Official. Usually, the breakage isn’t immediately perceived, but it must be addressed when it’s noted. Fixes rely on innovations developed by the group, in the form of new mechanics that touch core aspects of the Original Official that weren’t meant to be tweaked. For example, using another system’s spell-casting system in the Hybrid phase might impact character generation or ability scores or class abilities. Fixing the problem requires more than retrofitting existing mechanics; a more specific and original solution is in order.
- New Official: assuming the Innovation is stable, it probably looks nothing like the Original Official. The result is a game so seriously modified as to be a new system. The New Official is essentially unique to the group, though it’s at this stage that the game may be suitable for publication as an Indie game under some license.
These phases occur in various timeframes, depending on the preferences of the group. Not all groups progress through the entire Life Cycle, finding instead a suitable system for their style at some intermediary stage. Others may combine the Original Official and House Variant phases in a single incarnation. Similarly, the Hybrid phase may simultaneously incorporate original and borrowed mechanics. It’s also possible to step backwards if certain mechanical changes don’t satisfy the group’s subjective expectations. Of course, certain phases may never be achieved: If, after toying with the House Variant, the game fails to satisfy, the group may start again with a new Original Official.
The important thing to note is that the Life Cycle is inert without the subjective input of individual groups. More importantly, while the Life Cycle follows a similar pattern from group to group, the details of each phase are very likely quite different from group to group, both in terms of duration and exact detail.
Final Words
The paragraphs above may be obvious to you; I’m sorry if you read this far with the expectation of a Grand Revelation. But on the off chance that I held your interest, I want to stress the importance of subjectivity. The wide host of RPGs at our disposal, and the volume of blog commentary we produce, wouldn’t exist without the subjective aspect inherent to our hobby.
Thinking hard, I’d have to admit that the impetus of this post was the number of arguments and religious debates I’ve seen on various RPG boards, forums, and blogs (some of which I’ve participated in). I’m not making a plea for us all to “just get along,” but I am wondering how “right” any of us can be, given how disparate our gaming tastes really are. If the goal of gaming is to have fun, then we have to recognise that the destination may be reached via many different roads.