I went to Game Developers Expo this weekend and one thing you have to say about these conferences; they have some tasty food and fun Swag. You have to love chocolate croissants and mini-Frisbees.

The presentations were very good and were all very intriguing and thoughtful, but when Armando Troisi talked about his work on Mass Effect 2 he brought up a particular topic I had been thinking about quite a bit lately, Story Perspective.

Story Perspective as Armando called it, or Narrative Mode includes the point of view of the audience or players. Armando talked about the PoV of the player in Mass Effect 2 and compared it to other games such as Dragon Age. He talked about the difference as Subjective vs. Objective gameplay.

In Subjective Gameplay the player is their avatar they decide everything it does at a micro level; it is a first person narrative mode. (Not necessarily 1st Person Camera though) In this mode the player decides every word the avatar says (usually without voice acting) He had several example of these games, including Dragon Age and Knights of the old Republic.

In Objective Gameplay the player is not their avatar, but they control many of the avatars choices. They make choices on a more macro level; it is a second person narrative mode. Mass Effect 2 is his example of the mode; the player decides what sort of dialogue choice Commander Sheppard makes, his intent rather than his exact words.

Narrative Mode in RPGs

These ideas are very applicable to Traditional RPGs, both for the Gamemaster and the Player. Some Gamers consider these different modes as play styles and many games will move between these different modes depending on the situation. For RPGs, I will break Narrative Mode is two categories: PoV and Scope.

Most players have a conscious preference about their roleplaying Point of View. Those who like to speak in their character’s voice use First Person Point of View; they refer to their character as “I”, and state exactly what their character says. Other players prefer to play in Second Person Point of View, they tend to explain what their character says, and refer to their characters as “he” or “she”.

Few Gamers realise the scope used during their play and often consider it merely a function of pacing. Roleplaying Scope ranges between the Micro and Macro. The most common Micro choices are made in actions like tactical combat, which describes every exact action chosen by the round. Common Macro actions are used in contemporary games, where players choose the intent of their actions without choosing the individual actions to arrive at that intent. To increase the narrative, the Player or Gamemaster will sometimes describe the scene and the actions cinematically that lead to the chosen result.

All ranges of Narrative Mode can be of good use in RPGs. Even the most 2nd Person Players may like to perform a 1st Person scene, if provided with enough support. 1st Person Players may also enjoy 2nd Player scenes, perhaps to speed up scenes. Gamemasters should feel free to vary Scope, choosing a different scope for every scene or task. Some tasks will work better at a micro scope like conversation, but others are more macro scope tasks, such as trade or long distant travel. Gamemasters may even find interesting effects or efficient mechanics by changing scope, a chase scene or negotiation may be even be more exciting at a more macro level , while adding a micro scene to trade may make the normally mundane activity seem more real.

Can you play a social game with 4th edition? Or use WoD for a dungeon crawl? Does System Matter? Of course, you can use any system to play any sort of game, but should you?

Cross Purposes

Is it so bad to play at cross purposes; most systems are designed to have mechanics to handle any situation. So why does it matter?

Well, take D&D 4e for example; when you perform non-tactical combat actions you use a secondary system to perform skill challenges. If your game uses mostly this light unrefined quick skill challenge rule set, PCs will wander around with a great many relatively useless detailed powers while they use an under powered and unbalance system instead.

Would it not be better to use a system that did what you wanted it to?

House Rules

Many GMs solve this issue with house rules. House rules are a double edge sword as a good house rule can sometimes make thing work just the way you want, but house rules may also have horrible side effects. Well designed games are balanced for a specific array of gameplay and a bad house rule can often change this balance having many unforeseen effects.

Ironically, house rules seem to show how much system does matter; for the group to have type of fun they want, the GM has to change the rules.  The system provides the structure for the setting.  The rules give players abilities and tasks they can perform.  Combat heavy ruled games structure encounter creation to produce many of opportunity to fight.

Generic Systems

Does any of this really matter in a generic system game though?  Is it possible to create a rules system that allows players to do anything and GMs to create many different settings without the breaking the system.  A game like GURPS seems to head in that direction, but the GURPS rules still set the underlying reality. Due to the way GURPS systems work, GURPS settings tend to have similar deadliness and allow PCs to do the things in the same ways. It seems to me that the system, while broad, has a great deal of effect on the play setting.

Rules Light

Story games and rules light systems are all the rage now. Games like Inspectres or FUDGE have simple rules, a small list of character attributes, and a list of special skills you get to make up yourself.  You roll one dice that results in the story moving forward.  Less framework, more imagination. This affects the setting and gameplay a great deal. The game is less consistent and relies on GM/player views rather than a codified system. Gameplay slows to examine a moment of Roleplaying rather skill testing, combat, or caper planning clearly making that the most important aspect of the game.

Indeed, Systems do matter and the system you choose should concentrate on the type of gameplay that fits your group’s preferences. The perfect system is the one that supports the essential aspect of the setting with its core mechanics.

© 2010 Free Spacer Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha