A recent observation on one of my Starfinder/Pathfinder game nights was that some of my gang of players really dig the Pathfinder (and Starfinder) system and relish finding synergies and feat/skill/spell combos and stuff to make for more interesting or effective characters. It's not quite the wild west of the old 3rd edition days where build design and min/maxing was the subgame everyone was so busy playing that actual gameplay was like an afterthought, but it can be noticeably more convoluted and rules-bound than some less restrained systems.
To contrast, Cypher System, and old favorite of mine, is effectively about providing a loose mechanical set of rules that can apply broadly to most situations, and the specifics of how a thing works or what that looks like in play is narratively under the control of the players.
Then there's D&D 5E which holds a middle ground between the ultra-permissive Cypher System and the ultra-conformist Pathfinder; you have a lot of rules on specific mechanical effects and actions, but within those limits you can generally find some descriptive wiggle room, and its skill system is almost entirely free-form, with lots of area for narrative interpretation.
What I am realizing is that half my group likes the more creative and expressive RPGs, ones which don't require elaborate system mastery and reward creative expression in play, vs. the other half of the group which loves finding mechanical bits to work together and deploying them within the carefully defined scope of the rules.
For myself, I prefer the more open ended rulesets, I realize; I do love me some Pathfinder, but only until the harsh realities of the system mastery requirements butt up against the fun and narrative flow; Pathfinder is one of a growing set of games that actually provide defined narrative flow rules (encounter vs. downtime rules and such where you are allowed specific types of actions depending on what mode you are in), while other games such as Cypher System will let the group define such constraints as coincide with the needs of the story, or at least don't encourage restricting the story for the sake of a mechanical contrivance where possible.
This is not to suggest that a system like Cypher is freeform; it's got rules. But those rules are in service to the plot, and flex within it. It's one of the key reasons Cypher System is so good as a multigenre and weird adventures system; it's mechanics are designed to encourage and exploit creative play. Pathfinder, by contrast, only allows creative freedom when a rules lawyer isn't looking....or put another way, it only allows for more freeform gameplay when someone breaks the rules.
This has got me to looking at the game systems I have in these terms. Which ones will allow for more creativity and fun within their designs? Which ones want to do that but their mechanical stucture is too weak to allow for it? Which ones are mechanically oppressive and are only fun if you are looking to, as the title says, color within the box?
I know where I put Cypher System: square in Camp Creative, with a rules system designed to encourage and support that creativity. There's the intermediary levels, such as as a game where its rules are loose and freeform, but maybe its not so great at encouraging creativity; I might consider a game like Advanced Fighting Fantasy to fall into that category. There's also a hybrid category, where I think D&D 5E fits: it has "in the box" restrictions on some mechanical elements and then is freeform in other areas such as the skill system. And finally we have the endgame of mechanical rigor: Pathfinder being the aforementioned poster child, but other systems exist out there that fall into this bucket as well, such as the Battletech RPG, Traveller and maybe even Cyberpunk Red.
More to come!
No comments:
Post a Comment