Yesterday I wrote a little about roleplaying and what I consider roleplaying is. This started with the notion that DnD4 is mainly aimed at combat in it's rules.As said before, the proponents of this say that we need complex rules to simulate combat, but the rest can be freeformy, improvisational.
What I would like is more rules that simulate other aspects of the character than just his combat ability. Why is this? Because, if I have a character with a certain background or fluff, I want this fluff to have a mechanical effect. I want the game to support my persona, my character from multiple angles.
This can mean a lot of things, all from the Journal-based character sheet in Castle Falkenstein to the insanity-rules in World of Darkness. Another example that I still remember fondly is the Campaign Ratings in Golden Heroes.
I think what I'm trying to say is the following: While some people say that the only areas that need real rules are combat, I believe that there are areas outside of combat that benefits from having some kind of framework of rules, methods or guidelines.
Examples of what I mean (with that I don't say that all these have to be in DnD4):
- An interesting flora of skills and abilities that are not just combat oriented
- The Virtue/Vice-system and it's effect on willpower in World of Darkness
- The long-term rules from Ars Magica, including magical research and keeping up your village
- The exploratory magic in Mage: the Awakening
- The company rules in Reign
- The rules for Karma, Popularity and Resources in Marvel Super Heroes Adventure Game
- The generic rules for all kinds of conflict in Heroquest
2 comments:
I really am liking the social combat rules in Exalted (yes, I know other systems do things simular, but I've never used them let alone play them). I've only used them as a GM mind you, but I find they come in really handy for NPCs. I don't have to figure out if this specific argument is persuasive enough to convince the character, instead I just figure out what's important to the character, and let the dice go from there for the most part. I also find it useful to not have to come up with a persuasive argument myself, especially when the PCs are interacting with a lot of NPCs in ways I wasn't expecting.
Yeah, I've heard about them, but I haven't tried them myself. As you said, it can be useful to not have to come up with good arguments all the time. I mean, the success of your fighter isn't determined by how good the player is at fighting. This way, a player that isn't that eloquent can play a character that is persuasive, charming and well spoken.
Post a Comment