"generic systems"

[stepnix]

papercult has had two different threads on generic systems. which is fine. which is cool. both have come to the conclusion of "it's better when a game has specific goals rather than trying to be the One Game For Everything." which is fine! which is cool!

...but. i do not think that so-called generic systems should be reduced to trying to be the One Game For Everything. i think "this game doesn't work for every campaign concept" is always going to be true! which makes it a boring observation to me. It's much more interesting to me to drill down into the specifics of what they do work for and why. In this sense, "generic" can still be a meaningful (if not perfectly accurate) label for gesturing at some setting flexibility, but it's not like, the main appeal. I don't think the genericism is ever the main appeal, really.

idk i have a vague dissatisfaction with Generic Systems Discourse because it takes a foundational bit of design theory (different mechanics produce different outcomes, so should be used intentionally) and then stops. once you start talking about several generic systems at once, they aren't mechanically unified, so you're no longer talking systems! you're just saying "games should have goals" without trying to analyze the goals of the games you're discussing!

i think this means i don't have any beef with any individual generic system i just think people talk about them weirdly

Comments

Well ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

My all-time favorite game engine is Atomic Sock Monkey's PDQ. The core version and the later PDQ Sharp are available free. You can teach or learn the core system in about 5 minutes, make characters in another 5, and start playing. It can adapt to any setting.

You want customization? It has been applied to several genres in games you can buy, some with truly brilliant setting-specific game mechanics.

It's hell and gone better than trying to bash AD&D into something that would actually fit my storyworld and gaming style.

Re: Well ...

[stepnix]

oh huh I hadn't looked too close at the other games in the series before. Good shout!

Re: Well ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

My favorites are Dead Inside and Truth & Justice, but Sorcerers of the 7 Skies is also good.

[kihou]

I feel like a lot of this is sorta down to marketing, sorta the issue is that it's hard for the discourse to get too far from the same topics because the way games describe themselves doesn't do a good job of putting a stake in the sand for what the game is well-suited for.

In some ways it's similar to D&D discourse, where D&D despite not being a generic system tries to sell itself as being universal in a slightly different way.

And I think the other part of this is there isn't much in the way of a canon of game analysis other than how the games market themselves, so except in very specific bubbles there isn't an assumed consensus as to what a game's goals are or what it's aiming to work well for, unless the game itself tries to make that clear.

[stepnix]

pointing at a discrepancy between design and marketing and starting a flame war about whether that's a failure of design or failure of marketing

[kihou]

Brb, writing an Expectation Setting Matters manifesto that's 100% trite and obvious by volume