Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
principles [2025/06/18 13:28] – Ron Helwig | principles [2025/07/04 00:23] (current) – Rewrote with updated style, edited for consistency Ron Helwig | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | This is a place to toss principles I think of until I can place them better. | + | # Principles |
- | ====== No Lore ====== | + | This page outlines the **core principles** and **design goals** that should guide the creation of a modular, flexible, and engaging RPG system. These principles can be used to evaluate any ruleset or inform the development of a new one, but we created these to make sure what we developed was what we wanted. |
- | The rules for a general RPG should have no lore in them. Most RPG lore is just something that some people made up, and in order to really get into it you first have to learn the lore that some rando thought up. | + | --- |
- | But RPGs are all about the **players** creating a story. They, in concert with the game master, should be the ones coming up with the lore. | + | ## 📚 No Lore in Core Rules |
- | This doesn' | + | Core mechanics should |
- | Also, when the rules don't have lore attached to them, it allows it to be used for more genres. | + | - Lore is optional, subjective, and personal. |
+ | - Basing core rules on invented histories, gods, or cultures creates barriers | ||
+ | - Systems should support a **wide range of settings**—homebrew, | ||
- | ====== Not Afraid of Math ====== | + | Lore belongs in **separate supplements**, |
- | If you are an adult and you think adding a small handful of single digit numbers together is a chore, you really need to grow up. Math is a basic function of everyday life. | + | --- |
- | And if you are still a kid you probably could use more practice. | + | ## 🧠 Not Afraid of Math |
- | The idea that a little bit of math that any competent adult should be able to do nearly instantly in their head is an issue is just ridiculous. | + | Mathematics—especially basic arithmetic—is |
- | ====== Campaign Length | + | - Simple calculations keep gameplay fast and reinforce life skills. |
+ | - Players, including kids, benefit from practicing math through play. | ||
+ | - Systems should not fear a little math in the name of smoother mechanics or deeper decision-making. | ||
- | I am coming to believe that most people these days conceive of D&D campaigns that are too long. Characters advancing through twenty levels | + | Mechanics should reward **clarity |
- | So I am thinking that character advancement to maximum abilities should take around 6 months of active regular play. That is something people are more likely to be able to handle. | + | --- |
- | I am also thinking that the amount of abilities should be much more manageable. In my current D&D classes I have been printing out cards for each of a character' | + | ## 📈 Manageable Complexity with Clear Progression |
- | ===== Complexity | + | ### Character |
- | Characters should start simple, with just a few clear choices. As they advance through Domain tiers, they gain more abilities and options—but never so many that it becomes cumbersome to play. The goal is to balance strategic depth with ease of use, especially for younger or newer players. | + | |
- | ====== Proficiency ====== | + | Character options should be **easy to manage** during play. |
- | Using a skill should | + | - Early characters |
+ | - Depth and variety should unlock **gradually** as players gain experience. | ||
+ | - In-the-moment choices | ||
- | It doesn' | + | A good rule of thumb: |
- | Perhaps the number of times you use a skill required to advance proficiency in that skill is tracked exponentially. If we are using a tiered domain system (like we are developing) then applying exponential requirements is worth considering instead of simply asking that each task be accomplished only once. | + | --- |
- | But the main point of this should be that proficiency should not be an overall effect. We should be aiming to get rid of it altogether. | + | ### Campaign Length |
- | ====== Skilled ====== | + | The system |
- | But on the other hand, if you are good at something then you should | + | |
- | Because of that I am desiring | + | - Campaigns should reach a meaningful conclusion within **4–6 months** of regular play. |
+ | - Advancement pacing should reflect typical group schedules and attention spans. | ||
+ | - Power progression | ||
- | ====== Classes are too limiting ====== | + | --- |
- | As I wrote in the **Why** section of the landing page here, a system of classes limits the possible archetypes that players can choose from. Class systems require the developers to implement the classes, and if a player wants something that hasn't been developed yet, they are out of luck. | + | |
- | A better way to go is to make it so that every player can essentially develop their desired archetype on their own or with the help of their game master. | + | ## 🔁 Use-Based Progression |
- | This same logic applies to race/ | + | Character growth should be based on **action, not abstraction**. |
- | ===== Level free advancement ===== | + | - Skills, powers, or traits should improve through **frequent use**, not just generic leveling. |
- | If we are getting rid of classes, then that makes levels harder to implement since they have nothing to apply to. | + | - Progression should reflect what the character *does*, not just how long they’ve existed. |
+ | - The system may include **decay** for neglected abilities or make improvement require **increasing effort** over time. | ||
- | And if we are not using the traditional hit point system, we won't have hit dice or the need to add more HP each level. | + | This supports **narrative consistency** and player agency in character development. |
- | ====== Sheet plus Cards ====== | + | --- |
- | The main character sheet should have all the info that every character needs, and nothing more. Everything else is a choice the player makes for their character and should be on separate cards. This should make character management easier. | + | |
- | With a card system players can separate them, keeping a hand of only the cards that are relevant to the current situation. To put it simply, using cards enables table-time speed and reduces analysis paralysis. | + | ## 🎲 Bell Curve Over Flat RNG |
- | ====== Allow for Player Differences ====== | + | Random outcomes should reflect **skill |
- | While [[research: | + | |
- | ====== Rests should | + | - Systems |
- | The Long Rest in traditional D&D resets/ | + | - Flat distributions (like a single d20) allow unskilled characters |
+ | - Dice mechanics should provide **consistent, predictable performance** for practiced characters, with room for drama and risk. | ||
- | But whatever the system, taking a regular rest should not be a "get out of jail free" card. | + | --- |
- | ====== | + | ## 🧩 Modular |
- | Every component of the system | + | Character creation |
- | Domains are a perfect example: a game master might choose to include only a specific subset, | + | - Systems should avoid rigid **classes** |
+ | - Instead, characters should be built from **modular components**—such as roles, features, or abilities—that can be mixed and matched. | ||
+ | - Advancement should not require **global levels** but instead come from **unlocking new options** through story, mastery, or training. | ||
- | ====== Inherent Teamwork ====== | + | This allows players to create characters |
- | There should be some mechanism | + | |
- | A good idea would be that each Domain would have an optional Tier 1 (Beginner) card that allows a character having that card/ | + | --- |
- | They should also be slightly more powerful (by resources spent to do them) than a comparable regular Action. By doing this, it gives the players more incentive to take teamwork Actions. | + | ## 🗂️ Sheet + Cards Model |
- | Maybe these cards/ | + | Gameplay |
- | ====== Progression ====== | + | - A character's **core information** |
- | Progression shouldn't simply increase power but should | + | - All abilities, features, |
+ | - These items should be easy to sort, group, and manage during play. | ||
- | ====== Well-Rounded Character Expression ====== | + | Benefits: |
- | Every system that grants player-facing | + | - Reduces clutter and cognitive load. |
- | * Combat | + | - Helps newer players remember and use their features. |
- | * Exploration | + | - Encourages dynamic play without endless page-flipping. |
- | * Social Interaction | + | |
+ | --- | ||
+ | |||
+ | ## 🧑🤝🧑 Built-In Teamwork | ||
+ | |||
+ | Systems should encourage and reward **cooperation**. | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Players should have ways to **act during each other’s turns** or benefit from others' | ||
+ | - Actions or abilities | ||
+ | - Shared resources, combo actions, and reactions can all promote teamwork. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Good systems reward **synergy**, | ||
+ | |||
+ | --- | ||
+ | |||
+ | ## 🧭 Designed for All Pillars of Play | ||
+ | |||
+ | All parts of the system—character abilities, adventures, mechanics—should support: | ||
+ | |||
+ | - **Combat | ||
+ | - **Exploration | ||
+ | - **Social Interaction | ||
+ | |||
+ | Players should never feel like they’ve built a character who can only function in one of these areas. Every build should have the tools to **engage in the full game world**. | ||
+ | |||
+ | --- | ||
+ | |||
+ | ## 🧠 Growth Through Mastery | ||
+ | |||
+ | Progression should feel **earned** and **intentional**. | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Advancement should depend on **using and mastering existing tools**, not just ticking XP boxes. | ||
+ | - Gaining new options should be tied to **meaningful play choices** or player achievement. | ||
+ | - Systems should avoid rewarding repetition or spammy tactics. | ||
+ | |||
+ | This encourages **engaged and varied play**, not just number-chasing. | ||
+ | |||
+ | --- | ||
+ | |||
+ | ## ⚙️ Modular by Design | ||
+ | |||
+ | All rules should be **modular and replaceable**. | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Each subsystem—combat, | ||
+ | - Game masters and players should be able to **swap in alternate mechanics** or **remove unused rules** without breaking the system. | ||
+ | - Modular design also supports **digital or printed curation**, where a group can tailor the game to their needs. | ||
+ | |||
+ | A strong system supports customization **by default**. | ||
+ | |||
+ | --- | ||
+ | |||
+ | ## 🔄 Realistic Resting | ||
+ | |||
+ | Recovery mechanics should avoid **full resets**. | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Resting should be meaningful and impactful, but not a “get out of jail free” card. | ||
+ | - Partial recovery encourages **resource management** and **strategic pacing**. | ||
+ | - Short rests should matter; long rests should help but not erase all danger or tension. | ||
+ | |||
+ | This supports a **gritty, lived-in world** and prevents abuse of rest cycles. | ||
+ | |||
+ | --- | ||
+ | |||
+ | ## ⏳ Structured Play for All Personalities | ||
+ | |||
+ | Not all players want to fight for spotlight time. | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Systems should include **structured turns** or cues that ensure every player has a chance to act. | ||
+ | - This supports **introverted players**, those with slower processing speed, and groups with varying experience levels. | ||
+ | - Freeform play is still valuable—but **structure builds equity**. | ||
+ | |||
+ | --- | ||
+ | |||
+ | ## ✅ Summary of Core Goals | ||
+ | |||
+ | | Principle | ||
+ | |-------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------| | ||
+ | | No baked-in lore | Support all settings with neutral core rules | | ||
+ | | Math is good | Encourage fast, simple arithmetic for smoother play | | ||
+ | | Complexity scales | ||
+ | | Use-based growth | ||
+ | | Reward expertise | ||
+ | | Modular characters | ||
+ | | Clean reference | ||
+ | | Team-focused | ||
+ | | Full gameplay support | ||
+ | | Growth via mastery | ||
+ | | Modular system | ||
+ | | Realistic recovery | ||
+ | | Structured spotlight | ||
- | This ensures players can build characters that feel complete and capable in diverse situations, and encourages a variety of play styles. Each Domain tier or feature set should include a mix of abilities that reflect these gameplay aspects, even if a character only selects some of them. |