Wings Over the Pyre - Oddities

I think "realism" is a fool's game, you want the truth. The question that inevitably emerges is the obvious one: "Realistic to what model?"

I don't game to model realistic physics, or even realistic social interactions. Trying to do so runs into too much in the way of the assumption fallacy; the assumptions of the author may or may not be the same as mine, and the statistical spread of possibilities within the system is certainly not going to match the span of physics.

So, that leaves us more attainable goals: What genre are we trying to model? What form of literature? What mode? If I want to do high-flying derring-do like you find in superheroic comics, I probably should stay away from Hero 5, because despite the fact I can spec out a toaster in game mechanical terms, its a programming language, not a system that enables the kinds of interactions that I want to play out. For similar reasons, and ones of eye-bleeding aesthetics, I tend to avoid GURPS -- but likewise because the consistency I like in my designs was long eschewed by the authors. (Compare the point value of say, an Ogre autonomous tank and a special black ops guy. Now shudder.)

As such, I tend to prefer die-minimalist systems which have some significant narrative control mechanics built in. Wushu, Truth & Justice, Sorcerer, Nobilis, Capes, Over the Edge, and Fudge (when its in its more minimalist modes) all give me the kind of gaming experience I want these days; more focus on the way the story unfolds, mimicking heroic literature or surrealistic modern. Are they "realistic?" Not in the sense of modeling our reality, fuck no. Do they model the literature, film, and feel of the things I'm enjoying? Absolutely.

That's not to say that there's not a place for more mechanics-heavy designs, but those mechanics have to deal with something important to the way the story unfolds. Ars Magica's detailed structure which constrains magic and the stories that get told about it, or Jovian Chronicles' extensive handling of space combat and element construction.

So, I don't really have an answer for you, save the usual answer from one craftsman to another: Right tool for the right job.

Let's take it a point at a time:

New Gamers: I pretty much have to go the opposite direction from you on my means of introducing folks to gaming. D&D Basic is good ... but not for new gamers. I prefer to teach my newbies to not look to the mechanics to define either their characters or the setting; I'm very much a "you tell me" kind of GM, as in:

"Is there a table I can jump up on?"

"You tell me."

"How about a back window I can throw this guy out of?"

"You tell me."

Tri-Stat/BESM 1st Edition was one of the most newbie-friendly systems I ever worked with, but these days I tend to jump right into Wushu. There's a few minutes of blinking to begin with, but I find it works much better at drawing out even the most reticent new player, and jumps them right into the "I'm a protagonist" mindset that I need to enjoy running or playing in a game.

I'd really love to try Capes with newbies at some point; the GM-less approach might be useful.

Horror: Any setting and system can do horror, but the best setting for it I've ever found was Kult 1st Edition. I like to describe it as "Like Call of Cthulhu, but without the sense of hope." That said, I've run horror in nearly every system I own, including Heavy Gear. Its a style and an approach more than a mechanical requirement.

Humour: Toon. Its hard to beat the self-awareness and system minimal structure of the game, and it does exactly what it thinks it should, leaving the rest to the players. I appreciate the trust. I've had plans to run a humourous kung-fu epic using Wushu for a while, I just haven't had the time or group.

[cont]

Post-Apocalyptic: Strangely, for pretty much all of the modern/post-modern "realistic" settings of this nature, I reach for All Flesh Must Be Eaten and/or Buffy. The Unisystem mechanics, particularly in the Buffy case, are sleek enough to stay out of my way, but structured enough that you can let them define things. My preference, however, is to use Wushu, actually; yes, it gives the players unparalleled freedom to accomplish unrealistic tasks, but if everyone's on the same page about appropriate narration, it works better than systems in which characters are more mechanically entwined (not least being because Wushu lets you get dice for narrating your own failure).

Magic: Having actually been published under the Mage imprint, I wouldn't run it if you held ivory knitting needles at my eyes as a threat. If I really want a system and setting that covers magic tightly and with style, I have to go with Ars Magica. Given my druthers, 2nd edition, but I can play any of them. The sheer amount of detail with which magic is handled, including study, writing books, etc, is wonderful if you intend that to be a focus of your game, and the way multiple-characters per player are expected rather than unusual was an eye-opener back in the days it was first released.

Space: Jovian Chronicles. No question. I tend to like my spacecraft and giant robots crunchy on occasion, and JC does it like no one else. If we're talking about a deliberately more space-fantasy feel, any of the fantasy systems I enjoy will suffice.

Superheros: This is the genre that has seen a lot of development in recent years, and with good reason. In a very real sense, most other genre settings are superheroic under the hood, in terms of expectation and style. Truth & Justice is a fantastic take on the genre, and Capes goes even beyond that level to an entirely different kind of RPG.

Mind you, I could easily take Fudge and hybridize it with anything at hand to produce a usable and effective system, but with so many good sources to build from, why not start there?

See, this is exactly why I don't like to start my newbies on D&D. Too much cranial damage lingers and I end up having to clean it up, later, so they can go, "Wow, that's ... nuts."

Wushu run well hinges on something I actually learned in Nobilis, which is "Yes, exactly what you said happened, happens ... Now what do you do?" The underlying assumption is that unless something gets veto'd by another player, that's just what happens. Want to run across the heads of a crowd, do an inverted helicopter kick, spin around thrice and pop a toe in the eye of the Big Bad that you've been hunting for months? Sure thing, and that particular move is worth 5 dice, if you were wondering. Once you get players into the mindset that what they say is what they do, things actually end up flowing more smoothly, because there's no question of "will the dice screw me on this?"

Its a wholly different state of play, and one I've become very fond of.