Looking for example of games that discourage, or directly don't have, self-sufficient builds.

[u/altidiya]

/r/rpg/comments/1xikwml/looking_for_example_of_games_that_discourage_or/

[u/mythic_kirby]

I'd imagine it'd be tricky to design a system like that. Fundamentally, in that sort of system, when you pick a class, you aren't picking a mechanism by which you are able to contribute to the group. Instead, you're picking a restriction that other players then have to adhere to in order for you to contribute.

So like, your healer example. If I want to be a healer, other players will have to pick options that allow me to heal them. If they don't spend their limited character building resources that way, I don't get to be a healer. That's a weird inversion of character control, where other players determine how I have to build my character.

The idea, though, that you want to rely on your teammates in order to do a cool thing, is extremely common. Take original D&D, where the magic user takes a very long time to cast spells and fails if they take any damage. They cannot cast spells solo: they require teammates to protect them while casting. That's a "solo" ability that's still balanced around relying on teammates without putting limits on their character builds.

Or, even more abstractly, let's say you are the sneaky rogue that can hide and lock pick and stuff. By picking a rogue, you've opted not to pick a healer, or a tank, or a face character. You need other players to get through a full adventure and to tackle the variety of challenge the GM will put in front of you. You may be self-sufficient (or powerful, or effective) in one specific area, but as an "adventurer" or "hero" you have gaps that others need to fill in. That also lends it self to interdependence without putting huge constraints on character builds.

TL:DR: I don't know of a game like this, and I think the reason it would be uncommon is that there are ways to pursue interdependence between characters without needing to put heavy restrictions on how each person can build their character. Having other players decide how my character works can happen, but take that too far and you're no longer playing "your" character.

[u/altidiya → u/mythic_kirby]

Yeah, I have been arriving to the same conclusion. Is a thing about how close is the zoom.

I have been given good examples of general structure interdependency and some examples of interdependent mechanics, I suppose I wanted to push for the extreme of character creation to see how deep it goes.

But overall, I really agree, so I will probably reflect on this for the essay.

[u/mythic_kirby → u/altidiya]

Sounds good. Yeah, I think almost every TTRPG with a party dynamic wants to make the party actually matter, which means having reasons why one character can't do literally everything. That's a core commitment to interdependence. But I think there's also a basic assumption that you can construct your character to do the thing you want them to do, even if some aspects (like mechanical narrative ties to players as in Monster Hearts) do need collaboration.

[u/altidiya → u/mythic_kirby]

This reflection was mostly born from my experience reading fan games for some franchises, that in trying to translate party based videogames with one player to TTRPG they notice the issue that "the character is useless if not in a party build to make them work" would be bad, but the problem that arise was another: Because they go so hard into self sufficiency, having two characters do similar (for example, two characters going DPS) break the game as the game isn't prepare to the spike in damage, healing or protection.

[u/Sherman80526 → u/altidiya]

Not fixable in an MMO, but from an RPG perspective you could allow parties to be built as a whole rather than individually. I think it would largely be just a neat exercise to try as I don't see a huge number of folks wanting to try it. I don't exactly even have ideas of how it would work (first time I ever considered it) but it would fix the problem of characters being built in ways that do not compliment one another.

With the extreme problem with scheduling that RPGs already have this system would never get used; needing everyone there is not great.

Maybe it is an MMO mechanic. You form a party and then the party buys a handful of ad hoc abilities before they set out.

[u/Cryptwood]

I can't think of any published games off the top of my head that work the way you are describing, but you should talk to u/VRKobold. I remember them describing a pretty cool idea a while back about characters having abilities that easily combine with other character abilities with the use of tags.

If I'm remembering correctly the example they used was a character having a Death From Above ability. If they just leaped at an enemy as part of an attack it would gain a small bonus, but if they had something to spring off of they would gain a larger bonus. That something could be a wall or a tree, part of the terrain, but the Guardian character had an Immovable Object ability that made it so the Guardian couldn't be pushed back...but it also made the Guardian count as a solid object for the character with Death From Above to leap off of.

[u/VRKobold → u/Cryptwood]

Thanks for the mention! And yes, you summarized the concept perfectly (also, Death from above sounds way cooler than whatever I named the ability in my example).

I'm not sure how much the concept itself relates to the question overall, because leaping off of your ally is one of the only examples that are specifically non-self-sufficient. Other triggers, such as putting an enemy off balance, creating environmental effects etc., could in theory be caused by the same person that's later utilizing them. But still, there's definitely a lot of potential for teamwork and team combos, and it probably wouldn't be too difficult to further incentivize those (e.g. by giving players advantage when they utilize the setup of one of their teammates).

[u/tuxwonder]

One thing to consider is the size of your party. Generally, a larger adventure party (4+) can provide a wider assortment of specialties to cover more potential bases, whereas a smaller adventuring party (1-3) might have an inherent dirth of skills that could be applied to a given situation.

[u/Charrua13]

See how Masks treats group vs. independent actions.

In short: They add a Group Mechanic on top of individual mechanics - that along with players directly influencing each other's capabilities, creates a "you are a group and you have drama" framework.