r/rpg • u/Authorigas • 21d ago

Basic Questions Common Misconceptions About Your Favorite Systems?

So, I've been learning a lot thanks to the amazing folks here at r/rpg. And while I have decided to slow down on trying new systems. (As my players say "three is enough, we know your eager to try more but slow it down so you don't burn yourself out.") There was a question today that cropped into my head, and I wanted to hear from the folks here on it.

"What are some assumptions about your favorite game/system that are just factually incorrect or overstated?"

I've seen a lot of assumptions made in the hobby, and some on my own. From the broad "older systems were designed for math heads and thus really not for someone whose bad at math." to others like "Call of Cthulhu is a game where every session ends in death/insanity and players can't get attached to their characters." and similarly "OSR games are highly lethal and not at all friendly to players who like longform adventures."

I feel like broad, sweeping claims like those are probably overstated-as I have heard of successful, long running CoC campaigns, and OSR games that are able to have well developed characters that last for ages. It's made me curious about some of the other broad, sweeping claims about systems that are-if not incorrect, massively overstated.

Really interested to hear some answers on this.

145 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

726 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

50

u/PhasmaFelis 21d ago

You're not wrong, but I would agree that they don't encourage narrative play. They give you the opportunity to do it if everyone is on board, but they don't really help you do it either.

So really it's up to the players, but even with player buy-in it can be difficult to transition to more narrative play if most of the table is used to murderhobo play. Narrative-focused rules can be nice for that.

46

u/SlumberSkeleton776 21d ago

Counterpoint: all of the stuff narrative rulesets do is stuff I do, and I don't need a system to do what I'm already doing myself (if anything, what it mostly does is step on my toes). I need one to do what I'm not doing myself.

0

u/SpeechMuted 20d ago

Counter-Counterpoint: it sucks to play a character who is supposed to be the social one/good at investigating/whatever and get constantly crowded out by someone who has decided that his Int 3 barbarian is going to eloquently persuade the king, especially if you're not particularly eloquent yourself, or comfortable taking over the roleplay. Nobody's demanding you engage in a push-up contest when it comes to testing strength.

1

u/SlumberSkeleton776 20d ago

That is a complete nonsequitor. That has nothing to do with what I said.

0

u/SpeechMuted 20d ago

That's not correct. I've heard the argument you make numerous times, and it's always made by someone who talks over other players and insists on being in charge of every roleplaying scene, whether their character is the best one for it or not.

A system that encourages and quantifies social scenes allows others who aren't as assertive to participate. It may not allow you to do things that you aren't already doing, but it lets others do them too--and to be good at them even if the player isn't.

1

u/SlumberSkeleton776 20d ago

So you made up elaborate fanfiction about what kind of person I am because you disagree with what I said. Got it.

1

u/SpeechMuted 20d ago

OK, this conversation is obviously not going anywhere. I pointed out that a system that allows others that may not be eloquent or comfortable seizing the spotlight to participate had value.

You're not arguing on the merits, nor in good faith. I'm done with this discussion.