I play a variety of games, both old and new. Many of the newer FRP games I find have a much different "feel" to them as compared to older games. It isn't surprising that some players voice a preference for this game or that. We all have our "favorites". As a naturally introspective person, I have asked myself why I tend to prefer certain games over others?
Early in my role-playing career, back when the only game in town was the one coming out of Lake Geneva, Wisconsin, I became aware that I preferred its lower levels of play... character levels 1-3 seemed the most exciting and rewarding both as a player and as a referee. I wondered, "Why is that?" Levels 4-6 seemed "powerful" and characters are better able to kick monster butt once they enter these mid-levels. This comes about largely due to characters having access to larger hit point totals and more damaging magics.
At the lower levels of the early FRP game a character's "life" rests on a razor's edge. With a paltry 1-6 hit points (maybe 7 if you are blessed with a high constitution score), the White Box adventurer is only one damage roll away from death. Life is exciting and dangerous for such characters. Clever (cautious) play can somewhat mitigate the risk, but luck is really all that stands between success and progress toward amassing a fortune in coin and leveling up (and becoming a better survivor) in a game based on random dice rolls.
Since the beginning of the 21st Century, FRP games have evolved mechanically to deliver a very different experience for players. The 20th Century mechanics found in the early editions and simulacrums there-of contain less opportunity for characters to wiggle out of death. Negative hit points, death saves, healing surges and other abilities combine to make characters more involved to roll-up and more resistant to danger.
The changes to the way we enjoy the hobby which have occurred over the decades since the world's first role-playing game was published amount to more than character death. We have largely moved out of the underground dungeon. We have moved away from "design it yourself" to a "rules as written" philosophy. We have given players more knowledge of, and the ability to control the use of, the rules while at the same time arguably placing limits onto those who are running the game - the referee or gamemaster. The GM role has evolved away from being the "arbiter of the rules" to become more of a "story-teller" and "stage manager". The mechanics of the game have also evolved to better reflect the changes in expectations.
Ultimately, I don't think it's rolling with "Advantage", or Feats, or Short and Long Rests that establishes the "feel" of newer games per se. Those mechanical things make characters more robust giving them more tools that can mitigate the risk of a random dice roll ending their fictional "life". The more I think on it, I believe danger to the PC is the biggest distinguisher between the fell of older and newer FRP games. Less risk of character death means less tension.
Searching for character survivability is not new to the game. From early on we looked for ways to avoid character death. It seems natural for players to become invested in their character - in fact the game encourages that. Various "house rules" to early editions have been invented to make characters less susceptible to dying. As time passes and the game evolves, some of those house rules become incorporated into newer editions. As a result, finding that you have a strong preference for one particular version of the FRP game may have a lot to do with how much risk characters are subject to when using the rules as written. Personally, I always did tend to lose interest once my characters had scores of hit points and could cast fireball (dealing a handful of damage dice to multiple monsters at once).
No comments:
Post a Comment