Tag: ryuutama

Actually, why don’t I like D&D5e?

Somewhat related to the last post, Leaving D&D5e, I should probably specify why I don’t like the system. I hadn’t actually grokked the reality of my feelings until earlier this morning, where I managed to write something in a conversation that I think was incredibly thoughtful and truly struck a chord as to answering why I don’t like the system, beyond a simple “it doesn’t do what I want out of a game” or “the rules are broken”, and even reflects on why I don’t like FATE Core, my problems with my home system of Numenera, and why my review of Ryuutama was so lukewarm!

Someone asked, a bit tongue-in-cheek, while we were discussing alternative systems, well “which [system] is the objective best”? The answer, of course, is that there is no such thing, and my friend replied as such – “there’s no objectively best system because they all answer different questions”. Therefore, then… The problems with systems come in when they fail to answer the questions they say they want to answer. This is where you get gripes with D&D5e, Shadowrun, etc. – most of my disliked systems are not disliked for their mechanics specifically, but because the mechanics and goals of the system seem to have failed to connect. Ryuutama had a weird amount of lethality to it for something that was thematically Ghilbi-esque, Numenera‘s combat and initiative system makes no sense for the logic-based rulings over rules guidelines, and FATE Core (review incoming)’s problem is that none of the mechanics actually work together to create something cohesive that answers goals. You hear time and time again from people who have played Shadowrun that they “love Shadowrun, hate the system” because the mechanics are just not conducive to the theme.

Recently I played Scum & Villainy, a “FitD” system that probably could merit its own review post, but I’ll just bust a quick one out here: I loved it. It did exactly what it was meant to do and the mechanics and the gameplay went perfectly hand in hand with the theme of the game we were playing (‘idiot assholes do shady jobs in space’). But I actually do not often care for PbtA-built systems, which is where FitD was born out of – but I liked this because it worked well. I love Numenera and nearly loathe Cypher because the system caters to Numenera‘s settings and goals and disconnecting the cyphers from that setting makes Cypher, well, not as impactful. It doesn’t feel good as a universal system.

What questions is D&D5e trying to answer? What are the goals of the system? One could say that it is in the name, ‘Dungeons’ and ‘Dragons’, but plenty of other bloggers have gone into the problems of the game no longer teaching people how to play or run dungeons, and how the mechanics of attrition seem to be fading away in favour of more narrative approaches. I think in order to become a better system in future iterations, the designers really need to lean into that more and change the rules to accomplish the goals that the designers actually want to achieve. But, they probably won’t, because D&D5e makes a lot of money as is… and that is why I think people should get away from 5e, not because it’s just, completely bad, or wrong, but because it doesn’t do what it’s supposed to be doing, and you have so many options that actually do a) what “D&D” is supposed to be and/or b) what you want to do in a game.

System Reviews: Ryuutama

I really ought to start this blog strong. But, the post I wrote (released yesterday) seems a bit too heavy and overwhelming for the first blog post, so I figure I should quickly just talk game reviews!

I did not run Ryuutama: Natural Fantasy Roleplay as a GM- it was run by one of my colleagues in my playtesting server so this is my perspective as a player (and having read through the rulebook after the fact). My basic understanding of Ryuutama is it is a travel/exploration-focused Ghilbi-esque TTRPG – sorry “TRPG – Table-Talk Role-Playing Game” with a bizarre amount of lethality and inventory management crush for its cutesy exterior. On to my general thoughts:

+ Worldbuilding together was great, though admittedly I ran a little late and missed a bit of it. Reminded me very much of Microscope–like worldbuilding and I had a lot of fun with that game!

+ I think the emphasis on travel is both a bane and a boon, to be honest – I feel as though travel is the weakest in most tabletop games in terms of mechanics and actually being familiar enough to be able to handle it as a GM. D&D5e doesn’t do travel well. Numenera doesn’t do travel well (though a new book on that is coming in the mail this month for me). A lot of popular tabletops just don’t do travel well (or, rather, it’s not the focus). Unless you’re a hexcrawl master like Justin from The Alexandrian, travel is probably one of the weakest points I’ve seen in other GMs (and in my own GMing). To that end, it was probably a good exercise, but it seemed like it would be tricky to run if you don’t already use a lot of travel elements in your other games. I typically just handwave most travel, and I’d really have to brush up on my skills if it was me running this. I also found it sort of boring. I would really like to see this pulled off by a GM who is experienced in running travel games just to see this system shining at its peak.

+ Unfortunately, during our one shot I was unable to experience the actual combat system, however, my character did nearly die twice anyway. This system is probably OSR-levels of realistically lethal.

+ Inventory management was weird. there’s a lot of encumbrance/weight and carrying capacity nonsense that the simulationist in me found fun, but it seems like a strange amount of crunch when the rest of the game has no crunch at all. I think I spent 80% of character creation organising my inventory, and then I never used any of it during our one-shot (I imagine in a full game it would have more use, but, alas)

+ I liked the condition mechanic (and accompanying roleplay expectations) a lot. Basically, for those unfamiliar, you roll certain stats to determine your ‘condition’ (how healthy/alert you are) for the day. A critical fumble/10+ score has other mechanics in-game, but for roleplay specifically, we were asked by our GM to play our characters according to what we rolled. In the games I run, I usually just ask players straight how they’re feeling that morning but I might incorporate similar things in other games. I will report back on my findings putting this into play elsewhere (fun note: I regularly rolled horribly on condition and enjoyed playing a very elderly frail of mind and might man).

+ Rolling different dice depending on your stats was very fun, and it gave a nice advantage while also still allowing you to do things quite poorly even if you were normally very good at it. I like being able to fail a lot. That said, as I wasn’t running the game I’m not sure how accurate the target # difficulty scaling is.

Personally: would I run this for anyone? No, probably not, it’s outside of my regular wheelhouse and I’m not sure it includes elements I find fun to run as a Game Master (a lot of overhead, travelling as a core mechanic). Would I play it again? Also… probably not? I wouldn’t say no, and it’s not bad, I do love the JRPG elements, and I appreciate some of the simulationist bits… but the setting and tonal dissonance of mechanics vs theme are… mediocre. It’s a perfectly average “TRPG”. I make no offence to those who enjoy the system, I can definitely see its appeal, and I’ll still recommend it to people who like travel and like simulationism, but I’ll mark this one down as ‘not for me’.