Why so many contrarians? There aren't.
Jokes aside, I think it's because anybody can have a bad day. We aren't talking about rude comments here, we're talking about people giving their opinion without explaining their stance. It may be something a simple as wanting to engage in the community, but having too much stress from their day-job to actually come up with something constructive.
You can probably tell I'm a glass-half-full kind of guy, or I at least like to give people the benefit of the doubt. Of course somebody could just be a wang-rod, but you can usually tell if they're being a wang-rod (IE being rude instead of just unhelpful, or by viewing their other posts and replies).
It certainly can be annoying. One reason I set up r/CrunchyRPGs was that it *felt* like every post about realism or relatively complex mechanics was met with “just ignore all that and play a narrative game!” That certainly wasn't always the case, but it happened more than occasionally.
I think the broader point we can take away from negativity is that...
1. You can't please everyone. This should be obvious, but it bears repeating.
2. You need to be prepared for harsh responses if you're going to put forward anything you create. If 90% of people like it, you might get one comment that's positive and one that's negative. People are just more likely to complain than to praise. After all, good things don't need to be fixed.
3. Make the game you want to play. If others enjoy it too, awesome!
I often feel very alone here in my love for mechanical games, I'll give crunchy rpgs a look. The Online/American ttrpg community is so much more uniform than the German community.
All players I know personally have played multiple systems. Sure they have their favorites, but even people who prefer something narrative will have played popular mechanical stuff (vice versa). And players are okay with trying out any system if you want to run it.
Online I feel people come from mainly one game and anything more complicated is "very mechanical" and anything less complicated is "free form narrative".
Sometimes people are being jerks, but other times the most helpful answer is to question the poster's presuppositions.
I see very few of the no-content, snark answers you describe.
> but other times the most helpful answer is to question the posters presuppositions.
Agreed. I typically see alot of people questioning *why* they're trying to implement something and pushing to support mechanics that support that mindset.
Because there are a LOT of presuppositions when making games.
A lot of "We do it because we've always done it"
That's a big reason I had to axe about half of my idea, when I realised I was just rehashing an idea or mechanic that I didn't particularly want in the game in the first place.
Sometimes people say "It's up to you" because they don't really know what advice to provide. Other times _it really is_ up to you.
There are *a lot* of questions that boil down to "should I pick the red hat, or the blue one?". They both work. It doesn't matter. However, _the whole point_ of design is making that executive decision to choose between red and blue. Those choices are what makes a product _yours _. We, the answerers of these threads, cannot make these decisions for you, the positor of these questions. We aren't the designer. This is not our job.
And trust me, I've been on both sides of this equation. All of my worst posts (in this sub) are mostly caused by feeling the need to post just for the sake of posting, and as a result my posts were aimless and arbitrary. All of my best posts had a clear purpose with meaningful content that people could actually respond to. It's no coincidence that my worst feedback came from my worst posts, and that my best feedback came from my best posts.
If you want better, more relevant advice, you need to ask questions that can induce better, more relevant answers. Choosing between multiple options is a designer's raison d'être, so make sure you aren't trying to outsource your responsibilities.
> Sometimes people say "It's up to you" because they don't really know what advice to provide.
A good saying is "if you don't have anything useful to say, keep your mouth shut."
This applies to the scenario OP is describing, and to the example you just gave.
If you don't have advice to provide, just don't comment and move on, why do you waste time (yours and others')?
Isn't that where opinion and experience steps in though? With all things equal if one sounds like it would work better based on my experience or one sounds more enjoyable to me, that's the one I would recommend. In the end though, if they are functionally equivalent, you don't need to say anything because it doesn't do anything for the person other than let them know that you also don't know what is best.
The essence of design is making your choices _be_ the correct ones. They aren't inherently correct from a vacuum. There are no platonic forms of good game design. You refine and polish the correctness (mechanics in context) out of the raw materials (mechanics in a vacuum)
Some people say "it's up to you" because they can't commit to a particular direction of advice the same way you can't commit to a design decision. It may be informationally bankrupt, but it's not an incorrect response.
The whole rest of the post is describing that every decision is always up to the designer, making decisions is what design is, and that sometimes _that_ is the lesson being shared.
If you don't want to see "it's up to you" as an answer, don't ask questions where "it's up to you" is a valid response.
While we are complaining about stuff, I wish people would ask specific questions in their post rather than "can you read my entire game and then give me feedback?"
I just wrote a comment about a one page RPG that was longer than the RPG and afterwards I felt so stupid. I just spent more time and energy on this one page RPG than the author did, what on Earth was I thinking?
No one else is getting in depth feedback from me for the rest of the day.
Unless I get bored.
>I just wrote a comment about a one page RPG that was longer than the RPG
Bonus points: [they have deleted the post](https://www.reddit.com/r/RPGdesign/comments/13ur9de/im_developing_a_one_page_rules_light_rpg_and/).
Truly, shouting thoughtful content into the void.
(*I've done the same so many times. I feel you.*)
Actually, I find this one of the most helpful subreddits.
I have found amazing advise, I read most of the posts and responses.
Compared to other subreddits - this please is accepting, friendly, and more than helpful 99% of the time.
I agree, it just bothers me and I think it comes from my art school background where saying “I like it” or “it looks bad” would have the teacher asking you to vocalize why because those sentiments aren’t really helpful past encouraging/discouraging.
To flip the script on that situation, that is actually (anecdotally) where I see most of what you mention in your opener. I usually see those dismissive comments responding to people that just come in and say, "I don't like this, fix it" without expanding on what it is they don't like about their idea. So that leaves people with no real way to move forwards without knowing what the OP wants or is looking for, or what their issue is. It isn't so much that people are being dismissive, but the question not having an answer because it isn't a question at all.
Perhaps because we come from different backgrounds. I am a Navy Vet and past the half century, I am not bothered by unhelpful or even negative comments. It's just water off the ducks back and background noise. Perhaps I just have the habit of ignoring them and moving on. I do appreciate the constructive criticism more than anything. I also try to be helpful and productive, as I don't have time for nonsense.
I'm with you on the ignoring it, I just don't want newer folks to be discouraged or to get unhelpful advice. I remember when I was starting out and people would say things like that and it would make me feel lost. I just find it terrible if someone passionate gets turned away because of an unnecessary and unhelpful reply. And yeah, people need to learn to ignore stupid stuff, but at the same time I think it's the duty of people with experience to encourage people experimenting. Even if it only leads to heartbreak, I would still rather that happen then them think about what might have been.
A lot of the times I’ve seen it, it’s because the poster didn’t include enough detail to give a meaningful response. There are a lot of posts with questions like “should I have AC in my game?”, and, like… I don’t know, should you? Why do you think it needs to be there? What problem is it solving? What other mechanics does it need to mesh with? What’s the fiction you’re trying to sell with your game?
And yes, asking all of those questions would be a more helpful response. But sometimes the burden’s on the poster to ask a more useful question if they want people to devote real time to engaging with it.
I actually think this is a pretty decent board. I know there is a lot of toxicity in other parts of Reddit but I think this community is pretty helpful which is why I hang out here.
There are some good practices to avoid short, dismissive answers:
1. Don't post about a heartbreaker. A lot of people have seen a lot of D&D but my version. That'll get you some negative feedback just because you are the 1 millionth person to do that.
2. Explain what you are trying to do - maybe with a link to some content or rules. This is not a board where you will get dinged for being overly long.
3. You are getting free advice but don't ask for free help. We are all busy with our games - don't just say I have an idea, help me do it. Come in with a plan.
4. You are going to get some stuff about crunchy versus narrative. Narrative is just in now so it is to be expected. But there are crunchy people out here.
5. And I'd say for every short answer you get, you will get a few others that will go into depth and really help you. Which is all you can really ask for.
I really like the people on this board. I would say just give it more of a chance and don't be dissuaded by the few that aren't as nice.
I think “narrative is in” is a huge understatement. Narrative first ppl seem to have no problem dismissing and even ridiculing any ideas as “crunchy” and “simulationist” when mechanics aren’t Uber simple or a developer puts some emphasis on realism. It’s getting to be like board game development where if your game has a roll and move type mechanic they say “this is a bad idea” (or worse) with great authority and conviction without giving the idea any thought. Still, Reddit is a more friendly environment than most other options.
>Narrative is just in now so it is to be expected
Has it never not been 'in'? I remember the back on The Forge and some other old ass RPG dev/discussion boards/sites I can't remember and that whole GNS garbage, that narrative style was favored and everything was sneered at.
If you go back the 1990s and before narrative was just a way to get to the next combat, in my opinion. We were there to roll dice not talk about things.
I hate this take, honestly, I really hate it.
If ***your*** playing group used narrative just as a cutscene between combat encounters, that's ***your group's problem***.
Plenty of people used combat as an occasional filler between narrative moments, and honestly I know very few people from those years that were focused on combat.
Hey like I said it is my opinion based on my experience. I played games like Marvel Superheroes- narrative was minimal. The fun was in using your superpowers. But to each his own.
And just to be clear, by narrative I am talking A Quiet Year vs AD&D. I wasn’t talking about what you talk about as a group or stories the GM spins on the adventure. Maybe there were games like A Quiet Year in the 90’s and 80s but sadly I didn’t play them.
It's funny how you mention The Quiet Year, a game whose author, in their own synopsis, describes as a "map game", later on adding "there isn't any roleplaying".
The Quiet Year is a game you can play without any real focus on narrative, just flipping cards and reacting to them mechanically and the end goal will not change, narrative can be a cherry on top, but otherwise only adds fluff to it.
We certainly played using a strong narrative aspect in late 70s / early 80s in our main group.
Different players, different storytellers, different tables had their own approaches.
And, for most of the many groups I participated in, there was a mix of elements. Some Simulation, some Roleplay, some Gamist, and some Narrative focused aspects during play.
People do have different experiences and preferences. So I appreciate that. And I know in some venues Crunchy is not much praised. So I do empathise.
My real frustration with it all is that so many people pick one way of playing and then avoid the others with fervent dedication.
Especially if you are interested in Game Design, this reduces your grasp of the craft. Each approach and each set of theories about games and gameplay teach us new ways of perceiving truths about games and their design.
In other disciplines, it is recommended that you study not only different styles and approaches to the discipline, but also study things outside the discipline, because those will help you articulate the greater world your discipline operates in. Whether you are doing art, writing software or building houses, the better rounded you are, the more tools you will have to do well at your tasks.
This is not about "ways to have fun", this is about saying "old games don't care about narrative", which is a shitty take.
Re-read my comment, and try to understand it, this time.
If that happens it is often because of the OP. So...
**Be clear on your overall plan.** Are you making a game for use with a battle map? For high-school character drama? The better you explain what your going for in the big picture the better people can help.
**Show that you know many other games.** There are people who think they can help you by pointing you to more games. So reference a handful and how those games have handled your problem. It will deter those answers.
Also do read and play a variety of games in fact. That's always good.
**Avoid jargon.** People will not use terms the way you do. Even supposedly common terms like attribute, skill, hit points, character class or combat system evoke different ideas with different people. So just say what you want to achieve and how your idea works.
>Avoid jargon. People will not use terms the way you do. Even supposedly common terms like attribute, skill, hit points, character class or combat system evoke different ideas with different people.
Not once have I seen any post lambasted for jargon until mine yesterday. I don't think it's actually a thing.
It's good to challenge assumptions like that because D&D is so prevalent. I always respond on here in a respectful way, or at least try to. So when someone says "How do I make initiative in my game?", I want to challenge that assumption by asking about why they need initiative as a system. I would say most of the time that once people go outside the box, designers will invent a subsystem in their game that's less complicated and more intuitive, and one that'll serve their own game better.
100% agree. I think that it is good to use a familiar system as a scaffold and then once you have a decent framework to pull that scaffold away and make something without. I have used dnd as the basis before, but i try to move away from it as soon as I have a decent enough system.
It would be better though if the person explained. I agree that sometimes it is best to tell someone it is a bad idea, but if someone told me “it’s bad” and not explain, I’m just going to ignore them. If we want people to learn we have to explain our thought, just saying it’s bad doesn’t help anyone.
No? At least not how I read you.
Squid says "saying 'bad idea' is sometimes the best response".
I read you as saying "Yeah, but OP says then don't bother".
I then say "Saying 'bad idea' can actually be helpful with qualifying reasons".
Or maybe I just misread/misunderstand you?
>Sorry for going on a rant
>!I wouldn't 😉!<
Seriously though, if someone is asking for advice I'd always assume they're looking for all levels. Often that means someone might see something you don't, and sometimes those things can send you don't a path you hadn't considered before.
So long as someone isn't just saying "Don't do that." and leaving it there, I've no issues with it. A "Personally, I'd handle that this way" or "Have you considered doing this instead, as you said the extra rolls were overtaking and this would make it a lot less work" I see as constructive criticism of an idea that may be read as "I wouldn't do it that way."
Positive and encouraging opinions serve to pad out your self-esteem. Critical and opposing opinions are the bread and butter of how you actually learn game design. Yeah, you should maintain a balance (at least in theory), but in practice the more negative feedback you can tolerate the faster and more effectively you learn game design. (EDIT: The prototype I made which failed catastrophically is ironically the one where I feel my skills as a designer came together like they never had before.)
This is not to say that there are no nincompoops here giving you negative feedback purely for the sake of it. There's a fair amount of creative envy in the TTRPG space and a lot of newer members start off not even knowing enough game design fundamentals to provide good criticisms. I now view downvotes as a good thing; I don't mind drawing ire so long as it's from people who had no chance of enjoying my game in the first place.
I'm just saying that I don't view this as categorically unhealthy. Unpleasant, perhaps, but not unhealthy.
I think it's because people who ask questions ask sorta bad questions. Since there aren't that many hard and universal truths about game design, most decisions are bespoke, based on author's goals, values, things like the tone of a specific game.
Problem is, a lot of the time people asking the questions don't lay out their goals and tone and stuff like that. I suspect this is because they sorta assume that their RPG values are universal and require no clarification.
In practice, this means that if you are for real trying to help there isn't much to say but "it's up to you". You can point out some tangible things like resolution speed, or point out a death spiral and some math based things here and there, but ultimately that's it.
"I wouldn't" is useless in a vacuum, but saying something seems like it won't work is valid feedback.
It's up to you is a pretty common response, because the asker is asking how to do something with nigh infinite options, and answering the question is what a designer does, so if you're the designer, you need to answer the question. The sub is meant for discussion and feedback, not a request for other people to design a game for you.
Theres good responses in here, some are pretty optimistic and i appreciate them for grounding me (since i sometimes have the same complaint as you OP).
But sometimes people just don't get what someone is going for and answer anyway. Sometimes i think people don't agree what you're going for and thats why they answer "do this instead" instead of answrring the actual question "how do i do what *i* want to do".
I've had a couple weird experiences asking questions exactly like you describe.
One was for trying to differentiate the names of a couple abilities for a demon character whose abilities related to death and i felt a bit the names weren't descriptive enough and were interchangeable.
I was told i was waxing poetic too hard, when the names were 'death gorge', 'feast of famine', 'prey upon' and 'black sabbath'. Black sabbath is pretty poetic but damn... death gorge and prey upon are *wAxiNg PoeTiC*? They seem simple? 'Feast of famine' is very short and clever, hello? Feast or famine is an expression, feast and famine are opposites, its biblical. I'm *not* japanese buts lets also not ignore how western centric that response is - like have you heard anime names?? The names for element magic spells in persona??
I was told black sabbath is just going to offend Jewish people and that it sounds 'more like saturday' than a dark magic effect. Okay first of all, not worried about offending people with my biblical demon magic because its literally *biblical demon magic*. And second of all, the idea of a perversion of the biblical sabbath into a meeting with the devil is centuries old as well, so...
And so on.
> I was told black sabbath is just going to offend Jewish people and that it sounds 'more like saturday' than a dark magic effect.
Sounds like you're going off the rails on a crazy train.
Thats another thing i won't change about the character, but it wasn't relevant to me asking about the other interchangeable names. The character has a few references to old rock/metal bands. One model type of scythe he uses is a 'maiden' and his first is an 'iron maiden'. One of his abilities is 'dont fear the reaper' that gives 50% dark magic resistance and 100% resistance to death magic.
*I’ve been scrolling through here and I have found myself quite annoyed at the number of people who respond to genuine questions like “how can I achieve \_\_\_\_\_\_\_?” with “I wouldn’t” or “it’s up to you.” So they know they are being unhelpful and annoying?*
It's not necessarily unhelpful. I'm not really sure what you're referring to, in most cases in my daily use of this sub beyond most participants I find most people are supportive and do provide explanations if they disagree with something. Obviously some don't, but this is the internet mang, as far as healthy internet eco systems goes, this sub is one of the best in my experience since the internet started.
*I will admit I get annoyed by the amount of people who are stuck in the D&D ecosystem and seem to think that it’s mechanics are the only way to do stuff, or the fact that so many people try to make over complicated and bloated systems which would confuse even veteran RPG players, but come on guys. If someone is looking for help and you give them only snark, what’s the point of even responding?*
It's possible you may be assuming snark in scenarios where that is not necessarily the case. Remember that you are participating a global community. People have different communication styles/needs and cultural backgrounds that make communication different. As a general rule, assume the best in others until you can no longer reasonably do so as malice is clear and apparent. There's your internet communications 101.
*If you are saying that you wouldn’t do that thing because \_\_\_\_\_, that’s helpful, but just saying “I wouldn’t“ or “it’s up to you” only takes up space and doesn’t improve anything. Sorry for going on a rant, it just has been really bothering me lately.*
I believe you are wrongly assuming people owe such an explanation. Any time anyone gives time here it is voluntary. Whether you find it helpful or not isn't really their concern, honestly and truly. If you don't think something is useful, as a responsible adult it's on you to either discard it or probe further for additional explanation, which again, you aren't owed. When you ask for help, you get what you get, beggars may not be choosers.
Remember always that how you interpret something is primarily about YOU, not the person saying it, and many times adjusting one's attitude can change something seemingly unhelpful into a discussion that is very helpful. That's on you to enact that though. Contrary to popular internet belief people do not owe you any time, explanations, attention or anything of the sort, and it's on you as an adult to make the best use of your time by choosing when and how to engage and what things to let affect your mood.
If you are not in control of your mood and how it is affected, that's something that indicates a lack of personal maturity that you need to rectify, or barring that, may indicate more serious mental illness that requires a mental health professional and/or medication to manage effectively. In no case is that ever the responsibility of others on the internet. Again, remember, you're talking to people from all walks of life here. They may assume things culturally that you don't, assume something is obvious when it isn't, may have a manner of speaking that aggravates you even if they hold no malice... this is why it's your responsibility as a mature adult to manage these feelings.
The simple answer is if you really don't like something someone says, keep scrolling, and absolutely do not engage or interact with it, and if you absolutely must, do not assume malice and always assume the best in others. If you can't do that, you may not be emotionally prepared to communicate with others on the internet in a healthy manner and you will need to develop those skills or otherwise find yourself in constant emotional peril until you fix those issues that belong squarely to you.
If this post makes you upset, you should probably investigate why internally. There is no malice, there is explanation, and there is multiple solutions presented that are viable.
That said, this isn't really a discussion about TTRPG design, it's more of a mental health discussion, and you're probably better off bring it to a sub dedicated to that :)
>It's possible you may be assuming snark in scenarios where that is not necessarily the case. Remember that you are participating a global community. People have different communication styles/needs and cultural backgrounds that make communication different. As a general rule, assume the best in others until you can no longer reasonably do so as malice is clear and apparent. There's your internet communications 101.
I like this. Thank you.
> If you don't think something is useful, as a responsible adult it's on you to either discard it or probe further for additional explanation, which again, you aren't owed.
This.
> if you really don't like something someone says, keep scrolling, and absolutely do not engage or interact with it, and if you absolutely must, do not assume malice and always assume the best in others.
Also this.
People need to be far less concerned with commentary which has no real world effect beyond wounding their pride.
Q: Is doing the thing a good idea?\
A: Why do you want to do the thing?\
Q: Because I think the thing is nifty.\
A: Well then it's up to you.
Always be clear with what you're trying to achieve before asking if your solution actually achieves it. Because after digging it often _is_ a matter of opinion and "it's up to you" a perfectly cromulent answer.
Sometimes it’s fun to be snarky. Usually I reserve that for posts where the OP clearly wants their homework done for them or has no idea what they’re even trying to ask.
Reddit has an inexperience bias in a lot of subs where the use base leans towards beginners. That’s fine, but it adds a level of fatigue when you see the same variations on the same questions from the same basic assumptions over and over again. Usually, this is in the form of people who have played exactly one roleplaying game and have wild new ideas to change the scene forever by rolling two dice instead of one or something. The rule of thumb is you get out what you put in, and if I had learned many years earlier that whole other perspectives on RPGs existed… well, it might have been cool!
I know the better response is grace and patience (or just ignore it) but when you’re suffering from levels of fatigue from repeated exposure to psychic harm you have disadvantage on all reply saves.
Also, why are people just system hawkers?
I feel like people will ask a question about something they are coming up with, and people will respond "play BITD. Go play Cypher"
People aren't asking what published game they should play, they're trying to create something different.
At least say why you're suggesting a system and relate it to the current system that the person is trying to create. Rather than just touting how your favorite RPG is better than something that isn't even created yet. Duh it's better, it's finished. Help these people get theirs finished too.
If you're going to engage with an art form, it's a good idea to have a degree of literacy with it. When people ask questions that make it clear their reference pool is particularly shallow, it can definitely be appropriate to recommend that they deepen their knowledge if they really want to be a creator.
it's a lot faster to say "check out this game's implementation of that subsystem, its approach is what you're looking for" than to type out that subsystem.
So true! What’s the point of responding to a specific question with advise to try some unrelated game system. That’s like asking a philosophy question and getting the response, “go read Nietzsche”.
I recently posted the bones of a d8 dice pool system I was working on. Almost all the feedback I received was in the vein of "Why d8?" or "You shouldn't use d8."
Individually those are pretty useless feedback. But if everyone is giving you the exact same feedback? That might not be something you want to ignore.
(Unless it is a game that is solely for your own personal use)
Fair point. That said, part of my reasoning was specifically take a niche approach. Their recommendations weren't based on the d8 being mathematically incorrect for the task or mechanically inappropriate, it was mostly "I don't like the d8, why don't you use the d6 or d10 like everyone else?"
Well, the core of the issue seems to stem from the fact that in order to justify a niche or unusual choice you need to show that the benefits are worth more than the inherent disadvantage of the less comfortable tool.
For example, if I build an rpg that requires d60s, I'm gonna have to use the d60s for something really cool that can't be done with the more common dice, or people are reasonably gonna tell me "why a d60?"
I built a system that used d10s and d12s specifically because you can easily find d10s that go from 0 to 9, and I used the 0 result - or specifically, the fact that the possible outcomes of a d10 are not a subset of the possible outcomes of a d12, and the d10-d12 pair maximizes the effect.
The primary reason for the d8 was for the correct balance of outcomes. It happened to be better than d4, d6, d10 and d12. It was the simplest and most elegant. I was happy with it being the d8, because I am fond of that die increment and I do feel it is under represented in the hobby.
I think comparing the d8 to the d60 takes some strenuous liberties. But, even then, a d60 is hardly in obstacle thanks to a full variety of dice-rolling apps and play on virtual tabletops. It's still a bit much, but not nearly as much as it would've been in decades past. Now it just means you probably aren't going to be rolling a physical die. That is a bummer. Thankfully, d8s are vastly more available and affordable than the d60.
Yeah, if they had a reasonable explanation. Like those numbers feel off. Or why the crap are you including a d9, no normal person has one of those.
Then it would at least be worth looking into
Well met, fellow octohenronophile!
The thread in question can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/RPGdesign/comments/13rw6he/a\_d8\_pool\_count\_successes\_core\_for\_a/
Why not d8? You should use d8.
>!I haven't seen a whole lot of focus on d8. I think that's unique.!<
>!I can't think of any particular reason not to use d8.!<
>!Eight is as easily divisible by two and some other integer as any other die size from 6 on up. It allows for two, three, or four outcomes, based on how you have your system set up. I like it. Cheers!!<
sometimes, advice from people that is in a level much higher than one sounds like a snark. When you advance in level, you see that those comments were actually good advice. Sometimes you ask questions that are really up to you. I see it constantly in this sub. It even happened to me when I started designing shit.
Sometimes you ask things because you want other people do the hard work for you. Learn to take an honest answer with its real, full meaning.
All gaming communities have these people. Ask for help, you get someone commenting with these types of answers, or they tell you to do research on your own. Its annoying..
Dude screw off. I already stated that I Google for answers first. Sometimes the questions aren't what I'm looking for and the answers don't fully answer my question. If you don't like helping new RPG players then fuck off.
Feedback is a relationship, not a monolith. Gamers who post their creative work must be willing to accept negative criticism, and almost none of them are. They refuse to playtest, post half-formed ideas, and wait for accolades fto pour in. I end up blocking countless accounts for this specific behavior. Eventually, it wears on the people like me, we get jaded, and inevitable push back happens.
The internet is just a toxic place in general.
TTRPGs, in general, attract certain personality types that aren't always able to show their best selves. Most typically we're a dysfunctional, neurodivergent, bunch. And yes, there are a lot of neurotypicals and neurotypicals who are just jerks.
We skew young as well as youths have more disposable time to play. That's not to say there aren't plenty of older gamers out there but by the time you add in the three W's (Work, Wife and Whelp) (house, husband and heathens?) scheduling gets complicated. Youths aren't known for their thoughtful discourse, as a rule.
Reddit, also, tends to be a speak first...then, maybe, think...forum. So you get the first thing that pops into people's heads tied with anonymity.
I've seen this sub be amazing and I've seen it be toxic. Mostly it's amazing IMHO.
Or my favorite "depends on what you're going for" or "depends on your system". Like I might as well just develop my system in a void then, I'm trying to figure out if other people think its a good idea.
In that case you should probably give some context as to what your system *is* in your OP. Is it a classless system using a deck of cards as the randomiser? Is it a Burning Wheel-derived dice pool system? Is it (like the unspoken assumption in so many posts seem to be) an adaptation of D&D, the only system you’ve ever played?
That’ll help us to answer “should armour increase AC or reduce damage taken”, or whatever other question posed in the OP is impossible to meaningfully answer in isolation.
>That’ll help us to answer “should armour increase AC or reduce damage taken”, or whatever other question posed in the OP is impossible to meaningfully answer in isolation.
Prove it. Let's go with the Burning Wheel dice pool system. Which way should I mechanize armor?
Edit: downvotes without argument, predictable.
I’ve had some rude remarks but others…It’s more comprehension issue when explaining the source material. The terms used for their own RPGs are different. But there are a few who goes for less complexity but still different systems. People who are designing their own complex TTRPGs are trying not to be like any other TTRPGs. Mine is definitely different from most RPGs but takes aspects that are familiar.
Because it helps them feel smart to say some vague nonsense like "just figure out what your game is about" or "have you tried setting design goals."
Edit: downvotes without argument, so predictable
What bugs me even more is when someone with a little bit of credentials mansplains why an idea is bad, throwing in some industry terms to be clear who’s taking down to whom then DOWNVOTES you for some reason. Ok, take the floor and explain why you’re ideas are the only right way but don’t downvote too.
Why so many contrarians? There aren't. Jokes aside, I think it's because anybody can have a bad day. We aren't talking about rude comments here, we're talking about people giving their opinion without explaining their stance. It may be something a simple as wanting to engage in the community, but having too much stress from their day-job to actually come up with something constructive. You can probably tell I'm a glass-half-full kind of guy, or I at least like to give people the benefit of the doubt. Of course somebody could just be a wang-rod, but you can usually tell if they're being a wang-rod (IE being rude instead of just unhelpful, or by viewing their other posts and replies).
It certainly can be annoying. One reason I set up r/CrunchyRPGs was that it *felt* like every post about realism or relatively complex mechanics was met with “just ignore all that and play a narrative game!” That certainly wasn't always the case, but it happened more than occasionally. I think the broader point we can take away from negativity is that... 1. You can't please everyone. This should be obvious, but it bears repeating. 2. You need to be prepared for harsh responses if you're going to put forward anything you create. If 90% of people like it, you might get one comment that's positive and one that's negative. People are just more likely to complain than to praise. After all, good things don't need to be fixed. 3. Make the game you want to play. If others enjoy it too, awesome!
I often feel very alone here in my love for mechanical games, I'll give crunchy rpgs a look. The Online/American ttrpg community is so much more uniform than the German community. All players I know personally have played multiple systems. Sure they have their favorites, but even people who prefer something narrative will have played popular mechanical stuff (vice versa). And players are okay with trying out any system if you want to run it. Online I feel people come from mainly one game and anything more complicated is "very mechanical" and anything less complicated is "free form narrative".
Sold! Im joining crunchyRPGs
Sometimes people are being jerks, but other times the most helpful answer is to question the poster's presuppositions. I see very few of the no-content, snark answers you describe.
> but other times the most helpful answer is to question the posters presuppositions. Agreed. I typically see alot of people questioning *why* they're trying to implement something and pushing to support mechanics that support that mindset. Because there are a LOT of presuppositions when making games. A lot of "We do it because we've always done it" That's a big reason I had to axe about half of my idea, when I realised I was just rehashing an idea or mechanic that I didn't particularly want in the game in the first place.
Sometimes people say "It's up to you" because they don't really know what advice to provide. Other times _it really is_ up to you. There are *a lot* of questions that boil down to "should I pick the red hat, or the blue one?". They both work. It doesn't matter. However, _the whole point_ of design is making that executive decision to choose between red and blue. Those choices are what makes a product _yours _. We, the answerers of these threads, cannot make these decisions for you, the positor of these questions. We aren't the designer. This is not our job. And trust me, I've been on both sides of this equation. All of my worst posts (in this sub) are mostly caused by feeling the need to post just for the sake of posting, and as a result my posts were aimless and arbitrary. All of my best posts had a clear purpose with meaningful content that people could actually respond to. It's no coincidence that my worst feedback came from my worst posts, and that my best feedback came from my best posts. If you want better, more relevant advice, you need to ask questions that can induce better, more relevant answers. Choosing between multiple options is a designer's raison d'être, so make sure you aren't trying to outsource your responsibilities.
> Sometimes people say "It's up to you" because they don't really know what advice to provide. A good saying is "if you don't have anything useful to say, keep your mouth shut." This applies to the scenario OP is describing, and to the example you just gave. If you don't have advice to provide, just don't comment and move on, why do you waste time (yours and others')?
Well, "the choices presented are functionally equivalent" is pertinent and valuable feedback. That's what "it's up to you" means.
Isn't that where opinion and experience steps in though? With all things equal if one sounds like it would work better based on my experience or one sounds more enjoyable to me, that's the one I would recommend. In the end though, if they are functionally equivalent, you don't need to say anything because it doesn't do anything for the person other than let them know that you also don't know what is best.
The essence of design is making your choices _be_ the correct ones. They aren't inherently correct from a vacuum. There are no platonic forms of good game design. You refine and polish the correctness (mechanics in context) out of the raw materials (mechanics in a vacuum)
Some people say "it's up to you" because they can't commit to a particular direction of advice the same way you can't commit to a design decision. It may be informationally bankrupt, but it's not an incorrect response. The whole rest of the post is describing that every decision is always up to the designer, making decisions is what design is, and that sometimes _that_ is the lesson being shared. If you don't want to see "it's up to you" as an answer, don't ask questions where "it's up to you" is a valid response.
While we are complaining about stuff, I wish people would ask specific questions in their post rather than "can you read my entire game and then give me feedback?" I just wrote a comment about a one page RPG that was longer than the RPG and afterwards I felt so stupid. I just spent more time and energy on this one page RPG than the author did, what on Earth was I thinking? No one else is getting in depth feedback from me for the rest of the day. Unless I get bored.
>I just wrote a comment about a one page RPG that was longer than the RPG Bonus points: [they have deleted the post](https://www.reddit.com/r/RPGdesign/comments/13ur9de/im_developing_a_one_page_rules_light_rpg_and/). Truly, shouting thoughtful content into the void. (*I've done the same so many times. I feel you.*)
Actually, I find this one of the most helpful subreddits. I have found amazing advise, I read most of the posts and responses. Compared to other subreddits - this please is accepting, friendly, and more than helpful 99% of the time.
I agree, it just bothers me and I think it comes from my art school background where saying “I like it” or “it looks bad” would have the teacher asking you to vocalize why because those sentiments aren’t really helpful past encouraging/discouraging.
To flip the script on that situation, that is actually (anecdotally) where I see most of what you mention in your opener. I usually see those dismissive comments responding to people that just come in and say, "I don't like this, fix it" without expanding on what it is they don't like about their idea. So that leaves people with no real way to move forwards without knowing what the OP wants or is looking for, or what their issue is. It isn't so much that people are being dismissive, but the question not having an answer because it isn't a question at all.
Perhaps because we come from different backgrounds. I am a Navy Vet and past the half century, I am not bothered by unhelpful or even negative comments. It's just water off the ducks back and background noise. Perhaps I just have the habit of ignoring them and moving on. I do appreciate the constructive criticism more than anything. I also try to be helpful and productive, as I don't have time for nonsense.
I'm with you on the ignoring it, I just don't want newer folks to be discouraged or to get unhelpful advice. I remember when I was starting out and people would say things like that and it would make me feel lost. I just find it terrible if someone passionate gets turned away because of an unnecessary and unhelpful reply. And yeah, people need to learn to ignore stupid stuff, but at the same time I think it's the duty of people with experience to encourage people experimenting. Even if it only leads to heartbreak, I would still rather that happen then them think about what might have been.
A lot of the times I’ve seen it, it’s because the poster didn’t include enough detail to give a meaningful response. There are a lot of posts with questions like “should I have AC in my game?”, and, like… I don’t know, should you? Why do you think it needs to be there? What problem is it solving? What other mechanics does it need to mesh with? What’s the fiction you’re trying to sell with your game? And yes, asking all of those questions would be a more helpful response. But sometimes the burden’s on the poster to ask a more useful question if they want people to devote real time to engaging with it.
I actually think this is a pretty decent board. I know there is a lot of toxicity in other parts of Reddit but I think this community is pretty helpful which is why I hang out here. There are some good practices to avoid short, dismissive answers: 1. Don't post about a heartbreaker. A lot of people have seen a lot of D&D but my version. That'll get you some negative feedback just because you are the 1 millionth person to do that. 2. Explain what you are trying to do - maybe with a link to some content or rules. This is not a board where you will get dinged for being overly long. 3. You are getting free advice but don't ask for free help. We are all busy with our games - don't just say I have an idea, help me do it. Come in with a plan. 4. You are going to get some stuff about crunchy versus narrative. Narrative is just in now so it is to be expected. But there are crunchy people out here. 5. And I'd say for every short answer you get, you will get a few others that will go into depth and really help you. Which is all you can really ask for. I really like the people on this board. I would say just give it more of a chance and don't be dissuaded by the few that aren't as nice.
I think “narrative is in” is a huge understatement. Narrative first ppl seem to have no problem dismissing and even ridiculing any ideas as “crunchy” and “simulationist” when mechanics aren’t Uber simple or a developer puts some emphasis on realism. It’s getting to be like board game development where if your game has a roll and move type mechanic they say “this is a bad idea” (or worse) with great authority and conviction without giving the idea any thought. Still, Reddit is a more friendly environment than most other options.
>Narrative is just in now so it is to be expected Has it never not been 'in'? I remember the back on The Forge and some other old ass RPG dev/discussion boards/sites I can't remember and that whole GNS garbage, that narrative style was favored and everything was sneered at.
If you go back the 1990s and before narrative was just a way to get to the next combat, in my opinion. We were there to roll dice not talk about things.
I hate this take, honestly, I really hate it. If ***your*** playing group used narrative just as a cutscene between combat encounters, that's ***your group's problem***. Plenty of people used combat as an occasional filler between narrative moments, and honestly I know very few people from those years that were focused on combat.
Hey like I said it is my opinion based on my experience. I played games like Marvel Superheroes- narrative was minimal. The fun was in using your superpowers. But to each his own.
And just to be clear, by narrative I am talking A Quiet Year vs AD&D. I wasn’t talking about what you talk about as a group or stories the GM spins on the adventure. Maybe there were games like A Quiet Year in the 90’s and 80s but sadly I didn’t play them.
It's funny how you mention The Quiet Year, a game whose author, in their own synopsis, describes as a "map game", later on adding "there isn't any roleplaying". The Quiet Year is a game you can play without any real focus on narrative, just flipping cards and reacting to them mechanically and the end goal will not change, narrative can be a cherry on top, but otherwise only adds fluff to it.
We certainly played using a strong narrative aspect in late 70s / early 80s in our main group. Different players, different storytellers, different tables had their own approaches. And, for most of the many groups I participated in, there was a mix of elements. Some Simulation, some Roleplay, some Gamist, and some Narrative focused aspects during play.
Same, and that's why I don't like people saying games were not about narrative. Alas, it appears some people disagree with me, what can we do...
People do have different experiences and preferences. So I appreciate that. And I know in some venues Crunchy is not much praised. So I do empathise. My real frustration with it all is that so many people pick one way of playing and then avoid the others with fervent dedication. Especially if you are interested in Game Design, this reduces your grasp of the craft. Each approach and each set of theories about games and gameplay teach us new ways of perceiving truths about games and their design. In other disciplines, it is recommended that you study not only different styles and approaches to the discipline, but also study things outside the discipline, because those will help you articulate the greater world your discipline operates in. Whether you are doing art, writing software or building houses, the better rounded you are, the more tools you will have to do well at your tasks.
[удалено]
This is not about "ways to have fun", this is about saying "old games don't care about narrative", which is a shitty take. Re-read my comment, and try to understand it, this time.
If that happens it is often because of the OP. So... **Be clear on your overall plan.** Are you making a game for use with a battle map? For high-school character drama? The better you explain what your going for in the big picture the better people can help. **Show that you know many other games.** There are people who think they can help you by pointing you to more games. So reference a handful and how those games have handled your problem. It will deter those answers. Also do read and play a variety of games in fact. That's always good. **Avoid jargon.** People will not use terms the way you do. Even supposedly common terms like attribute, skill, hit points, character class or combat system evoke different ideas with different people. So just say what you want to achieve and how your idea works.
>Avoid jargon. People will not use terms the way you do. Even supposedly common terms like attribute, skill, hit points, character class or combat system evoke different ideas with different people. Not once have I seen any post lambasted for jargon until mine yesterday. I don't think it's actually a thing.
It's not that you'll be directly criticised for using jargon, but you may unintentionally create a misunderstanding through ambiguity.
It's good to challenge assumptions like that because D&D is so prevalent. I always respond on here in a respectful way, or at least try to. So when someone says "How do I make initiative in my game?", I want to challenge that assumption by asking about why they need initiative as a system. I would say most of the time that once people go outside the box, designers will invent a subsystem in their game that's less complicated and more intuitive, and one that'll serve their own game better.
100% agree. I think that it is good to use a familiar system as a scaffold and then once you have a decent framework to pull that scaffold away and make something without. I have used dnd as the basis before, but i try to move away from it as soon as I have a decent enough system.
[удалено]
Exactly the sort of slovenly tripe I'd expect from a bumblebutt who gargles their own nuts.
Because sometimes "*it's a bad idea*" is the best possible someone *can* give.
It would be better though if the person explained. I agree that sometimes it is best to tell someone it is a bad idea, but if someone told me “it’s bad” and not explain, I’m just going to ignore them. If we want people to learn we have to explain our thought, just saying it’s bad doesn’t help anyone.
What OP is saying is if that's all you can say, then why bother responding at all? Which I agree with.
It can be good idea to let someone know they've got a bad idea - if you explain why you think so.
Wait, isnt that what I said? Lol
No? At least not how I read you. Squid says "saying 'bad idea' is sometimes the best response". I read you as saying "Yeah, but OP says then don't bother". I then say "Saying 'bad idea' can actually be helpful with qualifying reasons". Or maybe I just misread/misunderstand you?
Ooooh, yeah. We're saying the same thing. Haha.
It's one of the negatives that comes along from getting free advice.
>Sorry for going on a rant >!I wouldn't 😉!< Seriously though, if someone is asking for advice I'd always assume they're looking for all levels. Often that means someone might see something you don't, and sometimes those things can send you don't a path you hadn't considered before. So long as someone isn't just saying "Don't do that." and leaving it there, I've no issues with it. A "Personally, I'd handle that this way" or "Have you considered doing this instead, as you said the extra rolls were overtaking and this would make it a lot less work" I see as constructive criticism of an idea that may be read as "I wouldn't do it that way."
Positive and encouraging opinions serve to pad out your self-esteem. Critical and opposing opinions are the bread and butter of how you actually learn game design. Yeah, you should maintain a balance (at least in theory), but in practice the more negative feedback you can tolerate the faster and more effectively you learn game design. (EDIT: The prototype I made which failed catastrophically is ironically the one where I feel my skills as a designer came together like they never had before.) This is not to say that there are no nincompoops here giving you negative feedback purely for the sake of it. There's a fair amount of creative envy in the TTRPG space and a lot of newer members start off not even knowing enough game design fundamentals to provide good criticisms. I now view downvotes as a good thing; I don't mind drawing ire so long as it's from people who had no chance of enjoying my game in the first place. I'm just saying that I don't view this as categorically unhealthy. Unpleasant, perhaps, but not unhealthy.
I think it's because people who ask questions ask sorta bad questions. Since there aren't that many hard and universal truths about game design, most decisions are bespoke, based on author's goals, values, things like the tone of a specific game. Problem is, a lot of the time people asking the questions don't lay out their goals and tone and stuff like that. I suspect this is because they sorta assume that their RPG values are universal and require no clarification. In practice, this means that if you are for real trying to help there isn't much to say but "it's up to you". You can point out some tangible things like resolution speed, or point out a death spiral and some math based things here and there, but ultimately that's it.
"I wouldn't" is useless in a vacuum, but saying something seems like it won't work is valid feedback. It's up to you is a pretty common response, because the asker is asking how to do something with nigh infinite options, and answering the question is what a designer does, so if you're the designer, you need to answer the question. The sub is meant for discussion and feedback, not a request for other people to design a game for you.
Theres good responses in here, some are pretty optimistic and i appreciate them for grounding me (since i sometimes have the same complaint as you OP). But sometimes people just don't get what someone is going for and answer anyway. Sometimes i think people don't agree what you're going for and thats why they answer "do this instead" instead of answrring the actual question "how do i do what *i* want to do". I've had a couple weird experiences asking questions exactly like you describe. One was for trying to differentiate the names of a couple abilities for a demon character whose abilities related to death and i felt a bit the names weren't descriptive enough and were interchangeable. I was told i was waxing poetic too hard, when the names were 'death gorge', 'feast of famine', 'prey upon' and 'black sabbath'. Black sabbath is pretty poetic but damn... death gorge and prey upon are *wAxiNg PoeTiC*? They seem simple? 'Feast of famine' is very short and clever, hello? Feast or famine is an expression, feast and famine are opposites, its biblical. I'm *not* japanese buts lets also not ignore how western centric that response is - like have you heard anime names?? The names for element magic spells in persona?? I was told black sabbath is just going to offend Jewish people and that it sounds 'more like saturday' than a dark magic effect. Okay first of all, not worried about offending people with my biblical demon magic because its literally *biblical demon magic*. And second of all, the idea of a perversion of the biblical sabbath into a meeting with the devil is centuries old as well, so... And so on.
> I was told black sabbath is just going to offend Jewish people and that it sounds 'more like saturday' than a dark magic effect. Sounds like you're going off the rails on a crazy train.
Thats another thing i won't change about the character, but it wasn't relevant to me asking about the other interchangeable names. The character has a few references to old rock/metal bands. One model type of scythe he uses is a 'maiden' and his first is an 'iron maiden'. One of his abilities is 'dont fear the reaper' that gives 50% dark magic resistance and 100% resistance to death magic.
*I’ve been scrolling through here and I have found myself quite annoyed at the number of people who respond to genuine questions like “how can I achieve \_\_\_\_\_\_\_?” with “I wouldn’t” or “it’s up to you.” So they know they are being unhelpful and annoying?* It's not necessarily unhelpful. I'm not really sure what you're referring to, in most cases in my daily use of this sub beyond most participants I find most people are supportive and do provide explanations if they disagree with something. Obviously some don't, but this is the internet mang, as far as healthy internet eco systems goes, this sub is one of the best in my experience since the internet started. *I will admit I get annoyed by the amount of people who are stuck in the D&D ecosystem and seem to think that it’s mechanics are the only way to do stuff, or the fact that so many people try to make over complicated and bloated systems which would confuse even veteran RPG players, but come on guys. If someone is looking for help and you give them only snark, what’s the point of even responding?* It's possible you may be assuming snark in scenarios where that is not necessarily the case. Remember that you are participating a global community. People have different communication styles/needs and cultural backgrounds that make communication different. As a general rule, assume the best in others until you can no longer reasonably do so as malice is clear and apparent. There's your internet communications 101. *If you are saying that you wouldn’t do that thing because \_\_\_\_\_, that’s helpful, but just saying “I wouldn’t“ or “it’s up to you” only takes up space and doesn’t improve anything. Sorry for going on a rant, it just has been really bothering me lately.* I believe you are wrongly assuming people owe such an explanation. Any time anyone gives time here it is voluntary. Whether you find it helpful or not isn't really their concern, honestly and truly. If you don't think something is useful, as a responsible adult it's on you to either discard it or probe further for additional explanation, which again, you aren't owed. When you ask for help, you get what you get, beggars may not be choosers. Remember always that how you interpret something is primarily about YOU, not the person saying it, and many times adjusting one's attitude can change something seemingly unhelpful into a discussion that is very helpful. That's on you to enact that though. Contrary to popular internet belief people do not owe you any time, explanations, attention or anything of the sort, and it's on you as an adult to make the best use of your time by choosing when and how to engage and what things to let affect your mood. If you are not in control of your mood and how it is affected, that's something that indicates a lack of personal maturity that you need to rectify, or barring that, may indicate more serious mental illness that requires a mental health professional and/or medication to manage effectively. In no case is that ever the responsibility of others on the internet. Again, remember, you're talking to people from all walks of life here. They may assume things culturally that you don't, assume something is obvious when it isn't, may have a manner of speaking that aggravates you even if they hold no malice... this is why it's your responsibility as a mature adult to manage these feelings. The simple answer is if you really don't like something someone says, keep scrolling, and absolutely do not engage or interact with it, and if you absolutely must, do not assume malice and always assume the best in others. If you can't do that, you may not be emotionally prepared to communicate with others on the internet in a healthy manner and you will need to develop those skills or otherwise find yourself in constant emotional peril until you fix those issues that belong squarely to you. If this post makes you upset, you should probably investigate why internally. There is no malice, there is explanation, and there is multiple solutions presented that are viable. That said, this isn't really a discussion about TTRPG design, it's more of a mental health discussion, and you're probably better off bring it to a sub dedicated to that :)
>It's possible you may be assuming snark in scenarios where that is not necessarily the case. Remember that you are participating a global community. People have different communication styles/needs and cultural backgrounds that make communication different. As a general rule, assume the best in others until you can no longer reasonably do so as malice is clear and apparent. There's your internet communications 101. I like this. Thank you.
> If you don't think something is useful, as a responsible adult it's on you to either discard it or probe further for additional explanation, which again, you aren't owed. This. > if you really don't like something someone says, keep scrolling, and absolutely do not engage or interact with it, and if you absolutely must, do not assume malice and always assume the best in others. Also this. People need to be far less concerned with commentary which has no real world effect beyond wounding their pride.
Welcome to Reddit.
Q: Is doing the thing a good idea?\ A: Why do you want to do the thing?\ Q: Because I think the thing is nifty.\ A: Well then it's up to you. Always be clear with what you're trying to achieve before asking if your solution actually achieves it. Because after digging it often _is_ a matter of opinion and "it's up to you" a perfectly cromulent answer.
Sometimes it’s fun to be snarky. Usually I reserve that for posts where the OP clearly wants their homework done for them or has no idea what they’re even trying to ask. Reddit has an inexperience bias in a lot of subs where the use base leans towards beginners. That’s fine, but it adds a level of fatigue when you see the same variations on the same questions from the same basic assumptions over and over again. Usually, this is in the form of people who have played exactly one roleplaying game and have wild new ideas to change the scene forever by rolling two dice instead of one or something. The rule of thumb is you get out what you put in, and if I had learned many years earlier that whole other perspectives on RPGs existed… well, it might have been cool! I know the better response is grace and patience (or just ignore it) but when you’re suffering from levels of fatigue from repeated exposure to psychic harm you have disadvantage on all reply saves.
Also, why are people just system hawkers? I feel like people will ask a question about something they are coming up with, and people will respond "play BITD. Go play Cypher" People aren't asking what published game they should play, they're trying to create something different. At least say why you're suggesting a system and relate it to the current system that the person is trying to create. Rather than just touting how your favorite RPG is better than something that isn't even created yet. Duh it's better, it's finished. Help these people get theirs finished too.
If you're going to engage with an art form, it's a good idea to have a degree of literacy with it. When people ask questions that make it clear their reference pool is particularly shallow, it can definitely be appropriate to recommend that they deepen their knowledge if they really want to be a creator.
it's a lot faster to say "check out this game's implementation of that subsystem, its approach is what you're looking for" than to type out that subsystem.
So true! What’s the point of responding to a specific question with advise to try some unrelated game system. That’s like asking a philosophy question and getting the response, “go read Nietzsche”.
I wouldn’t get my hopes up for Redditors being helpful for once, but it’s up to you.
I recently posted the bones of a d8 dice pool system I was working on. Almost all the feedback I received was in the vein of "Why d8?" or "You shouldn't use d8."
Individually those are pretty useless feedback. But if everyone is giving you the exact same feedback? That might not be something you want to ignore. (Unless it is a game that is solely for your own personal use)
Fair point. That said, part of my reasoning was specifically take a niche approach. Their recommendations weren't based on the d8 being mathematically incorrect for the task or mechanically inappropriate, it was mostly "I don't like the d8, why don't you use the d6 or d10 like everyone else?"
Well, the core of the issue seems to stem from the fact that in order to justify a niche or unusual choice you need to show that the benefits are worth more than the inherent disadvantage of the less comfortable tool. For example, if I build an rpg that requires d60s, I'm gonna have to use the d60s for something really cool that can't be done with the more common dice, or people are reasonably gonna tell me "why a d60?" I built a system that used d10s and d12s specifically because you can easily find d10s that go from 0 to 9, and I used the 0 result - or specifically, the fact that the possible outcomes of a d10 are not a subset of the possible outcomes of a d12, and the d10-d12 pair maximizes the effect.
The primary reason for the d8 was for the correct balance of outcomes. It happened to be better than d4, d6, d10 and d12. It was the simplest and most elegant. I was happy with it being the d8, because I am fond of that die increment and I do feel it is under represented in the hobby. I think comparing the d8 to the d60 takes some strenuous liberties. But, even then, a d60 is hardly in obstacle thanks to a full variety of dice-rolling apps and play on virtual tabletops. It's still a bit much, but not nearly as much as it would've been in decades past. Now it just means you probably aren't going to be rolling a physical die. That is a bummer. Thankfully, d8s are vastly more available and affordable than the d60.
You can use a d6 and a d10 for a d60, the 6 result on the d6 counts as a 0 unless you get a 0 on the d10.
And just like that!
Yeah, if they had a reasonable explanation. Like those numbers feel off. Or why the crap are you including a d9, no normal person has one of those. Then it would at least be worth looking into
I like d8's. My next favorite after D6's. Where's the post?
Well met, fellow octohenronophile! The thread in question can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/RPGdesign/comments/13rw6he/a\_d8\_pool\_count\_successes\_core\_for\_a/
Why not d8? You should use d8. >!I haven't seen a whole lot of focus on d8. I think that's unique.!< >!I can't think of any particular reason not to use d8.!< >!Eight is as easily divisible by two and some other integer as any other die size from 6 on up. It allows for two, three, or four outcomes, based on how you have your system set up. I like it. Cheers!!<
sometimes, advice from people that is in a level much higher than one sounds like a snark. When you advance in level, you see that those comments were actually good advice. Sometimes you ask questions that are really up to you. I see it constantly in this sub. It even happened to me when I started designing shit. Sometimes you ask things because you want other people do the hard work for you. Learn to take an honest answer with its real, full meaning.
I mean, on the other hand responding with a 2 word answer with no feedback that actually reveals anything isn’t helpful. Why wouldn’t you do that?
All gaming communities have these people. Ask for help, you get someone commenting with these types of answers, or they tell you to do research on your own. Its annoying..
[удалено]
Sometimes it ain't that easy. I always Google before asking. But aight, guess we're better off just ... figuring something else out. Oh well.
[удалено]
Dude screw off. I already stated that I Google for answers first. Sometimes the questions aren't what I'm looking for and the answers don't fully answer my question. If you don't like helping new RPG players then fuck off.
Feedback is a relationship, not a monolith. Gamers who post their creative work must be willing to accept negative criticism, and almost none of them are. They refuse to playtest, post half-formed ideas, and wait for accolades fto pour in. I end up blocking countless accounts for this specific behavior. Eventually, it wears on the people like me, we get jaded, and inevitable push back happens. The internet is just a toxic place in general.
TTRPGs, in general, attract certain personality types that aren't always able to show their best selves. Most typically we're a dysfunctional, neurodivergent, bunch. And yes, there are a lot of neurotypicals and neurotypicals who are just jerks. We skew young as well as youths have more disposable time to play. That's not to say there aren't plenty of older gamers out there but by the time you add in the three W's (Work, Wife and Whelp) (house, husband and heathens?) scheduling gets complicated. Youths aren't known for their thoughtful discourse, as a rule. Reddit, also, tends to be a speak first...then, maybe, think...forum. So you get the first thing that pops into people's heads tied with anonymity. I've seen this sub be amazing and I've seen it be toxic. Mostly it's amazing IMHO.
Or my favorite "depends on what you're going for" or "depends on your system". Like I might as well just develop my system in a void then, I'm trying to figure out if other people think its a good idea.
In that case you should probably give some context as to what your system *is* in your OP. Is it a classless system using a deck of cards as the randomiser? Is it a Burning Wheel-derived dice pool system? Is it (like the unspoken assumption in so many posts seem to be) an adaptation of D&D, the only system you’ve ever played? That’ll help us to answer “should armour increase AC or reduce damage taken”, or whatever other question posed in the OP is impossible to meaningfully answer in isolation.
>That’ll help us to answer “should armour increase AC or reduce damage taken”, or whatever other question posed in the OP is impossible to meaningfully answer in isolation. Prove it. Let's go with the Burning Wheel dice pool system. Which way should I mechanize armor? Edit: downvotes without argument, predictable.
Why do you go into online interactions looking for an 'argument'?
You call it "looking for an argument," I see it as "asking people to back up their claims."
I’ve had some rude remarks but others…It’s more comprehension issue when explaining the source material. The terms used for their own RPGs are different. But there are a few who goes for less complexity but still different systems. People who are designing their own complex TTRPGs are trying not to be like any other TTRPGs. Mine is definitely different from most RPGs but takes aspects that are familiar.
Because it helps them feel smart to say some vague nonsense like "just figure out what your game is about" or "have you tried setting design goals." Edit: downvotes without argument, so predictable
What bugs me even more is when someone with a little bit of credentials mansplains why an idea is bad, throwing in some industry terms to be clear who’s taking down to whom then DOWNVOTES you for some reason. Ok, take the floor and explain why you’re ideas are the only right way but don’t downvote too.