Quote from ChoirOfFire >>

Where should you personally draw the line between mechanics and theme?

I myself find a great deal of appeal in the way designers can teach you the overall setting, tone, and themes alongside the rules by tying them closely together.

I think being able to really easily fall into a niche is preferable to me.

 
Mechanics support theme.  Part of the issue, though, is "what is theme". As a term, it has a broad application -- there is a setting theme, there is an archetype theme, there is a spell theme and a species theme and ...

Archetypes, for class, are a mechanical theme, in D&D, in some ways of classifying it. Hence the idea of a "class system" versus a "skill system".

D&D generally adopts a "European middle ages fantasy" milieu. Into that Milieu go Archetypes (Classes, Races) that fit into that Milieu. They provide outlines that make it easier to pick up on the idea (Fighter, magic user, thief, elf, dwarf, human) because an archetype is something that is very easily grasped as a concept.

But Archetype systems are inherently limiting -- step away from the archetype and the class loses luster. Dilute the archetype, and it loses that value of being a niche that actually makes it easier to play and plan and figure out your character. Warriors fight, Wizards magic, Rogues sneak -- but what about warriors who magic, wizards who fight, etc etc

so there is immense value in having structured niches, into "things you are part of". And doing that helps folks to come to understand the world at a different scale than say, reading a 550 page book, lol.

But those archetypes do cause issues for those who want to step beyond them, or use a "variant" of them.

In your example, you talk about ow rage is a great mechanic, and can be used for power ups for magical girls.

Well, nothing says that it cannot be used that way. The mechanic is "archetype agnostic", or "theme agnostic" in a lot of ways. You totally can use the same mechanic for magical girls.  Perhaps instead of calling it rage, you call it Defiance. or Heart. or Love. Or Stupid Cat. The theme shapes the mechanic.

The rage mechanic is:

On your turn, you enter a STATE.BEING
While in STATE.BEING, you gain:

• Single Ability Score Advantage
• Use Single Ability Score with Bonus Table
• Resist Damage

This lasts 1 minute, ends-if X, #.TImes=Level.

So, you can set this up to work with any Ability score -- the limitations will come from that ability score, the archetype, and the milieu in which that whole archetype exists (the theme).

I have a big ass book that talks about a world. I have an even bigger book that talks about how to make a character. Both talk about the particular "kingdoms", and how the people are.  But the player stuff goes into more detail of a different sort, because the theme of the two books is different. But each of those cultures is an Archetype in and of itself. Backgrounds are an archetype. Weapons are all archetypes. Archetypes must fit the theme -- and the reason one uses archetypes instead of variants is that they do help define the setting the thee and milieu, since the choice of archetypes one uses are dependent on such.

I dislike the sub-class system they use because a lot of it dilutes the Archetypes -- the niches are "softer", archetypes of a kind that is less fixed, and a lot of that is why I have such a visceral reaction to "Forgotten realms", loo. it's too bland, too loose, too without real purpose, meaning and point, and without those things, the idea of archetypes themselves are rendered into just flavor, instead of something that has real meaning, mechanically.

As horrifically orientalist as it is, I use the original Oriental Adventures as an example of why Archetypes matter because perfectly captures the sharp distinctions in how a Milieu changes the Archetypes you have available to you. And that *is* an "old school" way of thinking, because it is still relies on a literary base of reference instead of a "video game" PoR, where the delineations of the "classes" are built around either a skill system/tree or that reduce the archetypes to a collection of skills, making it a skill base instead of an archetype, but still saying archetype.

But I also have way too many thoughts about this stuff, lol, and I can write, um, 300,000 words on the subject, apparently...

Quote from AEDorsay >>

But I also have way too many thoughts about this stuff, lol, and I can write, um, 300,000 words on the subject, apparently...

 
For some reason I want to read your dissertation.

Quote from Gnomarchy >>

Quote from AEDorsay >>

But I also have way too many thoughts about this stuff, lol, and I can write, um, 300,000 words on the subject, apparently...

 
For some reason I want to read your dissertation.

If I ever decide that my peculiar ramblings on the subject of game design theory are worthwhile (and somehow better or complementary to all that is already present, both as theory and practical application), I will be sure to link you.

Fair warning: I never went professional because I just kept learning stuff, lol and my day jobs paid better. But I do come at it from a place of Game Theory, which is a whole freakign field and has way too much rather cruel shit in it for my taste, and so it can resemble real life a lot.

Oddly enough, part of the reason I like Archetype systems is that they are less complex, and so result in less "decision paralysis" issues that are often far more common among skill basis games (although I don't always see the two as oppositional).

For now, I will simply bore folks to death with long posts where I hold forth on whatever the question that caught my fancy was, lol.

Quote from ChoirOfFire >>

Here's what's on my mind today: Where should you personally draw the line between mechanics and theme? For example, the Barbarian's Rage feature requires you to attack or get hurt, otherwise it ends -- that fundamentally limits the types of character concepts that you can tie to the Barbarian class. A more neutral version might strip that away, plus removing the reliance on Strength -- you could then more easily use it for more concepts (Sailor Moon, Kamen Rider, Winter Soldier, Moon Knight, etc) but if you wanted to use it for, well, a berserker fury, it wouldn't feel nearly as cool. You'd probably even end up adding some of those features back in.

 
Most of the things for me tend to be situational. A barbarian raging for example, might go a round where they could not attack and were not attacked - and their rage might end. But if the player gives me a reason ("These guys killed my blink dog!") - I would then say, "OK, the Barbarian Rage continues, so long as an enemy is within 30' of you" (which is enough to allow the barbarian to see an enemy in reach that they could attack).

QOTD:

How should treasure be generated?

So, I did make that little system for Hoards, quick die rolls being the trick to it, based on either level or CR (there are only 20 lines, lol), but I am curious how others figure reasure or would like to see it figured. 

As Adam Smith tells us, the treasure of the nation is generated when we specialize our workforce, accumulate capital, and trade freely with our neighbors.* /s

I still revert to the 3.5e treasure tables, which are filled with interesting art items, gems, and trinkets. The 3e Draconomicon had a really excellent appendix for generating a dragon's hoard which can be used for garden variety troves, nd had a bunch of example hoards. For 5e, chapter 4 of Fizban's has a similar feel.

For magic items, I generally hand pick them.

*Last year I acquired a PhD of my own.

Quote from AEDorsay >>

QOTD:

How should treasure be generated?

So, I did make that little system for Hoards, quick die rolls being the trick to it, based on either level or CR (there are only 20 lines, lol), but I am curious how others figure reasure or would like to see it figured. 

 I just come up on the spot. You killed a baron? 50 gold on him, and a diamond worth 20.

                      QUESTION OF THE DAY:

have you ever tried combining multiple premadr modules into 1 storyline to make a campaign? If so, what adventures did you use? How did you connect the adventures.

I got the idea for this question because it is what I am doing in a group that I’m currently trying to put together for a PM group, I won’t say cause I have no clue if my players are lurkers in this thread.

I’ve never done this because I’ve only ever really run one mini campaign, but I have had the idea to do this. Either stringing together a couple adventures from the anthologies into a campaign or two or more published campaigns into one big super campaign. Right now they’re just vague ideas though.

Quote from AEDorsay >>

QOTD:

How should treasure be generated?

So, I did make that little system for Hoards, quick die rolls being the trick to it, based on either level or CR (there are only 20 lines, lol), but I am curious how others figure reasure or would like to see it figured. 

 I handpick all my characters treasure. I like choosing which magic items they will find so that I can give them ones that they will use without accidentally breaking the game. 

Quote from AllMightyLordOfDND >>

                      QUESTION OF THE DAY:

have you ever tried combining multiple premadr modules into 1 storyline to make a campaign? If so, what adventures did you use? How did you connect the adventures.

I got the idea for this question because it is what I am doing in a group that I’m currently trying to put together for a PM group, I won’t say cause I have no clue if my players are lurkers in this thread.

 I have had the idea to combine Strixhaven and Candlekeep together. Strixhaven isn’t that great of a campaign but I do not want to waist my purchase of it.

It might also be cool to combine Storm King’s Thunder with the Theros setting.

Quote from AllMightyLordOfDND >>

                      QUESTION OF THE DAY:

have you ever tried combining multiple premadr modules into 1 storyline to make a campaign? If so, what adventures did you use? How did you connect the adventures.

I got the idea for this question because it is what I am doing in a group that I’m currently trying to put together for a PM group, I won’t say cause I have no clue if my players are lurkers in this thread.

 I have only done the Lost Mines of Phandelver part with my party so far, but I’m combining that with Shadow of the Dragon Queen.

Given that I rarely use published adventure content, I have no experience mashing them together insofar as I'm not tearing them down and salvaging for parts.

Quote from DrakenBrine >>

Quote from AllMightyLordOfDND >>

                      QUESTION OF THE DAY:

have you ever tried combining multiple premadr modules into 1 storyline to make a campaign? If so, what adventures did you use? How did you connect the adventures.

I got the idea for this question because it is what I am doing in a group that I’m currently trying to put together for a PM group, I won’t say cause I have no clue if my players are lurkers in this thread.

 I have only done the Lost Mines of Phandelver part with my party so far, but I’m combining that with Shadow of the Dragon Queen.

 That sounds really cool. I never thought of merging Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance.

I genuinely wish I had more bandwidth to learn about the sort of statistics and politics that go on in the conflicts among chess-heads... chessquires? Chesspians?

Quote from Gnomarchy >>

I genuinely wish I had more bandwidth to learn about the sort of statistics and politics that go on in the conflicts among chess-heads... chessquires? Chesspians?

Lol bro chess players are kinda crazy tbh. When people think someone's cheating, they talk about how something's "interesting".  And there's a lot of valid worry about cheating, but also an insane amount of paranoia.

Chess politics is even crazier than D&D politics lol. :)

Sounds like academic politics too. "This result raises questions." "We challenge the identification strategy used by Shmo et al." "The magnitude of these estimates are implausibly large." "We wonder whether this result generalizes."

And that's just the academic side, not to mention the policy side of people throwing around charges bias and fraud, whether substantiated or not.

Quote from BoringBard >>

Sorry if I'm not very active right now, there's a massive fiasco going on in the chess world that I wrote a blog elsewhere about (link if anyone wants to see ig but it'll be a bit confusing for people not active in the community).

Quote from BoringBard >>

Quote from Gnomarchy >>

I genuinely wish I had more bandwidth to learn about the sort of statistics and politics that go on in the conflicts among chess-heads... chessquires? Chesspians?

Lol bro chess players are kinda crazy tbh. When people think someone's cheating, they talk about how something's "interesting".  And there's a lot of valid worry about cheating, but also an insane amount of paranoia.

Chess politics is even crazier than D&D politics lol. :)

Quote from Gnomarchy >>

Sounds like academic politics too. "This result raises questions." "We challenge the identification strategy used by Shmo et al." "The magnitude of these estimates are implausibly large." "We wonder whether this result generalizes."

And that's just the academic side, not to mention the policy side of people throwing around charges bias and fraud, whether substantiated or not.

 
It’s so crazy it’s actually divided into men’s & women’s chess as if gender makes any difference whatsoever in an intellectual game like chess. They have integrated frickin’ obstacle course sports, but chess is segregated by gender?!? WTF?!? That would be like segregating bridge or poker or competitive video gaming by gender for crying out loud. It maké no sense.

Quote from IamSposta >>

 

It’s so crazy it’s actually divided into men’s & women’s chess as if gender makes any difference whatsoever in an intellectual game like chess. They have integrated frickin’ obstacle course sports, but chess is segregated by gender?!? WTF?!? That would be like segregating bridge or poker or competitive video gaming by gender for crying out loud. It maké no sense.

 
I only recently heard of this. Perhaps men produce more chesstosterone? But women produce more chesstrogen, so I could see it going either way. /s