Recent searches
Search options
What are your opinions about so-called "all-in-one" systems, such as Pacesetter's, from way back in the stone age? Personally, I find the idea of them more compelling than the implementations I've seen, so far. Do you use them? Do you like them? #rpgdesign #ttrpg
@tabletopic
They're technically interesting, but seem to be addressing a problem that doesn't really bother most people.
It's never troubled me to roll separately for damage (or other results).
Actually, it adds a little bit of extra drama to the table.
I have, however, messed around with modern all-in-one games like DoubleZero, which is very much inspired by the older James Bond RPG (possibly the first all-in-one?).
oddly I liked the Chill system but not the James Bond system. I think in Chill the whole thing seemed to trend it away from combat crunchiness (and that suited Chill and Timemaster) and that seemed be lacking something as it was missing in the James Bond system. Horses for courses I suppose. I wanted damage rolls in JB and didn't care in Chill.
@Printdevil @ng76 @tabletopic I think it helped that all weapons in Chill do the same damage. Unrealistic, but thematically appropriate for fighting the supernatural.
"I shoot the ghost" does make a realistic system a bit pointless.
I agree that it seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Yet, there's a certain simplicity, even elegance -- at least, in the abstract -- about such systems.
It's so tempting to design something like this, yet I'm not sure even I would use it. It might be good to create one just to get it out of my system.
️ 
@tabletopic They're really great in Chill and other Pacesetter games, one quick roll, look up, resolve most combat or other actions. The new Pacesetter (Goblinoid) games are the same.
The TSR ones were a little more fiddly, but at least they do give you result quality without too much work. MSH works OK, GW 3E was eh, SF Zeb's Guide was awful, added nothing to the game.
But I've never been tempted to remake them in my own designs.
@mdhughes I remember the Pacesetter system with some fondness -- Chill never bogged down during skill use or combat.
I think the question I have in my mind is if such systems bring something that's inherently missing or better from other more popular/traditional styles of systems.
Still ruminating...
@tabletopic @ng76 I actually like the Pacesetter system, but it really has too many exceptions, subtables etc. Most of the one table games did. The big advantage was the visual representation of results, I think, rather than any real simplicity.
@tabletopic I have acquired Cryptworld, Chill, Indiana Jones, MSH and Conan...so I guess I will find out. They are very intriguing and will probably play well at the table. However, are they solving a problem that needed to be solved?
@ukgamerspodcast That's my question exactly. Interesting idea. I suppose, if it's well-designed, it just comes down to personal preference?
@tabletopic I'm all in favour of a single universal mechanic to cover as much of "everything" as can reasonably be covered.
I am less enthused by always needing to look things up on the table, when a bit of scaling could make it "take roll + attack - defence, the higher the number the more effective".
Greg Gorden seems to have been a big fan of this (DC Heroes, Torg) along with exponential characteristics.