Talk:Role-playing game system

Incorrect Assumptions In Current Article

Someone needs to modify the content of the paragraph that reads:

Most role-playing game systems involve rolling dice in order to introduce a random element into the process by which success or failure in an action is determined. Usually, the total of the numbers on the dice is added to an attribute which is then compared to a difficulty rating, or (as in World of Darkness games) the attribute is used to determine the number of dice rolled, and the number of successes (die rolls above the difficulty rating) determines the degree of success. Some games use a different randomising element, such as Castle Falkenstein, which uses playing cards.

This is incorrect on many levels, ignores numerous mechanics systems, and tries to say too much all at once to describe how dice mechanics can work.

If a description of mechanics of dice are to be described, they should probably be described separately in each paragraph with examples of each in regards to systems that use them. The current paragraph is a bit of a muddle and does scan well.

Joeteller 22:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Joeteller

Done. Sorry for the delay. As noted below, there is so much more to say about this subject, please feel free to expand this and add sources. Joeteller has the right idea, this could be expanded to include a subtopic for each method of randomization. Canonblack (talk) 22:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

D6 mention in first para

I've removed the D6 mention in the first para because I could not discern what it was the author was trying to say about it.

Some, such as the D6 System, are refinements of those used in earlier games.

Some what such as D6? Refinements of what used in earlier games? I have nothing against D6, the sentence just didn't say anything clearly. The author seems to be confusing the terms "game", "game mechanic" and "game system". If D6 is an important example of some sort of trend or is really a refinement of an earlier game system, please replace the sentence with one that is more clear. Canonblack 20:26, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

The D6 System is a gaming system that bases all its dice rolls on the 6 sided dice, like the D20 system and the 20 sided dice. But its merely a refinement of older systems as stated rather than something completely original and seperate.Neorapsta

I don't think that answers the question. What is D6 being held up as an example of? Some dice systems? All dice systems? It needs to be more clear. How is D6 a "refinement" as opposed to something "completely original and separate"? A refinement suggests substantial improvement over earlier systems, but the passage doesn't explain what, if anything, has actually been improved. The passage is extremely vague, and we really have to question whether it needs to exist in the article at all, since it doesn't say anything very clearly about the system. 71.200.138.188 (talk) 18:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I just took it out again. It had been reworded by someone, but still didn't contribute anything meaningful to the paragraph. The paragraph describes the difference between generic and universe-specific games. A discussion of dice systems seems more appropriate to the following paragraph, but since this article is so stubby and the sentence says nothing concrete, the statement seems irrelevant. What I was getting at so long ago when I initially removed it was that there is much more to be said, and the sentence as constructed wasn't saying it. There could easily be an entire section added to this article, briefly describing the various dice systems (d20, d6, d100) and how they compare in terms of playability and complexity. And that discussion could be a subset of a larger section that contrasts dice versus dice pools. In fact, I would dearly like to read that article, but I don't think I possess the gaming experience to do it justice.

Just saying that something is a refinement of something else without explaining why it is an improvement is just meaningless. It reads like a padded sentence of empty verbiage. We aren't listing all systems here, we are mentioning a few as examples of concepts presented in the article; D6 isn't presented as an example, it's presented simply to mention that system and say nothing really at all about it. If there is a distinction to be made, make the distinction, don't just suggest it exists. Canonblack (talk) 22:35, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

List of Game Systems

Since most of the systems have been removed to unduplicate those mentioned in the nav-box, shouldn't the remaining random list of "game systems" be removed? It does't seem to represent anything in the hobby. Newimpartial (talk) 09:20, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

D&D Bias

There is a bias towards D&D, and D20 systems in general, in the article. I will revisit with more specific criticisms but perhaps sections on the major underpinning systems of games are in order? AevumNova (talk) 03:01, 3 July 2023 (UTC)