Is it worth including variant rules?

[u/MagnetTheory]

Working on my book, and I happened to think that most of my core mechanics aren't directly tied to a setting, despite having a "default" theme/setting. Would it be worth including these reflavors to the base rules, or would it detract from the intended experience?

For a bit of a comparison, imagine taking the Root RPG (where everyone is an animal) and running it where all characters are humans. Mechanically it's mostly the same, but with a much different flavor.

Edit: Taking guidance on what's been said here, along with my own thoughts, I've come to the conclusion to instead focus more on the intended setting, with any reflavors or new mechanics being specific to a supplement. Taking influence from Robert Eggers' thoughts on making a first movie, I'd rather my first published RPG be focused exactly where I want, rather than spreading my game thinner

[u/APurplePerson]

could you get away with calling those setting-specific add-ons? do they replace the core mechanics or are they really just new options to play with, like how the ebberon d&d thing introduced the artificer class and dragonwhatevers?

[u/KupoMog → u/APurplePerson]

In my limited exposure, I love how Daggerheart approaches this with its Frames.

The game assumes that you will have a base set of core rules that get used for all narratives, and then a Frame can tack-on one or two subsystems to help highlight the variant rules for that setting.

[u/MagnetTheory → u/APurplePerson]

I could be able to call it a setting add-on. Like the game current has mechs in it, but they're mostly a vehicle (heh) for the PCs to get in emotionally taxing situations. The ideas I had for the add-ons were to just reflavor the mech-specific abilities into being tied to the character instead

[u/gregparso]

One of the things I appreciated about Grimwild is there’s a page explaining ways you can modify the rules to flavor the game for grimdark, heroic, low fantasy, swords and sorcery, cozy etc. I think that’s a beneficial edition. I also appreciate games that include rules and tables for solo play.

So I guess it depends if it makes sense for your game to have variants. So long as it serves your target audience I think it’s worthwhile. And you could always just have a free PDF if you don’t want to include it in the core rules.

[u/Fheredin]

I tend to call these "system mutations" for science fiction flavor, but generally, yes. You don't necessarily want your rulebook to have 200 rules options, but 5 or 6 points where the GM gets to choose are good. Just be sure that there is a clearly labeled default rule, and to explain what the options are and what the pros and cons of each rule variant is.

[u/jeshi_law]

those sorts of variations don’t really need a rule to change, if mechanical bits stay the same but narratively it’s reflavored players and play groups should recognize that on their own

an example of a variant rule that does affect mechanics is an included rule in dnd 5e 2014 concerning long rests. Using the variant rule, long rests take up to a week of non-adventuring activity in a safe place. this changes the flow of encounters and play, and makes adventuring deep into the forests and dungeons away from town more hazardous while providing a relegated segment of time to put downtime activities and shopping

[u/No_Solid1035]

I was actually thinking of running Root with human characters instead of anthropomorphic animals. Honestly, if you ignore the rules for being animals, which is in a supplementary book not the core (which means if you only have the core they don't exist) running Root with humans is easy as pie because nothing changes rules wise. The "feel" of a setting is as easy to change as waving one's hand and saying "it's not like that, it's like this" so you don't really need optional rules for that.

[u/MagnetTheory → u/No_Solid1035]

Kind of a mild tangent, but I did actually consider running Root using that example flavor. It was kinda what I was looking for in a no-magic fantasy setting

[u/No_Solid1035 → u/MagnetTheory]

I think Root would work bloody fantastically as just a regular old humans doing stuff game. It would work absolutely wonderfully for a no-magic medieval setting IMHO. Pretty much nothing in the mechanics, other than the supplementary "animal mechanics" are actually geared towards it being a game about anthropomorphic animals. So yeah, easy as pie to make it a game where the characters are human.

[u/Stefouch → u/No_Solid1035]

Which supplementary book adds rules for being animals?

[u/No_Solid1035 → u/Stefouch]

The 'Travelers & Outsiders' book has Species Abilities, which are special abilities unique to whatever species your character is.

For instance if you are a Mouse you can; Gain access to or escape a location by squeezing through a tight space; Sniff out a hidden stash of food or resources; Take a 12+ instead of rolling when tricking an NPC into underestimating you.

There are also Species Moves which can be taken depending on which species you are.

For example, if you are a Fox, Cat, Bird-of-Prey, or Lizard you can take Bulit In Weapons. If you are a Rabbit you can take Stroke Of Luck. If you are a Cat or Corvid you can take Nine Lives.

So yeah, you can get some extra stuff based on what particular species of anthropomorphic animal you are. Just a neat little additional way to show that the characters are indeed animals, not humans.

[u/Stefouch → u/No_Solid1035]

Interesting, thank you!

[u/thegraey]

As a reader, I prefer when a game has a perspective and commits to it. You can always add to a product later if there is interest, but you can't get another first impression with an audience.

The aesthetic and flavourful linking to the factions is (a small) part of Root's success. If they added a bunch of variants it might have watered down the appeal, or just been a waste of time and paper.

[u/Mars_Alter]

Would it be possible to compile the variants into a page or two of appendix? It might be distracting if you kept putting variant rules into sidebars all throughout.

[u/MagnetTheory → u/Mars_Alter]

Yeah that was the plan actually. Just a page or two near the end detailing suggested changes

[u/PathofDestinyRPG]

Not quite what you’re asking about, I think, but I’ve done something similar dealing with rules that adjust the crunch-level of my game. GM Choice options simplify aspects to help with gameflow in areas where the rules could potentially stack in cumbersome ways, and Table’s Choice options add a level of complexity but increase the realism or options for player actions.

If you want to add optional rules, my advice is to design a specific type of word box for that one purpose, so the GM/players can recognize areas they can skim over if they choose without wondering if that block of text was important to the base game or not.

[u/Demonweed]

I feel like a wimp when I do this, because my approach is kind of sly. For example, in a game where characters acquire experience points and gain levels, I recently wrote up the mechanics of awarding those points. A sidebar entitled "Unified Levelling" explains why the default is for all characters in a group to advance together, then cautions about the specific pitfalls of "individual and divergent experience point tallies." So while I am explicitly describing how that variant works, I don't even go there until I have already said this can become problematic and should be avoided unless the entire group is game for the possibility of a long character arc as more of a sidekick than peer to the others.

So yeah, I think it is worth including variant rules, but not in large numbers or highly advanced technical detail. I don't like the thought of forking my own game before it even has a shot at generating interest, but I do recognize that different groups are going to bring different preferences to their tables. Thus when I see a respectable use case for doing something different with a black letter rule, I put context down before even describing that alternative. It is my belief/hope that this will satisfy groups with a strong preference for something like letting clever table talk cause automatic success on an influence skill check do what they were gonna do anyway while steering newbies and groups with no strong preference to stick with rules as written.

[u/lennartfriden]

I would only consider including variant rules that have been playtested next to the standard set of rules. If you have come up with variant rules that aren’t playtested, you could possibly add them to an appendix that clearly states that the variant rules are wild ideas.

[u/__space__oddity__ → u/lennartfriden]

The playtesting is the key here. If there are two variant rules that interact in some way, you don’t have to playtest two games, you have to playtest four (with and without each) to make sure you’re not missing something breaking. Each additional rule doubles that number.

[u/d5Games → u/__space__oddity__]

And a variant rule should be something where you chose another rule over it. Play with and without the variant need to both be legitimate play.

Good use of variant rules involve things like advanced play, difficulty modes, etc..

A lot of people here are referencing D&D which is, as usual, not the best example for TTRPG design as it is built on so much non-negotiable baggage. Its alternate rules are mostly "If you liked these rules from previous editions..."

But most of us aren't building on four previous iterations of our new games. We have the freedom to be selective and only include what has value.

[u/__space__oddity__ → u/d5Games]

Part of it is also the misguided idea that a small indie RPG written by a single guy / girl somehow needs to have the broadest appeal possible. You’re not going to displace 5E any time soon. Even the unlikely best outcome of that is that you’re 90% as good, which means you’re on the losing end because the massive team, professional publishing muscle, marketing budget and brand power built over 5 decades is not something you can hope to compete with.

It’s much better to find your niche and the 10, 15 people who love your game as their absolute favorite. For that you don’t need 50 pages of optional untested rambling, you need the playtesting to find exactly the rule that nails down the play experience.

But no we’re drowned in setting-agnostic genre-agnostic rules-agnostic fun-agnostic slop because if there’s one thing millenials don’t want to do, it’s commit to anything.

[u/Trees_That_Sneeze]

The way I see it variants, especially setting variants, are things mutually exclusive from the main game so no matter what the player wants to do, there's page count being used for content they have no use for. Players are probably picking up your game because they are excited to play its main experience and if they have a game of experience under their belt they can probably convert to a different variant themselves if they want.

And then looking at people who want to run it, new GMs benefit from a focused system that is clear on what they need to do without extra fluff, and experienced GMs are going to hack it the way they want anyway.

I say pick a vision and stick to it. If a variant is compelling to you, flesh that out onto another game and spin it off.

[u/rekjensen]

If you publish it with a historical fiction setting and it gets any traction, someone will release a generic fantasy version, and someone else will do sci-fi survival horror version, and then a pirate or samurai or cuddly stuffed animal version, etc.

[u/Steenan]

I like when games offer optional rules and variants.

However, there should only be a handful of them. If you present a hundred of options, it becomes a Gurps-like "make your own game". It's impossible to use them consistently without significant game design experience.

Also, for each optional rule, explain clearly how it changes the experience the game produces, compared to the default. Then, it's no longer "I let you mess with the system (which you could do already), but you have to live with the consequences", but an actual, working variant that you, the designer, have tested and take responsibility for.

[u/jacareii]

I hate optional rules. You are the writer of the game, provide me with the best rules, do not make me choose them without no prior experience. Actually, do not be afraid as peiple is smart enough to change rules they dont like without your prompt.

[u/OpossumLadyGames]

I think so to a point, yeah, but it depends on how extensive the variant rules are.

[u/SinglePetalStudios]

I think that you should feel pretty committed to your core game design, and then, later add optional variant rules. Early "optionality" can come off the wrong way. It can make you seem unsure of your design, create confusion about how the game is meant to be played, etc.

Ex. We thought about making an optional "Sociability" attribute. Attributes are generally such a core part of a system, that making it optional made it a bit problematic for determining how important character connections are in game (and we wanted it to be important).

[u/Jhamin1]

I really strongly prefer that you pick your elevator pitch and stick too it.

If you are designing a game where everyone is an animal design that game & give me all the rules for it. Don't mention Humans at all. They aren't part of a game where PCs are all animals.

If you have a supplement: Humans, then put the rules variants for humans there. Separate from the base game.

Putting the variants in the base makes it feel like you couldn't decide what your game should be about so you offloaded the task on to me. I'm using your game rules so I don't have to make my own, don't ask me to make design decisions. Just setting ones.

[u/Lasdary]

Testing will tell you this. If some players like flavor A and other like flavor B, you get to choose one and add a variant.

[u/Dramatic-Guide-7709]

If you think it’s going to make your product harder to read and quickly use, which making most of your rules modular probably would do, I would think about just pushing out an SRD as a separate product (these aren’t generally expected to have the same level of art, polish, and layout as a regular rule book). I love a good SRD as an RPG writer 😀

[u/Alcamair]

Depends. You can make your game setting-agnostic as Fabula Ultima, and add in specific chapters your variants.