Hey /tg/... What defines a "Modern game", anyway?

>>54102997
Are you talking about a modern game as opposed to a traditional game, or are you talking about some kind of modern tabletop RPG game, like how modern games are full of reroll mechanics?

>>54103030
Modern /tg/ games, be it RPG, boardgame, or Wargame.

>>54102997
Not being a clunky piece of shit

Taking advantage of the 30+ years of experience of the others that came before you

>>54102997
Mirrodin and forward, not counting supplementary product (Eternal/Modern Masters, Commander, Etc).

>>54102997
A commitment to social justice.

>>54103170
This. It's designing a game that's fun to play, where the party members are balanced with each other, and every player can contribute in a meaningful way.

>>54103304
So, are PF and 5e not modern games then?

NWoD?

>>54102997
>What defines a "Modern game", anyway?
Some text in the core rulebook about how your GM can't kick you out of the game for making a gay character. Or at least that's the most prevalent answer you will get in this thread.

>>54103315
PF and 5e are games dragged down, bogged down, and held back by their legacies. The devs refuse to slaughter their sacred cows, and their games suffer for it.

File: thus of old thus of now.jpg (438KB, 600x742px) Image search: [Google]

438KB, 600x742px

>>54102997
Streamlined, for better or for worse at every level.
Also i find some uncanny blandness going on in them, in a lot of cases (while i agree that rules bloat is stupid) this streamlining removes the quirks and hearts of the games and i'm not sure if there is a happy balance.
>>54103304
>are balanced with each other, and every player can contribute in a meaningful way.
that's untrue, generally speaking i don't think i could think of a game that is modern that has good balance.
Because balance without making everything bland is rather difficult
>>54103347
folks generally aren't making these games ex nihilo. Even things with a new spin are running away from the old school mechanics.
PF carries their rules as much as say, savage worlds rejects it.
Warmahordes continues it's system on as much as AoS i rejects it's legacy (the latter's small rul;e set appearing to a reaction to the perceived complexity of the former)

>>54103347
5e is doing a way better job than PF (who literally refuse to change the core functions of the d20 system).
5e has its problems, but it shows that Wizards is willing to make some changes for the better. They've got a ways to go, maybe by 7e well have the best fantasy RPG ever Just kidding RQ6 already exists.
Pathfinder is a lost cause though. Better to let its fans have their fun and just advise new players against it.

File: Shack got Stuffed up.jpg (90KB, 500x323px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 500x323px

>>54103304
I'd say that honestly is the difference, and the commonality between all those differences is that the designers are simply more self-aware. When RPG's games first came out, spawned as a sort of small-scale wargame, you might reasonable describe them as "fantasy play-pretend with randomization." Today folk could easily describe them all as "improvisation games with more in-depth rule sets to evince a particular setting." People know these days what the strengths of these games actually are, and focus on creating a holistic game where mechanics actually work together, rather than writing the material and attaching mechanics haphazardly.

>prominent metagame mechanics
>reduced granularity, often because of mere association with high complexity
>eschews exact tracking of in game resources
>avoids the d20 die
>often tries to encode a specific narrative progression
>focused on genre instead of settings

>>54103430
>balanced with each other, and every player can contribute in a meaningful way.
>that's untrue, generally speaking i don't think i could think of a game that is modern that has good balance.

The point isn't "every character could one-shot every other character with equal chance to do so", it's "one character doesn't have the ability to replicate the main abilities of the other characters with a perfect rate of success". You know, the "thief has to roll to pick the lock, Wizard can just cast a spell to automatically open the lock" problem.

In older editions it didn't come up as a matter of imbalance much because casters were pretty gimped and had to be very conservative about when they used their spells.

File: 1440087951647.jpg (38KB, 348x346px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 348x346px

>>54103716
This is my main complaint about some games, especially D&D and its derivatives. The rules for less than half the classes take up more than half of the core rulebook, and said classes can replace the entire rest of the party with just some clever spell selection. It's not even a loophole or unintended exploit, it's right there in just the core rulebook. Just take a quick nap and glance over your spellbook, and you've changed up your spells enough that you can bypass challenges with some finger-wiggling and an incantation that other classes were built around overcoming.

>>54102997
>What defines a "Modern game", anyway?

Having being created relatively recently.

>>54102997
A game having a setting taking place in some version of the 1900s up to now. Maybe 1800s to now, technically.