Does anyone run just one system anymore?

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com

Ossian

Legendary Pubber
Joined
Nov 10, 2018
Messages
247
Reaction score
991
Do any of you run all your games using the same system?

I remember the days of yore, when my friends and I all played just one RPG. We all had, and knew, the rules.

Fast forward to today, and there’s a plethora of great games. You start reading one and getting ready to run it and BAM! another new shiny distracts you. And sometimes you’re like, “hey friends try this awesome game,” and they’ve never heard of it and can’t be bothered to buy yet another rulebook and learn the rules.

I’ve seen in another thread that when people list their favorite game, they list several. Does anyone ‘master’ a system anymore? Do you feel you’ve mastered several systems? Do you see any value in learning less systems?
 
Good question. We play different systems all the time. I have a hard time getting some of my players to go back to a system we've run before actually.
 
Like others here I like to try new systems as well as some classics. I tend to prefer when the ruleset is designed specifically for the setting/genre/concept of the game.

I also prefer lighter systems so 'mastering' a ruleset isn't really a priority for me personally.
 
Yeah, when I got into RPGs in the mid-90s, we were playing all kinds of games. If anything, we narrowed focus during the d20 boom (well, I didn't) and more recently I tend to run more Savage Worlds than anything else, but I've never been a one system guy.
 
Yes, I usually run RuneQuest.

Occasionally I dabble in HeroQuest/QuestWorlds, but mainly at conventions. My last HQ game was 15 years ago.
 
Yeah, I don’t see the need to stick to one. Different systems offer different experiences or modes of play or whatever.

I’ve used the same system for a few different games recently (Forged in the Dark) because I like it a lot, but I don't want every game to play that way.
 
Yep. Been running the same system for 21 years

I'll take dalliances with others, but I found/molded what works exactly for me and does exactly what I want.
 
I almost immediately got into multiple systems. Even at the height of GURPS and Hero I had no interest in doing all my gaming with a single system.
 
Run, yes only run my own for pretty much the last 20+ years (although it has evolved)....will play in any number of systems, really more about the referee than system to me when play.
 
I find as much fun in seeing how each system address or impacts each premise, as in actually playing the games, so I like to read and play lots of them. I just don't have the priviledge of time anymore, so these days I favor light- to mid -crunch only.
 
Been playing games for roughly 30ish years, and my groups have never been "one system" groups. We've always played a lot of different games.
 
No, I've never been in a gaming group in which we only played one primary system or even one primary GM, let alone campaigns that carried on for years. You play a game for a while, then when the current GM signals things are coming to close, any one interested in running the next game pitches their game ideas and whichever pitch gets more traction is what we play next.

That said at any one point in time I only a small range of games I'm prepared to run and I haven't a bought and ran a new set of rules in something like 5 years or more. The last one would been either Cartoon Action Hour or Owl Hoot Trail, both of which are excellent games but pretty niche.
 
I'm in the "I never stuck with one system in the first place" camp. There are certainly systems I return to time and again (like Traveller), but I neither see the point nor the attraction to "system mastery".
 
I'm in the "I never stuck with one system in the first place" camp. There are certainly systems I return to time and again (like Traveller), but I neither see the point nor the attraction to "system mastery".

I'm not sure what system mastery of an rpg ruleset would even look like.

Seems like a notion borrowed more from video games than rpgs to me.
 
I'm not sure what system mastery of an rpg ruleset would even look like.

Seems like a notion borrowed more from video games than rpgs to me.

Totally with you. Though I have heard (or read) other people talk about it as a concept before. I sort of mentally translate it to mean "munchkin" for my own working definition, but I'm not precisely sure.
 
I'm not sure what system mastery of an rpg ruleset would even look like.

Seems like a notion borrowed more from video games than rpgs to me.
lol n00b, fairly obvious you never unlocked the "Heir to Stafford" achievement in Runequest. Just read the combat section twice outside Beloit College. You'll need the "hardback copy" DLC.
 
I'm not sure what system mastery of an rpg ruleset would even look like.

Seems like a notion borrowed more from video games than rpgs to me.

I mean ‘system mastery’ from a GM standpoint. You know the rules so well that you never need to look anything up, even if it’s a crunchy game.
 
I mean ‘system mastery’ from a GM standpoint. You know the rules so well that you never need to look anything up, even if it’s a crunchy game.

The only crunchier system that is true for me is D&D 1e/2e/5e. Some systems like WFRP and RQ seem intuitive enough I think I could run them without reference pretty easily, it is only the piercing rules in RQ I ever have trouble recalling.
 
I suppose in the days where the people around me played just one system, it was when we were playing D&D or later Pathfinder. I suppose once you get off that boat, you see there’s a sea of games out there.
 
Yeah. My problem, I guess, is that WEG D6 Star Wars and Werewolf: The Apocalypse were my first and second games, respectively. Then I picked up (and fell in love with) Witchcraft. I "found" (A)D&D quite a bit later when I joined an already-established group. Once real life took its toll on that group, I moved on to Traveller and other games that caught my eye. At the time, I actually think I was looking for "one game to rule them all", but in the process found I got really jazzed about trying out new things once or twice a year, and it just kind of became "my thing".
 
Having played D&D 3.5, 4E, Pathfinder, 5E, and a few OSR games all over the last several years, it’s honestly harder to keep the rules straight among versions of the same game than it is ones that work differently.
 
I’ve seen in another thread that when people list their favorite game, they list several. Does anyone ‘master’ a system anymore? Do you feel you’ve mastered several systems? Do you see any value in learning less systems?
I have long fixed this issue by running the same setting. Sure some systems take less work than others. But in the end how the setting is how it works regardless of system. Some go into greater detail other lesser detail. But since all of them require that the players describe what they do as their character it works out in the end.

So in end it is not a system I mastered but a setting.
 
Do any of you run all your games using the same system?
No, but I've mostly limited myself down to 3 systems:
  • MRQii/Legend for Fantasy
  • Cepheus Engine for Science Fiction
  • Call of Cthulhu 5.6 for ... CoC and general horror.
I'll look at other systems casually, and I'll play about any system. But I generally only design and run campaigns around those 3 systems, because I like them quite a lot, and they do the job well for me. I don't want or need to keep up with edition changes, or advancements in rules technology.

I've owned plenty of systems over the past 4 decades, and played many of them. But I'm rarely motivated to own and learn new systems. I don't have the time for that sh!t anymore, and never have really been a rules junkie. Generally, I find rules discussion to be boring.
Do you see any value in learning less systems?
The value that I find is that I don't have a need to obsess about rules systems, and I can spend that time obsessing on campaign construction, prop creation, and session planning. You know... the fun stuff. At least, I find it far more fun than worrying about system mechanics.
 
I'm not sure what system mastery of an rpg ruleset would even look like.
As Ossian Ossian said, it's a GM knowing one system extremely well. Backwards and forwards; all the obscure rules; rarely needing to look anything up. Taking one system and putting it through its paces, campaign after campaign.

I have a friend, who for the past 8-ish years has only run GURPS 4e. He's used it for at least 6 campaigns. For him, there is no question about what he's going to run next, nor any hand-wringing over the system to use. He's pretty much locked-in, and only focuses on campaign development. I envy his dedication to one, universal system and absolute disregard for anything else. I don't have that kind of commitment but I try to restrain myself.
 
Do any of you run all your games using the same system?

I remember the days of yore, when my friends and I all played just one RPG. We all had, and knew, the rules.

Fast forward to today, and there’s a plethora of great games. You start reading one and getting ready to run it and BAM! another new shiny distracts you. And sometimes you’re like, “hey friends try this awesome game,” and they’ve never heard of it and can’t be bothered to buy yet another rulebook and learn the rules.

I’ve seen in another thread that when people list their favorite game, they list several. Does anyone ‘master’ a system anymore? Do you feel you’ve mastered several systems? Do you see any value in learning less systems?

My experience was kind of the opposite. I started in 85 and we played everything under the sun. We did have our go to games (D&D was always a mainstay) but we were always running other games here and there, and there were always GMs who liked to run games like GURPS, Runequest, etc rather than D&D. I didn't really experience the running just one system thing till the d20 boom.
 
Having played D&D 3.5, 4E, Pathfinder, 5E, and a few OSR games all over the last several years, it’s honestly harder to keep the rules straight among versions of the same game than it is ones that work differently.
Ain't that the truth. I've played every edition of D&D since the 70's and DMing 5th is mostly fine but occasionally jarring because it cleaves so close to other editions but doesn't do it exactly the same. I get stuff wrong more than if I didn't have years of experience with D&D.
 
No, I try to get as many new systems/games in as I can these days, although I'm less inclined to go with generic systems over ones tailored to a setting. A universal system would have to have something that really grabs my attention to pull me away from Genesys, Savage Worlds or AGE, but a system built specifically for a setting is an easy sell.
 
No, because I don’t game in a vacuum and, even though I might like to just play my favourite game it is normally a negotiation across the table for each participant to get a chance to suggest and play other games that appeal to them.
 
My goal over the past year or so is to find the right game for other members of my group to run. I wind up GMing like 90% of our games, and I’d like to just play again for more than a one shot.

All my players are capable of GMing. It’s just a matter of convincing them to do it. And I think finding the right game will help.

One if my friends is into conspiracy and Cthulhu....so I ran a couple of sessions of Delta Green to get him curious.

Another one is really into superheroes, so I’ve been looking through different options there. Worst case scenario, I’m almost positive I can convince him to run Marvel Super Heroes if no other system presents itself.

And finally, my sci-fi guy. I ran some Alien. Next I’ll be doing some Mothership. Maybe some Stars Without Number at some point because Alien and Mothership kind of scratch the same itch in a lot of ways. We’ll see.

I’m shooting for all three, but I’d be ecstatic if I got to play in at least one solid campaign between them all.
 
Do any of you run all your games using the same system?

I remember the days of yore, when my friends and I all played just one RPG. We all had, and knew, the rules.

Fast forward to today, and there’s a plethora of great games. You start reading one and getting ready to run it and BAM! another new shiny distracts you. And sometimes you’re like, “hey friends try this awesome game,” and they’ve never heard of it and can’t be bothered to buy yet another rulebook and learn the rules.

I’ve seen in another thread that when people list their favorite game, they list several. Does anyone ‘master’ a system anymore? Do you feel you’ve mastered several systems? Do you see any value in learning less systems?
So most people here and I just suspect on online forums outside of a particular company are going to be omnivores regarding games. It just takes up a larger part of our lives and at some point most of us try more or tire of just one system. I'm an omnivore. More! More! More!


That said I know where you are speaking from. When D&D 3.0 came out I was so happy to get back in to RPGs and the idea of learning just one system usable across a range of well supported genres sounded awesome. I dived into system mastery and loved it. It was a good system for building characters to match an idea.

Mostly though my various groups just move on to different settings and systems and don't really care about the cost of learning new. I'm getting to where I'll learn new systems but I'm less in love with complicated.
 
I really wish I could. I've read basically all of the generic systems, played quite a few, and I hate them all. I would love to play a bunch of different settings all in the same system, and never have to learn new mechanics again. That's the dream.

I really only play fantasy / horror fantasy, modern horror / urban fantasy, and space opera / Scifi horror though. So it would probably need to just do those things well.
 
Does anyone run just one system anymore?

I've known some grogs that only play the same old things but they're not the kind of people I typically game with any more.

I'm not sure what system mastery of an rpg ruleset would even look like.

Seems like a notion borrowed more from video games than rpgs to me.
I mean ‘system mastery’ from a GM standpoint. You know the rules so well that you never need to look anything up, even if it’s a crunchy game.
I would say that system mastery is more than simply memorizing rules; I feel like it's an understanding of the big picture and design philosophy behind the rules. Running the game takes less mental bandwidth. You can alter and create rules at a high standard as well as recognize quality work.
 
Generally, not really into generic games either. I prefer there to be at least an implied setting. Even when I tried getting into GURPS, a few years back, I tried to tie it to the Infinite Worlds supplement as a universal setting.
 
I don't know from system mastery. From my perspective, I think there's simply a point of familiarity past which system simply doesn't matter - at that point you are developing your skills as a GM that have nothing to do with the system.
 
I feel like all the versions of D&D that I gravitate towards are pretty similar: B/X or OD&D clones, simple and dangerous and easy to teach. There are a lot of versions of those that I like but they all feel like basically the same game: DCC, White Hack, S&W, OSE, Maze Rats, Labyrinth Lord, Lamentations, etc. The sorts of adventures that I like running are all basically compatible with these games.

That's the closest to running just one system for me, as I copy and paste the bits I like from all these and slowly make my own version.

But yeah even so there are too many others to play in other genres.
 
Thirty years ago when I had less disposable income and there were fewer options, I pretty much ran everything on Dragon Warriors.

Now in the past 4 years or so I have runned 6 different systems, some for only 3 to 6 sessions.

The systems I use for most of my games now are 5E and Savage Worlds, because they seem to be designed to cover most things. Where I choose to use other systems, it is usually because they are tied to a specific setting which I had a fondness for: Lone Wolf, Fighting Fantasy, and Dragon Age.

I think system mastery is a good thing, especially for rules which are comprehensive and have many optional rules which allow a GM to customise a game to his needs.

What is also good I think is setting mastery, where the GM and his players are familiar enough with a game world that they can base multiple campaigns in the same world, exploring perhaps different areas or periods of history in it.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top