Game Mechanics You Enjoy

[rapa-nui]

Basically, the things you do in a table top game (card, board, or RPG) that make you happy when you do them.

I assume, for some people, there is a great joy in simply rolling a d20, looking at the GM expectantly and then doing some basic arithmetic to tally up the damage. I expect that for some people, expertly maneuvering their character into positions, selecting the most devastating ability, and ensuring maximum synergy with their teammates ability also brings joy. For others, it's layering effect after effect, controlling the flow of battle or making oneself impervious to what the opposition is doing.

I ask, because I've noticed that when I play MTG, there are certain things that "never get old". Winning a counter war. Getting in for "exactsies". The physical action of drawing more cards. Casting lightning bolt. Activating birthing pod for value.

So, what do you actively enjoy doing in D&D or Arkham Horror or Catan or whatever? Casting Magic Missile? Rolling dice? Rerolling bad rolls? Math? Tactical positioning? Trading resources? Voice acting your character?

[Pedantic]

The single most satisfying thing I've done in a board game lately, is building a first or second turn port in Archipelago and selling the first round of pineapples to Europe for stupid amounts of money, while locking everyone else effectively out of the export pineapple market forever.

[OgreBattle]

Yu Gi Oh distilled the dick biggening thrill of countering one's opponent's tactics into a single image macro:


In MTG I love playing instants that turn the tide to your favor. In D&D4e the most enjoyment I got was using the interrupt/reactive abilities.

The problem with interrupts though is in a large group with multiple people there's always the chance of an interrupt happening so the DM has to ask or wait for players to tell them they do/don't do something.

[ishy]

Are you purely talking about combat mechanics?

Because the reason I like ttrpgs is affecting the world itself, like say building a wizard tower when you get wall of stone and permanent image.

[Aryxbez]

Voice acting your character?

Actually, yes, that's one of the major thrills I enjoy in these games, especially for DMing. It helps bring to life any character I have, even if looking back their dry dialog was generic.

I also enjoy fighting off multiple foes, especially if they're dropping in the same around gloriously. I enjoy the idea of combat, and thinking of cinematic scenarios that involved the characters (consistent within the rules of the given game). I also like the idea of protecting someone, jumping into the way of an attack to save an ally is an ability I've always liked (prestige class in Sword & Fist was cool idea for that). As well, I enjoy the fighting of important dudes, be it like defying the politics of an area, or taking down notable military ranked guys/bosses in an organization/evil-army. I also enjoy when an idea I come up with pulls through, or an endeavor is well liked.

[Mistborn]

From MtG I've always been a fan of Remand and I still maintain that the formats where it was the go to counterspell have been the best formats.

As for RPGs I'd say the best most interesting effects are those that can't be measured in DPR. Wall of " ", Solid Fog, Silent Image, stuff like that.

[Harshax]

From my RuneQuest 3 day, earning a POW improvement roll.

For those unaware:
Magic Potency and Magical Capacity were fueled by the same characteristic, POWer. It was also spent permanently to craft magical items. In order to improve this score, you had to overcome someone else's POW with your own, like a contested skill, but using the BRP Resistance Table and your POW as the Active Characteristic.

It led to terribly gamey actions and completely broken POW economy, but few things made me giggle with devilish glee than earning a few point of POW that I could spend on making magic items.

[silva]

I like the asymmetrical nature of Netrunner where one player is the corp trying to defend and push forward his agendas, while the other player is the hacker trying to infiltrate it and steal those agendas. Also, I love how the game feels like poker sometimes, with all the bluffing aspect.

I like the kind of freelance play that Shadowrun setting and premise evokes, where the group sit down, open the city map and say "so, how can we get money today ?", and go ahead to drive the game forward.

Very recently, I've been liking managing Plot Points (in the form of poker chips) in Marvel Heroic Roleplaying. This is the first game that made me look at this kind of currency and actually like it, as I've never been a fan of the concept before.

[MGuy]

Stuff I enjoy in table top depends on what I'm playing of course. In Trading Cardgames I like themed decks where I can actually stick to a theme with most if not all the cards without having to use major must have cards to pull off a win. Dark World, Six Sams, Gravekeepers, etc being some of my faves in Yugioh. Kithkin, elves, mermaids, etc for Magic. I've dropped Magic though for wallet related reasons.

Boardgames I just want anything that's engaging. I realize that's vague but there are a lot of boardgames that play completely different from one another and I really don't know how to summarize it in another way.

RPGs I enjoy mechanics that really get characters engaged in what's going on and empower players. I also like robust settings for inspiration.

[radthemad4]

This thread should probably be called 'Things you like doing in tabletop games' based on the examples.

My non exhaustive list in no particular order:
-Agency: The freedom to try pretty much anything and influence the setting
-Spectacle: fighting dragons, flying, teleporting, blasting, summoning, supplexing giant creatures, etc.
-Chargen: It's fun to examine all the options and pick and choose among them to build your own asskicker (or diplomancer or reality warper or whatever).
-Problem Solving: I really enjoy trying to figure out what in game actions I can take in order to achieve some in game objective (self imposed challenges and character goals included) using my character sheet and everything I know about the world and system. This includes stuff like combat tactics, bypassing obstacles, convincing NPCs to do stuff, etc.
-Exploration: Just seeing whatever's around the corner, in the next room, in the next town, etc. Replace with world building when MCing
-New Toys: Whether in the form of levelling up or loot, always nice to get more options
-People: the AI is amazing.
-Reading official sourcebooks, fan made
-Reading fan opinions, online homebrew, system mods, etc.
-Houseruling

[TheFlatline]

In BSG/The Resistance, the hidden traitor mechanic is a ton of fun. I never get tired of it. For me, in BSG the sleeper phase where your paranoia goes from theoretical (there *may* be 0, 1, or 2 cylons) to certainty (We now have 2 cylons among us) is one of the biggest gaming satisfaction moments I have.

[...You Lost Me]

It always feels really good to put down a card/effect that only lasts temporarily, then use it to full effect before its duration ends. Like if a card lasted 1 turn but had four +1/+1 counters and you took them off to put on your monsters before it popped.

[Prak]

From my RuneQuest 3 day, earning a POW improvement roll.

For those unaware:
Magic Potency and Magical Capacity were fueled by the same characteristic, POWer. It was also spent permanently to craft magical items. In order to improve this score, you had to overcome someone else's POW with your own, like a contested skill, but using the BRP Resistance Table and your POW as the Active Characteristic.

It led to terribly gamey actions and completely broken POW economy, but few things made me giggle with devilish glee than earning a few point of POW that I could spend on making magic items.

I actually disagree with this, a bit. Because I never worried about improving POW through character advancement. I played Mongoose RQ and MRQ2, and that was an arduous process (requiring you to bank xp equal to the stat to be increased). Instead, I had great fun in increasing my stats in ways the rules didn't intend, like when I played an enchanter and for my bennie* asked for a POW storage device and started buying POW from commoners to be recouped by selling enchanted items, or when my Timinint (spider person) sorcerer realized that the blood of some guy we just killed was highly magical, due to his rep and it not soaking into the ground, and so asking for a bottle, and bottling that shit. Or trying to, I think it lept onto his arm and absorbed into him, giving him the PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWER of direct rune control (I learned early to be very careful with the Infinity rune. Inf+Fire+Magic=BAD TIMES), as well as a tenent in my head.

So, in short, my favourite things in Runequest were telling the system to go suck it's own dick, and then forcing it to.

*My RQ gm gave players the option to request a bennie, an extra thing at character creation. Power level was limited only by what you could convince him of and make sure the others were ok with, and came with plot debt. At a certain point, i regularly requested Tap Power in my spellbook as part of my bennies. Specifically the version that actually raised your own POW.

[rapa-nui]

From MtG I've always been a fan of Remand

That's my favorite (competitive) card. It's pretty amazing in Modern tempo oriented-decks.

People: the AI is amazing.

Not quite a "game mechanic" or "game action", but I dig what you're saying.

It always feels really good to put down a card/effect that only lasts temporarily, then use it to full effect before its duration ends. Like if a card lasted 1 turn but had four +1/+1 counters and you took them off to put on your monsters before it popped.

That's a good example of unintended synergies combined with proper timing and sequencing. I think this is rewarding because you have to figure out the synergy, and then get rewarded by accruing rewards the opponent didn't expect. Giant Growth ain't always Giant Growth.

[Mistborn]

That's my favorite (competitive) card. It's pretty amazing in Modern tempo oriented-decks.

It's even better in Splinter Twin and back when it was part of the best standards it was an allstar in the major combo decks like Heartbeat and Dragonstorm. (man those were the days)

[silva]

Actually, yes, that's one of the major thrills I enjoy in these games, especially for DMing. It helps bring to life any character I have, even if looking back their dry dialog was generic.

I once valued this kind of thing. Nowadays I don't really care much. I mean, when the group is in the vibe to do it I find it cool and go with it, but most of times we just ignore this aspect altogether. For us. The in-character decision making is enough

[Koumei]

I like an intricate character creation system (or list-building system or whatever) that lets you play around with different ideas - the kind of game where, if you made a video game based on it, I'd end up making a dozen different characters and playing through that way.

For any kind of game, having the different options use the same rules but still play in their own way such that it feels different. 40k seriously could do worse than learning from DoW, for instance, in that the Dark Eldar lend themselves towards rapidly launching hit-and-run strikes all over the map and scouting the whole area to keep the enemy pinned down, while Orks reward "moving forward in a rapidly growing mob of doodz" and IG epitomise "Set up some turrets. Defend. Defend. Defend. Defend... BEHOLD THE BANEBLADE! FIRE ALL GUNS!"

Apparently, MtG basically does that kind of thing where picking a playstyle theme is generally the best thing to do, and each colour lends itself to a playstyle. Various "What the classes in D&D should have been" spiels by people here (Frank's being the most memorable of course) describe it for D&D.

For individual mechanics, I'm more or less okay with the idea of rolling some number of dice, possibly adding a number, and comparing to another number. More specifically, I prefer XdY+Z vs DC A, using degrees of success/failure and things like that, where the individual number rolled matters beyond simply checking for binary Pass/Fail.

[Sakuya Izayoi]

I like worker token systems like Carcasonne. At a pool size of six, it's just chunky enough to feel like I'm making meaningful decisions.

Resolving personal issues and story arcs for advancement, like in Tenra Bansho Zero or Chuubo's.

Variable Power Pools in HERO. If I ever run a game, I'm going to make them mandatory. Even if you're a Punisher expy and don't want to engage with the world beyond doing killing attacks on everything, you're still gonna have to load up your grimderp weapon vault with tricks, traps, and gadgets.

[silva]

Resolving personal issues and story arcs for advancement, like in Tenra Bansho Zero or Chuubo's.

I appreciate this kind of advancement concept too. MHR's Milestones are similar to this.

How does it work in Chuubo ?

[Mistborn]

Apparently, MtG basically does that kind of thing where picking a playstyle theme is generally the best thing to do, and each colour lends itself to a playstyle.

It varies, because most decks are two colors sometimes even more. Some colors have an inherent playstyle that stands on it's own, but others don't.

Mono-Red has a been a thing more often than not because cheap creatures and burn spells is always a decent deck. Mono-Green theoretically has had its Ramp into fatties strategy from day one but it rarely works Mono-Black has been a thing but that usually is the result of specific broken cards. Blue is the best color but R&D has put enough effort into "balancing" it that it has almost always need a partner in crime (though mono-Blue draw-go was once a thing). White has just never had it's own signature deck because it has always been a bit of a schizophrenic color.

Generally MtG decks are defined more by their strategic archetype than their color, so there have been Red control decks and Blue aggro decks.

[OgreBattle]

I love thematic decks in MtG. Some of my favorites were a soldier deck where all my instants and sorceries were commands and tactics, an elf deck filled with rangers and warriors backed by druids, and an evil cleric death and their ghastly minions.

WotC delivers theme+gameplay mechanics in such a slick, easy to digest way. I know that the Kor have a reverence for ropes and knots because they live in a world where roiling tornadoes often spring up to suck up anything not bolted down, I know that on one planet the vampires are openly the aristocracy but all the humans in tri-corner hats can't do much about it. I even know that there was a big undersea war between crab and fish people and the crab people won. I've never read any of the books they published, all I did was play the card game.

White's thing now is exiling cards and they really turbo-ramped up lifegain and tied in more cards that give you benefits when you play lifegain.

[rapa-nui]

I like an intricate character creation system (or list-building system or whatever) that lets you play around with different ideas - the kind of game where, if you made a video game based on it, I'd end up making a dozen different characters and playing through that way.

I think most people who design RPGs get this one right. I mean, even 4e, as boring as it was, had somewhat interesting choices for your initial character. In fact, if there's one great triumph for 3.x and Pathfinder, it's probably in this domain.

I like worker token systems like Carcasonne. At a pool size of six, it's just chunky enough to feel like I'm making meaningful decisions.

I've never played Carcassone, can you elaborate? Also, when one speaks of meaningful decisions, you don't just mean a binary win vs. lose decision, but rather more of an open-ended chess-like choice where your choices can change your entire stance many turns down the line, right? I think competitive games are always better when there's plenty of decision points like this that are non-trivial (but still have some decisions that impose low attention/memory burdens).

Resolving personal issues and story arcs for advancement, like in Tenra Bansho Zero or Chuubo's.

Sounds very interesting. Can you elaborate?

White has just never had it's own signature deck because it has always been a bit of a schizophrenic color.

This is true, but with the caveat that Craig Wecoe has based his entire ProTour career off: "Play small white dudes, bash, and use tricks to finish the job." It's actually a lot like mono red in that playin 2-power white 1 drops backed by anthem effects is never a bad deck. Occasionally, it has even has busted cards like Stoneforge Mystic or Brave the Elements.

[Hiram McDaniels]

I like the Talislanta/Omni System action resolution system.

The game has objective success thresholds and difficulty is expressed as roll penalties. Player rolls d20, adding bonuses and penalties, and compares the result to this table:



I like it because it includes degrees of success into a single d20 roll, and this includes combat. Damage is expressed as a static base value, which is modified by roll, so partial success on an attack nets 1/2 base damage value; full damage for success and x2 base damage for critical success.

I also enjoy Barbarians of Lemuria's career system.

I like the way FATE mostly eschews derived stats and focuses on the skill pyramid and Aspects instead. I particularly like the Magic System from Legends of Anglerre, a FATE based fantasy game.

[Sakuya Izayoi]

I've never played Carcassone, can you elaborate? Also, when one speaks of meaningful decisions, you don't just mean a binary win vs. lose decision, but rather more of an open-ended chess-like choice where your choices can change your entire stance many turns down the line, right? I think competitive games are always better when there's plenty of decision points like this that are non-trivial (but still have some decisions that impose low attention/memory burdens).

Carcassone is too random to be as deterministic as Chess, but you can plan ahead as there are a finite number of tiles to draw. Basically, you get six workers you can set onto various projects. Each turn, you place a tile down adjacent to an existing tile (creating the map over time). When you do this, you have the option to commit a worker to this tile. You cannot get the worker back until you've completed the project you've set it upon: a city is complete when it's walled in, a road is complete when every end terminates at a city gate, a farmland is complete when its surrounded by roads and walls, and a monastery is complete when it has 8 tiles surrounding it. Every player can place tiles onto a work on progress, and can place their own workers onto something someone else already has workers on, and share in the points for its completion. You're encouraged not to screw everyone over by placing tiles so that projects are impossible to finish, but at the same time, workers represent your ability to act upon opportunities, so you have to be cautious when and where you help your opponents.

Mostly I'd call Carcasonne a casual/party euroboadgame, but there are more complex euroboardgames that also use the premise of finite pools of workers (that I haven't played, so I cannot comment on them).

[Harshax]

I actually disagree with this, a bit. Because I never worried about improving POW through character advancement. I played Mongoose RQ and MRQ2, and that was an arduous process (requiring you to bank xp equal to the stat to be increased).

We're talking two different beasts along the same evolutionary path: Avalon Hill's RQ and MRQ. Honestly did not give MRQ, MRQ2, or Legend a chance. I didn't like the production values or the incompleteness of the MRQ rules when they first came out. It felt like a long con to be fleeced for content that once came in a single package. Aside from entry Traveler products, I have frowned on Mongoose games in general. It's a bias I'm sure has made me miss some gems. Mongoose can't be uniformly terrible, can they?

I know the authors who wrote all the Mongoose versions, also authored RQ6. From what I've been told repeatedly, there has been finer and finer improvements from MRQ to the newest edition and from what I see, RQ6 solves most all the problems I had with the older editions I'm familar with.

RQ3 didn't have experience points. To have a chance to increase POW, all you needed was to cast a spell such as Befuddle on an opponent who had at least/better(?) than 5% chance to resist your spell. It's been a while ...

I did like the concept of Runes as actual physical things you could integrate with and hope to steal that for a game, if I ever get an RQ6 campaign going.

Back to the topic on hand:

Another mechanic I really enjoyed, as a youth, was the char gen of Rolemaster. The idea that your class was a template which dictated how expensive skills were, but did not prevent you from learning any skill, was a welcome change to the rigidity of AD&D class system. I only played a handful of games, but I spent a summer making tons of characters.

I just realized I haven't run or participated in a lengthy campaign in over 5 years. I need to get my shit together and find a table.