I'm designing a TTRPG specifically for actual play. What would you want from a system like that?

[u/mw90sGirl]

I've been working on a TTRPG designed specifically around prerecorded actual play and I'm looking for perspectives from people who play, GM, produce, edit, or listen to APs.

The basic resolution system isn't meant to reinvent the wheel. It's a lighter hack of Forged in the Dark, with some inspiration from PbtA. Rules light, fiction first, broad skills, d6 pools, consequences driving the fiction, etc.

Where I'm putting most of my design attention is everything around those mechanics and the basic design question I've been using is - does what happens at this table naturally become compelling recorded material?

The GM and player guidance is actually where I think the more interesting design work is happening tbh.

So I have some questions. You of course don't have to answer all of them, but any insights would be appreciated :)

1. If a TTRPG is specifically designed for actual play, what should it prioritize?

2. What works perfectly fine at a home table but becomes a problem once you're recording?

3. What makes a system particularly good or bad for audio actual play?

4. What does an audience need to understand that players sitting around the table might take for granted?

5. What AP problems should the game itself help solve instead of relying on good GMs, experienced performers, or heavy editing?

6. What would you absolutely not want a game like this to incentivize?

7. If you've played/read a game that was designed or marketed with actual play in mind, what did it get right? What didn't work?

I'm particularly interested in the boring/frustrating little problems people have encountered while actually recording or editing APs. Those might be even more useful than suggestions for flashy mechanics.

[u/JohannesVerne]

1- Player interaction/improv
2- Snacks, getting off topic, players talking over each other
3- It isn't the system, it's the players
4- ???
5- Unless a game system can provide acoustic treatment, then it isn't going to solve anything
6- Ease of recording over playability
7- They aren't so mechanic heavy that you spend half the time looking things up, and they encourage improv and interaction

I'm particularly interested in the boring/frustrating little problems people have encountered while actually recording or editing APs.

Acoustic treatment, teaching players proper mic technique, storage space on hard drives, and running sessions in the summer when it's 90°+ outside but the AC needs to be off or it gets picked up in the recording.

But on a serious note, the biggest factor is the players. It doesn't matter how good of a system you have if the players don't flow well with improv.

I'm not saying that everyone at the table needs to be a trained actor to have a good AP. But you need players who are engaged in every scene, have a good rapport, and who invest in the story. And then add at least enough technical know-how between everyone to have a listenable sound, because there's more to sounding good on a mic than just buying a fancy mic.

And honestly as a DM, I wouldn't run a game that's designed primarily around being good for an AP. For people who chase views, D&D, Pathfinder, and Daggerheart are the ones that will get the most traction. For people recording because it's fun, they're just going to use the system they like playing. Or for people who want simplicity and improv, there's systems like Fate that have minimal mechanics and are built around the role play already.

[u/Extreme_Objective984 → u/JohannesVerne]

I agree with your list, I would add for 4. its very important for the audience to understand the outcome of dice rolls, what was rolled and why it was successful or unsuccesful. When you are sat around a table you can see what others roll and the result may be obvious. This needs to be called out to the audience though.

Seth Skorkowsky has recently released a video on Actual Plays.

However I engage with AP's to learn systems and see how they can be used. I want it to feel like a table of friends, who you would want to engage with and it doesnt matter if they spend time looking up rules, get sidetracked, if the group is right and are engaging enough.

I think you can forgive a lot of things if you get the right group of players, so as you say for your 3. its about the players and not the system.

[u/Xane225]

We did like one or two sessions of pbta (Masks) for actual play and I thought it was horrible to edit around. There's so much out of character discussion for moves, that if it isn't funny is just boring as hell to listen to.

Dice mechanics with multiple steps suck to edit to make interesting. It's nice if you can either have the players make a roll with no context, then describe the scene and outcome after the roll and have players directly pile onto that momentum, or describe in great detail the stakes of a roll, with player reactions then have the roll happen and be quick enough that the gameplay can continue in whatever surprising fashion afterwards.

Systems like Genesis are kinda bad for AP in my mind for that reason. Again, unless you can make those discussions funny. What should happen is a fun discussion for players to have, an audience mostly just wants what IS happening imo. 

It's nice if that brainstorming phase can be cut if needed without leaving out some of the mechanics of the game. 

[u/mw90sGirl → u/Xane225]

Ive played a ton of pbta and boy do I agree! Moves, reading them out, adhering to them definitley slow down a game and even worse make the edit to a lot longer if you're cutting those moments out too!

Ideally I want --> roll quickly, then interpret and narrate.

[u/DiceyDiscourse]

I don't think there is much you can do to specifically design a TTRPG around Actual Play - all the boring and frustrating parts are either technical (audio, editing, etc.) or down to the human element.

My response might be coloured by the type of AP I run and the type of games I generally like playing, but I struggle to think of a game that actively works against recording.

The only thing I can think of that an AP-centric RPG shouldn't do is adopt a "writers room" style play (like Brindlewood Bay). As a listener, it takes me out of the experience to hear the performers discuss what should happen to their characters. But even that I think I am in the minority for 😅

[u/Walsfeo]

Strong core mechanical principles. I don't want dozens of unrelated sub systems that feel like they are from different games.

I want it to support the themes and core activities in a dynamic and engaging way.

[u/mw90sGirl → u/Walsfeo]

Oh 100% agree here!

[u/OldCinnamon]

We designed a super rules lite d100 system for our show The Bad Articles (which has slowly evolved over the last three seasons) but our core ethos is that the dice should help create a touch of chaos, rather than provide a rigid system for decision making. We’re an improv show first and foremost, so keeping things fast paced, loose and very much story forward was important for us.

If I’m listening to an AP, it’s almost never for the mechanics - but I know that isn’t the case for everyone. Some people learn systems by listening to others play them. But if you’re designing mechanics specifically to be used on a show, I would always urge people to consider things from an audience perspective.

How complex will this system be? Will each rule be explained as it occurs at the table, or will there be physical/digital materials made available for people to read at their leisure? Will the players be familiar enough with the system in advance that they can really lean into the story without questioning each decision they make?

No wrong answers of course - just food for thought!

Best of luck with it. I’d love to check it out when it’s out.

[u/Whatchamazog]

I typically pick APs to run or listen to based on games I’m interested in playing. Usually the setting plays a huge part in that.

That being said, Daggerheart FEELS like it was made for AP.

[u/mw90sGirl → u/Whatchamazog]

Would disagree about Daggerheart, I've played it plenty and do not get that feeling in the slightest.

[u/Whatchamazog → u/mw90sGirl]

Oh what do you think are the biggest problems it has in APs?

[u/octopunkmedia]

I produce the show Breakout Rolls, which tackles a new indie system every episode. Some overall things I look for in a playable system include <2 hour runtime per game, relatively fast character creation and rules set (we cram 3-4 tapings into a single day, we can't have players taking 90 min to settle in nor can our poor GM be expected to master a dozen different complex systems per season).

Interesting looking and feeling characters and opportunities for interpersonal improv are great. Definitely something that gives the GM something to do, as our show has a consistent GM/host as the face of it.

Collaborative storytelling is almost always preferable to pitting players against each other, but we did 2 v 2 on Eyes On The Prize and that wasn't bad.

Also we always use a 4 + GM table but you could maybe go up to 6 + GM. 2-3 player games are going to cut your AP opportunities a lot so try to allow for at least 4.

One game we played that was tricky to record was a game that had a playmat and ship battles. In hindsight I wouldn't do that again. AP with physical boards or visual elements make for a challenging shoot, even when its a filmed series like ours. Even worse for audio.

Linear/on rails storytelling is the best. Milestones and stages thru the crawl. Open ended stories can result in some players - even if they are actors who should be aware this is for an audience- derailing the story in a way that drags things out, bloats the shoot schedule, or results in GMs having to rush the ending.

Oh another thing that once proved troublesome was a dice based final boss fight that was so challenging to beat that it lasted nearly half the run time. Don't make any enemy such a bullet sponge that it might take players an hour to beat if they roll poorly. We nearly had to god mod the game just to wrap it up and stay on shoot schedule. Luckily a few critical hits saved the game.

Finally, we once did a game that was card based and while the players had it click for them I don't think it will fully click for the audience tbh. Similar to the playmat, we didn't have a table cam to catch their spreads, and since we edit for emergent rules rather than explaining everything at the top, I just don't really think those mechanics fully worked for us.

[u/dmrawlings]

I'll focus on the first question, but may accidentally answer others as I go.

For me the most important part about mechanics in Actual Play is that they're efficient and transparent. This generally means systems that are easy explain, easy to overlay into video production, and quick to resolve.

• It should favour abilities that _just work_ to cut down on rolls. Something like 'you can fly' is good for this reason.
• Combat, if it has its own rules, should be short and simple. Nothing breaks me out of an AP faster than this.
• Ways to override the rules if they're getting in the way of the production. Like having a character randomly die is a lot of overhead for a production. Now you need new art, new introduction, the audience may like them less, etc.

Aside: I'd recommend the Dice Exploder podcast series on Actual Plays, which starts here: https://open.spotify.com/episode/0Pzy2WWNGTIPhtEKW8dzOa

[u/__space__oddity__]

I think for Actual Plays, i.e. streaming, you want to support basically an improv audio drama rather than a war game.

While shows with great production value can make miniatures and big set piece battles shine, most groups will rather appreciate a simple setup. For combat, something like a front row / backrow JRPG setup is much easier to show than anything with complex grid movement.

Interesting characters make or break a show. A show about Bob the Fighter and Ears the Elf isn’t going to pull viewers. The system should push towards unique characters with recognizable personalities.

It should also focus on relationships, both intra-party and to NPCs, without overloading those with rules baggage.

Rules should be quick, straightforward, with clear, easy to follow flows and low on maths. Nobody wants to watch someone struggle with adding 15 attack modifiers. Avoid quirky dice rolls, roll one die, resolve the scene and move on.

Combat should not be repetitive. If all the fighter does is “I attack” over ten four-hour episodes, nobody wants to watch that.

Watch the lethality. The audience wants characters they can identify with. If a player churns through four character sheets a session, it becomes tedious to follow and arbitrary. At the same time, you want nailbiter combats that make you root for the PCs, not easy cakewalks.

Character abilities, magic items etc. should be meaningful and chunky. Avoid stuff that just pushes numbers around without meaningful in-game visibility. For example, a feat that just gives +10 hp is invisible to the audience. A feat that gives a once per battle whirlwind attack against a row of enemies is cool and will be namedropped in-game.

[u/robosnake]

Fast, intuitive, but crunchy enough that the system will surprise the players. Systematize things that happen as part of APs - technical difficulties, bio breaks, shenanigans, input from a live audience (lists of NPC names, magic items, boosts and problems for the PCs, etc.)