Same Topic for Multiple Game System

[Jay_NOLA]

I was curious as to how people are handling topics and linking when you have a Realm that is being done for use for 2 different game systems and the details are not the same for each system for the information on most things.

Making 2 topics is what appears to be obvious, but you have other topics that are not game system specific that make reference to the game systems specific ones and the entries and you can only link to one of the topics.

For example lets say you have "Deadly Dragon (OSRIC)" and "Deadly Dragon (D6)" topics and you have other topics that mention the "Deadly Dragon" which one do you link to problem occurs.

So you handle something like this in your Realm?

 

[Parody]

My approach would be to have one Deadly Dragon Topic (assuming it's a "named character") with two statblock snippets or links to two system-specific Articles for the generic statblocks for its type.

That's what I've done in my Paranoia character Topics where I have versions of the character for both 2nd and XP. The Topic itself is written in general terms, minimizing system-specific references, and I attach two character sheet PDFs.

My Events are similar, but tend to have more references for what to do in both systems. Most of the time I can just say "make a Vehicle Operation and Maintenance check", describe what happens on success/close failure/big failure, and let the GM worry about the value of success later. You can't get away with that in less freewheeling systems, but you can still reduce the amount of direct system mentions as much as possible.

For reference: the Paranoia 2nd Edition and XP systems are very different but share a very similar world; providing stats for a Forgotten Realms adventure in both AD&D 2nd and D&D 3.5 might be a reasonable comparison. While the base stats and related skills changed in XP, the skills themselves are similar and the level of competence between non-weapon proficiencies in AD&D 2nd and skills in 3.5 is similar to the difference in skills between Paranoia 2nd and XP.

 

[MNBlockHead]

First, what is the purpose? If your purpose is commercial, you have two option, as I see it:

1. Create a separate realm for each system, the extra work may be worth it if you are selling each separately.

2. The better option would be to have follow Parody's suggestion, except I wouldn't have two options. I would have one article with statblocks for each system.

The other question is whether you will have the system rules included in the realm and, if so, how different are those systems.

If you are not putting in all the rules, then I think it is mostly a matter of differing statblocks. In the encounter topics and monster articles, just include separate snippets with statblocks for each system.

If you are including all the rules and the systems are similar you could create, say, one article for "saving throw" and give rules for both systems. If the systems are different enough that this approach would not work well, I would prefix mechanics articles with a code that indicate which system so that I can easily link to both systems.

 

[Parody]

The main reason I mentioned having two Articles is forward-looking: eventually you might be basing your Realm-with-two-systems on two system Realms not created by you, with two completely different "Dragon" Articles (monster entries). At this point there's no good way to know whether you will be better off including that content (and resolving all the links) or just making statblocks, encounter descriptions, and so on without links and letting the eventual GM worry about linking in the system they're using.

I also assumed two systems in one Realm. You're right that completely separating them might be a better approach.

A third approach is to be systemless instead.

 

[Silveras]

This gets into how the Content Market will work, and how content re-use will function.

Early discussions about this in the time of the Kickstarter talked about being able to "merge" content from multiple realms into one for this purpose. In that model, the publisher could well have a story-content-only realm, and as many rules-content-only realms as needed. How it would be sold, and how many realms would be delivered as part of the purchase, is open to whatever plan best suits the publisher. The end user, though, would create a new Realm in order to run the campaign and "import" both the story-only and rules-only realms, ending up with the story and rules in the active "campaign realm".

However, it has been quite some time (more than 2 years) since that was talked about. That's why my suggested topic for the Spotlight Series was to share the current plans for this kind of situation.

Edit: I think this illustrates why the Content Market will be a "paradigm shift" in how RealmWorks is used. Now, all content and rules are constrained to one Realm... if the Content Market is vision is mostly unchanged, spreading content over multiple Realms that are merged into a "working" Realm to run a game will be possible, and that will be a game-changer. It will almost certainly cause a dramatic change in how we plan and organize Realms.

 

[Parody]

Yup. Everything we're doing so far is prototyping and may have to be thrown out once sharing and the Market are available. (Well, and the community settles on some standards.)

 

[AEIOU]

Statting content for multiple systems isn't as easy as just recreating the same mobs and such. Take a look at Frog God Games' material. They release material for multiple systems but they tweak each encounter to match the system which may mean different power levels, different mobs and different tactics. To do multi-system conversions well, methinks it may more often take a scalpel than a hammer.

 

[kbs666]

I'd put them in the same mechanics reference article, assuming it is a monster. I'd cover the difference in system specific snippets or statblocks.