That's a great article. I really value minimal, tight, and thematic design in games that I read, play, or design, and those usually have minimal Layer 3 - opt-in thematic elements. I'd rather have that type of theme come from play, not before play.
I too prefer Layer 1 and Layer 2 thematic elements, and usually skip ("opt-out of") Layer 3 thematic elements. I rarely read flavor text, extended lore, and the similar. And yet, I strongly prefer thematic games to abstract ones when it comes to board games.
It also got me thinking.... what would a game with no Layer 1 or Layer 2 but only Layer 3 look like? I think that's called a novel! :)
I was thinking something similar: what types of Layer 3 do I engage with? What is the "right amount", or what methods of implementing Layer 3 cause me to opt-in, rather than out?
Such a good question, and one I'd have to think about for myself as well.
The only board/card game lore that has ever capture me is Android: Netrunner. Some of the early booster packs came with a (rather poorly written) short story that introduced each one. I really enjoyed reading those even though they had no mechanical impact on the game and were just opt-in.
Interesting analysis. For RPGs there's the additional consideration of how much of each layer is presented to the GM vs. to the regular player.
Players are often getting layer 3 thematic material *via the GM*, but that could be something from a rulebook or created by the GM themselves. Some players may not look at the book at all, and get almost everything (beyond their character sheet) via the GM. There's an implied design question there about how we (as designers) construct the role of the GM as a component of the mechinary of delivering theme.
Good points. The layers of theme do seem to be situated around structured board and video games. But as you point out, they apply to TTRPGs with GMs too.
I’m sure it’s pedantic, but I’m having a great time thinking about whether player-added rules/homebrew/traditions counts as layer 3, or a secret layer 4.
DnD homebrew rules are an obvious example. but other things too, just how people interact with the game and add their own flavor. when my friends and I play Sushi Go we have added the titles of “maki king”, “prince of pud”, and “pud serf” (for who has most and least puddings)
My first instinct is to call it Layer 3, as it's optional and doesn't interrupt gameplay. But then after some thought, homebrew rules may not be skipped as they are rules of the game... even if that rule is gaining a fancy title. So I'm going to land thinking those would actually be Layer 2 elements.
Really interesting analysis. I'll have to check out that book! When I'm thinking of designing an rpgI typically find an SRD that will match the thematic elements of the game I have in mind.
Oh boy. It's kind of a vibe but I often go back to the original game. Carta was originally made for exploring, Wretched and alone for horror survival. Even srds that seem completely devoid of theme have an original intent. Example being ironsworn, it fits wide open adventure games.
Great analysis and information. Bless you for ponying up the nearly $60 that book costs. I was interested in grabbing a copy but the sticker shock told me to sit down.
That's a great article. I really value minimal, tight, and thematic design in games that I read, play, or design, and those usually have minimal Layer 3 - opt-in thematic elements. I'd rather have that type of theme come from play, not before play.
Thank you!
I too prefer Layer 1 and Layer 2 thematic elements, and usually skip ("opt-out of") Layer 3 thematic elements. I rarely read flavor text, extended lore, and the similar. And yet, I strongly prefer thematic games to abstract ones when it comes to board games.
It also got me thinking.... what would a game with no Layer 1 or Layer 2 but only Layer 3 look like? I think that's called a novel! :)
I was thinking something similar: what types of Layer 3 do I engage with? What is the "right amount", or what methods of implementing Layer 3 cause me to opt-in, rather than out?
Such a good question, and one I'd have to think about for myself as well.
The only board/card game lore that has ever capture me is Android: Netrunner. Some of the early booster packs came with a (rather poorly written) short story that introduced each one. I really enjoyed reading those even though they had no mechanical impact on the game and were just opt-in.
Interesting analysis. For RPGs there's the additional consideration of how much of each layer is presented to the GM vs. to the regular player.
Players are often getting layer 3 thematic material *via the GM*, but that could be something from a rulebook or created by the GM themselves. Some players may not look at the book at all, and get almost everything (beyond their character sheet) via the GM. There's an implied design question there about how we (as designers) construct the role of the GM as a component of the mechinary of delivering theme.
Good points. The layers of theme do seem to be situated around structured board and video games. But as you point out, they apply to TTRPGs with GMs too.
Thanks for this comment! A lot to think about!
I’m sure it’s pedantic, but I’m having a great time thinking about whether player-added rules/homebrew/traditions counts as layer 3, or a secret layer 4.
DnD homebrew rules are an obvious example. but other things too, just how people interact with the game and add their own flavor. when my friends and I play Sushi Go we have added the titles of “maki king”, “prince of pud”, and “pud serf” (for who has most and least puddings)
Love this idea. Pedantic is my middle name. :)
My first instinct is to call it Layer 3, as it's optional and doesn't interrupt gameplay. But then after some thought, homebrew rules may not be skipped as they are rules of the game... even if that rule is gaining a fancy title. So I'm going to land thinking those would actually be Layer 2 elements.
Really interesting analysis. I'll have to check out that book! When I'm thinking of designing an rpgI typically find an SRD that will match the thematic elements of the game I have in mind.
Thank you!
I’d be curious to hear your tips on matching an SRD (assuming it is theme-less) with the theme of the RPG. It’s an interesting topic!
Oh boy. It's kind of a vibe but I often go back to the original game. Carta was originally made for exploring, Wretched and alone for horror survival. Even srds that seem completely devoid of theme have an original intent. Example being ironsworn, it fits wide open adventure games.
Makes sense. I guess those are all examples of strong Layer 1 core mechanisms where the theme is there even without Layers 2 and 3.
Great analysis and information. Bless you for ponying up the nearly $60 that book costs. I was interested in grabbing a copy but the sticker shock told me to sit down.
Thank you so much! And yes, it definitely has "academic book" pricing vs. mass market pricing. :)
It would seem there is agreement in the poll. 13 votes and it's 100% yes.