I would agree with this and my suggestion would actually be a setting where there is a city of the teen young ones and then across the bay or state or what not with the older heroes.
The older heroes are dealing with the major geo political threats and global issues. The teens in training are working to battle city and street crime. Two clear groups. There can be rp cross over (mentors etc) but the big dogs stay in their yard and the pups stay in theirs for the conflicts.
Systems
I think the appeal people have for Masks is the fact that in reading PBTA games there's this narrative appeal (which definitely exists) but it also carries with it a barrier to entry which is a learning curve (as all systems have).
So for me, your first question is what barrier to entry are players willing to pay to get in. I look at something like M&M or Champions as a VERY high barrier to entry. I look at something like Masks or Worlds in Peril as a medium barrier to Entry. Next, you have games like Supers! with a lower barrier (but still a mechanical system) and finally, your basic traits-based game with no barrier.
When dealing with an OC game, I think the traits-based game is tougher. The reason it works for features is that people know what Jean Grey does by and large. On OC game traits are a bit foggier.
So with that in mind. If I were looking at an OC game I would heavily suggest focusing on the low to mid barriers; being Masks or Supers! as the baseline.
Setting
One of the above-mentioned games, Worlds in Peril, is also a PbtA game but it gets less traction than Masks because it is based on Adult Team adventures, characters who are established. It also does a few of the mechanics differently. However, with that in mind, I mention this to state that there isn't a necessity to have things mutually exclusive in that regard. I would be curious to hear what people like and their reasons for it. I think the Teen Hero coming into things has the appeal for those players that can handle failure. Because that's the big deal with PbtA. You fail a lot. Even when you succeed there's a failure in that a lot of times.
FC vs OC
Yes, I know this thread is about an OC game but I did want to voice this thought. The reason I believe FCs and OCs don't exist on a game well together is that FCs crowd out the OCs so quickly and readily. Someone mentioned that there is always going to be some duplication happening, and that's certainly true. But the question I have is has anyone ever attempted to tell players If you want to play Superman that's fine, but you only get these two powers not all of them? Putting the 'Features' on the same level playing field as the OCs. Just a thought I'd float. Sorry if it derails.
Here's the question (as there seems to be some movement on a Masks systemed type of game). If there is genuine interest there, is someone going to grab the bull by the horns and start working on it? Could the people interested in it maybe get together and collaboratively put in work to bring it to reality?
@Cobaltasaurus You mean The World's Largest Dungeon?
$15 million per episode
8 episodes it's $120 million per season
Average movie budget is around $100 million
You get what you pay for?
I've always been intrigued by a Black Company styled game (which would be that Dark Fantasy Merc company set up). I think it'd be a great setting to have players localized 'together' and fighting against a common enemy but still provides windows for competition and struggle.
Not to mention political dealings, military actions, magic, all those fantasy things.
There is/was a game that fit this scheme but it was marvel based. Fate rpg I think. Don't recall the name.
I would throw out to you Mr-Johnson that I don't think the problems lie in the 'niche' factor. In fact I'd submit that it may not be a bad thing. If you look at the huge supers games it's easy for people to get lost in them (happens to me constantly and so I drift away from them).
A small directed game isn't bad but that's the problem, the direction. Are you creating an environment for people to just be in? Are you looking to have a storyline that plays out and evolves?
I know something I learned with @auspice on SGM was that we tried to do both, we wanted to have a story that played out (and things fell apart when RL swallowed us up) but also wanted an environment for players to be in. Turns out I think that doing both just didn't work for us. Having visited your games before, the environments were interesting, the niche not being the problem. But after awhile just RPing in those environments (for me) wasn't enough, I needed something happening to get involved with. Iunno, just some early morning thoughts.
@Auspice
Don't tell me what to do. You aren't the boss of me.
Rather than theme. I'm curious about mechanics. Do people prefer
Starless pure consent
Narrative mechanics (coin flips etc) for resolution
Light stats and mechanics (fs3 etc)
Crunchy (wod dnd etc)
I know there's a lot of wiggle room in between but I kept it kind of loose and general
This has been my observation as well. There tends to be some kind of carrot for people, particularly in the 'science fiction' genre. I have read a lot of these posts (you can search through for Star Trek / Star Wars etc) and there tends to be a decent amount of circulation around some general core concepts that extend beyond 'just a place to play and RP'. If there is an available Sci-fi oriented game that is sheetless I would be most interested in finding it. @sunny may claim a strawman argument, but a lack of evidence to support this sheet less sci fi world would seem to indicate it doesn't exist. (Has it ever?)
Perhaps that is the attempt that should be made for Star Trek. A completely statless/sheetless game focused solely upon the RP.
@Sunny
So show me evidence of the Star Trek game that is statless, sheetless, etc, that is currently running.
Star Trek games in an RPG format hold a distinct challenge. What is more important, the Journey between the stars, or what is found at the end of that journey?
Those who value the Journey itself clamor for space systems and the like because those support the act of the journey.
Those who prefer the end of the Journey edge towards 'Station' based RP because that is what they value. (Note: The concept of +report RP becomes the 'journey' between events on the Station rather than actual travel)
This is on top of the issues of exploratory/military RP and the aforementioned advancement cycle conflicts. How does a character 'level' in Star Trek? They attain rank & additional duties. However with a set number of spots available for individuals to fill, road blocks to advancement naturally occur.
So if you were to develop a Star Trek game, you'd first have to answer which is more important; the Journey or the Destination. Then you would need to identify how you would fulfill the 'journey' sequence between destinations. Finally you'd need to address advancement of a character with systematic road blocks in place against advancement. Good luck with all that mess.
Note: The reason games like ATS still 'exist' is because people come and go opening up spots within the 'hierarchy' but Trek Games are by and large on a limited time slot. Once the player base grows frustrated/annoyed at the inability to advance they'll filter off. We can lie to ourselves and say it's about RP, but it really isn't. WE all want /something/ for our time.
Pro tip. Mix four loko with a Tylenol with codeine (t3) and you'll have a 12 loko
I've always been curious around the Superhero MU genre. I've definitely played on them but rarely can I keep my focus or attention in them. I feel like it's just absent of motivation a lot of times.
I think my overwhelming question is what makes a 'good' Superhero game? What are people actually looking for?
That's exactly where I'm sitting too. I personally prefer narrative based story telling, but even in that mindset the incentive for story telling has to be present. I think that is the area I'm working through mentally with @auspice, developing the structures that promote narrative adventuring for the playerbase and keeps them engaged with it while not relying so heavily on Admin structured instigation that it burns us out.
I'm not sure such a thing can happen, but it doesn't mean there's a cessation of attempts.
This conversation is something I've been mulling over a lot. I think for myself I've forgotten the core concept. Humans respond to incentives. So the question that I see sort of circulating here is what incentives drive our community. I know we WANT to believe that the incentives of good story and the like are what drive it; but if we're genuinely honest with ourselves is that really enough?
So in concept of What types of Games? I would like to see a game that provides players with incentives to play and be invested. Theme and setting is all well and good. We could take any single one of these concepts that are suggested and put up a blank server with a few dug out rooms and it'd be done. So what are people really after?
D&D is a system, not a setting or a theme. What would an 'ideal' D&D 5E game entail and encompass?