Ruins & Rogues vs. Maze Rats

So after years of trying to design my perfect game, I finally have it in my hands... And what do you know, it turns out it's very similar to Maze Rats. Hell, its name is even made up of synonyms for "Maze" and "Rats."

I didn't consciously set out to write a Maze Rats hack. This is just where I ended up. But why did I end up here, and if what I wanted was so similar to Maze Rats, why did I make a new game instead of just playing Maze Rats?

I don't see many people talking about the actual rules of Maze Rats, I mostly see them talking about the tables, so this should be an interesting exercise.

Similarities

Before we analyze differences, let's take a look at what these games have in common.

1. Both games use "control-panel" layout and fit their core rules on a two-page spread.
2. Both games only use six-sided dice.
3. Both games have quick character creation based on rolling PCs randomly.
4. Both games use side initiative: on your side's turn, you can move 30 feet and take one action.
5. Both games use a simple advancement system where players get 1, 2, or 3 XP at the end of each session of play and get upgrades for leveling up.
6. The three categories of upgrades are basically the same: combat upgrade, task resolution upgrade, spell.
7. Both games rely on player and GM interpretation for spellcasting instead of spell effect descriptions.

Character Creation

The first thing you do in Maze Rats is roll your stats.

Then you choose a starting feature...

...and take six starting items from a d66 table. You get some armor and your choice of two weapons.

Contrast this with character creation in Ruins & Rogues:

A few things we can see right away:

1. There are fantasy ancestries in Ruins & Rogues. They have no mechanical impact, but each ancestry does have its own d6 names table in the lefthand column.
2. Ruins & Rogues gives starting characters goals. If we read on we'll see that these goals are directly tied to how players earn XP and level up their characters.
3. There are no stats. Instead, we have skills that collapse Maze Rats stats and "path" features into one thing.
4. The first column of starting items has broadly-defined "kits" instead of specific items.

What's the difference here? Maze Rats has a bunch of (what feel like) extra tables at the end of its chargen section that give your PC an appearance, a physical detail, a background, clothing, a personality, a mannerism... There's an effort made to differentiate and characterize PCs, but it's all surface-level details.

Ruins & Rogues wants you to know what your character wants. It wants to differentiate characters not based what they look or act like on the surface, but based on who they are and what they want.

I want PCs to argue with each other in this game. I want inner-party conflict. I want drama and relationships between characters to matter. Most of all, I want the PCs to feel like a real, living, dynamic group of people.

That's why ancestries are in here too. I'm not the biggest fan of them in the abstract, but they get players thinking about how their characters might be related and what they think of each other.

And that's why there are skills instead of stats. I want PCs to stand out as "the strong one" or "the stealthy one." I don't want players to have to compare numbers to see who's good at what.

The kits add an extra bit of flavor that help you think about your character's hobbies and what they think is important on a deeper level, while also allowing players to be creative. Does the cartographer's kit come with a compass? That might be just what I need to solve this weird dungeon problem...

Task Resolution

In Maze Rats, all rolls are Danger Rolls and the target number is always 10. You can offset this high target if you have a circumstantial advantage and take the highest 2 of 3d6.

I don't think I have to explain why Ruins & Rogues doesn't have advantage. I think the tide has turned against advantage and disadvantage mechanics in NSR spaces since Maze Rats was written.

But in Ruins & Rogues, task resolution triggers whenever the GM is uncertain, and you can set one of three target numbers: 6, 8, or 10. Why?

Well, I originally had language that you shouldn't roll unless there would be interesting consequences for failure... But new players found it very confusing. I couldn't figure out how to explain that concept of the O/NSR in the limited space I had.

So I figured, why not let the GM call for rolls whenever they want? I want this to be a game that new GMs can just pick up and play. If they call for a few unnecessary rolls, at least they can set an easy target number for them.

EDIT 2/19/2024: The above is no longer the case as of v2024_2! There's now language about how the action must be "risky and uncertain" and the GM should establish the stakes. I guess I'm more of an OSR-head than I thought, haha.

And speaking of target numbers, I don't like it when the target number is totally up to the GM, but I think offering three options is a nice trade-off. It lets me call for rolls when I otherwise might just say "yes" or "no," because I can make the tasks really easy or really hard to achieve. This way, players get to roll dice more. And that's fun!

I guess I think designers overthink task resolution. I wanted it to be simple, straightforward, and fun... And most importantly, I wanted it to be fast so we can quickly come back from the dice to the fiction.

Combat

I'm not going to get into the nitty-gritty here. Suffice it to say that Maze Rats bothers with the properties of different armors and weapons, and Ruins & Rogues doesn't.

In Ruins & Rogues, combat steals from a different thing with Ben Milton's name on it: Milton dice. Roll 2d6, discard dice that roll 4+, add the rest and that's your damage. If your target is vulnerable, resistant, or immune to your attack, you roll more or less dice. Armor doesn't factor in at all.

Why did I design the game like this? Well, I think the difference between different kinds of weapons and armor in different RPGs is pretty boring. Where are the interesting choices? I'm just going to always use the best weapon and the best armor I can afford. (Some systems factor in tradeoffs with hands and inventory slots, but I've never been a big fan of bookkeeping.)

If my choice of weapon is going to make a difference, I want it to make a big difference that I can really feel. Let me roll double the dice for a smart attack, or make me roll a measly 1d6 if my attack is ineffective.

I also would much rather imagine my character wearing whatever armor I think would look good on them instead of whatever armor the mechanics say I ought to be wearing.

Advancement

This is the Advancement track in Maze Rats:

Ruins & Rogues cuts this in half. Advancement is capped at level 4 (12 XP) and players get to pick an upgrade each level instead of every other.

Why is that? Well, it just so happens to work out that players will reach Level 4 after session 6 if they're getting about 2 XP per session and after session 4 if they're playing really well and getting 3 XP per session.

That was exactly the campaign length I was targeting. I could write a whole other post about how I think the "eternal campaign" is a misplaced ideal in the broader RPG hobby, but suffice it to say I think 4-6 sessions hits the sweet spot for exploring a small sandbox and getting the know the PCs without them overstaying their welcome.

Instead of worrying about what the players can spend their treasure on, I'd rather say, "you can't spend your treasure until you return to the city," and when they return to the city, "you spend your treasure and live happily ever after."

Spells

Maze Rats has random spells and that's great, but I wanted something more focused for R&R. Most of the entries here are directly inspired by this post from Against the Wicked City.

Maze Rats keeps players from spamming the same spell over and over by having them generate completely new ones after casting. R&R lets you keep your spells, but you can only cast them once per level on average.

As the space between levels increases (because you need more XP to level up), players get more spells and other in-world tools (magic items) that they can use to solve problems. You're forced to rely not just on your favorite spell, but your whole toolkit.

Conclusion

So, why did my game end up looking so much like Maze Rats?

Well, I wanted it to be easy to pick up and play for new players and GMs. I wanted it to be fast and get out of the way of the fiction. I wanted it to have simple rules for advancement over the course of a short campaign. And Maze Rats is great at all of those things.

But I wanted new PCs and their relationships with each other to jump off the page. I wanted combat rules to be something that players don't have to worry about learning during character creation, so they can jump right into the game. And I wanted the game to deliver on short, focused mini-campaigns.

That's why I made Ruins & Rogues and why I think what I've made is pretty neat. If you think all that sounds neat, you can check it out here.

...Now what it doesn't have is all those random tables. Maybe that's  something I ought to make for R&R going forward!