Words I Made Up
In my discussions of rpg topics on pilot.net, I've made up a number of shorthand phrases to describe concepts. In general, I'm talking about "games like D&D" - that is, games about combat and adventure, rather than games about characters and themes. I don't think those games are bad; I'm just bad at them. None of these terms really need a post on their own, but it's useful for me to have a centralized reference, so here they are;
PROCEDURAL ORDERS: Procedures in RPGs tend to contain each other. The archetypal example is that a hexcrawl contains dungeoncrawls which contain combat encounters, but this works for many other sorts of games. A higher-order procedure is a procedure which contains a lower-order one. A first-order procedure structures and orders only the decisions organic to the procedure and resolution mechanics; a second-order procedure orders first-order procedures, as well as containing organic mechanics; a third-order procedure orders first- and second-order procedures. A procedure is "contained" by a higher-order procedure if, during that higher-order procedure, we "dip down" into that procedure to resolve some specific situation. A "mechanic" is an empty procedure; no decisions are involved in its resolution, it's just a thing that you do. A skill challenge is a first-order procedure; a skill check is a mechanic.
TYPES OF COMBAT: Lots of RPGs are about combat. Lots of ones that aren't per se about combat at least include it. There are three dimensions of combat decision-making; preparation, tactics, and build. Tactics-based decisions are the decisions you make during the specific encounter (i.e. once the battle is joined); preparation is the decisions you make during the procedures above the combat encounter (how many guys do we have? are we low on HP? have we chosen good ground for this combat?); and build decisions are to do with intrinsic aspects of your character (I'm a fighter 5 ranger 2 with Goblins as my favored enemy specializing in greatswords.) A game usually has a mix of aspects. I refer to a campaign with 100% tactics as a "chess tournament with plot interludes" and a campaign with 100% prep-based combat as "total war autoresolve." There are two other types of ideal combat game, but I consider them results of poor game design or lack of combat emphasis - a build-only game (which is generally an extreme failure of balance, such that correct character creation outweighs any amount of correct gameplay) or a no-decisions game ("when you fight the enemy, roll +TOUGH")
LEVELS OF DECISION-MAKING: I interchangeably use "encounter, adventure, campaign" and "tactics, operations, strategy" in reference to the kind of decisions a generally D&Doid game can include. Encounter or tactical decisions are made in respect to a particular scene or interaction; adventure or operational decisions are stuff like "where do we go this week" or "how do we explore the dungeon" - that is, they're in the second- and third- order procedures; campaign or strategic decisions are about things like your character's goals in the big scope or what the campaign will be About. I sometimes refer to a hierarchy of games; "linear," "directed sandbox," and "pure sandbox." These are based on the highest level decision-making exercised during gameplay as a matter of course.
MICRO-AGENCY and MACRO-AGENCY: Macro-Agency is about the BIG CHOICES in your game. "Will we betray the Noble Dragon for the Evil Princess?" "What's important to our characters?" "Will we give our lives to save this town from the encroaching Cult of Meanness?" These decisions are the ones you remember, long after the game. They're often planned and anticipated by the GM. In contrast, micro-agency refers to whether your routine gameplay choices are meaningful and have consequences; whether it matters if you go left or right in the dungeon or play well or poorly in combat.
SHIPPING AND HANDLING: Mechanical resolution with no decision-making