I think those categories are so broad that they disguise how many systems exist.

I don’t think I’d for example call DND extremely crunchy when systems like GURPS exist. And GURPS also has derived systems like Traveller.

Then you’ve got the various Gamma World editions that vary from “basically just reskinned DND” to “I took a bunch of ketamine while watching math tutorials”.

You’ve got insane systems like FATAL, where even wholly putting aside the gross content, the actual system is actually insane in how it insists on statting basically everything. EVERYTHING. So it takes like ten hours to create a character.

More playable you’ve got games like Inquisitor which are almost more skirmish wargamey in rules and require the players to push the RPG elements themselves. Yet at the same time the homebrew Inquisitor community has popularized “Inquisimunda” rules to make the game even more wargame like. Is that more or less crunchy? Kinda both I guess.

You’ve got sibling systems like Call Of Cthulhu and Pulp Cthulhu which people sometimes interchange depending on the session or they mix-n-match to make some kind of hybrid homebrew creation.

A lot of this is aimed at the character creation stage, but if your current PCs are still low level and a bit aimless I think most or all of this could be applied to a fleshing out session to kind of refocus things with existing characters.

Now all the below is more what you’d call guidelines than actual rules, so sometimes it might not fit perfectly but anyway 'ere we go.

Characters should be written with at least a couple of NPC connections in their past. Family members, friends, rivals, whatever. If it’s a rival/adversary it probably shouldn’t something massive like The Demon Knight Who Murdered Everyone since that would overshadow the campaign but something more mundane like Gary from Pokémon. Or maybe if the character was an escaped slave the old slave trader, or if they were a merchant they rival across the street. Something that can be brought in for a minor plot if needed. If it’s friends or family that’s pretty self explanatory. This makes players actually think about how the character fits into the world and it gives the GM material to optionally slot in.

The characters should have some longer term motivation that is unique to them which runs parallel with being in the party. If they just want lots of gold, it just needs to be a step further as “I want lots of gold to do ‘x’.” That goal can be goal to get passage out of the region, or to build a giant statue of themselves, or to reverse transmute the gold into lead to smelt into a giant cannon ball to fire at the capital of their cultural rivals. Whatever it is, it gives a bit of insight into the character which is something hopefully the player keeps in mind.

Players should think about their alignments and backgrounds in how they interact with NPCs. I don’t mean they should be rigidly guided by this to the extreme every single interaction (because that leads to a whole other set of issues), but sometimes it’s good to think about alternate angles when things are kind of stuck. I see this especially when trying to negotiate with an evil or corrupt NPC and newer players just default to “Helping us is good and you should do a good thing!” arguments that are no sale, but if somebody remembered their character came from a shady background maybe they’d remember to bribe or blackmail instead.

Something I do for my own characters personally is write up at least one personality flaw. Hardheaded, untrusting, drinking problem, gambling problem, racist, whatever. Something that can come up and maybe change throughout a long campaign or maybe just never gets resolved. Again, important that this flaw is tempered against the flow of the adventure so it doesn’t become a drag.

Similarly I write up one or two short and sweet physical flavor details. One character had the end of their pinky chopped off for thieving when they were younger. Another had an obliterated tattoo on their arm. One happened to get nosebleeds slightly more than normal. All of these things could be nothing or could be something. I put them on the sheet and left it in the hands of the GM if they wanted to explore these possible hooks. If it never came up again, it never came up again but at least it was there to latch onto.

deleted by creator

Oh, might want to take a second pass on the post title.

That requires the freedom to do so. If it is a situation where the police interaction starts suddenly, there are many scenarios where this advice is not useful.

There are two related but distinct issues, and I hope to keep them separate otherwise the conversation goes in circles:

1 - Can police under the circumstances look at the contents of the phone at all? This is to say, if the phone is completely unlocked, can they look through it?

2 - If the police are allowed to look at the contents, but the phone is locked, in what ways can the police unlock it?

Subject 1: This is by far the more important question, and the one that seems to get ignored in discussions of phone searches like this. I would argue that under most circumstances there is no probable cause to search a phone- the phone can not contain drugs or weapons or other contraband, so to me this is the larger hurdle for police. Police should have to justify what illegal thing they think is on the phone that gives them probable cause, and I don’t think that pictures of illegal things are the same as the illegal things themselves. Lawyers would have to hash this out, because I do notice the suspect here was on parole so perhaps there is a clause of parole for this or something. But this is the bigger, much bigger issue- can police even look at the contents? There is an argument from the pro-search side that constants of an unlocked phone are in plain view, and so that right there is a big nexus for the issue.

Subject 2: If we assume yes, only then does subject 2 become an issue. How much can police compel? Well, they can’t compel speech. A passcode would count as protected speech, so they can’t compel that. Biometrics however, from what I have seen of court reasoning, tend to be viewed as something a person has rather than something they know. This would be analogue to a locked container with a combination lock compared to a key. The police can not compel the combo, but if they find they key in your pocket they can take it and use it.

If you are up in arms about privacy, my view is not to fall into the trap of focusing on 2 and the finer mechanics of where the line for what kinds of ways to lock a phone are, and focus on subject 1. Reduce the circumstances in which searching a phone is acceptable, even if the phone is unlocked to begin with.

This is about biometrics, not passcodes.

In boots it is quite easy (if time consuming) to worm your way up by wrapping the rope on one foot and stepping on it with the other.

Hey guys, wanna play this cool game called FATAL?

People: “What game is that one for?”

Me: “Game?”

I appreciate that the Toby pictures are in the correct order.