Everything I Need to Know About Roleplaying, I Learned From Magic(tm)

Okay, not really. Not by a long shot.
But there are some things it taught me...


When I first got into playing Magic, some people referred to it as a "drug for roleplayers." With the collectible aspect, that fits in some ways. On the other hand, I've had at least one friend call it "roleplaying without the fun parts." The mythos and art certainly evoke a setting familiar to most roleplayers, but the big thing is the mechanics. Magic is, in a lot of ways, a roleplaying game boiled down to pure mechanics. It has the (deck rather than character) design aspect, an element of chance (usually the draw rather than dice), and the goal is to defeat your opponent(s). There's no "fluff." There's no real playing of a role involved.

I've never been a serious Magic player. The closest I've come was still "serious-casual" or somesuch. I played in one con tournament during the utter infancy of the DCI, but never in anything sanctioned that gave points or assigned numbers. I probably peaked in my seriousness of the game during a local tournament. I ran a deck designed for speed and efficiency. Probably my toughest challenge was my final opponent who had the means to shut me down, but fortune - perhaps - favored me. After that, I've never really played at the same level.

These days, I play casually - usually a 4 or 5-person group game before roleplaying on a Saturday. I generally don't bring a deck to the table that doesn't have a way to win, but I rarely put together something that approaches "sure-fire." I specifically avoid tuning decks as much as I could. Once in a great while, I'll play a deck that has a three-card, instant-win combo (or near to it). Those aren't really fun. Either the game ends early and I savor victory for a few moments before we roll into another one, or people see what's happening in advance and gang up to kill me. Either way, the enjoyment for me is limited and for others it's pretty much non-existent. I don't really have the experience or mindset these days to make something truly tournament-worthy anymore.

So how does that relate to roleplaying? Well, Tashiro frequently brings up discussions about using the rules in a RPG and playing "to win," if you will. To me, it's basically the same thing.

The drive to have a character who is "better" than others is wearying to me these days. When I see others doing everything they can to get the best stats, or an unstoppable attack, or an unassailable defense, it gets one of two reactions out of me. Either it saps me of any desire to deal with that character or it makes me feel the need to better protect my own character... then it saps me of a desire to deal with any of them. I don't find such optimization fun. Infallible heroes interest me about as much as unstoppable villains - neither makes for a good story.

I have a reputation for winning more than my share at the Magic table, but I almost-always manage that with sub-optimal decks that rely on others playing the game too. If, week-after-week, I came with a "I win, you all lose now" deck, what would happen? Either everyone would gang up on me just because I'm me (no fun for me) or I'd end up winning without really giving others a chance to play (no fun for them). Neither sounds very appealing in the long run, so I'll avoid that, thanks. I'm still playing with friends and for fun. If that means I hold a Counterspell while someone pulls off a funky trick that may end up winning him the game while showing us something new, so be it. If he starts pulling that game-after-game, though, you can bet everyone will start gunning for him. The metagame is self-correcting to a degree.

Of course, I have to acknowledge that some people get a kick out of being undefeatable. Some are my friends, and for their sakes I wish I could say I had a greater tolerance for it. Heck, on a MUCK you get all kinds - from people who want to avoid the rules and just play, to those who will go so far as to manipulate holes in the code to get power beyond what's allowed in the rules. I might suggest if you want to optimize everything and trounce your opponents to dust that a persistent-world RPG is not the best place to do it, but I can't quite say that way is "wrong." Don't be surprised, though, if I try to deal with that as little as possible.

In a tabletop game, there are usually fewer people so you can tune things more easily. Of course, styles still clash sometimes. So it goes, I guess.

And... to end my ramblings with a final thought: I miss your roleplay influence, April.