(Over)analyzing RPGs

I stumbled across this site today: http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/ . It contains a great many little essays and references about roleplaying. Along the way, I found mention of Robin's Laws of Good Game Mastering and briefly considered purchasing the PDF version. Yet it was a neutral review of said book that gave me pause. Three stars out of five, and the person said in part:

In the beginning the author lays out a few types of players, like the powerplayer, the storyteller, etc. For the most part it pretty obvious (Power gamer likes to have a lot of power and story teller likes a good story... no, really?) After that, everything in this book pretty much boils down to "it depends".
 
For all that people say and argue about how best to run/play an RPG or what the different "types" of gamers are, it always seems to boil down so much more simply. Comparing degrees of "dramatist" versus "simulationist" may be useful in some cases, but the bottom line is to know your co-players. Even the most railroaded plotline has some collaborative elements (or the GM may as well be writing his own book), so more than one person is involved. Understand what you want, understand what the others in the game want, and find some common ground that you can all enjoy. Putting any finer a point on it probably requires details specific to the group. Essays written by someone else might open a person's eyes to the subject, but they're rarely going to be spot on to an individual/group's situation.

The ability to see things from someone else's perspective seems a major boon, and one that shouldn't be ignored. Put some points in Empathy now.

Comments

  1. kyn_elwynnApril 28, 2009 at 7:56 PM

    "But I've got this story I totally wanna tell..." "But that's meta gaming..." "I've made my character ahead of time, I can adapt them into any setting..."

    ReplyDelete
  2. marinredwolfApril 28, 2009 at 8:09 PM

    Other than proving people can be all over the place with their wants, I'm not sure what you're driving at. How should I respond to this? "Sit your punk asses down and get along, dammit!" or something? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. marinredwolfApril 29, 2009 at 7:02 PM

    Okay, a better reply, I should hope: My point here is that all these analyses and recommendations on gaming basically amount to knowing what your group wants and catering to that. There will always been problems. There will be people who can't/won't grasp or accept what others want. There are those who will not compromise. There are groups that have players with such conflicting interests that no campaign with satisfy all parties.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Adventures in Rokugan (ongoing)

 So, yeah, I'm terrible at keeping up with between-session conversations and all the piles of possible channels/servers in Discord - especially when work gives me some time to think, but not Discord access. I believe a question was posed about thoughts on the state and future of the Adventures in Rokugan game, though, so here goes... In general, I'm enjoying the time and look forward to it more than feel burdened by it. The start time is a little earlier than ideal, but I don't mind making it work on Saturdays. So, net positive overall. I'm a touch "meh" on the mechanics of AiR. I like the familiarity of D&D, but the Rokugan-specific stuff doesn't feel very rewarding. Granted, this may just be my pick of a shadow acolyte, but I feel like I'm getting more functional mileage out of the sharpshooter feat than all of the special class abilities and level-ups haven't been particularly exciting. I've been tempted to multi-class into something els
Read more

Harbinger of Chaos (Godbound)

 Last night seemed to be the climactic finale of the ongoing Godbound game. I have some thoughts. The previous session ended with a couple PCs and a shadowy person in the special chamber with access to divine realms and their vacated thrones (in the campaign, the gods were sorta kicked out of their positions, making things up for grabs). Once PC had already claimed a throne. All the others were waiting outside. At the moment the session ended, no one seemed aware that the shadowy figure was Beryn, big-bad threat of the campaign. This is where I feel weird about things, because that little detail came up OOC and it changed everything. If the PCs had been aware at the time, they probably would have started a fight outside the chamber when they saw him. That didn't happen. But suddenly because the players were aware, they wanted to be able to plan before the conflict (with downtime glossed over previous) so they could go into the next session guns-blazing and as prepared as possible.
Read more

RPG Desires?

 So I was asked last night what I actually want in an RPG game/campaign. I came up with a few points, but that's a question I find hard to answer on the spot. It's easy to point at things in an ongoing game that I don't like, and a little harder to point at things I do (darn negative-focused psychology), but making generalizations is more difficult still. It does, however, give me something to focus a little on and ramble about for a time... Story I like a narrative through line - not usually to the point of "railroading," but I want more connective tissue than just returning to a job board after each mission. Sometimes that develops as things go, with character goals shaping things. Setting an end goal at the outset ("defeat the demon lord!") can have ups and downs. However it comes about, I really like to feel there is some forward momentum toward something, though. Consistency This one gets sub-points!  As far as setting, I sort of stopped using the t
Read more