better gaming through chemistry

JoeGKushner · Nov 1, 2005

Black Pharaoh said:
Jim, it may have been unfair to single out Mongoose in your inital post.

Unfair, but perhaps not factually inaccurate! :lol:

DreadPirateMurphy · Nov 1, 2005

jim pinto said:
excellent point.

my bias is showing. but i don't believe munchkin players have anything to offer, and by default the DM is not obligated to offer him anything in return. he can go play zelda and be the antisocial power-gamer he wants to be against his xbox and not ruin anyone's fun... and here's where the problem lies...

the DM can't be expect to:

a) write a story
b) detail NPCs, maps, locations, etc.
c) administer the game (maintain the flow, know the rules, have everyone, involved)
d) make things interesting

AND

e) put up with everyone's nonsense

somewhere people have to bend to the DM. because if they're not bending to the DM, they need to start paying him for his time.

the DM should have an equal vote about the tone and quality of the game, especially if he's bound by all these rules about how to run things for the PCs.

and a good player, understands his role in this.... and if his role IS munchkin super power gamer, he needs to realize he doesn't get to be the center of attention all night. in fact, he's lucky if he gets to shine for longer than 5 rounds of the final fight of the evening.

at this point, i should list the SEVEN types of gamers... these are, by marketing standards, the people you have to focus your product on when selling.

Power Gamer. This is the guy who knows how to make the most with the least amount of rules. He knows that a gnome barbarian is the best combo for dealing maximum damage in a round, etc. He typically purchases books with more feats, equipment, etc.

Combat Monkey. Different than than the power gamer, the combat monkey's character has one schtick that the player is particularly proud of. All of his energy goes into making the perfect chain fighter, etc. The character is effective in combat, but the main purpose of the character is to kick ass.

Escapist. He's here to kill things, loot things, and generally just play. He wants to escape the rigors of the real world. His characters are one-dimensional and provide the game with nothing, but provide the player with the joy of killing stuff. He's just happy rolling dice.

Storyteller. Typically also a DM, the storyteller is concerned with making sure everything fits together. He doesn't care about rules and generally doesn't even care if he succeeds at all his actions.

Actor. Particularly devoted to character motivation, themes, mood, and drama. The actor creates characters that come alive at the table, but generally are less effective in combat. In battles, he tries to do things that the rules do not support. DMs have a hard time juggling this sort of player.

Hanger-On. A friend of a friend. This person shows up to game because someone he knows games. He generally doesn't buy books.

Casual Gamer. This is the guy who is inconsistent in showing up. He loves making characters, trying out new systems; playing asheron's call one week, and everquest another. He's buying pattern is unreliable.

and of course, some people are combinations, but generally one trait stands out.

the key, i think, is to make sure a book covers these elements and details how the PCs will get more OUT of the game, if they can adhere to these basic principles.

and "good" isn't as relative as you may think.

So the target for the book would be primarily storytellers and actors? If that is the case, then I would suggest explaining things like:

- When rules matter, and when they don't.
- Sharing the spotlight.
- Mentoring other players to see the advantages of following a plot.
- How to help if the DM doesn't get it.
- Teamwork in general (which is hard even for professionals in the business world).
- Recognizing the DM as another player who is there to have fun.
- Recognizing when somebody you game with has social or mental issues.

The last one I mention because it seems like a lot of gaming groups would run more smoothly if it was recognized that some of the members have autism, take anti-psychotics (and maybe miss a dose), or have problem families. A lot of folks are really OK people if you can get past their disabilities.

LostSoul · Nov 1, 2005

Janx said:
Some useful sections for your proposed book would be:
how to identify the GM's plot
Why you should find a reason to go along with the GM's plot

Ugh. Why not call the book, "How I Learned to Stop Caring and Love the Railroad"?

DMs need more advice because D&D doesn't have all that many rules to rein in a poor GM.

Jim Hague · Nov 1, 2005

LostSoul said:
Ugh. Why not call the book, "How I Learned to Stop Caring and Love the Railroad"?

DMs need more advice because D&D doesn't have all that many rules to rein in a poor GM.

Sorry, but having a plot doesn't mean there's a railroad. And I disagree on the 'no rules to rein in a DM' - that's exactly what the rules are there for and why the system uses a consistent approach to resolving conflicts.

Jim Hague · Nov 1, 2005

And more on topic - I'm shocked, shocked I say, to see that nobody's mentioned the venerable Uncle Figgy:

http://www.dragondogpress.com/unclefiggy/guides.htm

Joshua Randall · Nov 1, 2005

jim pinto said:
at this point, i should list the SEVEN types of gamers...

Have you read the first few chapters of the DMG II? It also categorizes the types of players.

Here is a thread I posted a while back with some brief descriptions of the types.

jdrakeh · Nov 1, 2005

LostSoul said:
Ugh. Why not call the book, "How I Learned to Stop Caring and Love the Railroad"?

There is a balance between 'Do what I say!' and 'Do whatever the hell you want!' that makes for a good game. Games that adhere to the former extreme usually suck for players just as much as games that adhere to the latter extreme usually suck for GMs. Advice on how players and GMs can reach a compromise might be a good topic.

[Edit: See Jim Hague's posts above for more truth.]

JoeGKushner · Nov 1, 2005

jdrakeh said:
There is a balance between 'Do what I say!' and 'Do whatever the hell you want!' that makes for a good game. Games that adhere to the former extreme usually suck for players just as much as games that adhere to the latter extreme usually suck for GMs. Advice on how players and GMs can reach a compromise might be a good topic.

[Edit: See Jim Hague's posts above for more truth.]

I've got a friend who is so into doing whatever the hell he wants that he keeps getting kicked out of gaming groups. One example is his portrayal of a samurai being lawful neutral as a complete chop 'em up in the streets if they meet your eyes in a western setting. another of being a wood elf in Warhammer with, yes, exactly the same mentallity in a Empire based campaign. "No one's going to tell me how to play my character!" is definatly his battle cry.

jdrakeh · Nov 1, 2005

JoeGKushner said:
I've got a friend who is so into doing whatever the hell he wants..

I've had a lot of friends like that. After a while, I politely explained that their 'style' wasn't going to mesh with that of the group at the time. I remained friends with most of these people, but it was probably because I didn't game with them. Players like this drive me up the wall (and not just me, but pretty much any of my other players who have rudimentary social skills, as well).

The "I'll play/do/say whatever the hell I like!" guy ranks right up there with the "I only play Ninja!" guy (which, in fairness, is a subdued version of the "I'll play/do/say whatever the hell I like!" guy) on my list of players that I hate to deal with, as either one can (and almost always does) abort any game that they participate in before it gets off the ground.

Teflon Billy · Nov 1, 2005

jim pinto said:
excellent point.

my bias is showing. but i don't believe munchkin players have anything to offer, and by default the DM is not obligated to offer him anything in return. he can go play zelda and be the antisocial power-gamer he wants to be against his xbox and not ruin anyone's fun...

OK! I'm now purchasing your book

I'm still not 100% on it's utility to me, but I'm just glad that someone here at our beloved EN World was man enough to say something about play style other than "Every play style is of equal value" or "It's all good as long as everyone is having fun"

I never dreamed in my life I'd get as tired as I have of the concept of fun in a game