A few years ago for an online course about strategic wargame design I devised a list of about a dozen dichotomies between warfare and games. The paradox of wargames is that warfare and games are polar opposites! After writing some 150 “Worlds of Design” columns I decided to do the same for RPGs, relying in part on some of my columns.
Your Turn: What dichotomies are most important to you in determining compatible play styles?
Where you see yourself in these dichotomies is a quick way to determine your play style. Game masters who answer one way and players who answer another may find they aren't a great fit for one another. Of course, dichotomies are a forced choice and gaming experiences are a spectrum, so this is as much a provocative thought experiment to get a conversation started as it is a discussion of two opposing tensions of tabletop play.
Game vs. Story
I’ve addressed this several times in columns, as it is the fundamental divide amongst RPG players. Is it a game, with a chance of failure (loss), or is it a storytelling machine? This is a spectrum, with various sessions sitting at different points on the spectrum.Fantastical vs. Realistic
This is “RPG as governed by the “rule of cool” versus RPG as “a life that could exist, but does not”. For both sides of this debate, see “Spectra of RPG GMing Styles: Improvising the Adventure” and “Spectra of RPG GMing Styles: Believability”Everyday Heroes vs. Superhuman
Heroes can be recognizably human, or can be more like superheroes, impossibly powerful and impossibly lucky. For an in-depth discussion, see “Heroes Made or Born?”Balanced vs. Unbalanced Character Classes
Some players insist that if character classes are not equally powerful (balanced), they can’t have fun. Others are more oriented toward interesting capabilities than class balance. I explored this topic in "A Question of Balance"GM- vs. Player-Controlled Characters
Some GMs like to say that a player character does such-and-such even though the player doesn’t want that to happen. This “your character does” such and such is more likely to happen in storytelling than in games, of course. For the GM’s perspective, see "Your Character Wouldn't Do That". How much can the players affect the outcome of the game? The more it is story- rather than game-oriented - the less agency they have; in the extreme they are “led around by the nose” by the GM. I discussed this in “The Tyranny and Freedom of Player Agency”.Old vs. New School
There are lots of elements here, but a major one is whether there’s real danger for characters, and another is earning what you get versus being rewarded for participation. I discussed this dichotomy in a two-part series reviewing Failure and Story and Rules, Pacing, and Non-RPGsSolo vs. Group Play
Does the GM construct things for the group as a whole, or does the GM tailor adventures and parts of adventures to individual characters? The “All About Me” FRPG series was examined in part one and two.Magic vs. Technology
We’re often not even sure where technology and magic meet, whether something is one or the other.Combat: Sport vs. War
Sports are supposed to be fair. War is the opposite – “All’s Fair in Love and War”. A fair fight is for suckers.Elaborate vs. Simple Backstories
Some players create elaborate backstories for characters, others just get a bare bones character together and use the play experience flesh out the character. See “Which Came First, the Character or the Backstory?”Other Dichotomies to Ponder
For the following, I haven’t written a column to cover the dichotomy, yet.- GM: Arbiter vs. God: Is the GM’s job merely to interpret the (clearly massive) rules of the game, or is it to be a creator of world and adventure, who can choose to do whatever is best for the game (in the GM’s view, of course)?
- GM vs. Player: Is the session a competition of GM versus player, or not? NOT is my answer, the GM is much more like a referee than a competitor.
- Treasure-Hunters vs. Divine Soldiers: Are the player characters money-grubbing, mercenary treasure hunters, or are they “heroes” in a war for their gods?
- Player Desires vs. the “Good of the Game”: Is an RPG a vehicle for what the players (think they) want? Or is it about what’s best for the game as a whole? (This is closely related to the previous dichotomy.)
- High Magic vs. Low: High or low with respect to both commonality and power.
- Tolkien vs. Non-Tolkien: Fantasy game worlds don’t have to be much like J. R. R. Tolkien’s Middle-earth – but often they are.
- Roll-play vs. Role-play: This has an element of historical trend to it. Early FRPGers were usually wargamers, and many were accustomed to actively try to make good things happen. They tended to role-play situations to determine outcomes, rather than rolling dice. With Third Edition D&D we saw Skill rolls start to dominate. This was good for passive players, who didn’t want to negotiate (in effect) with the GM, they just wanted to roll a die for Diplomacy, or Intimidate, or whatever. (In board games, negotiation is becoming a Lost Art.)
- Vicarious Participation vs. Acting Out a Role: This also has an element of historical trend to it. In early FRPGs, players often thought of their character as themselves, and asked “what would I do in this situation?” This made lots of sense for game playing. Now it’s more common for a player to ask, “what would my character, given their background and experience, do in this situation?” This works better for RPG as storytelling machine then RPG as game.
- Rules Lawyers vs. Rule Zero: Gamers tend to have a strong opinion about this. I’ve even seen rules referred to (perhaps tongue in cheek) as “sacred texts.”
Your Turn: What dichotomies are most important to you in determining compatible play styles?
