Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Worlds of Design: What's Your Style?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="lewpuls" data-source="post: 7775005" data-attributes="member: 30518"><p>You may benefit, as a GM, from understanding where your players stand in the spectrum from Romantic to Classical game player. The terms derive from music and philosophy. I discussed one point of view about game playing styles in an earlier column ("<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?4269-A-Different-Look-at-Player-Styles-Planners-and-Improvisers" target="_blank">Different look at playing styles</a>"). This one is much older in origin.[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK]</p><p> </p><p style="text-align: center">[ATTACH]104437[/ATTACH]</p> <p style="text-align: center">Photo by <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/Gx1jNNcvgqA?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText" target="_blank">Corentin Marzin</a><span style="color: #111111"><span style="font-family: '-apple-system'"> on </span></span><a href="https://unsplash.com/search/photos/gamer-type?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText" target="_blank">Unsplash</a></p><p></p><p>When I originally discussed classical and romantic play styles in 1982 I was thinking in terms of boardgames more than card games or RPGs. In 2019 boardgames are still purchased more than RPGs, though the tendency of boardgamers is to play a game 1 to 3 times and then move on to another one. At the same time we have an entire generation (Millennials) for whom avatar games seem to be the natural fit, whether video games or RPGs. And <strong>Magic: The Gathering </strong>has changed the game landscape since 1982.)</p><p> </p><p>Hearkening back to the well-known nineteenth century distinction in music, painting, and other arts, I call the two basic playing styles the Classical and the Romantic. (One might be called conservative and calculating, the other bold and more risky.)</p><p>[h=3]Classical[/h]The Classical player tries to know each game inside-out. They want to learn the best counter to every move their opponent (the monsters and GM) might make. They take nothing for granted, paying attention to little details which probably won't matter but which could be important. The Classical player does not avoid taking chances, but they carefully calculate the consequences of their risks. They dislike unnecessary risks. Yes, many RPGs may appear to be "dice games," but the Classical player's purpose is to avoid having to rely on the dice to save lives.</p><p> </p><p>Classical players prefer a slow but steady certain success to a quick but only probable success. They try not to be overcautious, however, for fear of becoming predictable. They maximize their minimum gain each turn - as the perfect player of mathematical game theory is expected to do - rather than try things that could gain a lot but which might leave them and their party worse off than when they started. A cliché among football fans is that the best teams win by making fewer mistakes, letting the other team beat itself. So it is with the Classical gamer, who concentrates on eliminating errors rather than on discovering brilliant coups. </p><p> </p><p>Some people call this the "minimax" style of play. That is close to the game theory term, but as used in gaming "minimaxer" and "Classical" are not the same thing. Gaming Minimaxers are people who pay close attention to numbers and odds, which Classical players also do. In the actual tactical and strategic decisions they make they may be Classical or Romantic.</p><p> </p><p>Virtually no one, not even as Classical a player as I am, always plays classically in RPGs. RPGs encourage the bold move because, after all, they're <strong>adventures</strong>. "Do you wanna live forever?" is part of the ethos of these games.</p><p></p><p>Some people refer to Classical players with derision as "mathematical" players. It's true that Classical players are concerned with odds and expected losses (though this alone doesn't identify or qualify a person as a Classical player). Nonetheless, Classical players do quite well in non-mathematical games. Which certainly includes RPGs.</p><p>[h=3]Romantic[/h]The Romantic looks for the decisive blow which will cripple the enemy, psychologically if not physically. They wish to convince their opponent of the inevitability of defeat, whatever the actuality may be. The Romantic is willing to take risks in order to disrupt enemy plans and throw the game into a line of play the opponent cannot handle. They look for opportunities for a big gain, rather than maximize their minimum gain. A flamboyant but only probable win is their goal. They may make mistakes, but they hope to seize victory rather than wait for the enemy to make mistakes. The Romantic player may be a little sloppy about seemingly minor details; if they get in their decisive blow(s) they won't need to worry about little things, and if the big coups fail those little things won't make a difference in the result.</p><p>[h=3]Player Types & RPGs[/h]RPGs are unusual insofar as there is no player enemy, but both playing styles can be discerned. The Classical player tries to avoid a reliance on dice, though must accept the occasional melee (where luck tends to average out). They hate to roll a saving throw. They like to devise thorough, sometimes complicated plans to defeat a monster or trap with the minimum of risk. The Romantic doesn't mind risking a saving throw against spells or whatever in order to get in his blow at the enemy. Sometimes he likes to rely on guile and bluff. The second level character who pretended to be a twentieth level magic-user and slapped a dragon in the face must be accounted a Romantic!</p><p> </p><p>Don't confuse intuitive play with the Romantic. I would assert, however, that Classical players tend to rely on logic, and Romantic players tend to rely on intuition and "yomi" (reading and anticipating the enemy's intentions). Many good players depend on intuition rather than study and logic to make good moves (even chess champion Jose Capablanca), yet the moves can be either Classical or Romantic. A Romantic player can also be a very cerebral/intellectual player who happens to prefer the Romantic style. </p><p></p><p>So what kind of player are you?</p><p></p><p><em>This article was contributed by Lewis Pulsipher (<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/list.php?author/30518-lewpuls" target="_blank">lewpuls</a>) as part of EN World's Columnist (ENWC) program. Lew was Contributing Editor to Dragon, White Dwarf, and Space Gamer magazines and contributed monsters to TSR's original Fiend Folio, including the Elemental Princes of Evil, denzelian, and poltergeist. You can follow Lew on his <a href="http://www.pulsiphergames.com/" target="_blank">web site</a> and his <a href="https://www.udemy.com/user/drlewispulsipher/" target="_blank">Udemy course landing page</a>. If you enjoy the daily news and articles from EN World, please consider <a href="https://www.patreon.com/enworld" target="_blank">contributing to our Patreon!</a></em></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="lewpuls, post: 7775005, member: 30518"] You may benefit, as a GM, from understanding where your players stand in the spectrum from Romantic to Classical game player. The terms derive from music and philosophy. I discussed one point of view about game playing styles in an earlier column ("[URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?4269-A-Different-Look-at-Player-Styles-Planners-and-Improvisers"]Different look at playing styles[/URL]"). This one is much older in origin.[PRBREAK][/PRBREAK] [CENTER][ATTACH=CONFIG]104437[/ATTACH] Photo by [URL="https://unsplash.com/photos/Gx1jNNcvgqA?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText"]Corentin Marzin[/URL][COLOR=#111111][FONT=-apple-system] on [/FONT][/COLOR][URL="https://unsplash.com/search/photos/gamer-type?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText"]Unsplash[/URL][/CENTER] When I originally discussed classical and romantic play styles in 1982 I was thinking in terms of boardgames more than card games or RPGs. In 2019 boardgames are still purchased more than RPGs, though the tendency of boardgamers is to play a game 1 to 3 times and then move on to another one. At the same time we have an entire generation (Millennials) for whom avatar games seem to be the natural fit, whether video games or RPGs. And [B]Magic: The Gathering [/B]has changed the game landscape since 1982.) Hearkening back to the well-known nineteenth century distinction in music, painting, and other arts, I call the two basic playing styles the Classical and the Romantic. (One might be called conservative and calculating, the other bold and more risky.) [h=3]Classical[/h]The Classical player tries to know each game inside-out. They want to learn the best counter to every move their opponent (the monsters and GM) might make. They take nothing for granted, paying attention to little details which probably won't matter but which could be important. The Classical player does not avoid taking chances, but they carefully calculate the consequences of their risks. They dislike unnecessary risks. Yes, many RPGs may appear to be "dice games," but the Classical player's purpose is to avoid having to rely on the dice to save lives. Classical players prefer a slow but steady certain success to a quick but only probable success. They try not to be overcautious, however, for fear of becoming predictable. They maximize their minimum gain each turn - as the perfect player of mathematical game theory is expected to do - rather than try things that could gain a lot but which might leave them and their party worse off than when they started. A cliché among football fans is that the best teams win by making fewer mistakes, letting the other team beat itself. So it is with the Classical gamer, who concentrates on eliminating errors rather than on discovering brilliant coups. Some people call this the "minimax" style of play. That is close to the game theory term, but as used in gaming "minimaxer" and "Classical" are not the same thing. Gaming Minimaxers are people who pay close attention to numbers and odds, which Classical players also do. In the actual tactical and strategic decisions they make they may be Classical or Romantic. Virtually no one, not even as Classical a player as I am, always plays classically in RPGs. RPGs encourage the bold move because, after all, they're [B]adventures[/B]. "Do you wanna live forever?" is part of the ethos of these games. Some people refer to Classical players with derision as "mathematical" players. It's true that Classical players are concerned with odds and expected losses (though this alone doesn't identify or qualify a person as a Classical player). Nonetheless, Classical players do quite well in non-mathematical games. Which certainly includes RPGs. [h=3]Romantic[/h]The Romantic looks for the decisive blow which will cripple the enemy, psychologically if not physically. They wish to convince their opponent of the inevitability of defeat, whatever the actuality may be. The Romantic is willing to take risks in order to disrupt enemy plans and throw the game into a line of play the opponent cannot handle. They look for opportunities for a big gain, rather than maximize their minimum gain. A flamboyant but only probable win is their goal. They may make mistakes, but they hope to seize victory rather than wait for the enemy to make mistakes. The Romantic player may be a little sloppy about seemingly minor details; if they get in their decisive blow(s) they won't need to worry about little things, and if the big coups fail those little things won't make a difference in the result. [h=3]Player Types & RPGs[/h]RPGs are unusual insofar as there is no player enemy, but both playing styles can be discerned. The Classical player tries to avoid a reliance on dice, though must accept the occasional melee (where luck tends to average out). They hate to roll a saving throw. They like to devise thorough, sometimes complicated plans to defeat a monster or trap with the minimum of risk. The Romantic doesn't mind risking a saving throw against spells or whatever in order to get in his blow at the enemy. Sometimes he likes to rely on guile and bluff. The second level character who pretended to be a twentieth level magic-user and slapped a dragon in the face must be accounted a Romantic! Don't confuse intuitive play with the Romantic. I would assert, however, that Classical players tend to rely on logic, and Romantic players tend to rely on intuition and "yomi" (reading and anticipating the enemy's intentions). Many good players depend on intuition rather than study and logic to make good moves (even chess champion Jose Capablanca), yet the moves can be either Classical or Romantic. A Romantic player can also be a very cerebral/intellectual player who happens to prefer the Romantic style. So what kind of player are you? [I]This article was contributed by Lewis Pulsipher ([URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/list.php?author/30518-lewpuls"]lewpuls[/URL]) as part of EN World's Columnist (ENWC) program. Lew was Contributing Editor to Dragon, White Dwarf, and Space Gamer magazines and contributed monsters to TSR's original Fiend Folio, including the Elemental Princes of Evil, denzelian, and poltergeist. You can follow Lew on his [URL="http://www.pulsiphergames.com/"]web site[/URL] and his [URL="https://www.udemy.com/user/drlewispulsipher/"]Udemy course landing page[/URL]. If you enjoy the daily news and articles from EN World, please consider [URL="https://www.patreon.com/enworld"]contributing to our Patreon![/URL][/I] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Worlds of Design: What's Your Style?
Top