What do you think of reality-sim players?

[S'mon]

The FR canon lawyers thread got me thinking of a good player/GM who often plays in my games. She loves the details of the campaign setting - including the details of my homebrew game world - and she loves to add to it, drawing heavily on real world history and especially anthropology, in particular with regard to non-European cultures such as Amerindian, Arabic and Japahese. She does the same in her own GMing. She is not at all antagonistic, but sometimes I feel that there is a sort of disconnect between her very real-world simulationist approach, which takes joy in the anthropological details of language, clothing etc, and my heavily pulp-fantasy approach, which is aiming more at the mood and feel of swords & sorcery, fantasy and myth, rather than reality.

At worst, it can feel a bit like what I want may be taken away from me. An example would be: I had a barbaric people based on RE Howard's savage,menacing Picts. With added detail from her, they became rather 'Dances with Wolves' real-world Amerindians. Have you experienced anything like this? What do you think about it? Any advice?

 

[Doug McCrae]

Takes all sorts. It would probably be quite boring if all the participants in an rpg session had an identical approach, and it never, ever happens anyway. As a last resort you could always put your GM foot down and scream, "Conan yes! Richard Gere nooooo!!!"

I'm running a superhero game at the moment. Even the players that are really into superhero don't have quite the same approach as me, which is heavily influenced by comics history, particularly the Silver Age. There's one player who isn't really into comics at all, his character is a secret agent Sapphire & Steel, John Steed-type, very British, contrasting a lot with the American PCs. The mix makes good things overall though I think, stuff I would never have thought of myself.

 

[Glyfair]

I know what you mean. Extremes of these two different types often cause problems in a game. Not outright conflict, but large sections where one or the other player feels bored. It usually only works well when both recognize it and try to accomadate the other viewpoint in their parts (with the help of the GM, if he isn't one of the two).

This conflict is actually why I dislike the direction that Glorantha has taken. I am the type who enjoys the mythical feel of Glorantha. The online discussions and products moved heavily to the anthrological studies of Glorantha. Indeed, you have to remove some of the real world bits, because one sub-group strongly objects to trying to pigeonhole a Gloranthan culture into a real world culture (Greg Stafford is part of that group, I believe).

 

[S'mon]

Takes all sorts. It would probably be quite boring if all the participants in an rpg session had an identical approach, and it never, ever happens anyway. As a last resort you could always put your GM foot down and scream, "Conan yes! Richard Gere nooooo!!!

Kevin Costner, not Richard Gere. Although I do scream Richard Gere nooooo!!!, also.

 

[S'mon]

Takes all sorts. It would probably be quite boring if all the participants in an rpg session had an identical approach...

Well, yes, but I do occasionally get a player on exactly the same wavelength* as me - there's one currently - and it's a wonderful experience. It doesn't seem related to rules knowledge or age, more a state of mind.


*Basically the 'Real Man' type of play from those 'What kind of RPGer are you?' tests. Not a powergamer or munchkin, the sort who thinks Kyle Reese and REH-Conan would both make good PCs.

 

[Bumbles]

At worst, it can feel a bit like what I want may be taken away from me. An example would be: I had a barbaric people based on RE Howard's savage,menacing Picts. With added detail from her, they became rather 'Dances with Wolves' real-world Amerindians. Have you experienced anything like this? What do you think about it? Any advice?

Well, the most obvious solution is to tell her to make her own soup, and not put stuff in yours. She can still take your recipes, and borrow from your spice cabinet, but it is your soup after all.

Assuming that metaphor makes sense, moving on to other options, you can also give her areas to play around with, like in the example given, have her work on some sub-tribe of the Pict-a-likes instead. Or you can take her suggestions, and prune them for the ideas you want.

 

[Korgoth]

The FR canon lawyers thread got me thinking of a good player/GM who often plays in my games. She loves the details of the campaign setting - including the details of my homebrew game world - and she loves to add to it, drawing heavily on real world history and especially anthropology, in particular with regard to non-European cultures such as Amerindian, Arabic and Japahese. She does the same in her own GMing. She is not at all antagonistic, but sometimes I feel that there is a sort of disconnect between her very real-world simulationist approach, which takes joy in the anthropological details of language, clothing etc, and my heavily pulp-fantasy approach, which is aiming more at the mood and feel of swords & sorcery, fantasy and myth, rather than reality.

At worst, it can feel a bit like what I want may be taken away from me. An example would be: I had a barbaric people based on RE Howard's savage,menacing Picts. With added detail from her, they became rather 'Dances with Wolves' real-world Amerindians. Have you experienced anything like this? What do you think about it? Any advice?

Fortunately my EPT game is full of pedants who are fascinated by languages, anthropology and theology. We have two non-pedants (one male, one female) and five pedants (four male, one female). The pedantry doesn't seem to break down on lines of politics (I'm an ultra-rightist; we've got another rightist and everybody else is left or ultra-left), literary taste (one of the non-pedants and several pedants are into S&S) or sex (male/female).

So we have our share of historical and linguistic digressions when a point of culture comes up, and our non-pedants bear it patiently.

What is also interesting is that I am not the most knowledgeable person about Tekumel in the group; two players (one male and one female) are both extremely well-versed in the setting and I sometimes lean on them for world details.

I'm curious as to what happened with your Picts: did they still get to fulfill the role you had set for them in the game? After all, even a detailed culture can be full of people who act unreasonably.

 

[S'mon]

I'm curious as to what happened with your Picts: did they still get to fulfill the role you had set for them in the game? After all, even a detailed culture can be full of people who act unreasonably.

Well, sort of: when I said "The Raven Clan have burned Fort Brathis!" it didn't inspire any fear or consternation, which it might have if my original vision had been enforced.

 

[Rechan]

I find this discussion interesting. I'm the sort who likes both playing with psychology/anthropology/theology/etc and enjoys the more pulpy colorful vibe.

Sometimes you WANT a monstrous humanoid race to have some culture to be interesting, and other times you want an irredeemable monster that is just for slaying. Finding a balance is a trick, but usually it depends on tone, setting, campaign, etc. Or just dividing things: Orcs are like Klingons - but gnolls are soul-eating demon whelps, etc.

Well, the most obvious solution is to tell her to make her own soup, and not put stuff in yours. She can still take your recipes, and borrow from your spice cabinet, but it is your soup after all.

This is my suggestion.

It would probably be quite boring if all the participants in an rpg session had an identical approach...

Depends on perspective. A group of people who all have an identical approach and like the same things sounds to me like a group who'd really get along. Because they all expect/want the same thing, and like all the same things.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

If this is something she finds engaging perhaps ask her to focus it on certain aspects of the setting. So instead of thinking about the Picts, she is thinking about and fleshing out a city-state somewhere. It could actually help in relieving some of the work-load.

I myself sort of hit the middle-ground. Though I delve into culture and such less to flesh out a world, more just to dig up concepts for stories and NPCs. Like, I make the pulpy thing to begin with then delve into and thicken it up to create a source for stories and NPCs.