Timmy, Johnny, & Spike - Rules for different types of players

If Spike is the only Spike in the group, this will probably work out great. Assuming Spike doesn't set out to "win" as the DM (and I doubt that he will - being a DM is a different animal), he'll probably do a good job of running the game because he likely understands the ins and outs of the system very well (being a Spike and all).

And if there aren't other Spikes at the table, the play styles of the remaining players will probably mesh nicely. Unless you get in there and screw everything up, of course, ThirdWizard. ;)
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't know what I am. In Magic I like effects that are either 1) very random, 2) hurt me as much as the enemy, and 3) move the game on at an extremely fast pace.

So, yeah, maybe I'll sabotage the whole game! :D
 

We have a guy in our group that will change how he approaches these issues depending on the character he is playing. If the character is more like Timmy in his approach, in game, then that is what the player does, too. Sometimes, he will go for a blend. Sometimes, he goes for one of the extremes--because none of the other players (or characters) fits that niche.

He likes to stir things up. OTOH, he is also a really nice guy that likes to support other characters mechanically, and involve other players in the roleplaying. He will quite happily set up a Timmy to get the big result, then turn around and help a Johnny pull off the intricate plan.

I think this may be a characteristic of some players that have spent significant time DMing. I know when I play, I try to be like that. I've spent so much time behind the screen, that even with a single character, I'm trying to help everyone else get where they want to go--and kind of lost with what a single character really wants. :p
 


This is a good list of ideas, but I think you're missing how a Timmy player can be a real problem at the game table. I'm sure we've all run into players who were simply not playing the game in order to engage in a strategic enterprise. Timmy is having fun, but what is fun for him can become a nuisance for others. In fact, by being oblivious enough to the risks and current strategic standing of the game he can become yet another obstacle to enjoyable play for other player types (their puzzling out of the rules to achieve their own ends - whatever those may be).

...

I think a problematic Timmy is best dealt with through determining shared goals at the table. "Do something fun" isn't nearly descriptive enough to help the other players or DM provide collective enjoyment at the table. How shared goals are instituted can be designed into a game's rules or made by each group.

That's an excellent point, and I must admit I don't have quite as firm a grasp on the Timmy idea. (Some of the more recent posts have been helpful in that regard.) I'm also not quite sure how to use mechanics to influence the problematic Timmy to be a better team player, at least not without being hokey. Would the Timmy enjoy something similar in feel to Dread's Jenga tower, where the build in tension is palpable, and difficult successes can be incredibly rewarding? What if there were a mechanic to represent the collective goals of the group, and the Timmy could specialize in such as way as to set himself up for a crowning moment of awesome?
 

To further define Timmy, Spike and Johnny, let's ask them what they would transform into if they were high level druids!

Timmy: I would transform into a Freakin' T-REX! Why? BECAUSE I WOULD BE A FREAKIN' T-REX! Why would I need to explain it! T-REX!!!!

Spike: The Rep-mender! It's a creature from "Monsters of the Vhine." With it's high natural armor, 60ft movement, heightened senses, and flying powers, I can win any possible encounter that may happen.

Johnny: A Beaver! Why you may ask? Well it's all part of my build! I had to search through 20 splat books but I finally made the ultimate architect for the Pathfinder game I'm in! I can't wait until I recreate Yankee's stadium in game!
 


Evoker or barbarian.


Illusionist, Bard, or Thief. I'm pretty sure I play as a Johnny.


Fighter/Magic User/Thief, Bladesinger, CoDzilla, Twin Strike Ranger something found on the CharOp forums.

Don't forget Melvin and Vorthos!

Vorthos is mainly a flavor guy while Melvin is mainly a mechanics guy. It seems that half the fights here are between Vorthos and Melvins once you think about it.

Vorthos: Invoker, Warlock, Assassin.
Melvin: ???
 


That's an excellent point, and I must admit I don't have quite as firm a grasp on the Timmy idea. (Some of the more recent posts have been helpful in that regard.) I'm also not quite sure how to use mechanics to influence the problematic Timmy to be a better team player, at least not without being hokey. Would the Timmy enjoy something similar in feel to Dread's Jenga tower, where the build in tension is palpable, and difficult successes can be incredibly rewarding? What if there were a mechanic to represent the collective goals of the group, and the Timmy could specialize in such as way as to set himself up for a crowning moment of awesome?
What are your hokey ideas then? :) I'm willing to listen. Dread uses the Jenga tower beautifully to challenge the players manual dexterity. I think it also instills so much tension because the players believe that test is something they can control, sort of like video games where the avatar is moved around the screen to avoid or kill enemies. (I can see them twisting around in their chairs with controllers in hand now) In Timmy terms, I think he would like the game as long as he enjoyed Jenga. There are people, regardless of player typing, who may not like it or have more physical difficulty removing blocks than most.

What ideas do you have for a goal mechanic? I was thinking more self-selected game objectives by the players, which they then share and negotiate in a kind of diplomacy manner to set short or long term team objectives. Diplomacy is an mechanic, I guess, but a "we do it my way" mechanic by, for instance, spending resources would turn me off.
 

What are your hokey ideas then? :) I'm willing to listen. Dread uses the Jenga tower beautifully to challenge the players manual dexterity. I think it also instills so much tension because the players believe that test is something they can control, sort of like video games where the avatar is moved around the screen to avoid or kill enemies. (I can see them twisting around in their chairs with controllers in hand now) In Timmy terms, I think he would like the game as long as he enjoyed Jenga. There are people, regardless of player typing, who may not like it or have more physical difficulty removing blocks than most.

What ideas do you have for a goal mechanic? I was thinking more self-selected game objectives by the players, which they then share and negotiate in a kind of diplomacy manner to set short or long term team objectives. Diplomacy is an mechanic, I guess, but a "we do it my way" mechanic by, for instance, spending resources would turn me off.

I'm thinking along similar lines. One problem I have is that, in general, I shy away from gamist mechanics unless I can ground them in the setting. Still, one idea I had was to create a pool of drama points that ebbs and flows in the battle. On a player's turn he can specify a dramatic action and use the points in the pool to accomplish it, or he can take an action in order to set up an even more dramatic action and add a point to the drama pool. Ignoring the pool would have no effect, and perhaps changing the dramatic goal would require removing a point. Eventually someone can spend those points to make something big happen. This needn't be part of combat, it could be a tool in intense negotiations. For example, if the PCs know a courtier is having a scandalous affair, in a conversation with king's court they might try and provoke him into incriminating himself. The drama points build as they push his buttons, and then one player can spend them for the final barb that pushes him over the edge.

I was also thinking about some variation of FATE aspects. For example, give the player the ability to temporarily apply an aspect to a creature or situation which he can dramatically exploit at a later time.

Taking inspiration from Dread I would probably not want to use a literal Jenga tower unless there were some weird metaphysical reason that makes sense in the game, but that growing feeling of unease is really powerful. For example, the player can use some resource to gain a more powerful benefit, but each time he does so future uses of that resource have higher risk/reward. If carefully designed into the game there could be a drive to spend this resource as quick as possible in order to end the fight, while holding onto a reserve so that you can more easily block the enemy's empowered actions. I guess that would mean you could spend early to gain a benefit right away, but it will be harder for you to block your enemy's most powerful abilities later. Eventually in this idea the "tower falls" and someone gets screwed.

To go with a more explicitly team-oriented option, perhaps we repurpose the often overlooked "aid another" action or equivalent so that the best effects are achieved only by intricate teamwork. For example, at the start of each round each player proposes the action they would like to take. They can choose to act on their own, but the players are given the option to help one of the other players move toward their dramatic action. This system would probably have a mechanic that replaces the usual initiative system, perhaps by bidding. The most powerful dramatic actions would occur later in the round, so an enemy has greater opportunity to screw it up, but in certain circumstances they might be able to pull off something incredible. If done right this system could beautifully handle situations like extremely complex Mexican standoffs, where the first person to go sets off a chain of events that quickly gets out of hand.

Finally, in a weird twist, perhaps each player would have to specify an action they think an opponent could take against them that would be particularly dramatic. I would want to incentivize the player so they would think of the most over-the-top dramatic thing possible, and then incentivize the opponent to want to try it. I'm not sure how. However, it gives the party a powerful way to influence their opponents actions. For example, a dramatic attack against the fighter might be too good to pass up for an enemy duelist, but leaves him open to the attacks of one of the other PCs. In short, a creature can oblige its enemies to great effect, but that must always be balanced against the fact that now it's doing what, in some sense, they want. (I am flashing back to every kung-fu movie where one of them invites the other to attack.) I'm not sure how this would work mechanically, but I think the concept is cool.

All of these would probably work better in a narrative game. I'm not sure how to smoothly work them in to something crunchier like D&D with combats that usually have tightly defined rules and interactions.
 

Remove ads

Top