I will step back a bit - its not that I mind tactical play when its appropriate for the character. If the character in question is a grizzled veteran of many campaigns, then its perfectly appropriate to play him in a careful, cautious, tactical manner. However, if he's a big friendly guy without much up top but has a good heart and a mean weapon arm, coming up wiht brilliant tactics or solving complicated logic puzzles is out of character and inappropriate.
And I do cater to my players, because while I like lots of action I'm more than willing to explore whatever is appropriate. Want tactical combat challenges? Make your character said grizzled veteran and you'll get your chance. However, if you want to explore unknown reaches, make an explorer, etc. The players drive the campaign.
I really don't like GNS, because its so bogged down in terminology that it isn't useful. That and most players use all three most of the time. I prefer Robin Laws' seven types of roleplayers - Power Gamer, Buttkicker, Storyteller, Method Actor, Specialist, Tactician, and Casual Gamer. While most of us fall in more than one category I find it more descriptive. I'm firmly in the Method Actor camp. When I make a character my main interest is 'will they be interesting to role-play'. There's a bit of tactician and Storyteller in me, as well as Casual Gamer.
And like I said, I'm not saying one way is wrong and another is right - its that some people like different styles. Its important to note that, otherwise you could end up with half the group playing one game and the other half playing another. And that rarely leads to somewhere good.
And I do cater to my players, because while I like lots of action I'm more than willing to explore whatever is appropriate. Want tactical combat challenges? Make your character said grizzled veteran and you'll get your chance. However, if you want to explore unknown reaches, make an explorer, etc. The players drive the campaign.
I really don't like GNS, because its so bogged down in terminology that it isn't useful. That and most players use all three most of the time. I prefer Robin Laws' seven types of roleplayers - Power Gamer, Buttkicker, Storyteller, Method Actor, Specialist, Tactician, and Casual Gamer. While most of us fall in more than one category I find it more descriptive. I'm firmly in the Method Actor camp. When I make a character my main interest is 'will they be interesting to role-play'. There's a bit of tactician and Storyteller in me, as well as Casual Gamer.
And like I said, I'm not saying one way is wrong and another is right - its that some people like different styles. Its important to note that, otherwise you could end up with half the group playing one game and the other half playing another. And that rarely leads to somewhere good.
I dislike casual, specialist & method
(my favorite part), go to dungeon, smash in doors(much fun),slay many,many beasts(much more fun), nearly die(not much fun), take much gold(back to more fun),go back to tavern, drink much more ale(much, much, much more fun
),have to leave town(because of much more ale), go to next town, repeat. Ahhh the good ole days.
(My mother's a sociologist, I'm an academic lawyer - she's usually very unimpressed by my writing & presentations because I try to make things as clear & easily comprehensible as possible, whereas Sociology seems to value obfuscation for its own sake).
