Fiddly Bits, Power Cards, and Imagination

[wolff96]

DISCLAIMER: I'm going to do my best to keep this edition neutral and I urge everyone else to do the same.

Does anyone else find systems with highly defined powers and options to limit creativity? It could be that it's just the people I game with, but that's why I'm here to ask if anyone else sees the same thing.

When I play 4e, my fellow gamers make good (often brilliant) use of their powers and make excellent tactical decisions. But it never even occurs to them to do anything else. When I wanted to temporarily blind a creature with my cloak -- the classic "throw a cloak over it's head to distract it for a few seconds" -- my fellow gamers looked at me as if I had sprouted a new head!

It's *not* the system's fault -- The DMG even has notes on players trying things not covered by their powers, advising DMs on how to handle these actions and making suggestions as to how to adjudicate them. After all, no system will EVER cover every single thing a player can come up with.

But simply by strictly defining their powers, it seems like the game put blinders on (at least some) gamers -- they don't think beyond that list. If they don't have a card for it, the action simply doesn't occur to them.

---------------------------------------------

It's by no means limited to 4e -- it's just a recent example -- but it seems like the more a system defines options, the less players try to think of anything ELSE.

A player might try to use the environment against a foe, but typically only if the DM highlights an area (pit traps, environmental hazards, that kind of thing). When's the last time a player threw sand in someone's eyes? Or carried flour in case of invisible foes? Used chalk to mark a maze? Researched a unique spell for a specific circumstance? (Just to name a few classics.)

I've slowly moved more and more towards "freeform" and "rules lite" systems. (In quotes because no two gamers ever completely agree on those terms... ) I was doing this long before 4e was even announced, so it's not a new phenomenon for me.

Is this a factor of the group / gamers I play with? Or does anyone else find that the better-defined a character's powers, the less the players are willing to experiment outside of those boundaries?

 

[Mallus]

My experience is players who enjoy coming up with 'creative solutions' -- and I use that phrase loosely-- will do so, regardless of the system used.

Conversely, players who like plumbing the depths of the system's mechanics in order to solve a problem will do so.

And even odder observation: sometimes they're the same player. I can't be the only DM with players who are both 'creative' and 'gearheads'.

 

[ExploderWizard]

In general, when a player treats the character sheet as an action menu you will get this effect. While the system isn't at fault for anything like this, the presentation of certain systems and the rewards for using the provided buttons can provide a barrier to other playing styles, especially if the players are unfamiliar with them.

 

[Scribble]

My experience is players who enjoy coming up with 'creative solutions' -- and I use that phrase loosely-- will do so, regardless of the system used.

Conversely, players who like plumbing the depths of the system's mechanics in order to solve a problem will do so.

And even odder observation: sometimes they're the same player. I can't be the only DM with players who are both 'creative' and 'gearheads'.

I agree with this.

Games with "well defined" power structures don't limit creativity any more then games without "well defined" power structures promote it.

Some people who look to the rules for what they "can" do will always look to the rules for what they can do no matter how many or how little rules there are.

Others will always try to figure out a trick they can do to let them do something different.

Power structures seem to give people who don't care to come up with non game defined methods something to do other then: "I swing my sword I guess."

Shrug- to each his own.

 

[Imaro]

Well, I personally think the problem is exacerbated in more tactically based rpg's... since one has to face the question of whether the effectiveness and viability of your actions are tactically (from the position of rules in the game) the best option or not. The crazy thing is that one usually knows the chance and precise effect of a discrete power or ability as opposed to the ad-hoc chance/effect rulings of the DM (and yes that is, even with, the guidance of something like page 42. in the DMG). Most of the time, tactically, it is more sound to go with something that you are familiar with and understand than to try and pull out a wild card.

Going a little further I also think that the more dependent other people's success in combat is on the choices and actions that other players make, the less likely one is to make fun but (possibly) tactically unsound decisions... it's just the nature of the beast... especially when there is no reward like Exalted's stunt bonus or Angel's drama points for trying something cool.

 

[Scribble]

Well, I personally think the problem is exacerbated in more tactically based rpg's... since one has to face the question of whether the effectiveness and viability of your actions are tactically (from the position of rules in the game) the best option or not.

I don't know if I agree.

I have a friend who has, since I've been gaming with him (back in the 2e days) always been the "the rules don't say I can but..." type of gamer, and now that we're playing 4e the same is still true... He just has more things to work with.

"This power lets me shift 5 squares... The rules don't say it but can I use it to shift up on that balcony crazy ninja style?"

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

In my experience, risk-averse people stick to the tried-and-true, while people who are a little more relaxed about it all are more likely to take chances on DM decisions.

If you think of it as a problem, it has come up before. Several people around here have espoused handing out an extra power card that says "Do something cool." Having that staring you in the face can't help but encourage you to take up that challenge.

Also, I think the DM should be reasonably generous when it comes up. If taking a chance on the "Do something cool" option is usually just as good as using a power (or better), people will be more likely to do it again in the future. It's empowering to see something you came up with on the spot be useful.

 

[Crothian]

I like the defined abilities and powers. It is there to help the people that are not as creative. But the few people that are creative enough to not need them them the system needs to be flexable and allow DMs and players to branch out creatively.

 

[Almacov]

My experience is players who enjoy coming up with 'creative solutions' -- and I use that phrase loosely-- will do so, regardless of the system used.

This reflects my experience too.
The players in my 4e game make frequent and unconventional use of their environments to thwart their enemies.
Last session they used a table as both a shield and a weapon (largely thanks to having a 20 STR dragonborn in the party), and slowed a bloodweb spider swarm by shovelling dirt onto it, as well as having it climb things then tossing them away.

I find if I don't nail something down there's a good chance it will be used. =P
I like it. =)

 

[Skallgrim]

Another aspect of the clearly defined system mechanics is accessibility.

Particularly in 4e (not a system criticism), where there is the excellent Character Builder available, which creates Power Cards, the players are presented with some options which are clearly spelled out, clearly defined, and easily accessible during play.

While some players may only choose these options because the cards put "blinders" on them, I have noticed that players often don't want to slow down the game with questions.

"How big is the brazier? What kind of action would it take to tip it over? How much damage would it do?".

The character, in the world, would be able to appraise that stuff pretty quickly (big brazier, hard to tip over, very, very hot), but the player has to do it while everyone else is waiting for their turn.

Then, on top of that, if the player gets all of the information which the character would absorb in a glance, and decides NOT to use the 'special action' (realizing it would hurt allies, or be too hard to do, or whatever), the player (and his comrades) might feel that all of that questioning was just wasted time.

Your power options are written on your cards, and you can mull them over when it isn't your turn, so you are ready to go when you are 'at bat'. Special actions often require conferring with the DM, so you either have to interrupt other people, or wait until your turn to start planning.

This is actually a 'creative problem' for people who are good gamers. They don't want to slow the game down, ask pointless questions, or hog the time, so they pick options that are readily available.

I would bet money that if you had two DMs, one who 'ran the encounter' and another who simply wandered around and answered questions, offered descriptions, and covered rules issues, that people would be a LOT more likely to be improvisational in a fight.

Even in rules-heavy games, like GURPS (can be), I find that more players are creative than in D&D, simply because SOME of the rules aren't presented in a convenient card format. I've played both systems with the same players and the same DM, and noticed this myself. Of course, that's purely anecdotal.