Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 7081808" data-attributes="member: 16586">[MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION]I am not a huge fan of Robin Laws' player type analysis. The intent of knowing who you are playing with and knowing what they want out of the game is mostly benign. However, in my experience, it fails to adequately capture the diversity of play experiences. I find that what motivates a player in any given moment is often a moving target. Our overall tendencies will also change over time. Furthermore it presumes conflict between things that do not have to conflict in any way. The right set of techniques and mechanics can do a lot to alleviate these conflicts. Additionally, it fails to capture the nuances within any single category. As an example, one "Method Actor" might be mostly concerned with details of characterization and color where another is more concerned with making character defining or revealing decisions and experiencing the same emotions as their character. What I find most problematic about the analysis is the idea that when we sit down to play a roleplaying game is that a given player will always be looking for the same sort of fun, rather than meaningfully taking on the interests of the game.Out of curiosity I took <a href="http://captainjoy.chunkyboy.com/RPGs/PlayerQuiz.html" target="_blank">this quiz</a> to determine my player type. Here are the results:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Method Actor - 96%</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Tactician - 75%</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Storyteller - 71%</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Power Gamer - 71%</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Butt Kicker - 46%</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Specialist - 42%</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Casual Gamer: 25%</li> </ul>When it comes to playing roleplaying games I pretty much like all of it. I am most concerned with advocating for my character vigorously and experiencing things as they do in a meaningful way. In the pursuit of those character goals I want to utilize my competitive desires and skill as a gamer. That means applying skilled fictional positioning and application of system mastery alongside a healthy dose of teamwork. I also want a compelling story to result, but I do not want to sacrifice character advocacy or skilled play in the name of getting there. I do not want to be gifted or told a story. I want to earn it and experience it through my character advocacy, skilled play, and creative contributions. I want to grab story by the throat and play in the moment. A good deal of my frustrations with playing and running mainstream games in the past was dealing with conflicts between my various desires, having to sacrifice one in the name of another. I am pretty much done with that.I get that preferences are different and we should not begrudge people their preferences. Throughout the course of this thread I have been attempting to distill down the unique values of a particular approach that I personally find rewarding and enjoyable. It's not the only approach that I find rewarding. It's not the only approach that I think people should find rewarding. I would encourage them to try it sometime, maybe in lieu of a board gaming night. I think we can enjoy many different things. I also think we should be careful not to condemn passion and thoughtful criticism. I get that I can be overzealous at times and be overly harsh in my criticism. I am trying to approach this thread thoughtfully.If you feel I am trying to put your play in a box, please tell me. I do not want to do that. I hate when people try to put my play in a box. That's why the flexible vs. focused thing vexes me so. I have experienced a great deal of very real diversity of play and played games with people of widely different backgrounds and interests within the umbrella of using these techniques. I also feel it fails to consider the unspoken assumptions and expectations that go along with most forms of adventure gaming. Things like long campaigns, the group as a gestalt character, finding the story, character as ideal, and a culture focused on outcomes rather than playing to find out. I am not saying that's like a bad way to play. I do find it to be just as specific an experience. It's just that the 1990s created this highly specific culture of play that we tend to take for granted.</blockquote>

Verification