Nifft
Penguin Herder
We, uh, hit faeries with the flowers. In the bag. Yeah, that's the ticket.Ahem, that's flour. While both can be used for romance, you only use one for baking.
, -- N
We, uh, hit faeries with the flowers. In the bag. Yeah, that's the ticket.Ahem, that's flour. While both can be used for romance, you only use one for baking.
This competitive build approach also causes them to become more interested in a particular game and it's intricacies in order to better show off their skill in said game. Now yes, I think some of this is due to the competitive factor in most young boys... but I also think most young boys are naturally competitive in some way with most "games"... even if it is a cooperative one. Most kills, highest damage, best items, etc. are all ways they may measure themselves... and games that require system mastery allow them to do this in a way that keeps them engaged and interested... it's one of the reasons I think CCG's were and still are so popular amongst young gamers.
The RPG you see them playing was intentionally designed to feature system mastery. Anyone you see playing it and enjoying it in the way it was designed to be played and enjoyed can therefore seem as if this is what they wanted and needed all along. But, you note you don't have proof, so...Okay, first let me state upfront that I don't have any data or proof or anything... and most of this is just thoughts and conjecture from observing my son and nephews play games ( videogames, ccg, roleplaying, board and SW miniatures)... but I'm starting to think system mastery might be something the younger generation enjoys and maybe even craves in games.
According to this blog by Monte Cook Ivory Tower Game Design it isn't necessarily always, but it can be. Of course people find it enjoyable when they figure out better ways of doing things. This is the whole point of building in system mastery - to enable that. The problem is that it turns out that is actually a short-sighted view towards game design.I know us experienced gamers have a tendency to decry system mastery as an objectively bad thing in roleplaying games... we tend to believe that we shouldn't have to sacrifice effectiveness in one area for aother or that there shouldn't be hidden traps and "not-so-obvious" choices that are objectively better or worse than others... but in observing my son and nephews I am starting to think this is an aspect of gameplay that they, and many of their peers, find enjoyable. Even though old hats may have grown into a dislike of it... is it really an objectively bad thing in game design.
And again, a flaw in System Mastery is that until you DO learn the system and weed the crap out of it you have intentionally had that part of your gaming experience subverted. That subversion may even continue as the player who HASN'T learned the tricks of the game is INTENDED to suck just so that the player who HAS learned the tricks can feel superior. Okay, maybe that's not QUITE what was intended - but that is a common practical reality.My son and his cousins take pleasure in constructing their decks/Star Wars armies/rpg characters/etc. and showing how "awesome" of an entity (for lack of a better all encompasing word) that they have created. They also enjoy the fact that better choices lead to a recognizably better game entity.
WotC did indeed draw System Mastery and other elements directly from their Pokemon and Magic CCG's. But D&D is not a CCG; it's NOT a game of competition, but of cooperation. In drawing System Mastery from their CCG's they DID start to turn D&D into a game of competition. My build is better than yours, has a flip side - my build SUCKS compared to yours so now I'm frustrated and disappointed just because YOU found a loophole that I didn't.This competitive build approach also causes them to become more interested in a particular game and it's intricacies in order to better show off their skill in said game. Now yes, I think some of this is due to the competitive factor in most young boys... but I also think most young boys are naturally competitive in some way with most "games"... even if it is a cooperative one. Most kills, highest damage, best items, etc. are all ways they may measure themselves... and games that require system mastery allow them to do this in a way that keeps them engaged and interested... it's one of the reasons I think CCG's were and still are so popular amongst young gamers.
Go on to a new system. Or buy a supplement with new rules for the present one. For a system master, the exploration of system is the fun part of the game. Understanding a new system, finding out what rocks and what sucks.But then what happens when players have played for a while?
Not so cool is sitting at home away from the other players working out your 20/30-level build.
No, I don't think so. What it means is that some choices are, in certain situations, better or worse than others. Grappling in 3e is an awesome tactic if you're a big, strong creature fighting a small, weak spellcaster. It sucks if you're a gnome fighting a hill giant. That doesn't mean grappling is always a bad choice. Mastering the intricacies of the grappling system allows you to know when you should try grappling and when you shouldn't.The "definition" of System Mastery (as given by Monte Cook above) is, "players are rewarded for achieving mastery of the rules and making good choices rather than poor ones." It means that bad choices are INTENTIONALLY provided in the game.