The Essentials articles are atrocious.

[Garthanos]

I hope you know I just was jokeing with that post...

well of course

 

[EarthSeraphEdna]

Incidentally, the simple reason why player categorizations don't align with G/N/S is that one deals with player types and the other deals with games and game mechanics. It's like complaining that the mammal/bird/reptile/amphibian categorizations don't align with the igneous/sedimenary/metamorphic categories for rocks.

I had never stated that G/N/S was more correct than Timmy/Johnny/Spike/Melvin/Vorthos. For this matter, the former would probably be even more incorrect; it is simply that the former tends to get thrown around more as a player stereotype (even though it is meant for game design).

 

[WalterKovacs]

You won't see all the spiders who disagree with you... until it is far too late.

"Mua-ha-ha!", -- N

Spiders have poisonous bites ... I believe he was refering to things like the colorful frogs that are poisonous if eaten. Method of catching prey vs. defense mechanism.

 

[Xris Robin]

Bites are venomous. Poisonous is something toxic when eaten or touched.

 

[AllisterH]

This may sound silly, but if we're going to use categories, why not use the ones that the 4e DMGs refer to?

Honestly, they seem WAY more appropriate/useful than the magic categories.

 

[catsclaw227]

I recommend (if we're talking 4e) that we use the DMG/DMG2 archetypes. I don't have my DMG2 here with me so I can't list them.

<snip>

The Actor
The Explorer
The Instigator
The Power Gamer
The Slayer
The Storyteller
The Thinker
The Watcher

This may sound silly, but if we're going to use categories, why not use the ones that the 4e DMGs refer to?

Honestly, they seem WAY more appropriate/useful than the magic categories.

Exactly what I was trying to say a page or two ago. It makes most sense.
And, like Robin Laws' categorizations, most of us are a mix of more than one player archetype.

 

[AllisterH]

Those classifications make more sense definitely.

I imagine most of the people who are troubled by the math are the power gamer types. The Slayer maybe as well since if he can't connect, he can't SLAY anything.

 

[Garthanos]

Do they provide insight on power selection? There can be multiple valid analysis methods depending on the goals. If I want to recommend power selection how do those categories help?

 

[AllisterH]

Do they provide insight on power selection? There can be multiple valid analysis methods depending on the goals. If I want to recommend power selection how do those categories help?

I think they do for SOME, since the classifications are what the players want/get out of the game.

For example, the power gamer is always going to pick the sky-blue/best optimized power for their character.

Similarly, the Slayer is going to pick the power that makes the most impact on the board which may or may not be the "best" power.

However, the Thinker and Watcher? The latter probably doesn't care what power he has whereas the Thinker similarly, isn't looking for any specific optimized power.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

This may sound silly, but if we're going to use categories, why not use the ones that the 4e DMGs refer to?

Honestly, they seem WAY more appropriate/useful than the magic categories.

Partially because of the same difference between Robin's Law stuff and the Magic archetypes. The player categories tell you what each type of player wants out of the game. It doesn't really tell you how they interact with the rule.

No matter how much of an "Actor" a player is, it won't really tell you whether that player likes a 2[w] power or a 1[w] power that dazes. In fact, a number of the player types could care less what power they take each level since that isn't the focus of the game for them. In fact, it's possible an "Actor" will use completely different criteria when evaluating game mechanics choices for their character than they would when making role playing choices for their character.

The Magic player types are much better at this sort of thing as they are specifically designed to see how people react to a small bit of game mechanics written on a card when compared to others.