Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OnlineDM" data-source="post: 5615250" data-attributes="member: 90804">I'm okay being in the minority here. And maybe it's true that a Spike psychographic can be really motivated by "winning" at role-playing, but I haven't seen that yet in my (admittedly limited) experience.I do continue to feel that, at least in a game like 4e (the only game I really know well enough so far to have formed opinions about), the game will be more fun for everyone if no one greatly outshines anyone else in combat on a consistent basis (assuming that everyone at the table finds combat to be fun). And while that doesn't necessarily mean that Spike and Timmy won't have fun at the same table, my hypothesis is that they will usually have more fun if Spike plays with other Spikes and Timmy plays with other Timmies.Yes, I'm making assumptions here that the Spike psychographic is likely to have a combat-optimized character and the Timmy psychographic is not. If that assumption is wrong, then I'm wrong and Timmy and Spike can probably play together just fine.I just don't think the Timmy/Johnny/Spike analysis is as useful for a game like D&D as it is for a game like Magic. Somewhat useful, maybe, but it's REALLY useful for Magic design. I think it's likely that all three psychographics can enjoy a game like D&D, but I don't think it's as useful for D&D designers to think of players in those buckets as it is for Magic designers.</blockquote>