Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lewpuls" data-source="post: 8328419" data-attributes="member: 30518">We've been <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/worlds-of-design-active-vs-passive%E2%80%94part-1.681131/" target="_blank">talking about active versus passive players</a>. But how do you tell which style works for your group?[ATTACH=full]139740[/ATTACH] <a href="https://pixabay.com/illustrations/book-burning-fire-learn-read-5965886/" target="_blank">Picture courtesy of Pixabay.</a><h2>Consider Computer RPGs</h2>There are lots of activities in video games, certainly, and often there's lots of opposition. Though frequently it's not human opposition, just the computer, and computers can become predictable when single player, resulting in the ability to “speed run” on succeeding plays because the player anticipates/knows what the opposition is going to do. More important, you cannot lose, you can rely on save games to extreme levels in video games, such as: here's a chest which I open several dozen times (getting something random each time), save each one, and pick the one that gave me the best result. That's a very passive sort of thing to do, even though you're doing something over and over and over again. Single player video games can become a form of management, for want of a better word, rather than a form of competition. So oddly enough, while everyone expects video games to be all about activity, they can still be quite passive when the player relies heavily on Save Games.Perhaps this is a reason why some people don’t care for computer RPGs, but do like tabletop RPGs—the former are more likely to be, ultimately, passive, the latter much more likely to be active.What about party and family games? Because people rarely care who wins party games, and many players are not ordinarily gamers, players may be more passive than active. Party games usually promote passivity insofar as there are no negative consequences for being passive; on the other hand, there are rarely drawbacks to being quite active in a party game. Family games tend to be more parallel competitions (tending to passive) and less opposed games (tending to active).Entire playing styles can fit into this distinction. Fortunately, tabletop RPGs accommodate both kinds.<h2>Applying This to Role-Playing</h2>The extreme storytelling side of RPGs, where the GM tells players a story through the game, is more likely to be satisfying for passive rather than active players. Comfort is very important in this equation. Being an active player is less comfortable, often much less comfortable than being a passive player; you may end up feeling stupid when you’re outwitted or crushed in the game. That can’t really happen in a story game. Games that attract passive players are ones where it's everybody achieves something, although some may not achieve as well as others.A GM should recognize what kind of style they’re playing, and it's important that GM- and player-styles match. People may be frustrated when they get in a game that goes the opposite way. If you want to run your RPG as an opposed game, a game people can win or lose, then you need at least one active player, preferably several. For a game that’s a storytelling mechanism for you, you probably want more passive players, so that they'll be content to go along with the story. But that’s not always the case: if you want players and GM to collaborate in making up a story, you’ll need a few active players too.<h2>Which Style Are You?</h2>The key then is this: how do you tell before a game starts whether someone is an extremely active or passive player, or somewhere toward the middle?You might get a clue if you've seen them play other games. But I think passive/active varies with the kind of activity. Someone might be a passive player of board games but an active player of RPGs. Most likely, the best way to find out is to talk with the player at some length, ask what kinds of games they like, what kinds of events they like in RPGs, and so forth. Then if you're running a game that really requires a group that leans strongly one way or the other, you can determine the play style taht works best for that player.If your campaign itself comes out somewhere in the middle, then you'll likely manage as long as all the players don't lean strongly one way.Of course, GMs can help players be more active, and can more or less suppress those who are so active that they get in the way of others (for example, the player who is constantly talking over others, even the GM). Passive players can be helped to choose characters that work for them. Have a player play a fighter, say, point the player in the right direction (so to speak), and let them have at it while other players do the heavy thinking and activity.If you've been reading “Worlds of Design” for a long time, you won't be surprised to know that I strongly favor the active side.Your Turn: Are you usually an active player or passive RPG player?</blockquote>

Verification