RPGnet <http://www.rpg.net> 	

<http://www.rpg.net/slib/ads/forward-ad.php?nextURL=http://www.polymancerstudios.com&imageURL=http://www.rpg.net/images/ads/polymancer3.jpg>

	Reviews <http://www.rpg.net/reviews/> 	Forums <http://forum.rpg.net>

News & Press <http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/press.phtml> 	Columns &

Info <http://www.rpg.net/columns/index.phtml> 	RPG Wiki

<http://wiki.rpg.net> 	RPG Shop <http://shop.rpg.net> 	

<http://www.rpg.net/members/>

      The Impossible Dream

    Player Goals

*by Hunter Logan*

Feb 10,2003

*Player Goals*

The Impossible Dream Installment #3

by Hunter Logan

Intro

The topic of the day is player goals and my thoughts about how to

support those goals in the game design. I suppose this also really

addresses how to support a player's desired style of play. I know a lot

of other people have tackled this. It has resulted in some rather large

and impressive bodies of work filled to overflowing with good ideas. The

most noteworthy efforts I know of resulted in grandiose three-fold

theories called GDS, GNS, and GEN. These are among /The Things That

Shall Not Be Named on rpg.net/, and for good reason. Mentioning them

often brings about a massive flame war. But before you unleash the

flames, rest assured I'm not going to discuss any of those.

After a very long campaign of research and discussion, I have concluded

that those esteemed (and oft reviled) theories don't work very well.

There are a lot of reasons for this, but I'll save the debate for

another day. Suffice to say, from my exploration of those works, I

developed this list of player goals and suggestions for supporting those

goals. Because we are roleplayers and this is about designing RPGs, I

formatted the goals on the list as roles that a player can take during

play. As always, this is the way I conceptualize these things. The list

is hardly all-inclusive, but I think it covers a lot of the important

bases and it's a good start.

The Big List

I don't think many designers consciously choose goals to support or not

support from a list like this, but the list may be a useful tool. Some

of the names are colorful, but this is out of appreciation, not

derision. Thus, I present */The Big List:/*

    * */Conqueror:/* Wants to kill monsters, smite the unworthy, and

      otherwise demonstrate the character's superiority over the enemy.

      The Conqueror really needs only three things to find happiness: A

      weapon that inflicts heinous damage, plenty of character skill for

      using the weapon, and ample opportunity to put both to good use.

      This is more about what the character can do than what the player

      can do. Also, the field need not be restricted to killing

      monsters. It might include sneaking around and stealing stuff,

      bartering with extreme efficiency, lying glibly, etc, etc. The

      bottom line here is simple: When the Conqueror rolls the dice

      within his character's area of expertise and gets good results, he

      expects to see big fireworks. And I want to see them, too.

          o Players who hold this goal in esteem may try to find what

            they're looking for in just about any game they play. If

            they can't find it, frustration may cause them to bend the

            rules to get what they want. The methods don't have to be

            pretty; they just have to produce the desired results.

          o Designers can support this by writing the game so that great

            expertise and good equipment consistently produce satisfying

            results.

    * */Creator:/* Wants direct control over various aspects of the game

      world and what happens in the game. Creators want to set the scene

      and determine the course of the action beyond the character.

          o Most creators end up sitting in the GM seat and may feel

            dissatisfied when denied the power to make things happen.

          o It's pretty easy to give Creators what they want, but if you

            want to put this in your game, this absolutely has to have

            designer support. Without support, it's really not going to

            happen. At least it hasn't ever happened for me.

    * */Detective:/* Wants to gather clues and solve mysteries.

      Designers can include means for players to find the clues needed

      to solve the mysteries, but mysteries themselves are more a part

      of the game world and the adventure than the game's system design.

      So, designers can support this by writing adventures that include

      mysteries for the player to solve.

    * */Explorer:/* Wants to explore the game world. Explorers want to

      see interesting sights, meet unusual beings, and encounter strange

      things. The dedicated explorer is probably more interested in the

      setting than in the game system. So, the designer can support this

      by providing a great setting for the game.

    * */Facilitator:/* Plays the game with the goal of helping other

      players realize their goals for the game. This is most often a

      goal for the GM, but players can choose to help the GM by playing

      along when needed. The designer might want to consider providing a

      bit of /Facilitator Training/ for GMs programmed to rule their

      games with iron dice.

    * */Gambler:/* Wants to take risks and experience the thrill of

      rolling the dice. This is easily supported with mechanics that

      provide a high degree of randomness in the outcome

    * */Gatherer:/* Plays the game to gather as much reward as possible.

      This may include experience points, levels, money, power, special

      equipment, and other measures of increasing character ability or

      character prestige.

          o It's easy for designers to support the Gatherer by including

            rules for character advancement and supplying items like

            experience or levels that the player can gather.

          o Further support can be included in the setting. A

            never-ending supply of improved weapons, treasure, and other

            specialty items will help keep the Gatherer hooked on the game.

          o A word of caution: It's my experience that players often

            build up a whole lot of goodies in a fairly short amount of

            time. It seems that after a while, players reach a

            /breakaway point/, a point where they have gathered so much

            experience and so much good stuff that their characters are

            unstoppable juggernauts unleashed on the game world. If you

            plan to support the Gatherer's desires, you may also need to

            plan for what happens as the characters become better,

            stronger, and faster.

    * */Negotiator:/* Plays the game to parley with NPCs and other

      characters in the game. The assumption here is, the player

      actually wants to do some of the talking for his character. The

      designer can support this in rules and in the setting. In the

      rules, the designer can pay attention to parley as an important

      process in the game. In the setting, designer can provide lot of

      interesting NPCs who want to negotiate.

    * */Passenger:/* Wants to see the story unfold and find out what

      happens next and hopes for a wild ride. I don't have much to say

      about this, except to note that any player may choose to take this

      position.

    * */Personator:/* Wants to portray the character as fully as

      possible from the comfort of the gaming table. From my own

      experience and from talking to others, I think some players really

      want to mentally /be/ the character. This touches on the ideas

      about immersion. It's an exercise of the imagination, an attempt

      to experience life in the game world from the character's point of

      view.

          o The player tries to put himself in his character's mindset

            and contemplate events in the game as the character would

            contemplate events in the game. Of course, this means that

            the player's decisions and declared actions should be

            exactly what the character would do in the same situation.

            It's not perfect, but it's as close as a player can get to

            "being there" from the comfort of the gaming table.

          o I have read much discussion about the validity of immersion,

            and I am not fighting that battle. I accept the intent

            within its context. I have tried it. I never forgot I was

            still me sitting at the gaming table, and I had fun. It is a

            demanding way to play, so it is not for everyone. But it

            certainly deserves some consideration for designer support.

            Whether or not you choose to provide that support in your

            game is up to you.

          o There is one other danger with supporting this goal. Some

            GMs may expect the players to be personators. A lot of

            times, it's true and works very well; but other times, it

            doesn't work. A guy who wants to play a smooth or suave

            character may play the character because he's not smooth or

            suave. Designers might want to include mechanical solutions

            to this sort of problem. You can also handle this with notes

            and examples.

    * */Puzzle Solver:/* Plays to solve the puzzles that come up during

      game play.

          o Support for this is primarily written into scenarios for the

            game. The designer can add puzzles to scenarios thus giving

            the Puzzle Solver something to do.

          o When puzzles are provided, it might be a good idea to also

            include mechanical means of solving the problem. It's fine

            to include the puzzle, but if the players can't or don't

            want to solve the puzzle, it might be a good idea to supply

            alternative means of resolution so that the game doesn't

            grind to a halt.

    * */Scientist:/* Plays the game as an experiment to see what will

      happen. Scientists do things to evoke responses. They expect that

      sometimes experiments will go awry. They know bad things may

      happen to their characters or the game world, and this is okay.

      The designer doesn't really need to support this sort of thing.

      Players and GMs will do it or not do it as they see fit. Still, if

      the designer does actively try to support it, the results might be

      like Greg Costikyan's <http://www.costik.com/home.html> */Paranoia/*.

    * */Storyteller:/* Plays to tell stories about the character in the

      game world. Some storytellers want to end up with good stories

      that they can reflect on or share with others about their

      adventures in the game world. Others really want to tell the story

      of their characters through play. They may want to show how their

      characters overcome adversity or transform themselves over time or

      something similar. I think there is room in roleplaying for better

      support of the storyteller goal. The actual form of that support

      may be similar to support provided for creators.

    * */Tactician:/* Plays the game to solve tactical problems, outsmart

      enemies, and overcome obstacles. Any resources available to the

      player in the game can be used to solve tactical problems in the

      game. Unlike the Conqueror, the Tactician is interested in using

      his own personal skill to meet the challenge at hand.

          o Tactical play does not necessarily mean wargaming. It's more

            about decision-making and carefully exercising options on

            limited resources in order to meet the player's goals for

            the character in the game.

          o The designer can support tactical play by providing

            resources for the player to manage and tactical situations

            for the player to resolve.

          o I now refer you to Brian Gleichman's article, Elements of

            Tactics

            <http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/elements01nov02.html>,

            for more information. 

    * */Wargamer:/* Wants to break out the miniatures and play a wargame

      as part of the RPG experience. A designer can support this by

      including rules for using miniatures and providing a combat system

      system that is really a war game within the RPG. The wargamer can

      roleplay, but he still wants to fight that battle in the most

      traditional way.

Other Factors

    * */Design Goals:/* What do you want your game to do? Why are you

      designing a game? If you are reading this article, you probably

      already have answers for those questions. Yet, your goals are

      factors that will impact on your design. If you haven't thought

      about them, you might want to do that.

          o Only you know why you want to design a game. No one else can

            tell you.

          o It's probably a good idea to articulate your goals in

            writing. This will save you time later. Also, you can

            include these notes and all the other stuff that affects

            your thought process as designer notes at the end of your

            game. Doing that will make Brian Gleichman very happy

            if/when he reviews your game. It will also give everyone

            else who looks at your game further insight into the ideas

            behind your game.

    * */Coherence:/* This is all about building a game that supports

      your design goals. For me, /coherence/ is a blanket term. You can

      strive for /coherence/ on several levels.

          o A coherent game plays efficiently. That is, the play flow is

            smooth and the mechanics work. One step segues into the next

            and the players can play through anything that comes up

            during the game. I think my whole column is predicated on

            the idea of achieving this sort of coherence for any game

            you decide to design.

          o A coherent game has clear, comprehensible rules and

            mechanics. The best game design in existence is useless

            unless you write the rules in such a way that a player can

            use your book to learn to play your game.

          o A coherent game has rules, mechanics, and play examples that

            support the designer's goals. Here is the pay off for

            writing your goals: You can critique your own work. You can

            compare what you've written to what you intended. If your

            game fulfills your intended goals, then you have probably

            written a coherent game. If you have doubts or you're too

            close to the project, get someone else to read it.

    * */Complexity:/* Brian Gleichman has written a very good article

      <http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/elements20sep02.html> on

      this very topic. If you haven't read it, I think you should. I

      agree with his statements, and I will be referring to them here.

      Also, I will use his terms without changing them. As Brian says,

      people have a threshold for complexity. I think simpler is often

      better, but other people like more /complexity/. It's up to you to

      decide how much complexity to add to your game.

          o Complexity of Implementation: This is the complexity of the

            actual mechanical steps required to play the game. If a game

            becomes too complex, some players may choose to simplify the

            mechanics.

          o Complexity of Mass: This is the number of options,

            exceptions, and special cases written into a game. Really,

            there is a point of balance for mass. Insufficient mass may

            make for sparse gameplay. Too many options means it may take

            longer for a group of players to master all the nuances of

            the game, or that some of those options will be discarded. I

            prefer a relatively simple implementation with a lot more mass.

          o Complexity of Concept: I agree with Brian that RPGs are

            complex in concept by their very nature. Excessive

            complexity (in implementation or mass) is not the /Kiss of

            Death/ for a game. I have found that when people like a

            game, they will adjust it to suit their own tastes. A simple

            game can be made more complex, and a complex game can be

            simplified.

# */Verisimilitude:/* This is really all about realism and maintaining

/Suspension of Disbelief/ in your game. I am not going to fight over

whether or not SoD exists. I accept it within its context. That is, you

can watch a movie, read a book, or play an rpg and evaluate for yourself

whether or not the presentation, handling, and outcome of events is

believable within the context of the source material. This does not mean

you have lost contact with reality or anything like that, but it is

important to the perceived verisimilitude of your game.

    * I think it's a goal of design to produce a game system that

      produces results consistent with what should happen in the game world.

    * There are many ways to approach the same goal.

    * No game system, no matter how complex or detailed, can perfectly

      model the resolution of events in the game world. The best we can

      hope to do is provide a set of rules and mechanics that allows our

      audience, our players, to produce satisfying results when playing

      our game.

    * Verisimilitude in a game system does not necessarily equal

      realism. I think our purpose as designers of games and game worlds

      is to find ways to present games so that players may play in our

      game worlds and attain satisfying results that sustain their SoD. 

Now, I have deluged you with food for thought. Next time, I'll talk

about resolution mechanics. Thanks for reading.

      What do you think? <http://trio.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110>

Go to forum! <http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110>

 Go to Top <http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110>  |  New Topic

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/post.php?f=110>  |  View Threads

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110&collapse=0>  |  Search

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/search.php?f=110> 

 Topics 	Author  	Date 	Latest Reply

 cooldog cotangent

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=98&t=98> (1) new

cranial_index  	01-31-2006 20:46  	01-31-2006 20:46 new

  CORONA <http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=97&t=97> (1) new

corn_chamomile  	01-31-2006 20:25  	01-31-2006 20:25 new

 Fendi Spy Bags WHOLESALE@WizardReplica.com

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=95&t=95> (1) new 	514 

12-02-2005 10:55  	12-02-2005 10:55 new

 Designer Handbags Wholesale@WWW.WIZARDREPLICA.COM

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=94&t=94> (1) new 	868 

11-14-2005 19:41  	11-14-2005 19:41 new

 REPLICA HANDBAGS LOUIS VUITTON REPLICA WHOLESALE@

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=93&t=93> (1) new 	794 

10-20-2005 21:37  	10-20-2005 21:37 new

 Death/playing style

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=92&t=92> (1) new 	Searcher 

09-22-2003 11:35  	09-22-2003 11:35 new

 Death and actual immortality

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=89&t=89> (3) new 	Cpl Ferro 

07-19-2003 08:53  	01-13-2006 15:22 new

 Non-death death

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=85&t=85> (5) new 	Sérgio

Mascarenhas  	07-18-2003 03:07  	07-23-2003 02:38 new

 Thanks, Hunter

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=80&t=80> (4) new 	Allan

Sugarbaker  	07-16-2003 00:18  	07-17-2003 19:34 new

 Realism <http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=74&t=74> (3) new

Robin  	06-20-2003 01:23  	06-25-2003 02:34 new

 Something you might have mentioned.

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=65&t=65> (3) new 	Yamo 

06-19-2003 16:13  	06-19-2003 18:11 new

 BTW, excellent column, Hunter!

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=63&t=63> (2) new 	flyingmice 

06-19-2003 13:11  	06-19-2003 18:13 new

 Armor and Damage Thereto

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=56&t=56> (2) new 	The Student 

06-19-2003 08:45  	06-19-2003 11:44 new

 Armor <http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=54&t=54> (9) new

flyingmice  	06-19-2003 08:29  	06-20-2003 06:12 new

 Death spiral and unconsciousness

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=53&t=53> (7) new 	Torben

Mogensen  	06-19-2003 07:31  	06-20-2003 06:52 new

 lucky or skilled

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=51&t=51> (2) new 	rhyme 

05-12-2003 18:49  	05-13-2003 09:25 new

 Absolute, unopposed and opposed

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=48&t=48> (2) new 	Torben

Mogensen  	04-16-2003 02:19  	04-16-2003 09:26 new

 0-9 open ended = brilliant!

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=31&t=31> (8) new 	Vibropod 

03-12-2003 10:41  	07-18-2003 01:28 new

 Smooth rerolls

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=27&t=27> (10) new 	Torben

Mogensen  	03-12-2003 00:47  	03-16-2003 23:57 new

 Resolution Mechanics

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/read.php?f=110&i=25&t=25> (8) new 	Kyle

Schuant  	03-11-2003 22:14  	03-29-2003 21:28 new

 Go to Top <http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110>  |  New Topic

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/post.php?f=110>  |  View Threads

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110&collapse=0>  |  Search

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/search.php?f=110> 

 Newer Messages

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110&t=98&a=1&>  |  Older Messages

<http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110&t=25&a=2&> 

------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Previous columns

    * #8: True Death </news+reviews/columns/dream17jul03.html> by Hunter

      Logan, 17jul03

    * #7: Assessing Damage </news+reviews/columns/dream19jun03.html> by

      Hunter Logan, 19jun03

    * #6: Putting Theory to the Test

      </news+reviews/columns/dream12may03.html> by Hunter Logan, 12may03

    * #5: Resolution Mechanics II

      </news+reviews/columns/dream14apr03.html> by Hunter Logan, 14apr03

    * Resolution Mechanics I </news+reviews/columns/dream11mar03.html>

      by Hunter Logan, 11mar03

    * Player Goals </news+reviews/columns/dream10feb03.html> by Hunter

      Logan, 10feb03

    * Balance of Power </news+reviews/columns/dream20jan03.html> by

      Hunter Logan, 20jan03

    * Play Flow First </news+reviews/columns/dream01jan03.html> by

      Hunter Logan, 01jan03

      Other columns </news+reviews/columns.html> at RPGnet

[ Read FAQ <http://forum.rpg.net/faq.php> | Subscribe to RSS

<http://www.rpg.net/rss.phtml> | Contact Us <mailto:www@rpg.net> |

Advertise with Us <http://www.rpg.net/ads/info.phtml> ]

Copyright © 1996-2006 RPGnet & individual authors, All Rights Reserved

RPGnet® is a registered trademark of Skotos Tech Inc., all rights reserved.