[svn] r2271@freebird: fabien | 2006-08-30 21:33:34 -0400
Mise à jour préventive.
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.