diff -r 3164c82ac16e -r bdef1afd1170 draft/dream10feb03.txt --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/draft/dream10feb03.txt Wed Aug 30 21:32:44 2006 -0400 @@ -0,0 +1,413 @@ +RPGnet + + + + Reviews Forums +News & Press Columns & +Info RPG Wiki + RPG Shop + + + + 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 */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 + , + 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 + 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? + +Go to forum! + Go to Top | New Topic + | View Threads + | Search + + + Topics Author Date Latest Reply + cooldog cotangent + (1) new +cranial_index 01-31-2006 20:46 01-31-2006 20:46 new + CORONA (1) new +corn_chamomile 01-31-2006 20:25 01-31-2006 20:25 new + Fendi Spy Bags WHOLESALE@WizardReplica.com + (1) new 514 +12-02-2005 10:55 12-02-2005 10:55 new + Designer Handbags Wholesale@WWW.WIZARDREPLICA.COM + (1) new 868 +11-14-2005 19:41 11-14-2005 19:41 new + REPLICA HANDBAGS LOUIS VUITTON REPLICA WHOLESALE@ + (1) new 794 +10-20-2005 21:37 10-20-2005 21:37 new + Death/playing style + (1) new Searcher +09-22-2003 11:35 09-22-2003 11:35 new + Death and actual immortality + (3) new Cpl Ferro +07-19-2003 08:53 01-13-2006 15:22 new + Non-death death + (5) new Sérgio +Mascarenhas 07-18-2003 03:07 07-23-2003 02:38 new + Thanks, Hunter + (4) new Allan +Sugarbaker 07-16-2003 00:18 07-17-2003 19:34 new + Realism (3) new +Robin 06-20-2003 01:23 06-25-2003 02:34 new + Something you might have mentioned. + (3) new Yamo +06-19-2003 16:13 06-19-2003 18:11 new + BTW, excellent column, Hunter! + (2) new flyingmice +06-19-2003 13:11 06-19-2003 18:13 new + Armor and Damage Thereto + (2) new The Student +06-19-2003 08:45 06-19-2003 11:44 new + Armor (9) new +flyingmice 06-19-2003 08:29 06-20-2003 06:12 new + Death spiral and unconsciousness + (7) new Torben +Mogensen 06-19-2003 07:31 06-20-2003 06:52 new + lucky or skilled + (2) new rhyme +05-12-2003 18:49 05-13-2003 09:25 new + Absolute, unopposed and opposed + (2) new Torben +Mogensen 04-16-2003 02:19 04-16-2003 09:26 new + 0-9 open ended = brilliant! + (8) new Vibropod +03-12-2003 10:41 07-18-2003 01:28 new + Smooth rerolls + (10) new Torben +Mogensen 03-12-2003 00:47 03-16-2003 23:57 new + Resolution Mechanics + (8) new Kyle +Schuant 03-11-2003 22:14 03-29-2003 21:28 new + + Go to Top | New Topic + | View Threads + | Search + + + Newer Messages + | Older Messages + + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ + + + Previous columns + + * #8: True Death by Hunter + Logan, 17jul03 + * #7: Assessing Damage by + Hunter Logan, 19jun03 + * #6: Putting Theory to the Test + by Hunter Logan, 12may03 + * #5: Resolution Mechanics II + by Hunter Logan, 14apr03 + * Resolution Mechanics I + by Hunter Logan, 11mar03 + * Player Goals by Hunter + Logan, 10feb03 + * Balance of Power by + Hunter Logan, 20jan03 + * Play Flow First by + Hunter Logan, 01jan03 + + + Other columns at RPGnet + +[ Read FAQ | Subscribe to RSS + | Contact Us | +Advertise with Us ] + +Copyright © 1996-2006 RPGnet & individual authors, All Rights Reserved +RPGnet® is a registered trademark of Skotos Tech Inc., all rights reserved. +