Exploration of Player

[Gordon C. Landis]

I think the issue is: if priority is put on exploration of self (such as in the examples I gave), what does this mean in relation to other GNS priorities?

Rephrased:  If self-discovery is something that a particular player or group is interested in, what impact does that have on the creative agenda?

Off-hand, I'm not seeing any solid impact - I mean, if you find that self-discovery is facilitated by theme-driven stories involving strong personalities, Nar play with strong Exploration of Character might work for you.  If real immersion (to risk a tricky word) in an unusual environment seems the best route to self-discovery, you'll probably pick a Sim game with heavy Exploration of Setting.  And challenging yourself in a Game with lots of Exploration of Situation might be a great opportunity for self-discovery to some - and might be a total barrier to that goal for others.

(I'm trying out this careful use of Exploration and creative agenda, and I almost collapsed something like self-discovery in as PART of the creative agenda - but I think that'd be a mistake; isn't creative agenda specifically and ONLY about the intersection of Exploration with G, N and/or S?  Other desireable aspects/outcomes of play are  . . what?  Part of the "something fun to do" box that surrounds Exploration?)  

It does seem useful to me to include things like self-discovery and socialization (and?) along with the creative agenda (Exploration meets GNS) as components in the "something fun" box.  And there ARE interactions, I'm sure - if socialization is a big priority for a particular group, that may mean that that group only finds certain creative agendas really work for 'em.  But . . . for another group, that set of CAs may be different, because of variations in individual taste like the "what serves self-discovery best" stuff above.

So I'm not sure we can generalize much about what kind(s) of GNS creative agenda(s) best serve the additional goal of self-discovery, because any of 'em might theoretically work well for a particular person/group.  But maybe all we need to do is position the goal in the proper place and include it as something for the group to talk about: "hey, I think self-discovery can happen right alongside the pursuit of this creative agenda - what do you think?"

Maybe all I'm saying is that it's perfectly all right for there to be goals ("priorities"?) that exist alongside of Exploration and GNS, but aren't really part of 'em.

Gordon

[M. J. Young]

While I understand the discussion of terminology, I think that it has taken away from the initial question which I think is rather interesting.  I would like to talk about the phenomena which Joachim first brought up, and settle on the terminology for it after discussion.  

I am proposing that perhaps there exists a layer of Exploration of Player (or Self) within Simulationism in many of the games we play -- and hence in games people in general play. Emphasis on it and enjoyment derived from it will vary accordingly.
...
What do you think, is Exploration of Player a "real thing" or am I seeing phantoms?

This rings very true to me.  Two good examples were (1) cross-gender role-play, especially on online MUD/MUSH games; and (2) playing yourselves in an extraordinary situation as PCs -- such as gaining superpowers, travelling through time (cf. BTRC's Timelord game), or visiting another dimension.

I've done both, obviously, although not in MUD/MUSH/MUX/MMORPG games (my kids play these, but I don't have the time or the inclination--and from their descriptions the ones they play sound pretty solidly gamist most of the time).

This thread and another on a very similar topic got started about the same time, and I posted my thoughts there, http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=5562&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc">Self-Revelation in Role Playing (or Educational RPGs) over on the RPG Theory forum. I touched there on the idea that young men flirt with death and RPGs give them a format in which they can do that, that many explore sexual identity through role playing games (something I read in some article somewhere). Overall, I very much believe that whether we're playing ourselves or someone else, we're frequently exploring (in a non-GNS sense) who we are and who we might become.

Role-playing yourself is I think typically done by a group of friends playing face-to-face.  While it is generally has a structured plot, I would think the PCs lack dramatic focus compared to games where the PCs are designed with story in mind.  On the other hand, you might say that the setup itself is a form of Narrative Premise.  For example: "What would you do with superpowers?" is pretty clearly a moral/ethical question.  On the other hand, from what I have seen the focus of play tends to be "What would you really do?" rather than "How can you best address the Premise?"  I don't think I can get too far in analysis, though, since I haven't played such a game first-hand.

I think one of the core issues that comes up again and again in Multiverser specifically is what does it mean to be who you are, and at what point does that change? Given the completely open-ended possibilities, characters can become cyborgs, magical beings, potent wizards or psions, genetically enhanced superbeings, and just about anything else imaginable--yet each player has to face the fact that he's talking about what he would do facing those options. Most players create lines in their minds, things they will not cross (one of mine is that I never allow my character to become genetically altered; I've never faced the cybernetic option in play, yet, myself, but I've had players go both ways on that). There is a sort of personal evaluation of "this is who I am; I will not become something else, no matter what benefit it offers." If the game does have a narrativist premise overall (as opposed to picking up such premises in individual worlds during play), that is probably it.

Oh, and we do play it with strangers, at conventions, demos at game stores, chat room (not currently, but I was running one for a while), PbEM, and forum venues. So the I Game concept is not limited to friends or tables.

--M. J. Young