News:

Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.

Main Menu

About A Player

Started by jburneko, April 25, 2003, 07:09:38 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

jburneko

All this talk about "No Myth" has made me start to think more about this one particular player I have.  Over all, I LIKE playing with guy for two reasons:

1) We're good friends.  Yes, yes, I know, not the basis for roleplaying and all that but it's still a factor.  The point is, I just plain like the guy.

2) He builds good characters.  His characters have motivations, personalities, and emotions.  He also manages OOC information well and when he's in the groove does some nifty stuff from Author Stance.

To further "profile" this guy I'll mention that I gave this guy a copy of The Riddle of Steel and he LOVES it.

But he does something that really anoys me or at least bothers me.  I'll illustrate by example.  

When I was in college I took a course called "History of Technology."  It turns out that the professor who taught it specialized in Bridges and Dams.  The first HALF of the course was all about Bridges and Dams and how they relate to culture, economics and politics.  The mid term consisted SOLEY of photographs of Bridges and Dams with only one question attached: What can you infer culturally, economically and politically about the people who built each of these structures?

This is EXACTLY the kind of thinking the player in question engages in ALL the time.

Imagine this scene in an RPG: The players are crossing a bridge in an unfamiliar land when they are confronted by a patrol of militia men who demand to know their business.  This player would likely turn to me in all seriousness and ask, "What's the bridge made of?"

You see, he's not just trying to be a dick, he's trying to discern what these people might value or have an interest in.  It's because he CARES about the motivations of the characters that he asks these questions.  The other night he asked me if the caves they were in were formed primarily by Lava or Water.  I forget precisely why but it had something to do with the Druids who lived in the caves.

Now in "No Myth" game this MIGHT not be a problem because once something's establish we just build from there and it doesn't matter.  But I'm much more fond of the techniques described in Sorcerer and other games where you at least have a firmly established backstory, maybe a relationship-map and and some flexible bangs.  And I've litterally had, say, a McGuffin that's been in play for a while rended obsolete by this guy because I made an offhand comment about there being two-story buildings in the area.

And it just scales up from there.  The ability for this guy to collate, infer and extrapolate thousands of cultural, economic and political details is AMAZING.  Now, I might just writes this off as hard-core Sim or even a form of political Gamism but he always, always, ALWAYS, brings it back down to the character-to-character conflict level be it for the PCs or NPCs.

Another example from actual play.  This happened durring the Space-Western Sorcerer game.  So one player was playing The Station Manager with the Station Demon.  Part of her Kicker/Backstory involved a deal she made with a criminal organization.   She allows them to operate safely out of the station if they leave her people and interests alone.  The player I'm talking about in this thread was playing a smuggler who had to pay "taxes" to the head of the aforementioned criminal organization nicknamed, "Gentleman Monte."  That nick-name was actually coined by the players because of how I was playing Montegue Forman.  I was playing him as very famboyant and overly friendly and a bit refined.

Anyway, the McGuffin I had thrown in that most of the NPCs cared about was a shipment of parts for an intersteller communications systems.  This next part is kind of hard to explain briefly but The Station Manager didn't want this shipment to make it to her station so she cut a deal with Monte to steal the parts and frame some faction of rebel intersteller terrorists.  There was also a rival gang involved who were also after the parts and the smuggler character was sort of stuck in the middle.

It was at this point that the player behind the smuggler started to act strange.  Just after the session in which all the above was setup he made some comment about the big war was going to start the next session, or something like that.  I looked at him and asked what he meant.  He then said, in all seriousness, "It's rather obvious that Gentleman Monte is going to turn on The Station Manager and attempt to take over."

I was no less than stunned.  We then went into a rather lengthy discussion about how all the little made-up-mostly-on-the-fly details about how Monty's organization worked, plus how the station operated, plus the movements of the rival gang, plus a thousand other little factors lead up to this "obvious" planned take-over attempt.

And the REAL problem here is that I and the other players all saw the above setup as the first step towards the climax of the story but HE saw it as only the tip of the ice berg for a MUCH BIGGER (and probably long-term) CONFLICT that never even crossed my or any of the other players' minds!  So here the group was all geared up for the resolution and here he was all geared up for the beginning.

On an emotional level this always makes me feel a little short sighted.  It makes me think that maybe I'm just not thinking through my backstories and character motvations and passions thuroughly enough.  I can write off the whole, "What were these caves made from?" as being a bit much but the thing with Monty gave me pause.

So, thoughts on the situation are welcome.

Jesse

greyorm

Jesse, correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't you asked about this before? I swear I recall hearing nigh unto the exact same thing only a few months ago from someone...

Also, I don't know what your specific question is here...what to do about that player? Well, there's two things you could do IMO:

1) tell him to knock it off, its a game, damnit
or
2) use him...you didn't see a war coming, and didn't plan it: but now there is.

I don't know what else I can really say about the situation.
Rev. Ravenscrye Grey Daegmorgan
Wild Hunt Studio

Valamir

I'll hit the obvious one.
Recruit him.

This guy bugs me, because he treads very close to the obsessive Information-Gatherer I loathe...but here he's doing for the best reasons.  He really WANTS to understand the culture in depth so he can play better, and it sounds like "play better" here doesn't mean for him to selfishly enjoy the game more but to enhance the overall game for everybody.

Terrific!

So I say, instead of have him ask you to fill in the details so that he can derive a particular culture and play it accordingly, bring him in on the culture and have him help you with the details.  That way you save snapping his disbelief suspenders by throwing in incongruent details that no one but him would notice.  He gets continue to help enhance the game play for everyone, and who doesn't like to have their ego stroked by being consulted as an expert.

Now maybe he'd lose the fun of piecing the details together himself and deriving conclusions from it, but it sounds to me like the conclusions he's drawing don't necessarily match where you were anyway (cause you didn't necessarily   stop to think/have the knowledge to know   what the impact a two story house would have.)  So you probably wind up having these OOC conversations anyway about why such and such would lead to so and so.

So just have them BEFORE hand.  Maybe even as part of your setting prep.  Give him the details you want to include, the props you're looking for, and solicit his help in making the props match the details...he'll probably even then extrapolate a bunch of stuff from that that gives you more details to work with.

Sounds like a win win to me.

Enoch

I'm just curious about something that may not be relevant.  Would his characters actually be able to do these things.  Does he have the relevant skill or even the relevant story role to be able to make these determinations?

-Joshua
omnia vincit amor
The Enclave

jburneko

Raven,

Yes, I've brought this up before but usually as one factor among many.  I kind of wanted to focus on it in isolation.  As I said, I was really thinking about it because of all the "No Myth" stuff.

Also before, I think I was focusing more on his pacing than his reasoning.  He likes slow boil plots, so while everyone else makes large emotional leaps forward, he takes casual strolls biding his time until he sees an opportunity to go places he's interested in.

It was only because of the "No Myth" discussion that I finally connected the two things about the player.  His pacing is BECAUSE of his way of thinking about the game universe.

It dawned on me that while everyone saw the whole "Race for the communication cargo" as the whole of the Situation he kind of saw it as just being an extended "Kicker", if you will, for the Setting at large.

And often I CAN just channel his ideas into construction but often there's this weird dijunct between what I think is going on how the characters react to it and what HE thinks is going on and how the characters should be reacting to it.

Jesse

jburneko

Quote from: EnochI'm just curious about something that may not be relevant.  Would his characters actually be able to do these things.  Does he have the relevant skill or even the relevant story role to be able to make these determinations?

Yes, he does.  He often plays politicians, scholars or other characters with setting focused ambitions such as the smugler.  He doesn't play characters who aspire to say, win the girl of his dreams, he plays characters who aspire to be king or the head of his own criminal organization or to win honor for his family clan.  The one time he DIDN'T do all of this was when he was playing an ignorant bandit slave with no world experience.

Also, his amazing colating brain works anyway.  So, sometimes, after the game he'll say something like, "by the way I was curious about X, Y and Z.  I didn't say anything at the time because my character wouldn't know/care about those things but they seem out of place..." or some such.

Ralph,

Your idea is really good and nails my feelings exactly.  I'm glad my post was able to communicate my percieved value in this player.  Indeed we've discussed doing exactly what you propose but the problem is that I really a "C" social studies student.  I don't even know what questions to ask without just handing over my entire prep and say, "punch holes in this" and that really WOULD ruin things for him.

Any suggestions on how I can hand things to him without, you know, really handing them to him?

Jesse

Mike Holmes

So have you talked to him in all the months between now and when you first brought this up? That was one suggestion last time. Have you let him know that he's making assumptions that are way beyond the simplicity of the games that you want to run?

I mean, either he doesn't understand, or, he's like me. When I'm in a game, I often do similar things to what you describe. Why? Because I'm a GM, and like to create. So basically I'm making suggestions to the GM about what I think would be cool to have happen. I'm basically trying to use director stance without being authorized to do so.

If you think he really doesn't get it, then talk to him, wet him straight on what's happening from your perspective, and tell him to be more careful. If he does get it, then he want's to be an author, and you have to go with Ralph's idea.

And not in some shy half-assed way, either. Your whole, "And often I CAN just channel his ideas into construction" idea isn't going to cut it. You need to say to the player, "OK, here are all my setting notes. Please take them, and add to them in any way you like. Oh, and in play, please feel free to add any facts you like. If I make a PC who you think is acting out of place with the setting, then let me know, and we'll work something out."

See, you have to make him understand that there's nothing hidden for him to find. Otherwise he'll keep searching for it.

This is in no way your fault. Quit whinning about not feeling up to some impossible standard. Even if you did have extensive ethnographies written up for each culture encountered, and detailed notes on the motives of each character as they pertained to their culture, he'd have another interperetation. See, he's not as smart as he thinks he is. Because I can garuntee you that there's no way you are transmitting enough data in a RPG session for him to be able to put together an "accurate" picture. Worse he's missing the fact that humans are individuals, and therefore not really very predictable on many matters, at least not from this sort of data.

IOW, your interepretations are, no doubt, as valid as his. For him to assume...well you know how the rest goes.

So he's doing a very bad thing. One that has to be rectified for all to continue to play in a satisfied manner.

Mike
Member of Indie Netgaming
-Get your indie game fix online.

Valamir

Quote from: jburnekoRalph,

Your idea is really good and nails my feelings exactly.  I'm glad my post was able to communicate my percieved value in this player.  Indeed we've discussed doing exactly what you propose but the problem is that I really a "C" social studies student.  I don't even know what questions to ask without just handing over my entire prep and say, "punch holes in this" and that really WOULD ruin things for him.

Any suggestions on how I can hand things to him without, you know, really handing them to him?

Jesse

Well, that would depend on your groups tolerance for:

1) having a quick OOC chat between you and him.  When he says "how is the bridge constructed" you say "what do you hope to learn about by asking that question".  He says "well I want to determine if this is the sort of culture which could accomplish X based on how advanced their building techniques are in this bridge"  You say, "Yes they can do that, how do you think the bridge would be constructed given that".  He says "Blah Blah" and you say "that's what it is".  You can then follow up with him after to pick his brains with "ok, now what are all of the other assorted things that having the bridge be constructed that way will lead to that I should know about" and build that into your prep.

2) Making retroactive adjustments to setting between sessions.  If your group would abhor such an exchange during actual play than you're probably better off making notes of his issues during the game and then consulting with him afterwards.  If your adlibbed responses are then found to lead somewhere you don't want to go, you can then say "ok, given this what SHOULD I have said the bridge was constructed of" and either retcon that into the setting, or retcon the hither to unknown (even by you) fact that the bridge was built by someone else and just being used by the current people who could not have built it themselves.

John Kim

Quote from: jburnekoI'm glad my post was able to communicate my percieved value in this player.  Indeed we've discussed doing exactly what you propose but the problem is that I really a "C" social studies student.  I don't even know what questions to ask without just handing over my entire prep and say, "punch holes in this" and that really WOULD ruin things for him.

Any suggestions on how I can hand things to him without, you know, really handing them to him?  
My thought would be to involve him as early in the process as possible.  The problem described is first thinking of the MacGuffin, and then trying to get him to fill in details around it -- but his ideas may inevitably clash with or trivialize the MacGuffin.  As an alternative, ask him first to help come up with details for an NPC or culture.  Then put in a MacGuffin based in part on what he has helped make up.  

There are consequences to this.  By working with him and keeping him happy, you will be involving more social and cultural elements into your game.  What he is trying for in all likelihood is not some token details unrelated to the rest of the game.  He is trying to get you and others to really look at things like society, culture, and politics.  Incorporating this inherently changes the flavor of the game.  

Now, I should point out that I am very much like this player, from everything you say.  I like adding in more society and culture into the game, but you should be aware that it necessarily isn't everyone's preference.
- John

Blake Hutchins

I firmly agree with the recruitment advice.  What seems to be at stake is your own comfort level with the perceived depth of your setting, and this player, by his intuitive-analytical nature, is essentially driving the construction of much greater depth than you're looking to produce.  If you don't feel comfortable cueing off him on the fly, then make it a sort of one-on-one social contract, and let him take responsibility for extrapolating off of setting information you hand him in advance.  However, if his mind works the way you say it does, he's always going to extrapolate new material based on in-game events and encounters.  Harness that energy, I say.  Get all his horses pulling your way.  If social studies isn't your cup of tea, then offer him a piece of that action.

FWIW, I have a player who is very much the same way, except that the greater thrust of his analytical energies goes to breaking the system to secure unique advantages for his character.   I'd kill to have someone who takes a more constructive direction.  Well, maybe not kill.  Maybe just bruise badly.  Or something.

Best,

Blake