Are kewl powerz inherently Gamist?

[ThreeGee]

Hey all,

I ask the question, "Are kewl powerz inherently gamist?" because many people strongly imply the answer is yes--that only munchkins would play a character with kewl powerz.

However, my answer is no, and the counter-argument is easily explained. Sorcerer is all about kewl powerz. After all, gameplay is defined by your character summoning demons to control them so that you can use their kewl powerz. The premise of the game could easily be stated, "Are kewl powerz worth the price?"

Simulationists do not get off the hook, either. I would say that games like Palladium and Storyteller are very sim in terms of writing style, yet both focus strongly on kewl powerz. Nevermind the number of superhero games that have been strongly sim..

So, I would say that the idea of playing a powerful character is universally appealing and has nothing in particular to do with gamism, but I am curious what you all think.

Later,
Grant

[Jack Spencer Jr]

I agree and I'd be surprised if anyone says much more than that.

[C. Edwards]

"Are kewl powerz worth the price?"

What about kewl powerz without a price? I imagine that archetypical 'munchkins' would see their Humanity scores launch into a kamikaze like dive. In Palladium the 'kewl powerz' aren't connected (usually) to the kind of counterbalancing aspect that they are in Sorcerer.

Perhaps using 'kewl powers' with impunity is the hallmark?

Since Gamism and Munchkinism are not one and the same I'm not sure about the parameters of your question. Munchkinism itself seems to be a spectrum ranging from somewhere around 'intensely Gamist' to 'abusive and annoying sod".

I agree that 'kewl powerz' are not inherently Gamist, or anything else for that matter. But the various uses and incarnations of 'kewl powerz' probably tend to correspond with different playstyles.

-Chris

[Valamir]

Kewl Powerz become the playdoh of munchkin endeavors largely because they feed so easily into a certain set of gamist sensibilities.  Regardless of their simulationist or narrativist useage in a game design, they meet the criteria for gamist enjoyment.

They provide a discrete easily identified and easily quantified measure of character effectiveness.  They are usually defined very specifically in terms of their effect on the game world.  They thus serve both as an effective tool to increase the character's impact on the game (through the execution of their special effects via those rules) and as a prize to be won to measure how well the character / player is doing.

There is nothing inherently "gamist" about Kewl Powers.  They just happen to be a very convenient thing from a gamist perspective and so are easily coopted to promote a gamist agenda.

[M. J. Young]

I'm particularly reminded of Legends of Alyria. There are characters who have extraordinary powers; yet oddly all these powers impact is color. There are the Blessed, whose mental powers can do just about anything they want to do with them. However, as far as their ability to affect the story, the powers are nothing--you use attributes and traits to determine the resolution of conflict, and all that the powers of the Blessed add to that is "O.K., this is how it happened." That doesn't make the powers any less "kewl"; it just takes out that aspect of "character effectiveness" mentioned by Ralph.

Even in play, it isn't whether you have Kewl Powers; it's what you do with them, how you use them in play. Are you creating a believable reality around a character with special powers? Nothing gamist about that. Are you telling a story in which one of the characters has these powers? Nothing particularly gamist about that. It only becomes gamist when you're using the powers to promote player/character objectives in play.

I've got an article over in my Faith and Gaming series entitled http://www.geocities.com/christian_gamers_guild/chaplain/faga016.html">Mind Powers in which I suggest that all of us today, as compared with our ancestors of a few centuries back, have incredible mental abilities. We can do things they would have thought psionic (if they had the word) or magical. I think that to some degree the gamist notion of kewl powers is the ability to do things that most people can't do--and that means inherently that most people in the scenario can't do them. It's really attractive to be Superman, but not in a world where everyone is Superman. I always liked Aquaman, but really, if I lived with an entire race of underwater people as one of them, that wouldn't be substantially different. The Flash isn't interesting because he can run fast, or even because he can run incredibly fast--he's interesting because he can run incredibly faster than anyone else.

I made this point in http://www.mjyoung.net/bible/letter02a.htm">an answer to an e-mail I once received. The writer's concern was that his friends were taking what he viewed as an unhealthy interest in magic through their exposure in role playing games. I asked why people wanted to do that, and answered myself: "The answer lies in a feeling of inferiority, a desire to have something special, to be someone important and powerful, to be able to control things in a way which others cannot.  So perhaps the question you should be asking is this:  why does your friend wish to be more than he is?" Kewl powers are attractive to some people because they feel powerless; the attraction of the power isn't the power itself, but the fact that it makes them better than others with whom they will deal. In a gamist context, that becomes very clear; but it can be an issue to explore in simulationist and narrativist games as well.

I've wandered quite a bit here; originally I was thinking "what Jack said", but maybe I've offered some other insights into it.

--M. J. Young

[ThreeGee]

Hey all,

Thanks for the replies. As no one has yet disagreed, I think we are done. It looks like I should have phrased the issue as a rant, instead.

Later,
Grant