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

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.

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.

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

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

Enoch wrote: 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?

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

jburneko wrote: 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

jburneko wrote: 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?

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