White Wolf recently released the Vampire Player's Guide for Vampire Revised (aka Vampire 3rd Edition).

The book is 90% system-free, consisting of mainly essays about how one should play Vampire. One essay is particularly notable: "But I Vas Chust Follwink Mein Character Concept!" by Greg Stolze.

In it, Greg posits the "Gamer Nuremburg Defense", characterized by the cry: "Not my fault, I was just following my character concept."

Yup, straight-up "My Guy" Syndrome.

Say what you want about White Wolf -- and there's plenty of White Wolf's usual attitude in this book -- but people complain that gamers don't want to think about their game at all and discuss theory, and here White Wolf is is paving the way for such discussions. Even if they have to use a lot of attitude to get the average gamer to swallow it, I applaud the effort. And let's face it, they're probably reaching a lot of gamers with this Vampire book that aren't being reached via the Forge or even RPG.NET...

So, I wanted to start a thread where we could mention examples of important (or even just useful theoretical concepts that more people need to be aware of being put forth somewhere that's accessible to the "average" gamer, i.e. the person who buys and plays RPGs.

(Another notable line from the book, a "radical" concept that so few get, from the essay "Rebels with a Cause" by Chistopher Kobar: "It may come as a shock to many players, but no rule, written or otherwise, even begins to suggest that it is the sole responsiblity of the Storyteller to create and maintain appropriate character motivations." Again, nothing new here as far as the Forge is concerned, but it's wonderful to see it somewhere where a lot of gamers have a chance of catching it -- and in print, no less.)

xiombarg wrote: So, I wanted to start a thread where we could mention examples of important (or even just useful theoretical concepts that more people need to be aware of being put forth somewhere that's accessible to the "average" gamer, i.e. the person who buys and plays RPGs.

I'd suggest that the following are incredibly useful for Actual Play if they are recognized:

1. Directorship - recognizing that there is a stance influencing who get's to make things "true." Recognizing that such exists overtly (instead of in the person of the GM alone) allows players to share responsibility.

2. Expectation - overt recognition that people want different things. This goes beyond Role-playing, but it works here too. Discussing "why i play" along with "why you play" in order to better fulfill those play motivations is a good thing.

3. Vocabular - a shared vocabulary (which we sort of have here on the Forge) is needed in order to discuss the above. These would have to be included along with the most succinct definition available.

I'm sure that there are a sugnifigant number of things that i'm leaving out, but these would be must-haves in my book.

Thomas

I'm not sure gamers "need" to be aware of anything outside of the context of a specific game. Ince you get past the really bare bones stuff, hings like Players and ST/GM guides are really about the community standards of a game. They teach people how not to be jerks when they come to the table.

This is not a trivial task, because gaming is like acting where egotism can infect the role. But it's not tied to one or more theories, unless you want to label things "The Theory of Not Getting You Character in the Way of the Story" instead of the common case that it is. In acting, you find the same thing: theory is actually fairly sparse(Stanislavsky wants you to bring you sorrow into a character's); off the cuff advice is much more useful (Stanislavsky warns you that lots of actors are liars, but that's OK).