Monday, 18 May 2009
What is gaming style?
Style is a word in the English language. There are different interpretations of many words and this I think may be one such word. So what does style mean when applied to a pen and paper role playing game? I have my ideas, but I won't chime in and bias anyone else. The person who prompted me to start this had better bloody get involved here. I suppose I am implying a threat there.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Gaming style, for me, is the attitude and chemistry and interaction of the group.
ReplyDeleteDo the players speak in character only, or do they have a lot of asides and commentaries? Is the focus of the game comedy (just for the laugh) or telling a story (realizing some drive to share a story, experience or idea)? Is the game just an excuse to get together or does the group meet at other times too, so that the game is the focus of the evening?
With Jacek's group in Poland, it was a very formal style of game, by which I mean: no out-of-character moments during play, only during breaks. The story and the realization of the characters'/players' goals was the focus.
With Magda's game, there was a very artistic style, by which I mean: description and performance were the focus, but there was plenty of room for comedy, asides, and silliness, provided everyone felt they'd played their character.
With the Marvel Universe Game, I feel it was a arc style, by which I mean the story was the focus, not the characters. With last year's Mutants&Masterminds game, I feel that the style is very informal, by which I mean there were more asides than in-character moments, and the story and characterization kept getting shuffled out of focus.
Thanks Blackbird.
ReplyDeleteMy take on style has changed a lot over the last couple of years. Originally I would have thought about style as being along the lines of 'plumbing the depths' of character or hack and slash, acquisition play.
The three Rs of role playing is what I have taken from a lot of the bullshit on the internet. I did not invent this. It is a bit of a hash from some of the stuff Ron Edwards was putting out that has lead to his "Big Model".
My 3 Rs
Romantic (N): The focus is about building the story. Decisions in the game do not have to be realistic and they are not about furthering the success of a character or group of characters. Characters can fail and still make the story progress nicely.
Realistic (S): The focus is about having a realistic world for the characters to move about in. If something is not logical (within the accepted framework) then it is not possible. You can still have magic and spaceships, but they need to follow a set of rules that make them plausible.
Resolute (G): The game has goals that can be achieved and are the focus of the game. There is the potential for the characters/players to be seen to have won. Having a powerful character is something that is sought after.
As I said, I have taken this from other sources and mixed it with my own ideas. However I diverge from those sources that say that a person comes to a game with a particular style of play and will find it difficult to enjoy or fully involve themselves in a different style.
I would say that in the past as a player I was often very Resolute in my own personal style. As a GM I think I was very usually Realistic. Lately I think I have moved away from being Resolute and have added Romantic to my Repertoire.