Skip to main content

playing within the rules

“First, let me state one fundamental rule of game design that has emerged from the talk of various game professionals: If something’s important to your setting, you need to have rules that encourage it, provide benefits for it, or suggest rewards for it. Sure, you can play without such rules, but they’re often helpful to get new people on the same page and understand what’s expected of them, as well as reminding Keepers of what should be stressed with regard to the setting.”
—Daniel Harms at the Yog-Sothoth.com forum
Actually, this rule works not only in games, but in real life, especially in a professional environment. I’ve worked at many companies that said they encourage sharing of resources, and collaboration, and efforts to improve the company culture, but I’ve never seen a anyone publicly acknowledged for their efforts, let alone a reward program in place to support these “play mechanics.” of the office. (thousand faced moon)

Comments

  1. I find it amazing how seldom positive reinforcement's used in gaming. I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of games that explicitly reward players for right thought and right action in addition to kicking monster ass. Strange, strange.

    - Sean

    ReplyDelete
  2. Right thought and right action? I personally enjoy the lack of an encoded moral compass in most games.

    Or by "right" do you mean "what the designers intended"?

    -T

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tim,

    I'm not looking at morality per se, unless a game's supposed to work off of a definite moral compass, although that can work with some games (I'm thinking, in particular, of the latest incarnation of Ravenloft, where players can be great and still fail if they're not good.) I'm looking more at the style of play.

    Prime example is White Wolf's "Adventure!" their wonderfully self-contained pulp game set in the Aeoniverse. The game's version of hero points are called Inspiration, and they allow the players to do big, impressive stuff. Inspiration allows the player to meta-game, creating amazing coincidences and hair's-breadth escapes. It allows the player to double hir dice pool, giving characters the ability to be the best in the world at something and have it stick.

    The way Inspiration's doled out plays directly into my "rewarding right thought and right action" mold. If one makes a roll with more than five successes, one gets a point of Inspiration. One can wager a point of Inspiration on an action, get a dice pool boost and win the inspiration back if s/he's using that roll for a heroic purpose. One can get Inspiration by going to new, exciting and Inspiration-rich places (First person to crack the gates of the gilded subterranean city of Opak-Re since 500 B.C.? Inspiration for you!)

    Many games punish players for risking their characters or, at best, simply reward them for success without providing an incentive to try outside of the demands of narrative ("I'm a hero, so I'd better do heroic stuff. I'll probably die, though. Le sigh.") The "Adventure!" game design acknowledges the fact that players aren't used to balls-to-the-wall High Pulp play and, thus, rewards players for putting their characters in harm's way by letting them look cool when they try and giving them a benny (which can, really, only be used for more High Pulp play) if they succeed. After two or three sessions of "Adventure!" my normally cautious group of players were having fistfights on the wings of planes and cheating death with impunity, partially because the rules rewarded them for that style of play.

    Heady, heady stuff there, and the sort of thing that's thankfully popping up in more and more games.

    - Sean

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tony diTerlizzi and classic D&D monsters

The sixth entry of his series on drawings of classic D&D monsters is up. He's one of my favorite fantasy artists. His work tends toward the charming and cozy, rather than others' focus on machismo or melodrama.

sad fate

“Our legendary personalities are evergreen ‘brands’ with the benefit of worldwide recognition,” reads a message on the Richman agency’s website. Guardian UK Article *vomits* Where is the line drawn between “public figure” and “celebrity”? How can a dead person have an agent, particulary where there are no specific works concerned other than a sense of character? It’s one thing to insist that Duck Soup is a work that should be protected (which any more simply means controlled by whomever has the most buX0rs), but shouldn’t personalities and such pass into the public domain as well? ( boingboing : Bill Gates 0wns Einstein, Groucho , Freud, Asimov, Fuller, et al )

on sheeps and androids

The movie Blade Runner is very dear to my heart. It is a treatise on the nature of existence expanding on, and perhaps exceeding the reach of the Phillip K. Dick work which inspired it, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Perhaps I have missed out on some greater subtlety of PKD's work, but the point of DADoES pursues the definition of fake, while Blade Runner instead focuses on what is real. Where the replicants in the novel are sociopathic monsters who emulate emotions solely to gain traction against humans who may hunt them, the humans there rely on machines to dictate their own emotions for them. They dial for "energetic determination" or "six-hour self-accusatory depression." As much as the replicants are machines incapable of real emotion, humans are similarly reliant on a machine to simulate emotion for them. In contrast, the movie's central them is spelled out for us in Deckard's apartment, when Rachel is playing the piano. She professe...