Challenge the Player, not the Stat Block (D&D)
JoyWriter:
Oh I realised I neglected something important in my first description of mental stats; if all the players have no ability in a certain field, (or below a certain threshold) then that is a signal not to include such puzzles in the game. They can still be parts of the fiction, but if Conan and family happen upon a literary trap, well it's as good as a wall to them! Like any other locked door it can have a key to resolve it, but this is resolutely not played out as a language puzzle for the players. The GM should think about this just like putting any set of locked doors in front of players, i.e. it's not fun if you do it too much!
@Shallow Thoughts, I will get back to you on that internal logic thing soon, much thanks for the link!
FredGarber:
I'm have the exact opposite viewpoint of this thread, I think.
One of the reasons why I've tried to get AWAY from Challenging the Player is that it lead in my groups, to a "Player Vs GM" mentality.
Invariably, that mentality lead to hurt feelings and frustrations, where I felt punished for revealing that I was smarter or more social than the average player
(or worse, that I was more socially adept than the GM).
I liked it when the GM challenge was based on my Stat Block, because then I could concentrate on my Immersion, and let my Effectiveness handle the Challenge. I could role-play the character during the combat, instead of having my Effectiveness depend upon whether or not the GM found me clever, funny or convincing enough (let alone strong enough or skilled enough) to get through the challenge.
D&D (from 1E to 4E) is not a system I enjoy at all anymore though, so take this comment with that in mind.
-Fred
Vulpinoid:
What is the game about?
Challenging a players cognitive functions?..challenging their morality?..challenging their physical ability?
Most decent games that I've encountered offer one sort of challenge to the players [via descriptive devices], then offer another sort of challenge to the characters [via the stat block]?
This could be read to say...
Some good game toolkits [D&D, White Wolf's Storyteller System, GURPS] provide options to create scenarios in which one type of challenge can be offered to the players while another type of challenge is presented to the characters.
Some specifically tailored games provide narrow settings with very specific challenges for their players and their characters.
But personally, Ive found some of my favourite gaming sessions have simply been the ones that have engaged both of these levels of play. Sessions that have involved challenging only the player OR the character feel like they're missing something.
Just my ideas on the topic...
V
LandonSuffered:
Fred wrote:
Quote
I'm have the exact opposite viewpoint of this thread, I think.
One of the reasons why I've tried to get AWAY from Challenging the Player is that it lead in my groups, to a "Player Vs GM" mentality.
Invariably, that mentality lead to hurt feelings and frustrations, where I felt punished for revealing that I was smarter or more social than the average player
(or worse, that I was more socially adept than the GM).
I understand the pitfalls of the "player vs. GM" play-style...I remember in middle school, I was picked up and held upside down by a player who did not like a particular ruling I made as a DM (though for the life of me, I can't remember what the ruling was...and to be fair, it may have just been me being an ass!). But I'm not sure it is "invariable" that challenging game play will lead to hurt feelings and frustrations...that kind of emotion varies depending on player temperament and the treatment of failure (e.g. how much gloating or ridicule goes on in "wins" vs. "losses"). In practice, I've found that with adequate buy-in to what's "at stake" in the game, players can handle "loss" in a mature fashion. By "players," I also include the DM-type person.
But, you know, wiser heads than me have raised all sorts of issues that exist in game systems where one player (i.e. the DM) has so much power over the SIS, or when other breakdowns occur within the social contract of a gaming group. To me, it would appear these dangers exist in every version of D&D, though, "stat heavy" or not.
Fred also wrote:
Quote
I liked it when the GM challenge was based on my Stat Block, because then I could concentrate on my Immersion, and let my Effectiveness handle the Challenge. I could role-play the character during the combat, instead of having my Effectiveness depend upon whether or not the GM found me clever, funny or convincing enough (let alone strong enough or skilled enough) to get through the challenge.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
: )
Callan S.:
Hi Michael,
Strangely I kind of agree in terms of two levels of challenge, except I'd be agreeing the two levels would both be challenging at the cerebral(and/or physical level) AND the moral level - really everything challenging the player. One would be dominant and the other challenge more of a side serving. But both aimed at players. Strangely I'd agree in a strange paralel sort of way that only having one or the other would seem to be missing something. Odd, aye?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page