Polarising Gaming Systems Into Left and Right to Better Understand Games and Gamers

Posted on June 2, 2010 by RupertG
  • Share
  • Share

One of the great pleasures that we enjoy in our gaming group is designing new game systems to play. Over the years we have designed tabletop wargames, collectible card games and, of course, role-playing games. One of our group even worked as a professional game designer back in the day. This last weekend whilst having a discussion with members of the gaming group over the design of a new system (of which I hope you will hear more about in the future) we came to a point where I realised that the disagreement that we were having was based on the two very different driving forces behind the player’s motivations.

The lead designer on the project is Cuchulain (the Call of Cthulhu and Dwarf Fortress fanatic). His main interests in a game are role-playing based. He likes nothing better than to throw rules out the window, don a quirky character and see what happens. Combat is something that happens only when it should ‘in-character’.

On the other side of the discussion was Ellisthion (the author of the Monster-a-Week series and many many reviews of gaming books). Ellisthion couldn’t be more different to Cuchulain. He’s a gamer and our resident rules lawyer (not that there is anything wrong with that, someone has to know what to do…). Ellisthion delights in finding the obscure advantages in rules minutia that allow his character to perform hither-to-fore acts unseen of heroism. To him, the game is less about playing a role than playing a series of stats to the best of his ability. His catch cry of “The character would chose the best ability for him to defeat his enemies!” is quite often heard at games.

And he’s right too. And so is Cuchulain. Which is one of the many strengths of the group. We have many different playing styles and motivations within the group and that keeps it interesting. Ellisthion plays great characters (just ask him about his character Bingles some time…) and Cuchulain knows the rules better than a lot of people do, so it’s not black or white by any means, but it is certainly a trend.

So what is the point?

In realising where the discussion was heading I stopped them and pointed something out. Cuchulain was on the Left of the RPG spectrum and Ellisthion was on the Right. (I chose left and right by the fact that Role-Playing is on the left of RPG and Game is on the right.) This analogy (borrowed from political science) helped to easily identify the issues at hand – it pointed out where the differences lay. It also raised an interesting discussion about where gaming systems sat in the proposed spectrum.

The conversation focused on games that we were familiar with, so this by no means definitive and is certainly open to discussion. We assumed that D&D would sit somewhere in the middle. LARP’ing and systems like Fudge would sit on the far Left with HârnMaster sitting on the far Right. This then puts games like Vampire: The Masquerade and Call of Cthulhu in the mid left and Rolemaster sitting on the near far right. It’s a fun exercise to place all your favourite games into the different categories and it helps to explain why you may or may not enjoy them, or at least your response to them.

Anyway, based on the conversations that we had, this is roughly what we came up with. Feel free to debate heartily with us in the comments…


At this point you may ask where I sit. I’ve been gaming for 23 years now playing in gaming groups on three different continents over that time. I’ve played countless different systems (D&D 1st, 2nd, 3.x and 4th editions, Rolemaster, Call of Cthulhu, Vampire, Mage, Shadowrun, Warhammer Fantasy Role-Play, Fading Suns, Alternity, Rifts, and the list goes on and on and on embarrassingly…). I’ve enjoyed all of these games primarily for the interactions with other players. Having said that however, I think that I sit in the middle – I enjoy the rules and the roles in something close to a balance. But as in all things, it’s hard to accurately critique yourself, so who knows?

Conclusion

To be honest with you, you could say this is a rather trite academic exercise at best, and I probably wouldn’t disagree with you too much. At the time however, it proved an effective way to mediate a disagreement and help two conflicting views come to some form understanding. It also provided an excellent conversation where we reminisced  on games past and talk about systems we hadn’t thought of in years. Perhaps the most useful part of the whole exercise is helping to understand the motivations of the players in your group – it certainly helped to clarify the positions of a couple members within the group.

Footnote

There’s been some recent discussion about the changes in D&D4e and how some of us feel like something is, for lack of a better word, missing. I have, apparently, struggled to get my point across, and I think that using the above analogy is probably going to give me the best shot. Here it is…

The game’s polarity hasn’t changed, it still sits pretty firmly in what I would consider to be in the centre of the spectrum. The books on the other hand are written more to the right than the others have been. This doesn’t impact how the core game is played, except in how it influences the players. In previous versions of the game it felt that players were given more to work with inspiration wise. Again, this is just my opinion, and feel free to disagree with me.

[You may also be interested in reading about GNS Theory (Gamist, Narrativist and Simulationist playing styles) or The Big Model.]

Similar Posts:

About RupertG

RupertG has been playing roleplaying games ever since he discovered Dragon Warriors at the age of 12. Since those days he has played many different RPG's, collected not insignificant Dwarf and Tomb Kings armies for Warhammer Fantasy Battles and even worked as a games designer in the heady days of the late 90's building a CCG. Now he runs a gaming blog and is a participant in the Grand Gaming Experiment
This entry was posted in Dungeons & Dragons, Game Design, Gaming, Role Playing Games and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Nicholas

    I think I pretty much agree with you, especially with regard to 4E materials being more Right-leaning while the game remains in the center. Every time I hear someone bash 4E on not supporting RP I wonder what they think the old systems did better in that regard :-p

  • Nicholas

    I think I pretty much agree with you, especially with regard to 4E materials being more Right-leaning while the game remains in the center. Every time I hear someone bash 4E on not supporting RP I wonder what they think the old systems did better in that regard :-p

  • http://alexandraerin.livejournal.com Alexandra Erin

    I totally agree with your placement of D&D and that 4E has not changed the polarity. What’s interesting to me, though, is that I think the intent was for the non-combat game to take a giant step to the Left that was poorly telegraphed by the core books.

    Reading interviews and commentary with the dev team, or reading the DMG attentively, it’s apparent that the intent was to allow things like forays into politics and seafaring adventures and romance and intrigue and so on to just happen when they need to happen without being bogged down in rules and tables (or short circuited by poorly written easily exploitable mechanics, see also: “Diplomancy”).

    This idea just isn’t put very front and center in the books.

  • http://alexandraerin.livejournal.com Alexandra Erin

    I totally agree with your placement of D&D and that 4E has not changed the polarity. What’s interesting to me, though, is that I think the intent was for the non-combat game to take a giant step to the Left that was poorly telegraphed by the core books.

    Reading interviews and commentary with the dev team, or reading the DMG attentively, it’s apparent that the intent was to allow things like forays into politics and seafaring adventures and romance and intrigue and so on to just happen when they need to happen without being bogged down in rules and tables (or short circuited by poorly written easily exploitable mechanics, see also: “Diplomancy”).

    This idea just isn’t put very front and center in the books.

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com RupertG

    It is my primary complaint I think with the new edition of D&D – whether it is by intention or not, it ‘feels’ like the game has moved to the right and players are responding accordingly. A lot of players (not all, obviously) use the content in the rules as a springboard for how they play the game. The new editions have removed some of that sort of content from the rulebooks (not from the game itself, which is an important distinction) and it often seems to me that some of the less experienced players, or less inclined, fall into the trap of playing the game ‘as written’. Good roleplayer’s don’t need a game system to RP well, that is true. Unfortunately, not everyone is a good RP’er but still enjoy playing an RPG. This is where, I think, the choices made in the core rulebooks are felt most distinctly.

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com RupertG

    It is my primary complaint I think with the new edition of D&D – whether it is by intention or not, it ‘feels’ like the game has moved to the right and players are responding accordingly. A lot of players (not all, obviously) use the content in the rules as a springboard for how they play the game. The new editions have removed some of that sort of content from the rulebooks (not from the game itself, which is an important distinction) and it often seems to me that some of the less experienced players, or less inclined, fall into the trap of playing the game ‘as written’. Good roleplayer’s don’t need a game system to RP well, that is true. Unfortunately, not everyone is a good RP’er but still enjoy playing an RPG. This is where, I think, the choices made in the core rulebooks are felt most distinctly.

  • shelie

    Wil Wheaton makes a very (very) brief comment relating to this debate in his recent update (http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2010/06/field-report-e310.html)

    “We ended up talking for about thirty minutes about nerd stuff; mostly gaming and D&D, and how to prevent 4E from becoming a tabletop minis game with little actual roleplaying (PRO TIP: it’s pretty much on the DM to keep the RP in RPG).”

  • shelie

    Wil Wheaton makes a very (very) brief comment relating to this debate in his recent update (http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2010/06/field-report-e310.html)

    “We ended up talking for about thirty minutes about nerd stuff; mostly gaming and D&D, and how to prevent 4E from becoming a tabletop minis game with little actual roleplaying (PRO TIP: it’s pretty much on the DM to keep the RP in RPG).”

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

    It’s interesting that you say that Shelie – the fact that the GM now has to work harder on keeping it from turning into a mini’s game is quite revealing. There is no doubt that I agree with him, yes the GM is responsible, what I was saying though is that it used to be easier.

    Our gaming group has started asking this question at the start of game:

    “Is tonight a role-playing night or fighting night?”

    This innocent question actually speaks volumes. In our group at least (and a few others with whom I have discussed this) it has become the norm to (not intentionally) alternate. There is simply no time to fit a regular combat into a normal night with the usual lead up to the climatic event as well. Combats have been known to take hours and this leaves little room for anything else in a single session…

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

    It’s interesting that you say that Shelie – the fact that the GM now has to work harder on keeping it from turning into a mini’s game is quite revealing. There is no doubt that I agree with him, yes the GM is responsible, what I was saying though is that it used to be easier.

    Our gaming group has started asking this question at the start of game:

    “Is tonight a role-playing night or fighting night?”

    This innocent question actually speaks volumes. In our group at least (and a few others with whom I have discussed this) it has become the norm to (not intentionally) alternate. There is simply no time to fit a regular combat into a normal night with the usual lead up to the climatic event as well. Combats have been known to take hours and this leaves little room for anything else in a single session…

  • Beowulf

    Robert the game doesn’t just feel like its moved to the right, it has.

    4ed is farther to the right then even ‘Rifts.’ After all ‘Rifts’ has twice as many social attributes, and a couple of dedicated rolls “ie. Charm, Impress, etc.”. 4ed has at best a single attribute and check.

    While the authors claim this makes the game more RP friendly. Its obvious they were just more focused on the combat mechanics, and streamlining, and just decided to wave on anything that wasn’t combat.

    While this doesn’t take the game any more to the right then 1st or 2nd Edition, it does take it to the right of 3.0 and 3.5.

  • Beowulf

    Robert the game doesn’t just feel like its moved to the right, it has.

    4ed is farther to the right then even ‘Rifts.’ After all ‘Rifts’ has twice as many social attributes, and a couple of dedicated rolls “ie. Charm, Impress, etc.”. 4ed has at best a single attribute and check.

    While the authors claim this makes the game more RP friendly. Its obvious they were just more focused on the combat mechanics, and streamlining, and just decided to wave on anything that wasn’t combat.

    While this doesn’t take the game any more to the right then 1st or 2nd Edition, it does take it to the right of 3.0 and 3.5.

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

    I am not sure that it was a deliberate shift to the right, but the books certainly have moved that way. The only thing keeping the game in the centre would be the GM and how they run the game. The more I think about it, the more the game now feels like a more complicated version of Warhammer Quest in many ways.

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

    I am not sure that it was a deliberate shift to the right, but the books certainly have moved that way. The only thing keeping the game in the centre would be the GM and how they run the game. The more I think about it, the more the game now feels like a more complicated version of Warhammer Quest in many ways.

  • shelie

    Actually, after posting the comment above I then went and read some of the comments left on Wil’s post. One poster linked to (one of many) forum threads debating the issue of RP in 4th ed. While my experience has really only been AD&D 3.5 and a touch of 4 (and a brief flirtation with Warhammer), I’m inclined to agree with what others have said: that the responsibility is spread across both the DM and the players. After all, our group has already illustrated a few times how well a bunch of players can completely ignore what the DM is trying to do with the story ;) I think it can be just the same when it comes to having a DM encourage RP in a 4th ed game — if the players aren’t on board with the idea, they will just keep blindly going by! However, the DM definitely has to be involved in getting the RP in the game, because the players can’t really do it without the DM.

  • shelie

    Actually, after posting the comment above I then went and read some of the comments left on Wil’s post. One poster linked to (one of many) forum threads debating the issue of RP in 4th ed. While my experience has really only been AD&D 3.5 and a touch of 4 (and a brief flirtation with Warhammer), I’m inclined to agree with what others have said: that the responsibility is spread across both the DM and the players. After all, our group has already illustrated a few times how well a bunch of players can completely ignore what the DM is trying to do with the story ;) I think it can be just the same when it comes to having a DM encourage RP in a 4th ed game — if the players aren’t on board with the idea, they will just keep blindly going by! However, the DM definitely has to be involved in getting the RP in the game, because the players can’t really do it without the DM.