This is very interesting to me. If you don't mind I'd like to use you as a test case for how to handle a player with my new "what do you want to do, not what do you want to accomplish" theory. Care to start a new thread?

Quote from: Elliot WilenThis is very interesting to me. If you don't mind I'd like to use you as a test case for how to handle a player with my new "what do you want to do, not what do you want to accomplish" theory. Care to start a new thread?

You are welcome to use me as a test case, and I'll be happy to participate, but you should make the thread. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by your statement there.

For certain players I don't think goals are very important. And I say this as someone who bases whole campaigns on pc goals. The thing is, what is crucial is that those players who do not have goals get something out of gaming which does not impede the fun of those who do have goals.

Also these goalless heathens should ideally be the kind of players willing to find something in the goals of the other pcs or something in the setting worth adopting as their own.

I have long since abandoned the whole "strangers meeting in a tavern" concept in any genre. Character creation is a group effort. we discuss what the campaign is about, some of the themes etc and the players create characters together - the most important aspect of which is what is their relationship to each other and what holds them (nominaly sometimes) together.

This has a couple of advantages. The first I can inject the pcs into the setting with minimal effort. The second and perhaps the more relevent to the topic at hand, it gives the goalless players something to hook their characters on (often times just a relationship) before moving on to something else

One of the reasons I'm not such a stickler for character goals, is that I have over the years discovered that for some players, it's just about doing stuff - sometimes for no apparent reason. Get the bad guy. Discover the mystery.Survive the encounter. Why? No reason, just because...

If that's the case and they are having fun, and also contributing to the whole atmosphere, than fine. A couple of players in my current group are just there for the ride and although there is not much character growth in their protrayals, they do contribute a hell of a lot of awesome to the game.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: SpikeYou are welcome to use me as a test case, and I'll be happy to participate, but you should make the thread. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by your statement there.

Thanks! Forward link!

I don't mind player's with characters that lack clear and/or epic goals, but it does bother me when they lack "common human goals" to the point of breaking suspension of disbelief due to their inhuman actions.  (for that genre / character)

I think I listed these earlier today:

Spontaneously suicidal or homicidal. Amoral. Fearless. Shameless. No concern for long term goals or consequences of any sort beyond the current gaming session. etc.

Wow.  I *think* I'm the one who started the thread about this elsewhere.  It's amazing where thoughts on the Internet go sometimes.  Anyway, this is my first time ever to this site and my first post here.... so howdy.  

In any case, my only reasons for bringing this topic up were...

1.)  I really had never considered having a character with absolutely no goals whatsoever as a player.  Goal probably isn't a good term either.  I'm talking more about motivations.  To me, a character without some sort of motivation is like having a chess piece in chess.  Sure the rules give it some "powers" by telling it how it can move around the board but the piece is pretty boring until you give it the motivation of "capture the opposing King".  (Please, don't take this analogy too far.  It's weak anyway and it might break under the strain.)

2.)  As a GM having players with no motivations leaves me with nothing to do.  In D&D I'm supposed to provide opposition to the characters but if they don't have any motivations I'm privy to then I have nothing to oppose.

Now, in the specific case I was talking about #2 takes care of itself.  Since I had a module the players were interested in, I just dumped them in a dungeon sans motivations.  Now they can kill shit and get treasure until they figure out what they want.  In some other, more open ended game, I'd be kinda screwed if the players didn't give me *something* to work with.

Andrew

Well, if it was you, you're not actually the one I found confusing.

I suspect part of it is a kind of slander: "Oh that player doesn't want to provide a motivation? he must just be along for the ride.."

Part of it is, I truly believe players don't actually need motivations at all for D&D, beyond just 'to play'. It's one of the great advantages of the game. There's a whole established method of play that allows for that whole characterization layer to come secondary.

The actual question here is whether you think characters should be developed in play or before play begins.

Quote2.) As a GM having players with no motivations leaves me with nothing to do. In D&D I'm supposed to provide opposition to the characters but if they don't have any motivations I'm privy to then I have nothing to oppose.

...try giant spiders.

It's been said--but I'm going to echo it: it's legitimate to want to set goals during play after getting a feel for the character/world. Not all characters portrary exactly as envisioned at creation time: I don't want to be wedded to a goal I might no longer care about.

Secondly, the GM and other PCs (not to mention dice rolls) all add input to the game that can make a character-goal less attractive during play than it seemed prior to play.

Now: I don't mind have sharply focused games (James Bond) where there are some goals that are clear from the outset (do the mission). And that, to many degrees works well. Secondly: if a player does show up with a goal that I, as a GM, can handle, that's exciting. So I like it.

Finally: not having a distinctly stated "goal" isn't the same as "not interested in playing." A Private Investigator may not have a goal like "eventually take down the corrupt mayor" but will still investigate any cases that walk into his office.

-Marco

Being the GM of a player who doesn't give his character any goals or motivations can be a frustrating experience. Are we supposed to fill in the blanks for him? Keep throwing hooks until they bite, even if other players are doing more for the game? Focus our efforts on other players? What?

Some players just need to get creatively comfortable.

In my current group, we had a situation where one guy was basicly writing his own plots. He had created a character that was secretly a villian, and he was doing all kinds of stuff, constantly writing me emails, all kinds of stuff.

We also had one guy who didn't provide any of that stuff. So I started leaving hooks out for him, including a really obvious one. He had this ultra rare race from the Psionics book for his PC, and so I put a female NPC of the same race in the game, and had her try and develop some stuff with him. He rebuffed her and avoided her, so we filed the NPC away. No bite.

Later on- like 3 months (or 12 game sessions) later, when the players reached the city where she was located, I went through my npc file and saw "oh this character is from that city, I'll have her make an appearance.."

So I did and it was in a way not even remotely directed at that player either.

Strangely, this time, he did bite and started following up on her. A lot of time when we get to a new city or something I'll just say "Ok, you've got the whole day to yourself in the new city, what would you like to do?" Usually this is time spent crafting or buying stuff. This guy said "I'll go find (that NPC) and see if I can reestablish connections with others of our kind.."

So I dunno, I say, do nothing special. Make hooks available. They bite or they don't bite, but you as a GM shouldn't sweat it if the player isn't ready yet. And as always, you can just ask the player if he has anything he's interested in pursuing.

With this guy, I truly think it was just that he needed a while to settle in and get comfortable being creative amongst the other guys in my group.

Forcing players to do things they aren't ready or willing to do on their own can backfire.  Maw's story was pretty interesting. If he'd gotten mad at his player for ignoring the hook, gotten in his face to one degree or another about getting 'motivated' then he probably would have lost the player and missed out on the stuff the guy did later.

Maybe some players need shoves, others will resent it.

Quote from: RedFoxIt's hard enough trying to herd nuclear powered cats when they're not all driven in different directions.

Rotwang! Reads Internet Post, Head Explodes

HUMAN LEAGUE, IN -- Gaming forum regular Dr Rotwang! today sustained major head trauma stemming from a clever post he read online.

"Bwa ha ha ha!", he was heard to remark at the time of the incident.  "Nuclear-powered cats...herding...oh, my g-" he exclaimed, shortly before his head exploded.  Sadly, he had nohing to contribute to the conversation, due in part to his injuries and the damn Bette Midler song that was playing on TV.  He is expected to make a full recovery.  Bette Midler was not available for comment.

The author of the post, fellow forum regular RedFox, has been nominated for a major award with light-up pinwheels on it.  

Alas, I cannot take credit for that particular turn of phrase.  I believe I saw it used in the Big Purple discussions on Exalted and, being both cool and appropriate, it stuck with me.

I have a question for anyone who is a "player without a goal": why are you playing?

I mean, I see a lot of discussion of what players without goals want, and what they really are and such, but really I see no reason for such a class of players to exist. I really really don't like people who play characters without goals (I tend to be proactive as a player, and have proactive characters, and when I GM I want, and rarely get, such proactivity), but PLAYERS without goals? I mean, why play?

There has to be SOME kind of a goal. I mean, even if it is "To explore this GMs setting." That is a goal. It's a wishy washy goal and I really would find myself bored by a player with such a goal, but it's a goal.

I love that mainstream (Exalted) games are starting to require characters with goals. It makes it so much easier for a GM. Instead of having to make a goal up that will entice all the players (or several overlapping goals) or dealing with players rolling their eyes and being bored ("Why should we try to save the village children from the orcs? I mean, there is no money in it... Screw this I'm getting drunk."), the players make their own goals, and if the goals bore them it is really a sign they have a problem.

Quote from: SethwickI have a question for anyone who is a "player without a goal": why are you playing?

To have fun, I'd imagine.  Maybe relax.  Maybe socialize.  Maybe to make dice towers.

Quote from: SethwickI mean, I see a lot of discussion of what players without goals want, and what they really are and such, but really I see no reason for such a class of players to exist.

Yes, let's begin the purges!  First against the wall will be the goal-less players.  Next will be the ones who turn in fifteen page character backgrounds.  Then maybe the ones who steal the last cheetos from the bowl.

Quote from: SethwickI really really don't like people who play characters without goals (I tend to be proactive as a player, and have proactive characters, and when I GM I want, and rarely get, such proactivity), but PLAYERS without goals? I mean, why play?

If you can't understand it, it shouldn't exist!  I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment.  There are so many things I don't understand.  Getting rid of them would simplify my life so very much.