Quote from: RedFoxYes, 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.
...
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.

This sounds recycled from some other discussion. :rolleyes:

There's nothing "persecutional" about saying players in a game should have goals -- particularly on a message board setup to discuss "Game Design & Theory".

I'd prefer it if players were proactive with character stuff, but if they want to wait until later sessions to have a goal-- or even if they never quite have a goal but theyre always in the game, then that's fine. In fact, I kinda distrust anyone who is too explicit with goals, or who has already set them up before playing.

If I'm looking for players and I get two guys, and one guy says "I just want to play a wizard" and the other guy says "I want to work out my issues with child abuse through roleplay", I'm totally taking that first guy. There's no question.

Similarly, if I get a PC who has already written his entire story and outlined his goals before the first dice hits the table, I have some distrust.
This is because I have a personal bias towards characters that develop through play.

I also run games that are about adventure. Adventure is the goal. So if you want to be some mopey guy or an angsty guy or whatever, that comes second to the basic goal of adventuring, and being a team player.

I can actually illustrate this with some examples from the last time I did a blind recruit of players (my current campaign recruited back in February, actually).

From my ads I got about 12 people.

Of those people: I got a couple from my area who started talking about 'conflict resolution', and I had to reject them. They seemed nice enough, but they were damaged goods. I had almost forgotten them, but I saw on another mailing list just this morning that they were still looking for a group.

Then I had some other guys who just couldn't work out a Thursday night.

Then my favorite was this one other guy I remember was wanting to play, but he had needs. He was like, "I never like to break character, so I'll need everyone to understand that.." (haha), and "by the way, I don't drive, so I'll need a ride." and then something like "It will be worth it for you to have me in your game, because I am an expert roleplayer."

I mean, geez, I wasn't looking for resumes.

But my bet- my personal theory- is that last guy there would probably come up with all kinds of character goals. And he'd also be annoying as shit to play with.

Good point, Maw.  Sometimes players with TOO MANY goals, or the wrong kind of goals for your game, are infinitely more frustrating than players with no goals beyond "Having fun".  

I personally have no real problem with the player who's just there to have fun and be along for the ride.  The problem can emerge when a player seems to have no tangible goals, and YET experiences frustration at "never getting to do anything".
Even that can usually be solved by throwing them some opportunities to develop goals (a "quest", an enemy, some personal opportunity, whatever), except if said player is all of the above PLUS he actively ignores/rejects all of these opportunities.

But that's still better than the goal-filled player who wants the campaign to be all about HIM. Those "primma donnas" are absolute poison.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RedFoxTo have fun, I'd imagine.  Maybe relax.  Maybe socialize.  Maybe to make dice towers.



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.



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.  

Red, did I tell you I love you? In a totally hetero, non-furry way, I mean!

-clash

It's worth noting the difference between goals like "exploring my character's sensitive past" or "create a deep and moving portrayal of a half-elven poet-dancer" and goals like "explore the dungeon, kill the goblins, return with the treasure".

Prima-donna players: bad.  
I don't want to go on the adventure players: bad.

Not going on the adventure?  That's not goal-less, that's disruptive.  Difference.

Aimless players are just along for the ride, for whatever reason.  They're also called "casual players."  They're not disruptive, because they don't generally instigate or block anything.  If anything, they're a non-issue until and unless they react to things well.

I think some people are confusing players that don't have a goal with the ones that have disruptive or counter-productive goals.  Like the ones who decide they want their characters to sleep all day instead of going on the adventure.

Those are just assholes.

I think some players have explicitly stated goals ("My character's goal is to do X") and some have implicit goals (They're exploring the dungeon with everyone else... they pick up the gold from the chest... etc).  

When I talk about characters with no goals they're the ones that don't want to go along with the adventure and object to *any* form of scenario setup as "railroading".  They don't want to guard the caravan, or explore the dungeon, or rescue the princess.

So yes... basically, they just want to be disruptive.

Quote from: RedFoxTo have fun, I'd imagine.  Maybe relax.  Maybe socialize.  Maybe to make dice towers.

All things better served by actions other than playing RPGs.

QuoteYes, 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.

I didn't mean it in that way. I mean I couldn't see a reason for them to game at all and thus I couldn't see a reason for them to exist as gamers.

QuoteIf 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.  

So explain it. If you don't have a goal, how or why do you play? It seems like you'd just be wasting everyones time.

IME  in some situations players showing up just to have fun trumps players having goals...seriously. I know the players showing up to have fun will find something in the game which is fun to them and roll with. Sometimes players who have goals get a bit frustrated when their goals don't exactly play out as they expected it to. What they had in mind may not necessarily be what happens during play.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RIME  in some situations players showing up just to have fun trumps players having goals...seriously. I know the players showing up to have fun will find something in the game which is fun to them and roll with. Sometimes players who have goals get a bit frustrated when their goals don't exactly play out as they expected it to. What they had in mind may not necessarily be what happens during play.

Regards,
David R

I have always thought, and still do, that bringing up "fun" ends meaningful discussion about gaming.

Sure, people game to have fun, duh. HOW they have fun and why certain things are fun to them and what kind of people have certain kinds of fun.

Anyway, I think just showing up to a game expecting fun makes you sort of a leech. You need to, IMO, show up with some plan to make some of your own fun at an RPG.

To me, players trying to promote their goals and resolving opposing goals and such is what RPGs are about. Showing up expecting to passively take it all in and get some fun means you are not providing anything to the group and game. Passivity doesn't work in RPGs unless you have other players (including GM) who are willing to make up for your passivity.

Quote from: SethwickSo explain it. If you don't have a goal, how or why do you play? It seems like you'd just be wasting everyones time.

It seems like a lot of the discussion involves the level of detail of said player goals versus a goals/no-goals light switch type division.

For example,  when I play a RPG, my player goal tends to be: "Roleplay a character".  You want more detail?  Ok. "Roleplay a character in a RPG".  More detail?  "Roleplay a character in a RPG with some friends who like RPGs also".  Still probably not the kind of detail that the GM is looking for.

I really don't like the question: "Describe where you see your character 5
 years from now?  10? 20?". This kind of question drives me nuts...especially at the beginning of the game. Dude. I'm still trying to figure out what "Dysha" means and WTF Isho is....how can I tell you what my character want's to do in 20 years, if I'm not even sure what he's going to do in 5 minutes...

I don't think there's anything wrong with figuring out goals as you go...but I'm crazy that way.

Conversely, I'm the kind of player that I(as GM) would pull my hair out over.."You don't know what you want to do?...AHHHHH!!!"....

Quote from: SethwickI have always thought, and still do, that bringing up "fun" ends meaningful discussion about gaming.

Maybe. But it is a shorthand that best describes why most folks game. But I'll repost (in italics) most of my earlier stuff to give you a better idea as to where I'm coming from

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.

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...

QuoteAnyway, I think just showing up to a game expecting fun makes you sort of a leech. You need to, IMO, show up with some plan to make some of your own fun at an RPG.

Needless to say, I'm not into the leech school of thought when it comes to rpgs as a social activity. Everyone contributes in different ways

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.

QuoteTo me, players trying to promote their goals and resolving opposing goals and such is what RPGs are about. Showing up expecting to passively take it all in and get some fun means you are not providing anything to the group and game. Passivity doesn't work in RPGs unless you have other players (including GM) who are willing to make up for your passivity.

If by passivity you mean that which impedes the other players fun, than yeah , a group may have a problem. Otherwise, I don't really see why the players and GM putting a little bit of extra effort to engage certain players is a problem.

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

Regards,
David R

Quote from: rcsampleIt seems like a lot of the discussion involves the level of detail of said player goals versus a goals/no-goals light switch type division.

For example,  when I play a RPG, my player goal tends to be: "Roleplay a character".  You want more detail?  Ok. "Roleplay a character in a RPG".  More detail?  "Roleplay a character in a RPG with some friends who like RPGs also".  Still probably not the kind of detail that the GM is looking for.

I really don't like the question: "Describe where you see your character 5
 years from now?  10? 20?". This kind of question drives me nuts...especially at the beginning of the game. Dude. I'm still trying to figure out what "Dysha" means and WTF Isho is....how can I tell you what my character want's to do in 20 years, if I'm not even sure what he's going to do in 5 minutes...

I don't think there's anything wrong with figuring out goals as you go...but I'm crazy that way.

Conversely, I'm the kind of player that I(as GM) would pull my hair out over.."You don't know what you want to do?...AHHHHH!!!"....

Ah... See, we're entirely different. Where do you see your character in 5, 10, 20 years is shit I know instantly upon thinking up the character. In fact, I probably thought of what the character will be before I thought about what the character is now.

I also tend to be about three or so steps ahead of gameplay. ZILLIONS of ideas are there, it's not hard to figure out what to do on my turn, it's hard to wait between turns.

As a GM I would hate you

Quote from: David RMaybe. But it is a shorthand that best describes why most folks game. But I'll repost (in italics) most of my earlier stuff to give you a better idea as to where I'm coming from

It describes how much folks game, sure. It's an absolutely useless description. It's like answering "Why does society form the way it does?" with "survival." Sure, that's the point, OF COURSE that's the point. It doesn't really offer any useful predictive powers though.

QuoteFor 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.

True. But I think showing up to play with a goal and then deciding you would rather follow anothers is better. It's not like coming up with a goal is hard, or takes any time. It takes a fraction of a second of brain activity.

QuoteOne 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...

I've discovered that players who do things "just because" sap my will to live and are the primary reason why I find it very very hard to keep my enthusiasm for GMing at all existent now days. People have reasons for doing things. So do characters. It isn't work to come up with a damn reason.

QuoteNeedless to say, I'm not into the leech school of thought when it comes to rpgs as a social activity. Everyone contributes in different ways

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.

"Atmosphere"? I don't really understand what you mean by that, beyond providing an area to game in or food or something. Since I'm generally the one who does that in my group of friends I guess I don't generally think about that.

QuoteIf by passivity you mean that which impedes the other players fun, than yeah , a group may have a problem. Otherwise, I don't really see why the players and GM putting a little bit of extra effort to engage certain players is a problem.

RPGs are not TV. Should the players and GMs try to do interesting stuff and engage each other? Yes. Is it their duty to get Dave to come out of his shell and take an interest in the game besides rolling to hit in fights and searching for traps when people ask him to? No.

QuoteI 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

Regards,
David R

I love the idea of group chargen. I LOVE it. Absolutely agree with you there. Thing is, face to face. I've never seen it work. Even if I insist everyone sits at the table at the same time while making characters, it always turns into one person at a time doing it. Online this doesn't happen. I don't know why it always ends up that way in real life.