This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: "Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups  (Read 6594 times)

tenbones

  • Poobah of the D.O.N.G.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6164
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #30 on: October 14, 2014, 04:37:04 PM »
I use Star Trek+ as my metaphor.

A good gaming group consists of -

Kirks - Natural leaders that players that are playing their characters to the hilt and though everyone in the party may not like personally, Kirks set the pace of things that inevitably drive the game. No game session is wrong because Kirk is the center of things even if he's not doing anything. At best it's an interlude of group interest before Kirk re-asserts himself/herself to keep things on track.

Spocks - The super-competent Beta. Spocks are the advisers to the Kirks when both are in play. But they are independent enough to have their own things in the campaign going on and can easily drive things when Kirks aren't around. You can have entire subplots and sessions centering around them with little issue. Spocks are the rules guys.

Bones - Bones are the looser version of Spock. Like Spock they freely advise the Kirks and everyone else including the Spocks (who often feel they don't need it). Bones are usually less rules-harping in nature, and more high-concept. Whatever is happening in the game - they're concerned with/about it. You can have entire subplots and sessions centering around them.

Scotties - Scotties are the One-Trick Ponies whose characters are hyperspecialists to the exclusion of other things. When their specialty comes into play - they're on top of it and own that shit like no one else can, or ever will. Even the normally Rulemastery-oriented Spocks will defer to Scotties in the areas of their expertise, though they can often synergize and wreak mechanical terror on your games on occasion. You can have session that center around Scotties on occasion.

(Scotty Sub-Class) - "The Jayne" - Jaynes are the Scotty of violence. They know one thing in RPG's: combat. And that's all they give a fuck about. Jaynes, contrary to popular belief, are not as one-dimensional as most people think. You can have elaborate backgrounds, and all kinds of permutations that Jaynes will dive and drive whole game sessions around... as long as it involves COMBAT. They are usually comic-relief unabashedly so, usually in things not related to combat.

Sulus - Sulus are inexperienced but enthusiastic players learning the ropes. They may someday turn into Spocks/Bones/Kirks - but they lack the experience and end up looking like Chekovs(see below). They often find themselves getting into trouble and needing the help of the officers to bail them out. You can't have entire sessions based on Sulu's though you can have interesting campaign-twists develop out of their attempts to reach beyond their means.

Uhuras - Uhura's are the big team-player. They tend to develop into a Scotty, though it's possible for them to become Spocks as well or on occasion a Bones. Uhura's are down with whatever the team is down for. They run backup on any play made. Character depth and background is icing on the cake at best. They tend not to be strong mechanic's players, but it's not unheard of. Those that are tend to become Scotties and Spocks. Those that aren't can mutate into Bones. Many do none-of-the-above, and remain sidekicks. You can't have entire sessions based around Uhuras because like being backup, not forefront, they tend to have no agendas.

Chekovs - These are the players that invariably follow what others are doing. They don't necessarily have the strength of personality to pursue things on their own for whatever reason. Consequently, Chekovs tend to get into trouble that is obvious to other players and not themselves. They create mishaps in games due to their own self-conscious desire to not want to do anything that might make them look like a fuck-up. Their characters develop usually as consequences of what happens in the story to them, rarely out of intent. You can't have sessions based around Chekovs, and most sub-plots fail due to lack of pursuit on the Chekov's part. Chekovs never mutate into anything. They play for metagame reasons of socializing with other people who are actually there to play an RPG.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2014, 04:40:54 PM by tenbones »

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #31 on: October 14, 2014, 05:35:22 PM »
Quote from: Omnifray;791968
Is this Beta player basically my "assistant GM" or "a-ref", a glorified player with broader narrative input than the rest (subject to my GM-veto), his own subplot and occasionally reffing-in-my-absence responsibilities as discussed


As GM I wouldn't make it an official position, give them broader narrative input or extra subplots, or referee ability, no. If they have extra power it comes from the other players, who eg agree to make them party treasurer, accept their directions for division of loot, typically follow their lead on where to go & what to do next, etc. The 'Beta' may help newbie players by explaining the rules, help them to generate their PCs, and so on.

I tend to be the Beta when I'm a player, except when there's an established Beta in the group - and even then I might sometimes get looked to to help out. It's a good role for people who GM a lot. But you're not there to hog the spotlight from the other players or exercise power over them.

RPGPundit

  • Administrator - The Final Boss of Internet Shitlords
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48855
    • http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #32 on: October 14, 2014, 10:51:28 PM »
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;791406
Do you have a link to any of these posts or the old blog? I'm interested in reading them.


The old blog was lost to history, but most of the posts from it ended up in the archive, in the RPGPundit's subforum here on theRPGsite. So you might be able to find it if you look.
LION & DRAGON: Medieval-Authentic OSR Roleplaying is available now! You only THINK you've played 'medieval fantasy' until you play L&D.


My Blog:  http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/
The most famous uruguayan gaming blog on the planet!

NEW!
Check out my short OSR supplements series; The RPGPundit Presents!


Dark Albion: The Rose War! The OSR fantasy setting of the history that inspired Shakespeare and Martin alike.
Also available in Variant Cover form!
Also, now with the CULTS OF CHAOS cult-generation sourcebook

ARROWS OF INDRA
Arrows of Indra: The Old-School Epic Indian RPG!
NOW AVAILABLE: AoI in print form

LORDS OF OLYMPUS
The new Diceless RPG of multiversal power, adventure and intrigue, now available.

Spike

  • Stroppy Pika of DOOM!!!!!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8105
  • Tricoteuse
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #33 on: October 15, 2014, 01:38:23 AM »
Fascinating, if a bit old hat.  Fascinating because early this year I took a break from GMing and managed to find a couple of seats as a player (two different games/GMs), so I've recently been re-exposed to the 'other side of the screen', so to speak.

Amusingly, and I'll steal the Trek+ here for a moment: While if you'd ever asked me I would have described myself as a 'Jayne', and proudly... double plus amusing since, after showing Firefly to a once dear friend I was told on no uncertain terms that I was, in fact, Jayne in real life (0_o)?

When actually playing I found myself being, almost exclusively, the Kirk. A good fighting type of Kirk, certainly, but a god-damned Kirk.  So much so that I was driving my GM to distraction trying to keep up with my character's actions.

Must be the frustrated player in me after years of exclusive GMing.  All the shit I wished my Players would try are expressions of what I would have done in their places.




Of course: the point people seem to overlook is just how fluid these roles are.  I can be a Kirk AND a Spock at the same time, while really just wanting to let my inner Jayne fly.  I tend to Plant from time to time, etc.

Even if simplified down to Pundit's questionable level (Omega? Really?!), roles still tend to be fluid. If the same guy is pulling Beta Duty in session after session, what happens if he has an off day and doesn't feel like wrangling the group?  Chances are another player (Gamma? I dunno...) might have a bit of frustrated Beta in him looking to cut loose that day.

 Finally: I confess I utterly missed the Jesus joke until the Meme-pic... I denounce myself.
For you the day you found a minor error in a Post by Spike and forced him to admit it, it was the greatest day of your internet life.  For me it was... Tuesday.

For the curious: Apparently, in person, I sound exactly like the Youtube Character The Nostalgia Critic.   I have no words.

[URL=https:

Lynn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1982
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #34 on: October 15, 2014, 11:32:20 AM »
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;791661
It'd be interesting to have Jesus at the table. Kill two birds with one stone.


I don't think Post-Rez Jesus can cast stones.
Lynn Fredricks
Entrepreneurial Hat Collector

tenbones

  • Poobah of the D.O.N.G.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6164
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #35 on: October 15, 2014, 12:38:05 PM »
@Spike - See, I'd just say you're a Kirk. Kirks can do anything Kirks sets their minds to. Kirks are lovers, fighters, leaders, diplomats - whatever they need to be to get what the Kirks want.

Kirk BEAT Spock at fucking 3D Chess!!! Consider THAT. Why? Because Kirk needed to win.

Kirks can out-do most people at their roles, but he instead lets them have their moment to shine. Right? So to me the fact you recognize these roles and dabble in them in discriminatory fashion probably means you're a Kirk.

I'm the same way when I play.

Chekovs, on the other end of the spectrum - they have a hard time reconciling their role because they fantasize they're actually Kirks/Spocks/Bones or anything BUT what they really are. Chekovs. You can't have an episode ABOUT Chekov... he only is a foil for failures that others have to clean up.

Spike

  • Stroppy Pika of DOOM!!!!!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8105
  • Tricoteuse
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #36 on: October 17, 2014, 12:21:46 AM »
@tenbones: My ego thanks you! :D

Seriously, though: I'm gonna start keeping an eye on my group in the future and see how this really shakes out.   My regulars didn't seem to have a proper kirk, just a sort of Kirk-lite. Looking over your list I'd say an Uhura pretending to be a Kirk because that was what the group needed.

The guy with the right personality for it always goes straight up Jayne.

Yeah: i like this sort of personality rating much better than the alpha-omega spectrum or the dry academic one.
For you the day you found a minor error in a Post by Spike and forced him to admit it, it was the greatest day of your internet life.  For me it was... Tuesday.

For the curious: Apparently, in person, I sound exactly like the Youtube Character The Nostalgia Critic.   I have no words.

[URL=https:

The Ent

  • Senor Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • T
  • Posts: 1733
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #37 on: October 17, 2014, 01:51:29 AM »
I like the Trek thing.

When starting out I was typically cast as a Jayne and a loose cannon one at that but turned out to be more Kirk-y eventually.

dragoner
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #38 on: October 17, 2014, 10:25:18 AM »
When playing star trek as a kid, I was always kirk, and a friend was always spock, but that's 1974 for you. Later in having to take leadership development courses, and to improve on my be-know-do aspects ...
The most beautiful peonies I ever saw ... were grown in almost pure cat excrement.
-Vonnegut

ArrozConLeche

  • No Más
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1761
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #39 on: October 17, 2014, 11:06:52 AM »
If someone could translate those terms into Farscape or Walking Dead characters that would be awesome.

Bren

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7638
    • http://honorandintrigue.blogspot.com/
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #40 on: October 17, 2014, 11:54:38 AM »
Quote from: RPGPundit;791298
Notwithstanding, the fact is, in almost any group I've seen the above hierarchies apply; and when they don't (when there's no beta to keep the group on-task, or no omega to help the group hierarchy feel defined, or when some player really wants to challenge the GM for the alpha spot) that's when you have fucked up gaming groups that are not long for this world.
Other than the fact that most groups, for very practical reasons, want a leader and thus they often end up with a leader...the rest of your oh so simplistic characterization is pretty useless. The notion that a group requires an omega to function is peurile, nor is it born out by my experience (in gaming or otherwise).

You really need to get out and experience more kinds of groups. Gaming with a group of socially functional adults might be quite revealing as to the mutability of these social roles which can lead to other less stultifying social dynamics. Or to put it in simple, playground terms, people can successfully take turns playing different roles.

Where you are correct is that designing games to prevent anyone from being a leader is a waste of time and effort. But it is the designer's time to waste and that sounds like a fairly harmless way for designers who are divorced from the real world to occupy their time. If only Lenin had spent more time as an avant garde game designer and Hitler had just sold more mediocre paintings....
Currently running: Runequest in Glorantha + Call of Cthulhu   Currently playing: D&D 5E + RQ
My Blog: For Honor...and Intrigue
I have a gold medal from Ravenswing and Gronan owes me bee

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #41 on: October 17, 2014, 12:52:15 PM »
Quote from: Bren;792591
Other than the fact that most groups, for very practical reasons, want a leader and thus they often end up with a leader...the rest of your oh so simplistic characterization is pretty useless. The notion that a group requires an omega to function is peurile, nor is it born out by my experience (in gaming or otherwise).

I agree about the Omega being unnecessary. I do think he has a point potentially about the Beta being useful for GM support. But as long as no one is challenging the GM for Alpha status (and worse, winning) there's usually no problem. Even if the Beta is more experienced and knowledgeable than the GM they need to make clear to the others ('Gammas') that it is the GM's game and he/she is in charge.

BTW one issue I've seen is GMs who are uncomfortable with Beta players and slap them down, rather than make use of them. These tend to be the insecure-authoritarian types. Or they may seek to assign an inappropriate player as Beta (ie not me) :D - I did have one zombie-horror GM who didn't take me or my (super-high-charisma & leadership) PC seriously, because my PC was female, while deferring to the guy with the munchkin character (we were told to make 'normal people' - he made an SAS veteran).

Haffrung

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5155
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #42 on: October 17, 2014, 02:11:41 PM »
Quote from: RPGPundit;791298

"Few months ago I bumped into a forum discussion by game designers where they were wracking their little brains on ways to prevent the dread occurrence of the group having a leader.

As far as they were concerned having a group leader was apparently akin to having a group rapist or something. The players should not be stifled and railroaded by these vile commanders of their fate. So they were coming up with game rules to prevent anyone from becoming the leader. Didnt matter if it was a board game or RPG.
"


Just more evidence that these clowns have little real-world experience and insight. It used to be that these sorts of delusions would dissipate as the theorists lived a bit and saw the way people really behave. But now that geeks experience 80 per cent of their contact with other humans via self-selected echo-chambers on in the internet where everyone fashions identities to suit the community, they can go on believing in nonsense forever. I despair at the future of humanity.
 

soltakss

  • RQ Fogey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1433
    • http://www.soltakss.com/index.html
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #43 on: October 18, 2014, 05:37:13 PM »
It is sometimes useful if parties have a leader, as decisions can be quickly made.

However, the leader is not always the same person, depending on the situation.

I prefer to have a combat leader, a magical leader and a social leader. Sometimes these are the same person, sometimes they are all the same person.

In my experience, many parties have strong personalities who try to dominate and lead the others. Some have people who always go with the flow. So, those parties get de facto leaders. The problems start when more than one person tries to lead at the same time.

But, a party without any leader at all just spins around with no purpose most of the time, in my experience.
Simon Phipp - Caldmore Chameleon - Wallowing in my elitism  since 1982.

http://www.soltakss.com/index.html
Merrie England (Medieval RPG): http://merrieengland.soltakss.com/index.html
Alternate Earth: http://alternateearthrq.soltakss.com/index.html

Omega

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • O
  • Posts: 17093
"Leaders" and the Real Social Dynamics of Gaming Groups
« Reply #44 on: October 20, 2014, 08:49:43 AM »
Quote from: RPGPundit;791298
Hello, faithful readers.  Over on therpgsite, we had a thread where someone posted a subject too interesting to pass up.

Here's the relevant section of the original post, talking about whether there should be 'leaders' in a player group:

"Few months ago I bumped into a forum discussion by game designers where they were wracking their little brains on ways to prevent the dread occurrence of the group having a leader.

As far as they were concerned having a group leader was apparently akin to having a group rapist or something. The players should not be stifled and railroaded by these vile commanders of their fate. So they were coming up with game rules to prevent anyone from becoming the leader. Didnt matter if it was a board game or RPG.
"

yeebus! Did I really say rapist?
... checks post...
er, so I did...

Sorry about that. BGG's occasional bouts of rampant stupid sometimes combines with family problems at the same times to really grind my gears and I got carried away...