The Gaming Den

( taken from the post by Deanruel87 on this page, where he postulates some roleplaying "axioms" )

Do you agree with that ? Do you think every gamer out there plays for "being powerful" ? Do YOU play for it ? Im curious because I know I dont*, and I think this is one of the greatest BS Ive heard in a long time.

* if I had to pick, I would say my primary motivation for gaming is setting or theme exploration

Mind exercises like roleplaying are typically some form of escapism. Most people enjoy imagining themselves as more powerful in one sense of the term or another.

Whether it's physical power, power of persuasion, power over others (managers, kings, CEOs, etc), mental power (being a genius).

So, yes, I think the vast majority of people express some sort of power fantasy in each character they play.

I think he's stretching to claim that as a motivation for everyone. I mean masochists exist and some people really do have fantasies of powerlessness.

But with a few weasel words like "the vast majority" or "everyone you are likely to roleplay with outside of the BDSM scene", I would be in total agreement.

I think you may be somewhat misconstruing his remarks, although to be fair I didn't think his phrasing was ideal.

The crux of the issue to me is, "What do you mean by 'powerful'?" The teenage hacker in a world where the whole planet is ruled by corporations run amok -- is that a powerful character? Yes, he can hack into computers and thus he has substantial influence over what he can reach -- but the megacorporations can crush him like an insect if he attracts too much of their attention. The high-school airhead who helps fight vampires despite being a snotty bitch with no weapons skills -- is she powerless? A master vampire would destroy her in less time than it takes for her to scream "Buffy, help!" but if she can demolish the egos of the football team and keep them away from the big fight, or convince the Principal to hold a fire drill, she's still contributing to the team. And maybe that's the vision her player had when creating her.

So I would say that if by 'powerful' you mean 'effective in the role their player conceived them with' -- then yes. Paradoxically, even if that role is to be a comically inept foil for the more competent heroes, then succeeding in that role is a kind of fulfillment of the player's "power fantasy."

My primary interest in playing rpgs is ruleset examination with a secondary emphasis in genre emulation. Escapist power fantasies, to be generous, would be an exaggerated way to describe that.

Well, verily thou art the pinnacle of fun.

I'm pretty sure what silva actually means is "WHAAAAA WHY DON'T YOU LIKE APOCALYPSE WORLD?"

If someone wants an entertaining read and an ideal demonstration of how much doublethink people like Silva are capable of believing check THIS post out.

It's from my time over at the IKRPG forums. A few posts above I say basically the exact same thing as Silva linked and when people argue it I challenge them to describe their last character and tell them they will probably focus on the ways in which their characters are powerful and exceptional. The response is a guy simultaneously declaring that he doesn't enjoy feeling powerful while LITERALLY describing the character he likes to play as a Cool Guy who Don't Look At Explosions. He literally describes lighting cigars on the burning clothing of his dead allies while striding away with an arrogant smirk and uses this as proof that he doesn't use roleplaying as an escapist fantasy.


Shakespeare!

If he were a sock puppet of mine I couldn't have engineered a more self-ignorant response. That is the standard for someone who says they spend their time playing imaginary games where they pretend to have magic powers and be buff barbarians and wasteland survivors but totally aren't doing it because pretending to be strong, capable, and badass is fun. Also as a fun blast-from-the-past for those who remember my talks about my time on the IKRPG you will notice that I seem to just stop responding after the first page and that is because a response I made got deleted twice so I stopped trying.

Are we literally talking about dickwaving I'm bigger than you power fantasy? Because that's arguable. 9 times out of 10 I'll create an efficient, powerful character to survive what the MC throws at the party because the MC has no interest in my character as something other than a collection of stats to determine challenge levels by.

But that 1 in 10 that will take things and run with them... Those are the games worth remembering, because I get to escape the traditional dick-waving fantasy and play around with more flawed, flat out *interesting* characters.

And that in and of itself is a power fantasy. The ability to drastically impact the story/world around me in a way that I myself wouldn't be able to. Even if I'm playing someone particularly gullible or whatever. It lets me have my cake and eat it too.

deanruel87 wrote:I challenge them to describe their last character and tell them they will probably focus on the ways in which their characters are powerful and exceptional.

My last character in Shadowrun was a decker shaman from Pueblo Corporate Council. He wasnt really good neither at decking nor conjuring, but he was damn fun to play.

My last character in Tenra Bansho was a Imperial (double) Agent. He wasnt exceptional at anything really, and got constantly overshadowed in combats. But out of combat he had its use in the social field, besides some nice political backgroud that the GM used for hooks.

My last character in Ghost Lines was a criminal fugitive from Skovlan who made its way to the Imperial Lines as a Spider. He wasnt the most useful in ghost hunting, neither in gig searching, but he was damn great to play, and his criminal backgroud steered the group to some exciting situations. Though I suspect that, because the game is so focused at ghost hunting, sooner or later the character would get boring to play.

I suspect that more focused games (like Ghost Lines above) make it difficult for you not optimizing your character at the risk of not having many things to do if you dont. While wider-scope / "toolkit-like" games, like Shadowrun and Tenra above, allow for more leeway in the kind of characters you can choose. And maybe this is also related to certain playstyles - a group which playstyle is "pure combat" may see the kind of "pure color" character getting worthless/disfunctional fast.

...as if anybody does anything for exactly (and only) one single reason!

Neon Sequitur wrote:...as if anybody does anything for exactly (and only) one single reason!

Boom. Personally I like playing a decent (usually mundane, don't like playing magical characters) character, but I prefer games like Paranoia, Call of Cthulu, Deadlands and Shadowrun where you become powerful (or just die through commie treachery) by doing shit and gaining influence; playing a character in a fictional world, not by optimizing game mechanics. The whole "I'm a level 18 druidzilla so thanks to magic I become a man-god" has jack shit appeal to me. If the only point in playing a paper and pencil rpg is to break the un patchable game system in a Goddamn cooperative storytelling game, than its time to wonder what the fuck you're doing spending 10 hours a week playing out an already certain outcome from the time you wrote your character sheet. Or better yet, play a goddamn video game or a tabletop wargame, because you're stripping out what makes the tabletop rpg worth the clunky shit.

[quote="Flatline]But that 1 in 10 that will take things and run with them... Those are the games worth remembering, because I get to escape the traditional dick-waving fantasy and play around with more flawed, flat out *interesting* characters.

And that in and of itself is a power fantasy. The ability to drastically impact the story/world around me in a way that I myself wouldn't be able to. Even if I'm playing someone particularly gullible or whatever. It lets me have my cake and eat it too.[/quote]

Flatline hits it on the head, the power fantasy a lot of people want to play is not Deanrulez "lol you die instantly cuz magic", its playing a character who is better than you, yes, but one who is more than an optimized set of numbers. One who you can feel while talking to other PC's and the GM. He's got flaws, he's not perfect and he's fun as hell to play. Correct me if I misinterpreted your comment, but I think I got the gist of it.

Fuck it, we're all playing Bunnies & Burrows.

Sashi wrote:Fuck it, we're all playing Bunnies & Burrows.

Dibs on being the obligatory B&B Bigwig clone.

It's not that you're playing a character that's better, it's that you're playing a character that's *different*.

I think Objectivism is bullshit and one of the worst things to ever happen to philosophy. I think Ayn Rand was a hypocrite who idolized a serial killing pedophile necrophiliac and based an entire system of thought off of this idolization as a reaction to the atrocities she witness and probably went through during the Communist Revolution.

That being said, I've played serious hard core Objectivists who were True Believers (even if Objectivism didn't exist in the setting), made it work, and enjoyed the hell out of it. That's a total power trip in that getting to play with ideas, in a safe environment, that I never ever would in real life.

In that respect I "get" Black Dog and some of the squishier sides of White Wolf & other RPGs. It's a chance to explore ideas you normally wouldn't explore in a "safe" setting. I think it's cliche to go straight to the taboo shit for the shock factor, and I definately have lines drawn that I just don't need to cross over, like FATAL for instance. But yeah, for me, playing a character that isn't necessarily flawed or even better than me but is *different* than me, and has fundamentally different values and outlooks on life, is a trip. It's what gets me to come back after 20 years to the hobby. I'm not good enough to be a professional actor, but I can scratch that itch at the table.

YEAHHHHH!!!

NotoriousAmp wrote:Flatline hits it on the head, the power fantasy a lot of people want to play is not Deanrulez "lol you die instantly cuz magic", its playing a character who is better than you, yes, but one who is more than an optimized set of numbers.

I'm aware that this is a troll thread to troll me but I feel compelled to highlight this bit as it is rare to see someone arguing against a strawman of your points by agreeing with your actual points.

You are shoehorning a roleplayer/rollplayer fallacy into this "argument" with no basis in anything I've written. I have not declared that people play to imagine themselves as being all-powerful or perfectly optimized but, as you said, to imagine yourself as someone you identify as being better/stronger/suaver/whatever than you. Because that is enjoyable. Pretending that my position was not about someone like James Bond (whom I specifically mention) and instead only about omnipotent mary sues is disingenuous. Following that with your agreement to my actual stated position is bizarre.

Actually I know people whose sole motivation in RPGs is to prove they have the biggest RPG-peener in the room if not on the planet. That's why I specifically asked if we're talking dick-waving I'm more powerful than these guys or different definitions of power trip.

Edit: So in this case I can still say that I disagree with silva.

deanruel87 wrote:You are shoehorning a roleplayer/rollplayer fallacy into this "argument" with no basis in anything I've written. I have not declared that people play to imagine themselves as being all-powerful or perfectly optimized but, as you said, to imagine yourself as someone you identify as being better/stronger/suaver/whatever than you. Because that is enjoyable. Pretending that my position was not about someone like James Bond (whom I specifically mention) and instead only about omnipotent mary sues is disingenuous. Following that with your agreement to my actual stated position is bizarre.

In that case I apologize, I was thinking about it in context of your original den accepted ideas thread, where you seemed to go down the optimization uber alles path.

Flatline- I've had the misfortune of running into those kind of people too, luckily if you avoid DnD and Pathfinder, and their general family of games, they tend to disappear because there's no real place for them

Neon Sequitur wrote:...as if anybody does anything for exactly (and only) one single reason!

This.

As with anything every gamer has their own different reasons for liking RPGs. Some people like tactical challenges, some people enjoy the puzzle aspects, others like actually interacting with NPCs, and yes, some do see it as a power fantasy.

TheNotoriousAMP wrote:In that case I apologize, I was thinking about it in context of your original den accepted ideas thread, where you seemed to go down the optimization uber alles path.

His point was always obviously that if you want to play James Bond, and there's a Secret Agent class, it better be able to do the sort of things James Bond does. Because if it doesn't, you aren't going to have any fun playing your character.

silva wrote:The reason you play RPGs is to express power fantasies

True for me.

Taylor and Hickman's XDM has the description that I've found most apt: players have one of three basic goals: kill it, talk to it, solve it.

fectin wrote:Taylor and Hickman's XDM has the description that I've found most apt: players have one of three basic goals: kill it, talk to it, solve it.

Isn't there a "fuck it" missing?

I think that falls under either "talk to it" (world exploration) or "kill it" (power fantasies).