Pages

Friday, February 11, 2022

What Do Players Want in RPGs?

Many years ago, way back in 2016, I read a book on (primarily video) game design called Game Design: Theory & Practice, 2nd Edition by Richard Rouse III. It was a good read, and I had a lot of insight into RPG design and play from it, not only that of computer based games. I even mentioned wanting to blog about it in this post. But with academics, family life, actual gaming, designing Chanbara, and what not, I never got to it. At the time, I only had an ebook copy, but I ordered a hardcopy either last year or the year before. It's been sitting on my shelf waiting for a reread (or for my son, who is getting into coding and thinking of computer game design, to read). 

Then JB at BX Blackrazor wrote this post, in response to Adam of Barking Alien. And the conversation is relevant to another post I've barely started writing in response to Alexis's recent world building posts (which I'm enjoying quite a bit, although I'm a little behind on reading them). 

The question Adam raised was, why world-build when character backstories aren't encouraged? And JB, instead of answering directly, started off by musing on why bother playing D&D at all? And that reminded me of Rouse. So I grabbed my copy off the shelf, and re-read his first chapter, where he talks about what players of (video) games want, and what they expect. Rouse makes the strong assertion that interactivity is what sets games apart from other forms of entertainment, and that computer games have the most interactivity. I disagree. An RPG has much more interactivity than even the most carefully crafted computer offerings. So his points on what players want and expect do seem to have transferability to RPGs.

According to Rouse, players want the following in their games: 

1. Challenge

2. Socializing

3. Dynamic Solitary Experiences

4. Bragging Rights

5. Emotional Experiences

6. To Explore

7. To Fantasize

8. To Interact

He of course elaborates on all of these things. And of course not every player is equally desiring of each of these elements. But if you think about the people in your play group, I bet you can pick out two or three of these that fit each person in your group. 

According to Rouse, players expect the following in their games: 

1. A Consistent World

2. To Understand the Game World's Bounds

3. For Reasonable Solutions to Work

4. Direction

5. To Accomplish Tasks Incrementally

6. Immersion

7. Some Setbacks

8. A Fair Chance

9. Not to Need to Repeat Themselves

10. Not to Get Hopelessly Stuck

11. To Do, Not to Watch

Again, Rouse of course elaborates on these points. Most of them are pretty self-explanatory, I think, but Expectation 4. Direction might need a bit more explanation. Even though most computer games are railroads that take you along a linear story (I recently started replaying Final Fantasy VII on my emulator box, and so much of the beginning is just a linear story without any real choice in where to go or what to do), Rouse isn't saying players expect to be railroaded. 

He means that players expect the goals of the game to be obvious. And players need some clues about how they might achieve those goals. When he talks about the goals of the game, he doesn't mean completing the story. He means playing the game. 

Translated into D&D terms, it doesn't matter if it's a megadungeon, a hexcrawl, the GDQ series, or even the railroady Dragonlance modules. It doesn't matter if the BBEG is a dragon, a lich, a vampire, or the gods themselves. It doesn't matter whether or not there is even a BBEG. That's all window dressing. 

What is the mechanical goal of the game? In D&D, it's (like it or not) gaining levels. Possibly becoming a ruler or even an epic hero or immortal (depending on edition). How do you achieve that goal? Fighting monsters and accumulating treasure. 

This, I think, is why so many players prefer D&D over other game systems. And why it's often easier for DMs to create a satisfying long-term D&D campaign when they struggle in other systems. Some people, like Adam D. have no problem creating satisfying games with other systems. And there are other systems in which the mechanics lead naturally to the in-game story the way D&D's do. But for most people, D&D is just much clearer, EVEN if there isn't a lot of world building done in the campaign (yet). Is there a dungeon full of monsters and challenges and treasure? Great, we can explore it and if successful, gain levels. 

Writing this post has helped me to clear up in my mind exactly why I'm dragging my feet preparing for my next Star Wars d6 game. I'm having fun running the game. The players are having fun playing the campaign. But the mechanical goals of the game (increase your skills) don't necessarily lead to specific in-game fictional goals the way D&D easily does. Should I just focus on combat with the Empire or criminal elements? Should I have exploration or social adventures? How does a desire to improve Technical skills, for example, translate to in-game goals that are challenging and exciting? 

It's not as clear as in D&D. And games like Star Wars or White Wolf's Vampire or what have you require a bit more world building up front than D&D. Granted, well-known IP like Star Wars take some of the heavy lifting from you, but they also come with baggage that may not always suit the style of games you want to run. With D&D, the goal is to get treasure to level up. I'm a Fighter. He's a Thief. She's a Magic-User. They're a Cleric. The dungeon is over there. The treasure is in the dungeon. Let's go!

My Star Wars group include (current and former members): a Camaasi Force Adept seeking knowledge, a Smuggler trying to earn enough to improve his ship, a Mandalorian looking to improve his beskar armor, a Minor Jedi seeking training, a Young Jedi looking for romance (go figure!), a Duros Pilot who likes to instigate trouble, a Failed Jedi seeking redemption, a sentient Battle Droid (not a Separatist model) looking for bigger guns and explosives... No where near as cut and dry as with D&D.

11 comments:

  1. It's worth noting that mechanical improvement is much less of a focus in Star Wars d6. "Levelling up" is a part of D&D's gameplay loop, "numbers go up" is a selling point of the game that veterans use to recruit new players. Systems like WEGd6 or Storyteller de-emphasize mechanical improvement in their gameplay loops, in favor of a cinematic play experience.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's Rouse's point. The gameplay loop is very much focused on the in-game fictions, not on game mechanics. Rouse is very up-front that the basic game mechanics that underlie the in-game fiction need to address the various wants and needs of players. And if the gameplay is driven by in-game fiction goals, players need a frame of reference. For a frame of reference, the game master/storyteller needs world building. In some games, that world building is already provided, but it needs to be KNOWN and COMMUNICATED to the players before they can make meaningful choices.

      Delete
  2. "The question Adam raised was, why world-build when character backstories aren't encouraged? And JB, instead of answering directly, started off by musing on why bother playing D&D at all..."

    Hey, man, that WAS direct (well, as direct as I ever am). I was trying to be, you know, POSITIVE (why world building is needed) instead of negative (here's why you don't do backstory). At least, I was trying to be less than inflammatory.
    ; )

    I haven't read Rouse's book, but judging by the list of expectations and wants, I'd say it's more aimed at computer games than RPGs. The only expectations I'd take from that list (with regard to D&D) are #6 and #11. Everything else is bunk OR IN AID OF those goals. Even if the players have a difficult time articulating these things, it's really just #6 and #11.

    [Increase incrementally? Are you kidding me? Players would increase in tremendous leaps and bounds...if they could. The D&D rules themselves put the break on how far and how fast they can climb, but the players will take as much as they can get and LOVE IT so long as the challenges increase at a like rate]

    Only beginning players expect "direction." As they should: when learning a new game, and a new world, some hand holding is required. But the training wheels have to come off sooner or later (hopefully sooner)...only the most superficially engaged players want yet another quest-giver to point them towards treasure. Generally, if the players are deeply engaged with the game (which only happens in a well-built world) they will begin plotting their own goals and objectives as soon as they feel comfortable.

    I disagree that SW and VTM require more world building than D&D...just the opposite! Everything in VTM is the real world with a layer of Kindred in-fighting and machinations explaining the woes of the world. The maps are real world cities. The history of their wars sketched out back to Cain and Abel (literally!). What needs to be built? Simply write up some NPCs (if you don't have a city book), insert players and go. All you are crafting are conflicts.

    Star Wars? Unless you REALLY want to start building new planets and species, you're probably hitting all the usual ones. Even if you aren't, the space opera of SW defaults to One Planet = One Environmental Type + One City. Yet every place has blasters, communicators, speeders, etc. and doesn't care about what food the people are eating or what god the people are praying to. The conflict is with the Empire...or the Hutts...or followers of the Sith. It's all pretty cut-and-dry in my opinion.

    D&D "out of the box" requires immense world building. You can BUY a setting for it (Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, etc.) but the game itself offers none. And it requires a world in order to make the world deep.

    Those other games? They just require characters. Perhaps that's why backstory for your vamp or rebel guerrilla is more appropriate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. [hmm...that should have said that D&D "requires a world in order to make the GAME deep." Sorry!]

      Delete
    2. The book barely touches on RPGs, if at all. Yes, it's focused on video/computer games. BUT, Rouse does make it clear that not every player shares every want and every expectation.

      Are you really saying that you don't think players expect to occasionally have setbacks? To have a consistent world (pretty much the point of Alexis's recent world-building posts)?

      I agree that #6 and #11 are pretty important for ME, but most of the other expectations are there, to a lesser degree. And not every player I know really expects immersion!

      With regard to Direction specifically, Rouse agrees that it's really only expected at the beginning. But again, as I don't think he's talking about in-game fiction quests or whatever. He's talking about direction in the gameplay feedback loop.

      VtM (never played, but have looked through an older edition and heard plenty of stories from friends) is set in a fictional version of Earth, but if I'm creating a character, is it really enough to say "I'm a vampire in Cleveland."? Or do I need to know about the various factions to which I can join? What's the difference between a Malkavian and a Ventrue? Does it matter? Should I pick one randomly?

      Backstory is definitely important, and backstory requires world building. I think that might be part of why Adam was baffled by your statement (but I'll let him chime in on that if he's reading).

      Also, while I don't mean to disparage your goal to make the game play deeper (I can dig it), not everyone wants to play a deep game. Plenty of beer-n-pretzels gamers out there.

      Delete
    3. Ooo, boy. Not sure where to begin, man.

      RE: expecting setbacks

      No, I don't think any players are EXPECTING set-backs (at least in D&D). They are hoping there are NO set-backs. Seeing how they deal with adversity (level drain or curses or death, for example) is one of the interesting things about the game. But an expectation of play? No. I disagree.

      RE: Immersion

      Even if they don't (or can't) articulate it, this is a major reason folks play RPGs instead of pursuing other forms of group entertainment. It's one of the main offerings of a tabletop RPG. Immersion happens at different levels (and has different value) for different folks, but it's the main expectation of play...whether or not the players know that's what they're in for.

      [conversely, if immersion isn't happening at ANY level, there may be an issue with the way the group is playing]

      RE: VTM

      I *have* played the game extensively and, yes, it IS as simple as saying "I'm a vampire in Cleveland." My game was "we're vampires in Seattle." Later, the players moved to Chicago (a lot of adventure scenarios were written for Chicago, so a lot less work for the GM). The difference between a Malkavian and a Ventrue isn't a matter of world building; the clan system is already built into the game (no world building required). Do you pick your D&D class randomly? Do you put your highest stat in strength and then say you want to be a wizard?

      RE: Backstory

      I talk about this in my most recent blog post and the comments section of the same:

      http://bxblackrazor.blogspot.com/2022/02/heres-why-you-world-build.html

      I will disagree with both of your assertions (that backstory is "important" and that backstory "requires world building"). Perhaps you and I have different ideas of just what a "backstory" is.

      RE: Adam

      If Adam is baffled it is only because he has been playing RPGs in a certain fashion for decades I am trying to shift his paradigm to (at least) see my perspective. I understand where he's coming from. I do. I've experienced that type of play before; I've seen and known lots of folks who played the way he does (or similar).

      I am doing my best not to be terribly derogatory or dismissive because I do not want to raise the hackles of Adam or anyone else who values this style of play. The fact that he keeps coming 'round my blog, asking questions, staying curious...he reminds me of someone who's been an agnostic for a long-time and is now (subconsciously?) considering conversion.
      ; )

      ANYway. I don't think you're trying to disparage my "goal." I enjoy beer-n-pretzels games, too. However, for the most part I've stopped looking at D&D as a beer-n-pretzels game. I'd rather play cards (cribbage or pinochle or poker) then play "light-hearted" D&D. Too much work for that.

      Delete
    4. I should be careful with my words. Backstory isn't important for some games (D&D for example) while it is vital for others (plenty of storygames require it to function).

      What I mean is that if game play goals don't spur action, the in-game fiction (which requires world building to establish) is necessary to drive the action.

      WEG Star Wars mechanics don't do much to drive play on their own. Players need familiarity with the source material (that is world building, even if it was done by George Lucas 40 years ago) or else a lot of direction (railroading) from the Referee.

      And again, none of this is needed by experienced players or those well versed in the SW millieu.

      Also, be careful not to conflate expectations for wants. Players WANT to succeed at everything. They WANT to accomplish things and advance as fast as possible. But most players are smart enough to know to expect some failure along the way, and that improvements take time and effort. They don't necessarily want them, but they can expect those things to hapen.

      Delete
    5. Hmm. I don't THINK I'm conflating expectations with wants.

      With regard to D&D, I think there is an EXPECTATION that players will be challenged...challenged even with the possibility of death itself in the form of mortal combat. But I don't think "set-backs" (what I would equate with "loss:" loss of character, loss of levels, loss of equipment, loss of effectiveness) are looked for, hoped for, or expected. Players expect to be challenged, and hope to succeed.

      With regard to the necessity of backgrounds in other RPGs, I don't disagree with you that they have more importance: mainly to explain the character(s) place in the setting and fiction (since so many RPGs fail to offer clear objectives of play, identity is about the best players can hope for).

      However, I don't think it requires any particular "world building" to establish a character background. A backstory is simply a piece of fiction, created by a player and/or GM in conjunction with other players (or not).

      Perhaps you and I have a different idea of what "world building" is.

      Delete
    6. Set backs are not looked for, nor hoped for. But that is not what I mean (Rouse as well) by "expect."

      Are players aware that things could possibly go against them when they sit down to a game? Anyone older than a preschooler should /expect/ some ups and downs.

      Expectations in this list are not about "desired states" but realistic expectations.

      Delete
    7. I should probably read the book. It seems a rather broad definition of "expect." One can say I ANTICIPATE the possibility of set-backs, but I do not EXPECT them to occur unless I flub up in some way. That's how I approach the D&D game.

      But you wrote that:

      "Rouse does make it clear that not every player shares every want and every expectation."

      So, sure, I suppose some players approach the game "expecting set-backs." I will revise my original statement on this matter to:

      I don't think MANY players are expecting set-backs.

      [rather than "any"]

      But that's from my experience. Maybe the folks I've played D&D with over the years are a tad on the optimistic side.
      ; )

      Delete
    8. Funny, for me, "anticipate" has more of a connotation of desire, while "expect" is more neutral prediction of a possibility. YMMV

      And as you mentioned a couple of times and I forgot to address, yes, we seem to have slightly different ideas when we say "world building". Anyway, I do get what you're saying.

      I plan on succeeding every time I roll to hit (as a player) but I know that I will often miss. I make an assumption that the party will find a way to defeat the monsters when combat begins, but I know there is the possibility of things to go pear shaped. I think that's all Rouse is trying to say with regard to "expect setbacks".

      Delete