In his Friday, October 23 post, Brian muses over whether there is a sweet spot of complexity that offers more satisfaction of game master and thus more user satisfaction. Let me up the ante on that thought.
I propose that part of the enjoyment of role-playing games is exploration of space -- this is an obvious part of the actual content, since exploring dungeons and wilderness has long been the basic trope of the game. But the very structure of game play, in my mind, includes several types of exploration of constructed spaces:
- The players (including the GM) explore the space of possible activities within the set of game rules.
- The players explore the fantasy world.
- The players explore the role of their character, creating personalities, experiences, and potential actions.
- The players explore a dramatic space through collaborative plot development.
- The players explore social space through the development of a set of informal and formal social rules, roles, and expectations.
Discovering, uncovering, and constructing these explored and collaboratively created spaces gives RPGs a unique potency as a recreational experience. The exploration of rules-space is the safest, most consistent, and most easily portable beyond the social event of the game, making game complexity an interesting sub-hobby on its own.
At least that's my half-baked off the top of my head thought.
Great observations! I suppose this ties in with the gamer types identified in the DMG. Anytime I read a post seeking to unify the gaming experience, and accepting the diverse interests and styles of gamers, I think it's worth applauding. Well done!
ReplyDeleteThe way I see it, most RPGs should be built around a very tight (~20-30 pages) core of rules that handle the basics of character creation, task resolution (including combat), and character development. A succinct list of basic weapons and equipment is also a good idea for a few standard genres (generic fantasy, generic sci-fi, how ever you want to define those).
ReplyDeleteBeyond this, everything else should be a discreet, optional "plug-in" of rules that can be layered on as desired. GURPS actually does a good job of this - their "lite" version of the rules is only ~32 pages long, and gives you everything you really need to get going. The rest of GURPS is all gravy to add as you like.
I think compexity is a little more, well, complex than simple 'exploring'.
ReplyDeleteOne of the purposes of complexity to raise or lower barriers to entry, e.g. how hard it is learn the game.
The harder the game is to learn, the greater the sense of achievement from mastering it. It also becomes a filter, limiting the game to a certain type of person.
Both these effects can, counter-intuitively, help a game to spread because each individual is more committed to the game and the community of players is more distinctive.
It can be argued that had original D&D been as simple and as easy to learn as 4e, D&D would not of obtained its cult status and spread around the world.
Chris, I don't think that complexity necessarily raises or lowers the bar for entry, when it comes to RPG's. Since it's a collaborative, group activity, the group can bring individual members over the complexity barrier.
ReplyDeleteAccess to a DM or group, and interest, have pretty much always been the limiting factors in gaming. Complexity and specific system, not so much.
I think you're onto something worth discussing, Chris. After all, my current interest is in using S&W. I'm all for believing in the value of low-cognitive-investment RPG systems. But my experience is that a large core of gamers dismiss the idea of low-complexity systems as inherently inferior.
ReplyDeleteNo, I have been one of those gamers in my you. So But my question ismore why would complexity be entertaining or pleasant? After all, it seems some gamers do get some sort of reward from complexity in and of itself. That's where my musings are headed here.
But given the complexity of making sense of the OD&D box set, I think Wickedmurph is onto something, too. The group activity overcame that a lot.
@Chris: I think Doug's point is that complexity of rules systems is one aspect of gaming that some people are drawn to. (That they want to explore.) So then he asks, "why would complexity be entertaining?"
ReplyDeleteI believe it boils down to mastery. A lot of people have mastered programming, or a musical instrument, or law (as examples only, not intended to single those folks out) and some of them get satisfaction out of being seen as experts. The reward is that others look to you for answers. I suspect that is one of the roots of the fascination with game complexity.