From: Sandy Petersen (sandyp@idgecko.idsoftware.com)
Date: Fri 01 Mar 1996 - 17:40:13 EET
> The more complex and "realistic" a game world is, the more a
> minimaxer is thwarted. Or rather, the more he is forced to _play_,
> rather than just follow his formulae.
>How do you come to this conclusion? Wouldn't the minimaxer simply
come up with >a more complex formula? In your examples, you show a
"Mindless Minimaxer" >caught in a system/world more complex than
the one which rewards his simple >algorithms. I don't see why such
a player shouldn't just observe his >environment and construct a
more rewarding calculus for behavior.
The more complex the world, the more difficult it is to
make your formula. After a certain point, it's easier to roleplay.
Also, my conclusion isn't based on armchair reasoning.
After gamemastering for 23 years, I've seen a number of power-gamers
become roleplayers. I've also seen power-gamers start making the
first steps towards roleplaying, then backslide again.
Invariably, one of two things caused the first move away
from powergaming:
1) Boredom. The player gets sick of always being the same
thing, and starts experimenting with his character. Eventually, this
results in playing a wider range of characters and usually into
true roleplaying.
2) Envy. The player sees the other players having more fun
with their peg-legged ducks and superstitious headhunters than he is
with his super-dude.
Good gamemastering is needed for either of these two impulses to
take effect -- if the powergamers' first faltering steps are
rewarded by instant death or by an immediate decrease in game
rewards, like a dog he'll return to his vomit.
Too often, an GM doesn't recognize the initial step, and
instead punishes the player, chortling in having finally "got" the
damn powergamer. Example: I played in a game where one guy who
_always_ played a Storm Bull decided to try out a Humakti for his
next character. Now, this wasn't much of a step towards roleplaying,
but hey, it was a step. At least a Humakti was something new. The
GM responded by inflicting a geas on him (no right leg armor) and
having that geas prove a dire handicap at every possible opportunity
(trolls would use Sureshot to aim at that leg with their
blade-venomed javelins, frex). The guy's next charaxter was another
Storm Bull. He'd learned _his_ lesson.
If instead, the GM had had barmaids walk up to the Humakti
and admire his courage and manliness in going without right leg
armor, or had some ruffian walk up, start to work himself into a
fight, then notice the lack of leg armor, realize he was a Humakti,
and back off cravenly, whimpering for mercy, the player would have
been _proud_ of his geas, even if in combat he still tended to see
those damn trolls aiming their blows.
Sandy
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:29:48 EEST