Playing against the chr sheet

[museleading]

At Pheno, there were two games I played which I think required me to play my chr at odds with what was said on the chr sheet.

In the first game - The Heist, I played the psycho who had goals to kill things (including the other chrs). I felt this went against the exectations of the setting, but did it anyway and I felt the game was less for having done it.

In the second game - World of Darkness high, I played someone who had recently become a supernatural. It was specifically written on her chr sheet that she would never tell anyone her secret as they wouldn't understand. However the game was about the discovery that all the chrs are in the same boat, so part way thorugh the game I ignored the written words and told all of the other chrs what had happened to me. If I hadn't, I felt that the game would have gone precisely nowhere.

In both games, I believe other player expectations were that I play across what was written (and in WoD High, I believe this was the GM's expectation too). But doing so it turning out to be a big deal for me. I trust the GM to write a good game, balance it well and so on. If I play against what they have decided is my chr, I am worrired I would be secondd guessing the GM and possibly destroying the game.

I'm curious about other people's thoughts on this. Is deciding to play against what is written a big deal? Whose's expectations are you playing to when you decide to play against what the GM wrote?

[emmajeans]

In the Cabinet of Dr M. we found that we all had secrets on our character sheets.
When the GM was out with the security officer (and I'm fessing up now, sorry team), we had an OOC discussion about some of what was on our sheets, which meant that when we had screen time with the GM, our characters could try to use our player knowledge to drag the secrets out of the other characters... or we could drop hints IC which the other characters could pick up on.

I know that ccth0mas said that at least one of his characters just wouldn't have gotten involved in ANY of the action if he'd played according to the ch sheet... but that's his story so I'll let him tell it!

[Trithemius]

Heyo! I will do a repost-o-rama here since I blasted off a quick one on RPG Opinions.

I think that playing against the character sheet can work well as a motif, so long as the sole source of information about the game is not the character sheet.

If the facilitator hands out the sheets, gets people to read them, and then says "Okay, so here is the premise of this game..."

The sheet tells you what the character thinks, knows, feels, and can do; the facilitator can tell you what kind of game this is really.

ASIDE:I know that in our session of The Heist the GM talked a bit about the premise and the inspirations for the game - and since we were all familiar with them we knew where to go. Perhaps this was an addition after earlier games?

ANOTHER ASIDE: In many of the "SSS-style" games the characters are the game, I think that this is where Narayan might get some of his aggravation. These sessions are about the experience of being in someone else's position in a stressful situation, not what some of us here might see as the normal process and objectives of the games we play.

[Armydan]

Interesting post....

First thing though

I felt this went against the exectations of the setting, but did it anyway and I felt the game was less for having done it.

I just want to be sure here, rather than launch into a rant about inappropriate things to put on character sheets, where your expectations of the setting - in a sense - correct?.

I ask because your expectation of the setting effects how you would play the character and if you were mistaken about the setting (or misinformed etc) then this would mean that you would have a disconnect with the character as it would be written.

I suppose there - the simple thing on this is that GMs write characters based in the setting as they understand it...

Now

It was specifically written on her chr sheet that she would never tell anyone her secret as they wouldn't understand

ARgh! I hate this sort of thing. Especially in 'con games. Erks me to bits, why? characters are there to be shared, its only okay to have a secret that she would never tell anyone as long as the game specifically has a scene where she has no choice but to tell everyone her secrets. (and that is most often railroading / aka tunnel of fun metagaming to get there) [/end rant]

To the questions

Is deciding to play against what is written a big deal? Whose's expectations are you playing to when you decide to play against what the GM wrote?

To me this is a yes and no question.

Deciding to play against the character as written can have a fundamental effect on the game for the GMs and for the other players. Characters - if written aptly and in 'con games - are meant to be written to provide or involve themselves in the conflict of the game, there are usually hooks and triggers within a character sheet that are tied to the story (or other characters) that the GM is trying to tell or facilitate - something to allow each player to shine.

Playing against something on a character sheet can derail these plans and thus cause things not to happen or a source of conflict not to occur.

For example, if the Evil Masters beautiful assistant hates the hero (rather than falls in love with her) and just decides to pull the trigger rather than help the hero escape - the story looses the great escape scene at the end and the results are unsatisfying (if trying to tell a great hero adventure thing)...

On the other hand...

Deciding to play against the character sheet can have awesome side effects and take the game in an unexpected and entertaining direction. Maybe the Masters Beautiful assistant doesn't secretly love the Hero, but rather loves to be the Hero and thus after killing the hero with the shot to the head, dons a (hero) disguise and becomes the hero for the last scene and defeats the Evil Master....

While the trigger and the hook that the GM put into the character sheets wasn't true for the player, the player has taken (or rather replaced) that hook that has the same effects or could result in the same level of enjoyment for all the players at the table. This could all horribly backfire though.

Ultimately...

The GM put the character sheets into the players hands for a reason, most often character sheets are carefully crafted to be triggers and hooks for the players to get into the game or story or adventure. Playing against one or more of those hooks have to be very carefully considered as all of those hooks should be there for a reason, and if that reason occurs and your character doesn't act (or take the hook) it is possible that the adventure could fall flat or not be entertaining.... the GM has plenty to do in the game, on the fly re-writing of Character sheets just further complicates the whole process - but some can do it...

[Narayan]

Is deciding to play against what is written a big deal? Whose's expectations are you playing to when you decide to play against what the GM wrote?

I think that a character sheet should be a spring-board rather than a straight-jacket. It should give you ideas how to play the character rather than restrict what you can do with the character. To my mind, writing up a character sheet with the expectation that the character must be played in a specific way, such as betraying the rest of the PCs, is expecting too much. It is encroaching into the player's sphere of control. If you are the player, then you get to drive. The GM can write down directions on the sheet, but it's up to you when and if you follow them.

That said, I understand that many "Phenomenon-style" (if I may use such a broad and ill-defined term) games are often written so tightly that if the players don't follow the directions on their character sheets, they don't get to experience the "fullness" of the story. In these circumstances radically departing from the instructions of the character sheet may unhinge the story and break the game, such as it is. However, if you consider that following the directions might ruin the fun of the other players, then you are stuck.

So what should you do? As I see it, you have four possible choices:
1. Play the character as written and hope you don't ruin the other player's fun;
2. Play the character contrary to what is written and hope you don't derail the story;
3. Consult with the GM about this dilemma and see if you can work out a solution, or;
4. Consult the GM and other players as a group and see what the group wants.

I consider options 1 and 2 to be equally risky. Given the style of games, I think that option 3 is probably the most realistic choice, but, ideally, I'd much prefer option 4. I'm not sure if this option is palatable in the context of the convention, though.

ANOTHER ASIDE: In many of the "SSS-style" games the characters are the game, I think that this is where Narayan might get some of his aggravation. These sessions are about the experience of being in someone else's position in a stressful situation, not what some of us here might see as the normal process and objectives of the games we play.

Yeah, I don't really get this idea. I mean, I could make a game out of submitting my tax return, but why should I? For me, the game is what happens at the table (or in the theatre space, if we are talking freeform). All the character sheets should do is communicate what the characters are doing in the premise, what they want to get out of it and what they can use to do so. If the GM gave us thirty minutes to peruse the character sheets for the hidden bits and pieces and then discuss what it could all mean as a group, I'd feel differently. But being expected to get across a three-page character sheet in 10-15 minutes in order to pick up all the clues to play my character as written doesn't rate very high on my fun-o-meter. It is even less fun if I am expected to keep all my character's secrets to him or herself.

[Trithemius]

Clearly (to me) a game needs a character sheet too. Something that explains what the game is about, what its themes and tone might be, that stands apart from what the character knows.

It doesn't need to literally be a sheet either: some metagame "boxed text" about the game before the action kicks off or character sheets are divvied up would be fine.

Some games are going to have to be careful with what they say on their summary, in order to avoid undermining the tension that may be integral to the scenario; others can be totally open, referencing inspirations and even basic outline plots (I think the Heist benefitted from a verbal summary of this sort in our game - it could easily be written down).

Relying on assumptions may be a safe bet with that group you play with every week/fortnight/month for the last year/decade but with sleepy/hyper gamers it's best to not rely on assumptions and to explain things clearly so everyone is on the same page and you are all working towards the same kind of game experience.


For me, these days, this kind of expectations normalisation is essentially mandatory for on-going games - I think it could be useful for convention games too.

[StuJB]

Relying on assumptions may be a safe bet with that group you play with every week/fortnight/month for the last year/decade but with sleepy/hyper gamers it's best to not rely on assumptions and to explain things clearly so everyone is on the same page and you are all working towards the same kind of game experience.

I've just had a conversation with Muse along the lines of:
Me: "You can totally trust players to pick up the character's nuances from the character sheets!"
Muse: "... No I can't!"

I rely a lot on my character sheets to convey information - not just about the characters, but also the setting, the tone, the genre, the expectations. For my style of game (which is, just to be clear about where I'm coming from, pretty much always a one-shot systemless convention game for Pheno or Arcanacon), the characters are very much the game. I won't say that I've never had it fail, but it works far more often than it doesn't. I've had players tell me off for interupting their characterising with plot.

I agree - it's best not to rely on assumptions and to explain things clearly. But, you know, it's also best to be subtle about it. If my character sheet points to where the fun in the game is - which it should - I don't feel bad if someone who hasn't bothered to read it properly misses the fun.

Well, I try not to feel bad. I still tend to feel bad.

Stu.

[StuJB]

An aside:

Yeah, I don't really get this idea. I mean, I could make a game out of submitting my tax return, but why should I?

You know, this kind of example comes up a lot, but in my real and true life, I have experienced gut-wrenching terror as I realise that, once again, I haven't filled in my tax return and it's three hours to the submission deadline. There's time pressure, there are consequences, there's emotion, there's adrenaline, there's stakes.

It's not fun, obviously - but it's dramatic and intense.

I'm not sure I could make a game out of submitting my tax return - but, you know, if I did it would look like you were trying to recover the notes that will let you reconstruct the aethorinator so that you prove the Professor is innocent so that you can stop Dr Methusalah before his moon-cannon dooms us all!

Stu.

[StuJB]

ASIDE:I know that in our session of The Heist the GM talked a bit about the premise and the inspirations for the game - and since we were all familiar with them we knew where to go. Perhaps this was an addition after earlier games?

Hrm. We were told this, but expressed a preference for the lighter end of the genre which, it turned out, wasn't supported by the game. From my point of view, one of the characters belonged in a different genre, and the presence of that character forced the others into his genre - which wasn't the genre we thought we were playing.

Stu.

[ccth0mas]

"It was specifically written on her chr sheet that she would never tell anyone her secret... I ignored the written words and told all... If I hadn't, I felt that the game would have gone precisely nowhere."

I had exactly the same dilemma in "World of Darkness High" and chose the same option. My character wanted to keep the secret. My player knowledge suggested the game would stall until somebody broke their silence.

I agree it is a big deal - I was not just risking my character's integrity, I might have been breaking the GM's game for everybody. On the other hand, when I have to choose between that and no fun then I'll take the risk. If it doesn't work out I blame the GM for forcing me to choose between enjoying the game and breaking it.

Last year a player waved their character sheet at me and said "I am not a jewel thief" when my character let them know privately of his suspicions and that he would like to be in on the job. Then at the debrief the player reported they managed to keep their secret but failed at their other objective because they couldn't find an accomplice.

I hope GMs could find some other way to describe the character, as "she would never tell anyone her secret" is inherently dull and potentially stupid.

In "Body Corporate" I had the same dilemma: my character wanted to stay behind and screw my horny neighbour; my player knowledge suggested the game would stall until we went to the secret laboratory of inevitable death. How do I keep my antithetical character in the game? I let another player drag me back onto the plot train (and chose death instead of sex).

A variation on this theme in "The Cabinet of Doctor Makundi": my character wanted to keep away from my nefarious business dealings until the UN went away; my player knowledge suggested I would have nothing to do if I kept away from my nefarious business dealings. This time I went with my character knowledge - after all it wouldn't stymie the whole game, only my game. I was rewarded with an early death at the hands of unnamed NPCs.

[museleading]

First thing though

I felt this went against the exectations of the setting, but did it anyway and I felt the game was less for having done it.

I just want to be sure here, rather than launch into a rant about inappropriate things to put on character sheets, where your expectations of the setting - in a sense - correct?....

I suppose there - the simple thing on this is that GMs write characters based in the setting as they understand it...

&

Hrm. We were told this, but expressed a preference for the lighter end of the genre which, it turned out, wasn't supported by the game. From my point of view, one of the characters belonged in a different genre, and the presence of that character forced the others into his genre - which wasn't the genre we thought we were playing.

A number of others mentioned this - we were asked whether we knew of Heists where where everything was planned and went right or everything was planned and the plan went fubar. I don't specifically recall whether we were asked whether we wanted Ocean's 11 or Resoviour Dogs. I have to admit, I hadn't seen the later, so I had no context for that sub version. I think therefore Armydan, your idea was correct, I hadn't understood the setting as the GM laid it out.

So what should you do? As I see it, you have four possible choices:
1. Play the character as written and hope you don't ruin the other player's fun;
2. Play the character contrary to what is written and hope you don't derail the story;
3. Consult with the GM about this dilemma and see if you can work out a solution, or;
4. Consult the GM and other players as a group and see what the group wants.

I did check in with the GM, who was happy for me to go for it. I too think at the time, it was too awkward for me to stop the game to check in with the other players. In retrospect, I think this would have been a better option. It turned out that all of our expectations were Ocean's 11 rather than Dogs.

I hope GMs could find some other way to describe the character, as "she would never tell anyone her secret" is inherently dull and potentially stupid.

I rasied the same question over on RPGopinions and the consensous there seemed to be that it was ok to have such a thing on a chr sheet as it was implicitly understood this was a chr starting postition. The game would reveal it was ok to change the chr's mind.

Maybe I'm a little to literal for my own good, but I don't feel there is an implicit understanding about these things.

[museleading]

Clearly (to me) a game needs a character sheet too. Something that explains what the game is about, what its themes and tone might be, that stands apart from what the character knows.

It doesn't need to literally be a sheet either: some metagame "boxed text" about the game before the action kicks off or character sheets are divvied up would be fine.

In Anthropology, there is an idea of Liminality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liminality) which in essence says for rituals in involces a change to the participants, there is a period of transition period as you are about to pass into each stage. These are periods that need to be handled carefully as there participants are open and more responsive that than will be once they have hit the new stage.

Moving this to a roleplaying game, I see the tranistion period as the time bewteen when a group of players walk into the room and when they start playing. In between, they fiddle with their bags, eat lunch, settle down, get the chr sheets and hear the first scene information.

Poppa's inital setup was my attempt to address that transition period and ensure it was crossed easily with the players moving into the game in a mindset that was appropiate. In essence, people were warmed up, aware of
setting and the games themes.

I'm hoping to expose the themes a little more explicitly in my next game and play around with how that works.

[andrewthotep]

Now there's an interesting notion:

If a Triptych-style systemless game is in the character sheets, the game part might be about entertaining revelation of what is initially concealed on the character sheets.

A bit like those 'how to host a murder' thingies.

Would it make you happier Narayan if this was made more explicit in the structure of the character sheets along the lines of 'reveal these things early', 'reveal these things later', 'only reveal these things if accused'?

Or are there better ways to organise the character sheets if we do assert the character sheets = the game?

Museleading, your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to use 'liminality' and 'temenos' in the same sentence.

[Trithemius]

I rasied the same question over on RPGopinions and the consensous there seemed to be that it was ok to have such a thing on a chr sheet as it was implicitly understood this was a chr starting postition. The game would reveal it was ok to change the chr's mind.

Maybe I'm a little to literal for my own good, but I don't feel there is an implicit understanding about these things.

I wasn't part of that consensus I should note!
I think it's very counterproductive to make assumptions that a bunch of people you don't necessarily game with a lot are going to "get" what your game is about. I'd recognise that many of the con crowd might be able to get away with this since there is a lot of mutual understanding around that core of people - but to make the next leap and assume that everyone is just going to comprehend what you are telling them on the character sheet is flawed.

This thread has several examples of those expectations gaps resulting in sub-optimal experiences; those who suggest that there isn't a problem are just ignoring it; to their detriment I think, since it will reinforce the perception of a clique.

A great counter-example (and perhaps some unabashed flattery museleading? ) was Poppa from Pheno last year where the players all knew the situation because they constructed it around a pre-existing scaffolding. That's a great way to get buy-in and to get people on the same page - but for games with more prior structure there are other ways.

I'm always a big fan of just saying what you want the game to be.
If you don't tell people what you want, you can't complain if you don't get it. Well you can, but you probably shouldn't.

[Trithemius]

Poppa's inital setup was my attempt to address that transition period and ensure it was crossed easily with the players moving into the game in a mindset that was appropiate. In essence, people were warmed up, aware of setting and the games themes.

I'm hoping to expose the themes a little more explicitly in my next game and play around with how that works.

To my mind this is basically the key idea in fluency play - it's a conceptual lubricant of sorts. As mentioned (just previously!) I found this process to be extremely effective for me.

I think there are less neat ways to get those basic expectations across (from what has been said here The Heist tried this with matching already understood symbols - but didn't seem to follow up with anything if those symbols didn't match. I didn't notice this since I already comprehended those symbols. I like those kind of movies and shows!)

A lot of the more open concept games of recent development really focus on getting agreement across the group on what you are all there to do. Some games avoid this by being laser-focussed on particular scenarios (Grey Ranks is about Polish guerilla child soldiers in a specific military action; Steal Away Jordan is about the experiences of slaves in America). By contrast, the Burning Wheel has no built-in story and so has a lot of words, and an imminent 350+ page book!, about techniques for getting this set-up done right.

The strong implication that getting that intial scenario right - and getting it to be well-understood by the participants - is really important.

(I'm almost annoyed that anthropologists already had this Astounding Revelation figured out before gamers, but I should have guessed. )