|
Archive for Brian Modreski
-
Brian Modreski
United States
Thornton
Colorado
-
This year, I'm going to try to be a bit more regular about updating this blog. We'll see if it works. Some of my bonus blog time will be riding the bus, so I'll be typing on an iPod on a bumpy bus. I shudder to think what predictive text will do if I'm not careful. (check out damnyouautocorrect.com if you don't know what I mean).
Ok, so I'm going to vent about one of my big pet peeves: the term Cooperative Games.
No, I won't even get into the whole coop/co-operative thing.
When I was in Junior High, I would occasionally hit the local arcade with a friend or two. Around 1985 a new game arrived that devoured our quarters like nothing else: Gauntlet.
If you've never played Gauntlet (which rock have you been under? I'm sure you have at least heard "elf needs food - badly!" That's Gauntlet) it's very simple; each player has a hero (barbarian, elf, Valkyrie or wizard) and you run around in a maze trying to hit the fire button fast enough to kill all the monsters.
Now, if you are one of the above mentioned rock dwellers, you might decide to go download a rom of Gauntlet and try it, or find it online, or something. And then you'll probably say "THIS ate quarters? It's lame." And you would be right; gameplay on that sort of game has improved a lot since then. But more to the point, you would be playing it alone on your computer. That is NOT how Gauntlet was ever meant to be played.
The sheer awesomeness of Gauntlet came from the teamwork. Because it was something newish at the time: a cooperative* game. Usually when I played I'd be gaming with one friend and two random strangers, and by the end of a long run we'd all be shouting plans to each other and high-fiving when we beat a level and giving each other grief about shooting the food. A great experience.
Now, fast forward a few years. I meet Lisa. We spend an awful lot of time blowing up each other's armies, racing to the crown of command, or trying to cost each other 20 life points.
This is all good, but we keep saying "Gosh golly gee willickers, wouldn't it be cool if we could occasionally play a game where we just got to team up?" We said stuff like golly-gee-willickers because that's how people talked back in ancient times, since you whippersnappers who don't recognize Gauntlet probably need that explained.
When we thought "hey, let's team up", we turned to video games. Sure, we liked table-top games better, but only video games could let us play together against an automated foe. We never found a ton of co-ops, but as the era of the N-64 and Playstation arrived, they became more common.
When we went into a game store and said we wanted two player cooperative games, there were three options:
1) The clerk knew exactly what we meant (and probably recommended games we already had).
2) The clerk didn't know of any co-ops.
3) The clerk didn't know what 'cooperative' meant and suggested Street Fighter. We pointed out that we wanted games where you work together, and the employee switched to response 2.
Never once did we have a disagreement with an employee about what co-op actually meant.
Then, in 2000. Lord of the Rings, the Knizia boardgame. A co-op board game!!!!! Awesome!**
More followed. Not a lot, but Pandemic popularized the genre a bit more and we started seeing more choices.
And then we would go into tabletop game stores and ask about co-op board games and get the same set of responses we used to about video games. Except they probably recommended Settlers of Catan instead of Street Fighter.
Then something odd happened.
"Any good new co-ops?"
"Yeah, there's this great new co-op where some of you are traitors trying to secretly thwart the other players - you manipulate and trick each other and are in constant fear and paranoia!"
"Um...ok...but we're looking for games where you all work together."
"You do!"
"But...what about the traitors?"
"Oh, yeah, well THEY don't. But aside from backstabbing and fighting against them all the time, you work together. It's a great co-op!"
Somewhere here, someone missed the point.
Now, I'm not opposed to traitor games existing, or 1 vs all (though neither are mechanics I'm fond of). I'm just opposed to calling them co-ops.
I think it's easy to see why they get called that. Co-op games are still pretty niche; it's easy to get noticed by being a co-op since there aren't many choices. And co-ops are partly niche because so many gamers prefer to compete. So what's an easy short cut to hitting the top of a bunch of 'best of' co-op lists? Make a co-op that really isn't one.
Meanwhile, some of us are still looking for games where we ALL work together. And getting ticked off whenever I go "ooooh, it's a new co-op...oh, wait, no its not".
Now we're supposed to start talking about "pure" co-ops. Well, sorry (not really), but we've been using the term "co-op" for 25*** odd years now. There is no need to change what it means now, especially when you've already got perfectly usable terms for the other games. Team games. Traitor games.
The only reason to call these non cooperative games co-ops is to deliberately make it harder for people to find the kind of games they want, and to try to get publishers to make fewer co-op games. Why bother coming up with a purely automated challenge (a tough prospect) when you can just make players compete and get lumped in the category anyway?
Co-op. Team. Get them right!
*Gauntlet wasn't the only co-op of the era, but it was the most memorable 
* ps: putting in italics on the iPod is a royal pain!
** Technically, Warhammer Quest was a co-op before LotR, but we never thought of it that way; we mentally classified it as an attempt at a GMless RPG.
*** Ugh. I feel old now.
-
Brian Modreski
United States
Thornton
Colorado
-
For some reason I felt compelled to read through the D&D forums discussing the upcoming 5th edition. I'm not sure why. But, it seems like certain things creep into discussions of the new edition that kept coming up in old editions, and are really all about player attitudes rather than rules versions.
A lot of them start with "My PCs are idiots..."
A lot of them have a very common theme.
A lot of them have been being said for a long time now.
A lot of them are really off base.
Disclaimer: The following discussion applies mostly to the last few editions of D&D, and to a lot of related high fantasy adventure type games. There are lots of genres of gaming or specific games it does not apply to. Read with that in mind.
My PCs are idiots. They don't want to learn tactics. Maybe I should kill them a few times to teach them a lesson.
Ignoring the entire questionable issue of whether not killing the PCs will actually teach them tactics, your PCs sat down to play a roleplaying game not Advanced Orc Leader. It is entirely possible that they want to sit around playing make-believe with orcs and elves and telling cool stories and don't give a damn about tactics.
Much as you are dying to play tough drill sergeant and beat into their thick skulls the lessons that will one day save their life...its not going to. Their lives will never depend on their ability to outmaneuver orcs. Never. And, sadly, if it does, moving little plastic pieces around and rolling dice won't actually prepare them for it.
So what do you, oh poor beleaguered Rommel GM surrounded by a bunch of tactical nitwits do? Do you keep killing the PCs until they start playing the way you want? Or possibly until they get fed up and decide to all mysteriously forget to invite you to future game sessions and accidentally issue a court order prohibiting you from coming within fifty feet of gaming events?
Well, here are two small suggestions:
If you really want a tactical challenge, here's your chance. Underpower your monsters a little from the challenge level you want and rely on your tactical skill to even out the odds.
Or, you could always join in the gleeful disregard for tactical cleverness and come up with personalities that will come out in combat for your NPCs. Have a gnoll that's determined to take over the leadership and so takes reckless chances to show off. How about a fighting group that's been made up of remnants from two past groups and doesn't all work well as a unit? A dragon that's just too egotistical to consider the little humanoids a real threat. Remove your need to tactically enhance your PCs and make some memorable moments in one fell swoop!
Ok, that was long. I promise the next ones will be a lot shorter.
My PCs are idiots! They're only second level and they thought they could fight an ogre. It should have been obvious they couldn't handle that - its twice as big as they are! I should kill them and teach them a lesson.
And whether or not an ogre is a reasonable fight for a 2nd level party can vary wildly from system to system and game to game. If your players haven't been memorizing the monster guide, the may have absolutely no idea what's a reasonable match for them.
But its twice as big. Yeah, well, when they reach 10th level and can take it out with one blow, its still twice as big. When they hit 15th and have sidekicks who can take it out in one blow, its still twice as big. At 20th, when they have pocket-watches that can take it out in one blow, its still twice as big!
My PCs are idiots! That farmer TOLD them that an ogre was fearsome and scary and no one could fight it and they STILL went after it! I should kill them and teach them a lesson.
Yes. And no one has ever made it throug the Fire Swamps alive. One does not simply walk into Mordor. Snub fighters are no good against a battlestation that size.
Heroes getting told that "no one has ever done it" and "you're no match for it" and "you'll die for sure" is standard operating procedure for heroic adventure stories. If you actually want to discourage your PCs, that is NOT the way to do it. Unless you just want to beat it into them that they are never supposed to do anything risky. And then you'll complain when they sit home growing vegetables instead of going to fight the dragon that you actually wanted them to fight.
My PCs are idiots! They got into the fight with the dragon and refused to run when they were clearly over-matched. I need to kill them until they learn to run away.
And, once again we'll skip over the fact that killing them will teach them they should have done something else, of which running only is only one possibility. And it may just teach them that your games aren't much fun.
And we'll move on to talking about the dragon. (Note: Its not an ogre this time. Dragon. This usually gets said about dragons). See that movement score? See how its twice as high as your PCs move? Now see that "Flight" next to it? Did I mention that the dragon knows the area and the PCs don't? And that by the time they know they should run, one of the PCs is down. A friend/blood-ally/relative/lover or who knows what else that they would be abandoning to certain death?
Yeah. Does running away really sound like such a good idea now?
If you want to throw your PCs at tough fights and have them run, you'll need to teach them that its ok to run. Which doesn't mean killing them. And it doesn't mean expecting them to run from something they shouldn't expect to be able to run from. And once you've taught them its ok to run, be ready and happy when they use the option to flee even when you didn't plan on it.
What was the point of all this?
Simply this: your players may not have the same assumptions and expectations about "challenges" that you do. They may not have the same knowledge. You may be missing things that you should have realized.
Next time you want to scream "My PCs are idiots", take a deep breath. If there are six people at the table and you are the only one who thought it was a dumb idea, maybe they aren't the ones being idiots.
-
Brian Modreski
United States
Thornton
Colorado
-
As some other users have been discussing lately (such as in [blog=347]CS Hearns blog[/blog]), one of the frequent complaints about co-ops is that they sometimes degenerate into one person telling everyone else what to do.
Now, I'm of the opinion that this is a problem with the group and not the game. But its not an incomprehensible problem.
Gamers are used to being competitive; sometimes that might come out in a co-op as trying to compete by taking charge.
Gamers are also used to being helpful to new players. That can turn into overbearing help if you aren't careful.
And gamers playing co-ops like to discuss tactics and plan. Sometimes its easy to miss that your discussion has turned one sided.
Now, its a sad fact that often a bossy player isn't the best or most experienced but just the loudest. But I'm going to assume that you, dear reader, don't want to be bossing people around and will attempt to give some practical tips on avoiding it.
For the experienced player trying not to be bossy:
* Remember that no matter how doom-filled the game may be, no matter that plagues are about to sweep over the Earth or Sauron is about to reclaim The Ring, its just a game. The world will not really explode. No need to stress about winning. Better that everyone have a fun game and you can laugh about losing to the new players mistake than have new players whispering about what a jerk you are and not wanting to game with you again. 
* When it comes to giving advice, do something radical and ask how much advice new players like. Do they want to figure it all out on their own? Do they want a lot of tips. Communicatation - a novel concept I realize!
* Count to 10. Or maybe 30. When a new player's turn starts, just hold in that brilliant move you've seen. Give them a chance to see it on their own.
* If a new player wants suggestions, try to come up with at least two options to suggest. "Well, you could clear out London which is looking bad, but a research station over there would be really useful to". That at least helps ensure you aren't making ALL the decisions.
* If you need to point out something important, phrase it in terms of end-results, not game actions. This is very important and could do with some examples.
Example 1: In Pandemic, you need a 5th Blue card to complete a set. Apparently, a lot of players at this point would say "What cards does everyone have?", wait for everyone to list all the cities they have, figure out how to meet at a blue one, and tell that player what they need to do.
Instead, say "I need a 5th blue, can anyone get it to me?" This gets everyone else involved in trying to figure out what to do, and gives the other players the chance to make the decisions and take charge.
Example 2: In Ghost Stories, a Vampire will reach the board next turn and haunt a third village tile, ending the game. Obviously, this needs to be dealt with, so you tell the new and unconfident player "You have to try to banish the Vampire".
Except there are actually several ways to approach this peril, so instead stay "The Vampire will haunt a third village tile, looks like you need to do something to save us". This puts the ball in their court. Do they try to banish it? What about using the Night Watchman to push it back? The Taoist Altar to unflip a haunted tile? Perhaps they'll even notice something you missed - that while they need a really lucky roll to banish the Vampire, they have the Tao to easily banish the Fury of Depth, which will give then their Yin-Yang back, which they can use to unhaunt a tile. And then you won't have to be rolling the curse die either!
The real key here is to avoid dictating the player's actions. Keep your thinking in terms of goals and thematic terms instead of details and actions and you'll be less bossy.
For the new player wanting to not be bossed around
* See the first item above! Communicate! Tell the experienced players if you want to figure it out on your own, or if you want a few tips. Don't be afraid to speak up and change this mid-game.
* Take the initiative and do something. Who knows, maybe it will even be the right thing. If you're just sitting there waiting for people to tell you what to do, they may wind up feeling like they don't have much choice but to tell you what to do. Dive in and go for it. The worst that can happen is the end of the world
* Be vocal. If you are busy trying to choose between tactics, talk about what you are considering. This lets players know you haven't just locked up and keeps everyone involved more. (Actually, this tip could be in the section for experienced players as well).
-
Brian Modreski
United States
Thornton
Colorado
-
Everydays tasks become dramatically more exciting when you think of it as:
Purging the vehicle hangar of the unclean filth and driving the multi-limbed xenos from their nests with the cleansing fury of bristles in the name of the mighty Empress!
rather than:
Sweeping out the garage because your girlfriend thinks there are too many spiderwebs.
Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:37 pm
|
|
|
