It applies to everybody

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Sergio Mascarenhas at 2005-03-27 19:46:18
Converted from Phorums BB System

My maing problem with your article is that you restrict your qualifications to gamers. I mean, anybody can be normal, associal, antisocial or hypersocial, not only gamers. So, you should not speak about antisocial gamers, associal gamers, normal gamers and hypersocial gamers. You should speak instead about normal, associal, antisocial or hypersocial people that happen to be gamers. And this for two reasons:

The first is to detach peoples' behavior from gaming. For instance, if one is antisocial, ane is such in general, including when gaming. This is useful specially when dealing with non-gamers. I suppose that you don't want to have people coming again with the idea that gaming generates antisocial or associal behavior, right?

The next is because the simple fact that someone attempts to game means that the said person is not antisocial or associal. Yes, the person may have problems dealing with other people, but the person also wants and needs to be part of society, at least the society of the gaming group. This means that there's hope for such people after all...

Sergio

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Jim Bob at 2005-03-29 06:32:49
Converted from Phorums BB System

This is all true to a degree, but as the article's authour said, the influence of other people in the game can change the tendencies of each individual. Again, this occurs outside rpg groups as well.

For example, a guy might be a real sweetheart to his girlfriend, but when he hangs out in the locker room with his buddies, and they start talking about, "dumb bitches", he laughs and goes along with it. Then when he comes back to his girlfriend, he can't help but treat her with the tiniest amount of contempt.

Similarly, when a guy's just been to temple, and heard a good sermon about how important it is for a man to be kind to his wife, when he goes home, he can't help but reach out and touch her gently with a smile.

So while this or that gamer will be this or that way in themselves, when they get together with others in the group, the way those people are in the group affects them.

This is one of the reasons that a group, each individual in it can be great, but in combination they're awful; or vice versa.

All in all, a good article, but of course just a beginning to the topic...

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Ross Winn at 2005-03-29 12:35:00
Converted from Phorums BB System

I will admit that this may not only apply to gamers. However this is a column about games and gaming, so there you go. Secondly, these are not observations of how I want things to be. They are observations of how I perceive them to be right now. If that is dysfunctional then I can live with that. Frankly, after a few decades of kids playing CRPGs, paper roleplayers will be looking like the cool 'together' kids.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Rich Stokes at 2005-03-30 06:48:04
Converted from Phorums BB System

Ross, just a quick question:

I don't know you views or opinions on the "three fold model" stuff that Ron Edwards writes about a lot, but personally I've found it both fascinating and helpful. It's just another neat tool which helps me when i'm thinking about this stuff. That model is (as you say) concerner with playING, not playERS (as your's is).

Do you think that the 2 ideas can work together? Can both tools be used at the same time? Personally I'd say yes, and I could point out that (in my experience) a lot of Gamist play tend to appeal to the asocial or antisocial gamers, while Narrativist play tends to attract the hypersocial.

Or aren't you interested in that? (not that you have any obligation to be)

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Ross Winn at 2005-03-30 10:31:21
Converted from Phorums BB System

I always preferred the threefold model to Ron's ideas. If you haven't read the threefold model look at http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/threefold/faq_v1.html or do your own Googling. I do think that the idea of a playing model and a player model have merit, but haven't found one I use. Actually I think I am formulating one (if I do you will read it here).