So, I was re-reading Ucle Figgy today, and got to wondering about the Mad Gamer. It's not that I have a problem with it, per se, only that it helped me to realize some things I found interesting. Others may, or may not, but here goes:
Role playing IN CHARACTER is good. As a GM, I love it when players love a game and do so. But there are limits. As a gamer who GMs far more than I play, I tend to consciously makes PCs in larger games that fit the game as best I can. (I tend to get more experimental in one-shot games :)) I won't go and make a loner or power gamer. I'll play in character, but only to a point.
The point being where the game stops being fun for someone else. Such as killing their PC or doing things just to annoy people. Saying "But it's what my character would do!" only strikes me as an excuse for not really role playing. It's about MORE than just being your character. I'm the player as well, and actions have consequences.
The mad gamer can be fun. I've done it and quite enjoyed it, but - there's always a but. There's a point where anything goes too far, and it's always good - imo - to know where that is, and to reign your character (and yourself) in. Amusingly, I tend to be better at this while playing than GMing {Cf. La Fin 2 and Peter Pan, and the taking of ideas to logical conclusions :p}.
I suspect part of the problem is that I've GMed too often, and not played near as much. For me, it's not a problem. I like GMing. But reading the guide and finding out where I clash with "Figgy" is interesting. I have to wonder if this makes me a better GM than player, that I always keep myself a couple of steps removed from a character and temd to go on what is good for the GM/Game rather than "What is good for my character?" if push comes to shove.
Is it good? I don't know. I like challenging systems, fun games, and challenging a GM (sometimes just to accept the character I made), but there's always a line I try and draw between character and player, between acting in character and screwing other people over.
I'm not sure either view is right. Perhaps I'm just confused. Anyone else read it, and any views of their own?
Well, here's the deal. If I have to choose between doing something that will screw over another player or doing something that is honestly just not in character, I'll most likely screw that person over. Yeah, I might try to screw them over as little as possible, but in character is in character. But by that same token, I'll also do things that I predict will screw over my own character if I really feel that action is something my character would do at the time (see: Faline). That's just where I stand.
ReplyDelete