On Apr 29, 5:22=A0pm, psychohist <psychoh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> That's a good point. =A0It's one of my blind spots and I always forget
> that people can think this way; I remember being amazed when one of my
> players mentioned that one of the most im****tant things about a game
> to him was player skill, rather than character skill.
I'd certainly agree with your player, otherwise I wouldn't play such
game at all.
> In the case of skill, I'm happy to leave it up to the player as to
> which they use; in the case under discussion, though, where we're
> talking about characters earning each others' respect, I'm not so
> happy with it. =A0Any suggestions on how to get a player to understand a
> more character based world view in this kind of situation?
In terms of "I've earn respect for my actions as a player" vs. "my
character has earned respect for his actions", things are a bit more
muddled than the more simple player skill example. While perhaps
similar in some ways, I don't really think they're related.
Assuming that the player isn't fixed on this behavior (always
possible), I'd try to reset expectations. Campaigns tend to grow and
expand and set expectations without realizing it. The idea that their
new character is going to be viewed as a nobody may very well have
never crossed the mind of the player. It may be time to express the
reality of the matter in a out of character discussion of the campaign
between the gaming group.
One doesn't have to convince the problem player I think. One only
needs to convince most of the players, or even just the best couple of
players. After that, peer pressure and group leader****p may will
control the problem as it has with the die mechanics before.
|
