forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

The other day I picked up a small book (more like a pamphlet) at Half-Price Books called "Robin's Laws of Good Game Mastering" (2002) by Robin Laws. It's been a fun and interesting read so far.

I just came across something I found quite fascinating, and I don't recall ever hearing or reading anything like it before.

On 'power fantasies', Laws wrote how they "give players the chance to play characters vastly more competent than themselves - or, for that matter anyone else in the world as we know it". Later, he said "in power fantasy, PCs always have a good chance of vanquishing their foes".

He later writes the following:

"The appeal of power fantasy varies geographically. American audiences embrace it wholeheartedly; the basic themes of the adventure story strongly parallel those of U.S. national mythology. British audiences, on the other hand, view the power fantasy with greater suspicion. The English concept of heroism is less about victory than endurance in the face of seemingly impossible odds. U.K. Game Masters therefore can assume a greater license to make things rough on their players."

Like I said, I don't recall ever hearing this before. I can see how much of Tolkien's works model this, and I suppose the English experiences in both World Wars might factor into their cultural outlooks as well.

What do you think? Is there often a different outlook and approach by U.K. GMs, as opposed to those from the U.S.?

That passage from that book has always stuck with me. I need to talk to Robin about it and where he got that evidence.

I agree that his comment does fit well with Tolkien's themes, particularly the idea that by fulfilling the power fantasy characters risk becoming the bad guy. You could even look at Boromir and Aragon as representing both heroic points of view.

There might be something in that. I have a friend who DM's for his American family when they visit and he says they are competitive and combative all the time and it's all about winning. Whereas some of our own games revolve a lot around survival and pushing back against the Shadow or be swept away.

Huh. I'm American, running for mostly Americans (with the occasional Canadian and Australian for good measure). I don't think of myself as running a game that is a power fantasy... all of my TOR games are more about fate and making good decisions even when it costs you.

Of course, my one group has decided that they're going to go kill themselves a dragon, so it might be that they're on a different page than me.

I remember that passage.
I'm not british nor american, but I admit that this description fits the stereotypes that I got about people from the two sides of the pond.
But I know that stereotypes are dangerous simplifications.

It's an interesting idea, certainly, but I'm not sure its true. I'm sure there will be cultural elements that are different to Brits and Americans (and anyone else for that matter) that we'll all bring to the table but if you're roleplayers then you'll be engaging with the game and so those things should largely take a backseat.

I've played with tripped out power gamers that are all out-of-work guys and know that some of them wouldn't be interested in playing The One Ring so I wouldn't dream of running it with them. On the other hand, the group that I run TOR with play it right, or at least what I think is right, but we've also played Amber (where the players' character are often arrogant godlings of great power), Golden Heroes (where the supers in it range across the board) and various other games; all met with gusto, enthusiasm and a desire to play the game in the way it was intended.

I think it's therefore the quality of the players, not the culture or location, that have far more of an impact on a way a game is played. And quality is really all about experience and the ability to learn from it. I don't see how culture could impact on that unless we're saying that people from certain areas of the world will only play certain types of games. I guess there could be some truth in that but I don't have the exposure to it to say either way. Amd, if it is true, could it be the choice of games that really drives any cultural difference - ie, many Americans won't pick up a game that is about enduring (and losing often) against impossible odd whereas Brits may be interested in such a game moreso? Therefore, you don't really see a difference in play at the table, as players are playing because they want to and are interested in the game and its themes, but it is in the initial purchase?

I don't believe Robin is commenting on the quality of players here or making a judgement about the style of play. My understanding is that he is explaining his experience with the assumptions of the de facto style of fantasy play (zero to hero, save the kingdom, vanquish enemies, get the treasure, etc). I like his comment about UK audiences viewing it with suspicion. Possibly his comment is aimed at the kind of commentary prominent in White Dwarf magazine (after all that book is pretty old now) and how games such as Warhammer 1st Edition compared against D&D.

Sounds to me like it perfectly fits the stereotype Europeans have of Americans.

I'm an American GMing for Americans. I think this generalization might work better outside of TOR. In playing D&D, I definitely see a lot more power gaming among my group than I do in TOR, so I would suggest that players who want to play TOR tend to understand Tolkien's themes on at least a basic level, and so come into it with a different expectation than they do D&D or another fantasy RPG.

I would say also the kind of fiction you read plays a big role in this. I GMed for a large group of players who I knew well for a while using Pathfinder. I could probably draw a connection between the characters they made and the fiction they enjoy if I set my mind to it. Thought whether that would in the end fall out to "those who enjoy American fiction make one kind of character and those who enjoy British fiction make another kind," I am not sure.

It might be simpler and wiser to say that some groups of players will want a power fantasy and others will not, and a good GM will figure this out and act accordingly.

bluejay wrote:I don't believe Robin is commenting on the quality of players here or making a judgement about the style of play.

But that's sort of (at least) the point I was making; that the quality of the RPer is more important to playing than any particular cultural bias. Players learn how to engage in specific ways and enjoy different games for different reasons.