On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 10:35:27PM -0600, Karen J. Cravens wrote:
>I'm always of mixed feelings about MBTI; everyone seems to say "Oh, that's
>ME to a T!" exactly the same way they do about a horoscope sign.
Heh.
Each time I take it, I get closer to absolute centre. I guess that means
I'm a balanced personality (drooling from both sides of my mouth at the
same time?).
>Nevertheless, it's been interestingly discussed in a few blogs, in
>particular here:
>
>http://yudhishthirasdice.blogspot.com/2005/12/myers-briggs-and-gaming.html
"As we all know from the Big Model the first thing that happens at a
gaming table is real people interact with other real people. For that
reason it's obvious that the most important MB types are those of the
actual players."
Hmm. I think I should be quite offended if I thought my GM were running
psychological models against me to give me the sort of game I'd enjoy,
even though the similar ad-hoc process seems an entirely normal part of
GMing ("Roger is playing a character who thinks of himself as
chivalrous, so it would be good to give him an opportunity to be it").
Maybe it's a matter of separation:
* Player desires for the game in general (player's concern, to pick or
stay in a game that gives him what he wants). A GM playing to this
starts to seem either over-calculating or desperate to hang on to
players. Am I arguing for creative integrity over popularity? I guess I
am.
* Player desires for his character (something the GM should reasonably
expect to cater for).
* Character desires (some overlap with previous category, but the GM can
be much freer about frustrating these in the short term).
>I'm not so sure about my characters.
I try to play characters from all over the place; I occasionally use
MBTI randomly (i.e. picking one of the sixteen blocks based on the
population distribution, sometimes furkled about with for isolated
populations) in order to generate a core personality for an NPC.
Usually, though, the personalities just "come to me" (almost always with
PCs). I do try to avoid playing a "type"; if I've had a lot of careful
thinking PCs recently, I'll go with a reckless type (e.g. Dona
Constanza, the exiled Castilian sorceress in the 7th Sea game I've just
started playing in; she's pretty solidly ESFP).
If I were looking at a personality model for RPG mechanics, I think I
might go for something more like the Big Five
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_five_personality_traits), since this
gives the ability to rate on a continuous scale rather than in one of a
set number of boxes.
--
Roger, gaming grognard
Lots of role-playing stuff: http://tekeli.li/
----------------------------------------------------------------
GAMERS Home Page: http://www.phoenyx.net/gamers/
