Mythic Logos

So lately I have been thinking about designing an RPG. Actually, I think I am almost done with the basics which is about as far as I am likely to go. I have been looking at some other systems and discussions. Independently, I recently read a book which I borrowed from a neighborhood cafe. In it, it has the HOTS theory of personality differences:

• Hares. These are idea people, creative types who get blown away by ideas and then leave them. I am a hare.
• Owls. Strategists, planners. They make connections and plans. I can do this.
• Turtles. Wet towels, naysayers. They take ideas and find out what is wrong with them. They drive me nuts.
• Squirrels. Detailers. They love to go through each step in a logical, methodical way. I have done it, but man is it hard.

Such setups and views are not new, but they are still nice. As I said, I am a hare. It explains my “work ethic”. I come up with amazing ideas, pursue them for a bit, and generally tire of them, moving on. I can do the owl thing. I find being a turtle antithetical to my being. If I have deadlines and pressing needs, I can do the squirrel thing. I do have a PhD in mathematics, after all. And I like programming (even finished some programs, on occasion). But I have to say that I wish I could get my squirrel on.

The book recommends getting a team to complement one’s strengths. I would need a turtle though I do have a friend who has a knack for that. He doesn’t quite have the bludgeon to death attitude of most turtles, but he can fill in. Maybe my team can draw straws to be a squirrel.

Anyway, in my search of RPGs, I have realized that that there are three types:

• Rules, rules, rules. This is the modern form of D&D. I currently play such a version and at times it does drive me crazy. This form of the game is for squirrels. Much like the legal code, this generates a lot of income in selling large numbers of rule books.
• Treasure, XP! This I think is for owls. They are goal getters, methodically increasing their way to riches and power. This is the original form of D&D as far as I can tell. It has less rules and is more about having some creative BS thrown in to spice up the game not worrying about fine-tuned rules, but for the most part it is a dungeon dive–go in, kill a few monsters, grab the treasure, run away. Player skills come out in this version, not in-character role-playing. This mode makes some money with supplemental adventures.
• Story. This is what I want. Indeed, I have been having a great deal of fun writing up and making up adventures for my D&D character over at Mord Blog. The RPG I am designing fits this need. Instead of getting stronger through adventures, it is the back stories that can increase the character capabilities. I want a structured, dice influenced, improv experience. I want the DM to say yes to crazy ideas and figure out what happens, how to handle it. And them amazing creative sparks fly. I speak for the hares! Unfortunately, my interest already wanes and it has been less than a week. There is also no profit in this. My rules will come to about 2 pages of materials and while supplements could be made, the type who like this game would really want to do it themselves.

So that is where I am at. Role-playing is fun, but it is fun for different people for different reasons. There are the rule munchkins who probably make good lawyers. They parse the rules and optimize their characters in that system. The story setting is secondary to just becoming a superhero. I play in such a system and have a superhero character, but I am not happy about it. I feel constrained. I want to be imaginative, but that does not really happen in this game.

Somewhere in between the munchkins and the story-tellers lies the overachievers. They want to win the race against time and death to be their primary concern. This can indeed be fun.

I propose the names: lawyering, dungeon-delving, and story-playing for the three different types.