History Main / PlayerArchetypes

** ''Challenge'' seekers derive pleasure from overcoming a series of obstacles or tasks (these may include puzzles that must be solved or social challenges that must be defeated by IC dialogue). They want to be given fair challenges, the tools to solve them, and a real (or at least believable) risk of failure. They find games where the GM fudges the dice (either for or against them) or applies the rules unfairly frustrating, and are bored by sessions where there are no obstacles to overcome.

* [[http://theangrygm.com/gaming-for-fun-part-1-eight-kinds-of-fun/ A pair]] [[http://theangrygm.com/gaming-for-fun-part-2-getting-engaged/ of articles]] by '''[[http://theangrygm.com/ The Angry GM]]''' divide players up into eight groupings based on what they enjoy about the game[[note]]though any given player will usually enjoy several, but probably not all, of these categories[[/note]], previously identified by Marc [=LeBlanc=] and incorporated into the MediaNotes/MechanicsDynamicsAesthetics model:

* [[http://theangrygm.com/gaming-for-fun-part-1-eight-kinds-of-fun/ A pair]] [[http://theangrygm.com/gaming-for-fun-part-2-getting-engaged/ of articles]] by '''[[http://theangrygm.com/ The Angry GM]]''' divide players up into eight groupings based on what they enjoy about the game[[note]]though any given player will usually enjoy several, but probably not all, of these categories[[/note]], previously identified by Marc [=LeBlanc=] and incorporated into the UsefulNotes/MechanicsDynamicsAesthetics model:

* In an attempt at deep analysis of tabletop [=RPGs,=] gamers on UsefulNotes/{{Usenet}}, and specifically on the newsgroup rec.games.frp.advocacy, came up with a classification called the [[http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/threefold/ Threefold]] which makes the division Gamist/Dramatist/Simulationist. This was eventually refined into [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNS_Theory GNS Theory]] by Creator/TheForge community, which divides players and games by their objectives:

** In short: [[{{Pun}} Diamonds sparkle, spades dig, hearts care, and clubs hit things.]] Modern versions of the Bartle Test generally subscribe to the opinion that nearly everyone has parts of all four inside them and give their ratings accordingly. For example, E/S/A/K gives the proportions of each from highest (explorer, or spade, in this case) to the lowest (killer, or club). The newer "Kol Bartle" version of the test will give the top two percentages if they both are close enough together; for example, a "Roving Hugglebunny" is mostly heart and spade, in that order.
** Bartle's original conception also catalogued the impact various player types had on one anothers' populations in a multiplayer environment. For instance, Clubs/Killers tend to drive down the population of Hearts/Socializers as they propagate, because the Socializers don't appreciate getting picked on, but find Spades/Explorers unsatisfying to kill at best, since it barely inconveniences their actual goals, and hate being, at worst, [[LethalJokeCharacter completely schooled by some weird combination the Spade had in their back pocket from their experiments]].

** The ''Mastery-Achievement'' cluster contains Challenge, Strategy, Completion, Power, and Discovery (the latter two serve as "bridges" between this cluster and Action-Social and Immersion-Creativity, respectively). This cluster contains the classic powergamers, min-maxing "hardcore" grognards, and [[HundredPercentCompletion completionists]].

*** ''Vorthos'' is primarily interested in fluff, setting, background, story, etc. A Vorthos-Johnny might build a deck with contraints of "Soldiers only. It doesn't matter the color, because soldiers are professionals, and know how to work together." Or, "I am going to buld a zombie deck, with a handful of necromancers and maybe a powerful demon. It fits storywise." Or (and this one's straight from the ''Magic'' website), "How about about a deck focused [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5824 solely]] [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5763 around]] [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5770 clams]], with a single [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=631 Mox Pearl]] in the middle?" Vorthos is on the Casual side of the CasualCompetitiveConflict.

** In short: [[JustForPun Diamonds sparkle, spades dig, hearts care, and clubs hit things.]] Modern versions of the Bartle Test generally subscribe to the opinion that nearly everyone has parts of all four inside them and give their ratings accordingly. For example, E/S/A/K gives the proportions of each from highest (explorer, or spade, in this case) to the lowest (killer, or club). The newer "Kol Bartle" version of the test will give the top two percentages if they both are close enough together; for example, a "Roving Hugglebunny" is mostly heart and spade, in that order.

* '''Richard Bartle''' wrote an article in 1996, "[[http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players Who Suit MUDs]]", describing four different player archetypes in {{MUD}}s (though as ever, the types are quite recognizable to players of other types of game). It's had quite a bit of influence on subsequent development on [[MassivelyMultiplayerOnlineRolePlayingGame massively multiplayer games]]; ''VideoGame/KingdomOfLoathing'' references it directly, and the Path system in ''VideoGame/{{Wildstar}}'' is clearly influenced by the four archetypes.

** ''Diamonds, AKA Achievers:'' These players go for the goals of the game themselves. Gaining [[CharacterLevel Character Levels]], getting a High Score, slaying the BonusBoss, and so on. Also called power gamers or raiders. A subset of these are the kind who like collecting rare items.

Note that, with most of these categorizations, blends are entirely possible, and indeed likely; for example, you can have someone who's part Timmy and part Spike, or someone who integrates beating up bad guys with socializing with their team. Indeed, most people will have at least a ''little'' of each category.

* In an attempt at deep analysis of tabletop [=RPGs,=] gamers on '''Website/{{Usenet}},''' and specifically on the newsgroup '''rec.games.frp.advocacy,''' came up with a classification called the [[http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/theory/threefold/ Threefold]] which makes the division Gamist/Dramatist/Simulationist. This was eventually refined into [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNS_Theory GNS Theory]] by Creator/TheForge community, which divides players and games by their objectives:

* '''''TabletopGame/SentinelsOfTheMultiverse''''' has ''Jeremies'' and ''Johns,'' named after a pair of Handelabra employees known for the appropriate playstyle: calculating optimisation for John, raw destructive power for Jeremy. This is the CasualCompetitiveConflict showing up yet again, in that John is being calculatingly Competitive, whereas Jeremy's love of raw power for its own sake may reflect a more casual attitude -- but the match isn't perfect.

* '''''TabletopGame/SentinelsOfTheMultiverse''''' has ''Jeremies'' and ''Johns,'' named after a pair of Handelabra employees known for the appropriate playstyle: calculating optimisation for John, raw destructive power for Jeremy — the CasualCompetitiveConflict showing up yet again.

* '''''TabletopGame/SentinelsOfTheMultiverse''''' has ''Jeremies'' and ''Johns,'' named after a pair of Handelabra employees known for the appropriate playstyle: calculating optimisation for John, raw destructive power for Jeremy.

The most basic division is the CasualCompetitiveConflict, but sometimes things get a little more nuanced. For instance, one kind of player (the most Competitive kind) may have absolutely no use for AwesomeButImpractical abilities; they avoid even getting them, they write to publishers asking them not to put them in future games, and they deride players who ''do'' use them as ignorant newbies. On the other hand, other, more Casual players go straight for them, and use them as often as possible, just because they like the impressive visual effects and the feel of doing [[{{Cap}} the maximum possible amount of damage]]. And yet ''another'' player will acquire them, but not use them except as a FinishingMove, because it's [[RuleOfDrama more dramatic that way]].

* '''''TabletopGame/YuGiOh''''' gives us ''Tourney Players'' and ''Casuals.'' Some people mix between these. The fun here comes that the term {{Scrub}} is eagerly applied to ''both'' sides of the debate... and then you have the Timmy-esque ''"Billy"'' players, who can consistently trash meta-tier tournament decks with the card game equivalent of CherryTapping (and, in fact, [[http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Billy_Deck have their own deck type trope]], as a result), and are called {{Scrub}}s for not using top-tier decks. Even though they just won against such a deck.

For instance, one kind of player may have absolutely no use for AwesomeButImpractical abilities; they avoid even getting them, they write to publishers asking them not to put them in future games, and they deride players who ''do'' use them as ignorant newbies. On the other hand, other players go straight for them, and use them as often as possible, just because they like the impressive visual effects and the feel of doing [[{{Cap}} the maximum possible amount of damage]]. And yet ''another'' player will acquire them, but not use them except as a FinishingMove, because it's [[RuleOfDrama more dramatic that way]].

*** ''Vorthos'' is primarily interested in fluff, setting, background, story, etc. A Vorthos-Johnny might build a deck with contraints of "Soldiers only. It doesn't matter the color, because soldiers are professionals, and know how to work together." Or, "I am going to buld a zombie deck, with a handful of necromancers and maybe a powerful demon. It fits storywise." Or (and this one's straight from the ''Magic'' website), "How about about a deck focused [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5824 solely]] [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5763 around]] [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=5770 clams]], with a single [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=631 Mox Pearl]] in the middle?"
*** ''Melvins,'' at the opposite end of the spectrum, would see such constraints as pointless. They still care about what's written on the cards, but focus on mechanics rather than flavor. A Melvin might build a deck around a mechanic such as vampirism (dealing damage while gaining life) and completely ignore any flavor. A Melvin-Johnny might say "I am going to figure out how to use these oddly-worded cards that seem kinda counter-productive, figure out how they actually work, and then build a Goldbergian deck that I understand, but will leave my opponent hopelessly confused". Melvins LOVE the TabletopGame/YuGiOh CCG, and were deeply offended when a card for [[http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Griselbrand a demon]] had the number "7" in every possible spot except one (the casting cost).

** The ''Action-Social'' cluster contains the motivations of Destruction, Excitement, Competition, Community, and Power. This cluster puts sensory enjoyment and interaction with other people above other concerns, and its members often derisively dubbed "casuals" by detractors.