Should You Play Your Own Game?

[Gashlycrumb]

@Third-Eye There’s a secondary issue in there – PCs that are just called NPCs 'cause they’re staff PCs and staff aren’t allowed PCs in their own section is a weird thing that happens. I’m not sure it matters much except for giving bad vibes, though.

[Faraday]

@Wizz said:

I think choosing to play or not choosing to play are just different ways to engage with a game you make, each with their own unique challenges and pitfalls, and aren’t inherently problematic or better on their own.

I agree with this. Some people just have more fun with coding, building, or GMing. As long as they’re not exhibiting any other troublesome behavior, I have no problem with it. I can think of several staffers like this, but the most iconic was Death from TGG (EUBannana I think was his MSB handle?) He rarely played a PC (at least while I was there) but ran a great game. I think mostly he just liked watching people play in the war sandbox he’d made

I do think that if staff isn’t actively engaging with the players in direct RP, it’s important to have some other mechanism for getting the pulse of the game. It’s easy to be out of touch if you’re not playing (for the reasons @kestrel mentioned).

[MisterBoring]

My thought is sure, staff should be able to play on their own game with some caveats:

1. I agree with @gashlycrumb that all alts should be identified OOCly so that a lot of unethical behavior can be stopped at the pass, especially where staff is involved.
2. Further to that, I believe that no staff member should act as staff for a scene involving their own PCs. So if Staffer A is playing their PC in a staff run scene, Staffer B is responsible for running the scene and making any rulings on the scene.

If a staff member doesn’t want to have a PC on the game, that’s okay too.

[Ominous]

@Meg said:

So, what do you guys think about staff not playing the game? Would that raise any red flags? I know the immediate thought is from people saying ‘oh, staff shouldn’t play’! But if staff legitimately did not want to play any characters, would you find that a warning sign or anything?

Honestly, I think at least one staffer shouldn’t play the game, meaning not having a PC but possibly still running scenes, playing occasional NPCs, etc. I think it’s important to have a sort ombudsman staffer who has a bit of distance from the game and can be a least somewhat objective in analysis. Hand-in-hand with that, though, is that a few staff should play the game, so at least some of the staff have a view of what’s going on ground-level.

[L. B. Heuschkel]

Ideally, every staff member should also be a player. However, not everyone is very active RP-wise, and that’s okay. What’s really important is that they’re active in the community, that they’re visible. Whether they RP, or prefer to hang out on chat, or are always around for questions – that’s not so important which one it is. What really moves things is that players see them, hear them, and get to know them.

Staff that is essentially faceless authority figures invite abuse and fuckery from players who don’t identify with them as fellow hobby nerds. Staff that have faces and are the next guy over – not so much. At least not from the ordinary types – there’s always the occasional malignant creep, and no amount of good PR fixes those.

[Faraday]

@MisterBoring said:

I believe that no staff member should act as staff for a scene involving their own PCs.

I used to believe that too, but I no longer do. On a good game with a decent staff, you can trust staffers to remain fair even for their own characters. I’ve been on a number of games run by couples (@roadspike and @blu for instance) and have run games entirely by myself. These games have demonstrated to me that strict impartiality of rulings is unnecessary. In contrast, countless games where “impartial” staffers rubber-stamp crazy things for each other have demonstrated that the thin veneer of neutrality on most games is just performative.

[MisterBoring]

@Faraday said:

On a good game with a decent staff, you can trust staffers to remain fair even for their own characters.

Funnily enough, I don’t suggest this based on fairness, though that’s an additional benefit of it. I suggest this because playing a PC in a scene at the same time as one is staffing a scene can add to burnout at a faster pace. While fairness is one part of it, I have noticed that staff who run scenes they’re PCing in seem to, in my experience, burn out faster than those that keep a separation between the two activities.

[Gashlycrumb]

@L.-B.-Heuschkel said:

Staff that is essentially faceless authority figures invite abuse and fuckery from players who don’t identify with them as fellow hobby nerds.

This, and more.

Staff who really want to be authority figures are, hm. Typically not great. If they value protecting their authority more than they value fairness and widespread fun, they’re liable to be a nightmare.

You cannot separate the authority from the work, but the authority should not be the reward for the work nor the reason you do it.

In workplace type situations that get studied by sociologists and the like, people who put much psychic stock into being an authority figure and protecting that status are at a much greater risk of burn-out as well as making everyone around them miserable.

Because I was raised by goats I am an anarcho-syndicalist, but even putting that aside I’d still actively make an effort to be an OOC-friendly chat-channel user as a staffer. Players should feel that I have a personality, and that I am accessible, and that I am open to making new friends, even them.

[Roadspike]

@Faraday Very much appreciate the compliment, but it wasn’t always this way. I’ve been accused of spotlighting my own characters and she’s been accused of running scenes just for my characters. It’s been a learning process to get to the point where we feel comfortable running scenes that we have (or our partner has) a character in again.

I agree fully that staff should play their own game (as long as they want to) and that it’s a net benefit for them to do so. However, staff need to be careful not just about the actuality of improprieties when playing their own game, but also the appearance of improprieties.

It’s very easy for it to seem like a staffer is running scenes for their own character (or anyone else’s) if that character does particularly well in a scene, has an expertise that suits the scene (even if it’s just because the staffer is running a scene of a type they like playing in, which is why they play that type of character), or the character is connected to the scene in some way (even if other characters are too).

That’s another reason to be active and approachable and engaged on your own game, because even if no one will tell you directly if you’ve overstepped the bounds of reasonableness (but get yourself some friends who will tell you this), you can get a feel for the game by playing it and often recognize when you’ve stepped outside of the perceived realms of good behavior in running your own scenes. This does take some self-awareness that some don’t have, of course.

[Gashlycrumb]

@Faraday said:

On a good game with a decent staff, you can trust staffers to remain fair even for their own characters

Yes. And if alts are all marked, so everybody knows that the staff PC is a staff PC, and the staffer is not a raging ego who will explode at being called imperfect, then – while I was typing @roadspike hit it – that staffer/player will hear about it if they’ve overstepped.

[Gashlycrumb]

@Roadspike said:

I’ve been accused of spotlighting my own characters and she’s been accused of running scenes just for my characters

I’ve no idea what the circumstances were for that, but I want to point out:

It’s not wrong or bad to do either of those things.

It just shouldn’t be a big percentage of all the spotlighting and scene-running that you do, you know?

I remember games that did regular ‘staff appreciation’ events where staff PCs (including those who saw a lot of action without that boost) were purposefully spotlighted . Players were down with it.

[Faraday]

@MisterBoring said:
I suggest this because playing a PC in a scene at the same time as one is staffing a scene can add to burnout at a faster pace.

I haven’t observed that personally, but it certainly does take more work to both GM and play in a scene. I still think it should be up to the individual staffer as to whether that’s something they like and can handle, and not something to be universally discouraged, but YMMV of course.

@Roadspike said:

@Faraday Very much appreciate the compliment, but it wasn’t always this way. I’ve been accused of spotlighting my own characters and she’s been accused of running scenes just for my characters. It’s been a learning process to get to the point where we feel comfortable running scenes that we have (or our partner has) a character in again.

You’ll never escape that kind of accusation, even on a game with a dozen staff members each keeping perfectly to their silos. Heck, I once got complaints about my character being spotlighted when the plot was run by someone else (a regular player) as a thank-you. And as @gashlycrumb also pointed out, there’s nothing inherently wrong with running plots for yourself/your friends. Staff deserves to have fun too. As long as there’s transparency and clear expectations, players can vote with their feet if they don’t like the way staffers are running plots.

[Gashlycrumb]

@Faraday said:

there’s nothing inherently wrong with running plots for yourself/your friends

I think its more inherently right. That’s what’s really wanted, isn’t it? The ideal MU experience you have a friendly RP group of gaming-friends and work plots together with GMs who are also gaming-friends.

The balancing act is the but also making it so that random gamers who find your game on MUDstats or Ares Central etc have a path to getting in on it.

[Jumpscare]

I’ve tried multiple times to be a player in Silent Heaven. I don’t want any special treatment or plot attention, so I’ve gone incognito. But inevitably I’ve been found out, whether it’s due to my writing style or a mistake on my part. And then my character gets treated differently. In my experience, it causes a behavioral amplification effect of sorts. Some people cling to my character’s words in a way that feels like they’re hoping to get in on a plot, and others suddenly disregard my character.

I’m not sure what to do to get an organic experience, or even if one is possible, haha. I’ve never been someone who craves the spotlight. I’m perfectly happy playing NPCs in support of other characters’ stories. But it also means I miss out on the day-to-day interactions.

I’m open to suggestions!

[Gashlycrumb]

@Jumpscare said:

Some people cling to my character’s words in a way that feels like they’re hoping to get in on a plot, and others suddenly disregard my character.

If you make it known (in +finger or whatever) that it’s your PC, the disregard side will probably reduce. Discovering that two personas you’ve been dealing with are one person can be off-putting and people who have that reaction are likely to withdraw some. Some people may feel that secret staff PCs serve as undercover wrongfun police who are scrutinising them rather than playing with them, and will avoid.

The cling-ons may drop off if events on the game are transparent enough that people can tell that IC connection to a staff PC isn’t a doorway to plot access. At least, it was my experience that my main PC didn’t attract that sort of thing, while people did run out to meet certain NPCs.

[howyadoin]

I am of the opinion game runners should be playing the game. Whether they need to flag their pcs or not I think depends on how much their pcs are involved in plot, and if they have authority or power as a pc that could be fudged with their staff power.

If a staffer is playing some ordinary, low-stakes pc just to stretch their legs? I don’t really care if they flag or not.

I don’t see how STs can gauge story pacing and see areas of the game that actually need work, and sort these from trivial (even if loud) complaints without playing the game.

@Jumpscare said:

I’m open to suggestions!

I don’t think you can have a truly organic experience. Going incognito in and of itself is not organic because it is a forced thing.

You can tell people up front your character is not a stepping stone or a plot lever. If you’re logged on, you’re on to chill (same as everyone else) and not there to entertain or Oprah plot hooks.

It’s fairly easy to note people who will be up your ass just because you’re an ST. Pour ice water on them.

[Roadspike]

@Jumpscare I’ve run into similar situations. I started a) having my character be wrong more often, and b) making it clear in meta-commentary when my character was blatantly, obviously wrong (not all the time they were wrong, because then it would “confirm” when they were right, but often).

This was things like, “Grey scowls about, ‘You’re all going to get in so much trouble with the Guard for this.’ They aren’t.”

People started taking what my characters said so seriously when I did this… I do it now even when I’m not staffing, and I find it amusing to do.

[Juniper]

Playing their own game makes a good gamerunner better and a bad gamerunner so much worse.

[somasatori]

Should one play any games at all?

[MisterBoring]

@somasatori Only games that will never make it as a MU. Like Unknown Armies and pretty much any PBTA game.