The Magic Tree House Spectrum of OSR Player Behavior
Image taken from the Magic Tree House anime. Can you believe they didn't bring this thing over to the US? Missed opportunity.
Introduction
A lot of ink has been spilled on character alignments. When I first started playing D&D during 3rd edition, it seemed like a weighty choice: Chaotic Good or Lawful Neutral? Lawful Good or Chaotic Evil? In truth, what I wanted was an alignment that wouldn't constrain me too much and nothing seemed to perfectly fit. When I started getting into the OSR scene, I found it interesting how alignment was more of an allegiance than anything, and less choices (Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic) seemed more compelling.
I don't have much use for alignment nowadays. I suppose I wasn't exposed to Moorcock early enough. I find the world more interesting when PCs and NPCs aren't boxed in by cosmic allegiances, and ultimately I think players mostly do what they want to do and justify it after the fact.
However, as much as I'm not interested in character alignment, I am interested in player behavior. Types of players, you might say. Slightly less ink has been spilled on that, but I find this a more interesting avenue to explore. Probably the most well-known set of player types come from Robin's Laws of Good Gamemastering, but I don't find them particularly useful when classifying OSR players. Plus there are so many. I want a simple way to describe the tendencies of OSR players, because I think the balance of player in your dungeoncrawling game is going to largely impact how successful you expedition is and how much fun everyone has at the table.
So here is a dead simple way of classifying players that comes from a children's early chapter book.
Context
A while back my daughter became obsessed with the Magic Tree House series by Mary Pope Osbourne. It became a nightly ritual to read a few chapters before bed. Around this same time, by complete coincidence, I started playing in an Open Table game run by Gus L. of All Dead Generations fame. This was really my first time as a player in a full OSR-style game, really, as I have spent most of my time in the hobby as a GM.
What I discovered is that a book series aimed at small children has a lot to teach us about how players approach adventure.
I will explain the premise for those of you who never read these and are unlikely to do so given you are presumably not a small child: One day, two siblings named Jack and Annie find a tree house in the woods behind their house that wasn't there before. Inside, they find a small library of books that have a most peculiar property: if you point to a book and say "I want to go there", you are transported to the time and place the book is about.
Jack and Annie are small children with very few resources compared to your average adventurer, and yet they go on amazing adventures where they uncover hidden mysteries, claim ancient treasures, save people, the works.
It sounds more exciting than it is, honestly. The books are very much a product of their time. Not only are they very repetitive and thus predictable, but it could be argued that they put forth a very gendered perspective with their two characters: Annie being the impulsive girl full of emotions and Jack being the studious, logical boy. This gendered division of tendencies isn't borne out by reality, of course. For instance, my daughter tends to act more like Jack while my son is more like Annie.
Leaving aside the problems with the series, what I find interesting is how Jack and Annie approach adventure very differently and generally balance each other out enough to be successful.
Player Tendency : Calculating
Anime Jack, sadly lacking in the blue hair department. Image taken from the anime.
Jack is the older brother of Annie. He pays attention in school, is very studious, and generally both practices and preaches caution.
Jack has a lot going for him as an adventurer. He is very knowledgeable about things, and he expands his knowledge by taking diligent notes. He even takes the time to write things down in the middle of an adventure! He's also likely to spot problems with a plan or recognize potential dangers.
Jack is also cautious to a fault. He doesn't want to act unless he is sure of the outcome, is untrusting of people and creatures that he meets and unlikely to view them as anything but a threat, and will often let opportunities pass him by if left to his own devices.
Player Tendency: Daring
Annie is cooler than any Ranger or Druid PC you have ever had. Image taken from the anime.
Annie is the younger sister of Jack. She is bold, fearless even, and during adventures she wants to get out and get things done and make friends along the way.
Like Jack, she has a lot that she brings to the table as an adventurer. She is quick to take action, and more likely than Jack to try and solve a problem without perfect information. She is friendly and empathetic, often making allies with the people or animals she meets on her journeys.
However, Annie isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination. She is sometimes too quick to act, unwilling to analyze a situation or listen to reasonable caution. She sometimes gets herself in over her head, or complicates an already bad situation due to curiosity. Also, as much as her tendency to make friends often pays off, sometimes she encounters people or creatures that are deaf to overtures of peace and friendship.
The Quest for Balance
The key thing here is that neither Jack and Annie would be successful adventurers by themselves. Each brings unique strengths to the table and their negative characteristics are balanced out by the other person. Jack often provides key knowledge that Annie lacks or pulls her out of hairy situations she gets herself into, while Annie cultivates allies where Jack only sees threats and seizes opportunities that Jack would let pass by.
What Does This Have to Do With Dungeons?
Image taken from the D&D Cartoon. Also pretty cool.
At the risk of generalizing here, when people dungeon-delve in an OSR game I have observed that certain tendencies manifest themselves. The Dungeon is a place of adventure! A constant risk/reward analysis is happening as people are forced to balance dwindling resources against the promise of treasure and discovery.
Some players are Calculating. They gather meticulous information, writing everything down that occurs and referencing it during and between sessions. They carefully observe their surroundings, checking for traps and listening at doors as often as possible. They also want certainty when they commit to an action, and will sometimes be unwilling to commit to a course of action if they don't have it. They would rather kill a dangerous person or thing rather than negotiate with it, because leaving it alive is too risky. They will often abandon treasure rather than risking death in its recovery. They tend to stay alive longer, but often miss out on amazing treasure and excitement.
Some players are Daring. They want to get out and explore the dungeon. They will interact with the weird object, drink the strange liquid, take the chance on talking to or trying to reason with the monster. They also tend to trigger traps, fail to listen at doors, and be betrayed by untrustworthy foes. They can doom an entire party by refusing to cut losses and run, or because they just had to push the proverbial button to see what would happen.
Just like Jack and Annie in the book series, dungeon-delves need both types of players to be successful. Different tendencies will be the correct decision depending on the circumstances a party finds themselves in. The problem is that, unlike Jack and Annie, the party can't always be assured of having balance.
Tendencies & Takeaways
My natural tendency as a player is to be Calculating. I like learning secrets and solving mysteries and so I tend to take notes (and write play reports), exercise caution when dealing with the unknown, and I will ruthlessly destroy enemies if given the opportunity because there are fewer variables when they are dead. The problem is that if I always give into my Calculating impulses during the session, and there are no Daring players to counterbalance me and others like me, the session can result in fewer rewards and less fun. Opportunities are not seized, doors are not opened, objects are not interacted with, and parties turn back after a few setbacks with little to show for it.
On the other hand, a party that is dominated by Daring players can make for an exciting but incredibly dangerous session. One where traps are triggered unnecessarily, enemies are antagonized for the lolz, and characters and treasures are lost due to impulsive decision-making. It's certainly amusing when it works out, though less so when there is an unnecessary TPK.
While I know my natural tendency is to be Calculating, I have found that the more I am on the player side of things the more I adapt my approach depending on the party makeup. If there is a vocal contingent of Calculating players who I think are giving into the worst impulses of that player tendency, I will often deliberately shift my way of thinking and begin advocating for a more Daring approach. On the other hand, if I feel like the party is embracing too many of the negative characteristics of Daring players, I will try to be the voice of Calculating in the mix.
I don't always get it right, and it's certainly not something I can do alone, but I have found that ever since I adopted this way of thinking I feel better about my decisions as a player by the end of the session. No plan will ever go off without a hitch, and even with "perfect" decision-making the dice will inevitably inject a dose of chaos into the expedition that is out of your control, but by embracing both tendencies at appropriate times a party can have both a fun and successful session.
I'm sure some will argue that this is too simplistic a framework. That they take notes like Calculating players but are risk-taking like a Daring player! I am not interested in setting up the Magic Tree House Axes of OSR Player Behavior, though. Instead, I will say that everyone falls somewhere on the spectrum, with Calculating on one end and Daring on the other.
So is your tendency to be Calculating or Daring? How about the rest of the players you play with? Do you think you have a good mix of both tendencies, or is there a different approach that could result in a more rewarding experience?