#dnd tip for player management: the DMG identifies 7 player types: actor, explorer, instigator, fighter, optimizer, problem solver, and storyteller. Most players are a mixture of these, and we could use other monikers. Every way, there are ways to appeal to each of these types.
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019
As I discuss these player types, I'm not looking to judge them or call one better than another. I am looking at ways to identify these types and run fun games for them, regardless of who you are or what your DM style is.
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019
One of the best help to interact with this tyeps are the two 4e DMGs that deepen in every profile, how to manage and resolve negative behaviours. ⭐️
— Zoltar SageAdvice (@SageAdviceDnD) April 18, 2019
Categories are useful for educational purposes. Of course each player is different, but since I cannot talk individually about all the millions of people who play, this is a good place to start from, not necessarily to end at.
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019
But is it useful for individual DMs? It would make a good sociology study but it doesn’t help me figure out what each of my players is looking for.
Far be it from me to argue with Robin Laws, of course, but I know in my own use, I’ve found categorizing players not very useful. As I run convention games and try to bring the best experience for people I have never met, I certainly rely on this information all the time. Not always perfect, but it generally helps. Which is what I am going to talk about for the rest of the month.
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019
I want to be the problem solver but I’m probably the instigator. ⚔️ I am totally an instigator, although I try to dial it back when I am playing with DMs and players who aren't familiar with me. If I see that the table needs a little kick to get everyone more involved, I turn up the dial a little. 🙂
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019
None of my players have ever fallen perfectly into one category. They’re all blends which means its more useful for me to just talk to them and figure out what they like individually. Yep. If you have the time and luxury to spend time talking with players that's great. If you don't, relying on previous experience is certainly better than just saying, "Well, since I have not had the time to give each player a psych eval, I won't even try."
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019
I would suggest that if possible, seek to play with players of similar types and it will usually mesh better. I’m not suggesting exclusivity, any make up can work, just that like-minded types usually make for better flow. Sometimes, for sure. And sometimes having different types can add a depth to a game that everyone can enjoy in a different way. There are methods to blend a game to speak to different – or even opposite – player types at the same table.
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019
To use a marketing term, it is kinda like creating personas. Nobody is going to be exactly like that, but it gives a guide how to best serve them. When you are dealing with the numbers of players at a con, having those 'personas' in mind is invaluable as a GM.
— Justin 🇺🇸🏳️🌈🌊 (@ToHitAC0) April 4, 2019
Wow, I've been out of marketing for a whole year, and I already drove that term from my mind. But it is a great example. https://t.co/PhCxPbCF42
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019
The longer I am in marketing the more deeper i see it tied to being a DM. I don’t know if that is a good thing. I see it now that you mention it. I've seen it in terms of education. Students have different learning styles, including strengths, weaknesses, and challenges. You try to present material in different ways to allow information absorption and skill-building in different ways.
— Shawn Merwin (or a poor clone) (@shawnmerwin) April 4, 2019