As a Gamer I Am Mostly...
...boring. I'm 40 years of age, but this isn't something that has happened recently due to my descent into decrepitude. I've been playing games my whole life. A good portion of that was spent playing video games, starting as early as the now legendary Atari 2600. I looked for games that had depth and allowed me to choose my own fate. In any situation I could choose how I played, from Dungeons and Dragons role playing to Mass Effect, I was inexorably drawn towards playing characters in a very narrow way. Blame it on a million different factors, but if I could be Lawful Good (or some derivation thereof), I would be a shining example for the eons.
So as a video gamer if we were to apply Magic's color wheel to my gameplay philosophy, you would think I would be described as a player who preferred white. Very white. Historically, I was drawn towards games that allowed me to make decisions that were altruistic. I wanted to impose order. I felt a strong pull towards helping other players. I never enjoyed playing as a Cleric, but playing as a Paladin or a helpful thief with a conscious was always possible. I was the guy that could tell you how every game with more than one path to completion ended - so long as it was the only path that was possible if I made morally 'good' choices. Even playing Grand Theft Auto, I was the good guy. Don't think for a moment that I didn't try to occasionally shrug off my mantle of righteousness to get to the alternate ending of a role-playing game. I would start off with the evilest of intentions. It would all be for naught. I'd get two or three days into a game and suddenly find myself rescuing the maiden or solving the villagers' problems, instead of creating the ruin I set out to do. Mayhem was not my middle name. Actually, it was probably more like Fred. 'Fred the Paladin' has a ring to it, doesn't it?
But where does that need to be the high and mighty gamer come from?
In Real Life, I'm...
...the same, boring personality. I follow the rules. Actually, that's not completely true as I do have a problem with posted speed limits. I prefer to think of them as guidelines. I'm not here though to defend my medical condition of Plumbum Pedis.
Where were we? Ah yes, my penchant for following rules. At work, I deal constantly with people that want me to bend rules, just this 'one' time. But that, my friends, is the path to chaos. Break the rules once? Not on my watch. Co-workers think it's cute (actually, they think I'm downright annoying at times), but I'm over what people think. My kids think I only look at life in terms of black and white. People who really know me realize that I have a small streak of bad in me. Something that lets me have fun - but ONLY when it's the right time and the right place.
I won't go too much into my personal life. It would put most readers to sleep. What is important from this trip down the rabbit hole of Magic Dad's psyche is that we realize that in my personal life, I'd align more than VERY WHITE with the Magic Color Pie. I'm actually 100% white - to the point that lands other than plains would never touch my hands. Artifacts would be banished from my sight. In fact, I don't know if I would suffer players of other colors sitting at the same table, nay, in the same room as me.
But, in Magic the Gathering...
...I identify with another color. To find the way to who I am, I have to talk a little bit first about what I'm not.
How have I bucked 40 years of gameplay tradition you ask? The answer may be less about being able to derail years of environmental and genetic inputs, and more about really understanding the classification of colors in Magic. Let's first look at the color pie and what it lets us do. I'm going to borrow heavily from the guru of Color Pie wisdom, Mark Rosewater (any mistakes are mine) as I talk about the colors of Magic.
White - Let's deal with the elephant in the room. I don't align strongly with White. White does stand for altruism (check). It stands for following the rules and getting others to follow the rules for the good of the collective (check). It seeks to share resources (check). It does seem to do many of the things that I enjoy from other games. So why isn't it right for me? Most every player identifies more with one color than any other. Even if they don't claim to, certainly they favor a color over others.
White does have a certain affinity for me. I enjoy playing it as a second color. My only Commander deck is Boros (Red/White). That's more from lack of resources though than for any other reason. It's the closest I could get to a red deck with what cards are at my disposal. White is also rarely my first pick as a color in limited, even when presented with a bomb. There is another color in Magic that identify with in a much stronger, more visceral manner.
Black - I'm sure you realize that as black is the polar opposite of white, it's rarely a color I want to be playing. Certainly, black has an allure that I find tantalizing. Creatures and spells that look to create some chaos on the board in the form of Deathtouch and tricks with the graveyard can be fun to play. I'm not altogether comfortable playing Black though. It's more than the association with Zombies, graveyards and Demons that makes me uncomfortable.
Black is chaotic. I've never piloted it without having some personally unexpected results. My favorite being when I forget for the millionth time that Deathtouch doesn't beat First Strike. Ah, Deathtouch. I don't think there is any creature ability that fills players with such trepidation. Do I attack? When do I attack? Do I hold? What is the most likely result from going on the offensive? A single creature with Deathtouch on the board forces both players to evaluate, then re-evaluate every attack. It can be very painful when it's misplayed. Chaos indeed.
Blue - I think I'm least comfortable with Blue. I appreciate much of what it stands for - thoughtful planning and measured outcomes. I enjoy playing a mid to large size blue flyer as much as the next guy. Yet when it's time to plan out 3 steps in advance (including opponent responses) to optimize my uses of Cancel and Negate, I often just phase out. I find it difficult to remain interested in the planning process required to pilot blue decks.
I want to be more Blue. I know this is the color that pros and power players drift towards (so long as the format supports it), but my comfort with being in control to the point that I can pilot my deck while denying the right components of my opponent's deck isn't there yet. Perhaps in time, I'll figure out how to make Blue work for me.
Green - I love green. Perhaps it is a result of my formative years watching Sesame Street and becoming entranced with Oscar. It could also be that I associate it with my love for nature. Or perhaps, I just like making things big and smashing face. Green is almost exclusively about growth. Tokens, counters and buffs that make opponents stare holes into their hand looking for answers is what Green reminds me of when I play it. And let us not forget the fat creatures that get bigger and bigger with the right support.
If I had to choose between White and Green, I'd pick Green (it is close though and largely depends on the format). I appreciate the ability to simply wade in and do damage. It also seems rather neutral to me in terms of alignment, a little bit of, "I don't care what you think," is happening with Green players. In the end though, it isn't my preferred color. That honor goes to the last color I want to talk about.
Red - Red runs contrary to almost everything I told you about myself as a gamer. So why Red?
Let's go back a moment and look at something important I said earlier. I told you that I couldn't stand being the cleric, but I loved being the Paladin. The logic behind that statement is that I simple enjoy doing damage. I don't need it to be clever (like Blue), nor do I want it to be sacrificial (like Black). I want to be strong enough for it to hurt (unlike White). And I want to do it fast (unlike some of Green). Give me a 2/2 with haste, and I'm happy. Better yet, give me a 4/2 with haste and I'm in heaven. Red is about being aggressive and punishing the player across from you. The question shouldn't be why do I enjoy playing Red. Rather, it should be why doesn't everyone?
Red is emotional for many who play it. For me though, it has become less about my emotion than it is about my opponents. From what I can gather, many players really don't like running up against a mono-red deck. They almost tilt from the first play, giving me an advantage. Mono-red is not always the strongest deck in a format - but it doesn't have to be when you take into account how others react to it being played.
This is only a part of the story. I'm sure, having read this far, that you're still wondering how I came to align as a red player. There is one critical part of my gaming pedigree that I kept from you.
Hit'm Hard
When I play computer games, notably single player games, I do play as a white knight. But when I play social games, whether they are computer, card, or board games, I have a slightly different personality. I have no problem selling out my neighbor. I don't care if I rob Peter to pay Paul, so long as it messes up Mark's next turn.
Here is one little story to help you understand best why I'm red. Four years ago, I was taking a comprehensive training course. One night of the course, the fifty of us enrolled engaged in a game set up by the instructors. The game was unlike anything we had ever played. The premise of the game was simple. Teams of five to six players are formed and you worked with your team to make a simple decision each turn over a course of 10 turns. If one team selects X and the others select Y, then the team that picked X receives all of the points and the teams that pick Y receives negative points. If two teams pick X then they split the points and the Y teams get negative points. But, if all teams picked Y, then they would equally split a small amount of positive points. On the chance that all the teams in a pod selected X, then they would all receive negative points. The stakes increase as the game progresses and the rules change to encourage greater collusion between teams. Teams that realize early one that working together has a consistent, flat pay out do alright. Teams that figure out screwing over everyone around them is the only way to really come out ahead CAN do better - but at a cost.
Turns 1-3, the teams in my pod worked independently of each other. We were in a pod with three other teams, and our decisions were weighed against the other teams. We always made the choice to maximize personal value by choosing X, but this penalized other teams in my pod who were slow to catch on to the concept. By the third turn, the other teams on my side of the room had figured out how the game worked and had started to encroach on our strategy, negating further advancement in points. Then the rules changed.
We were to send one representative from each pod to discuss the next decision. Point values would be doubled. For the next three turns, all of the teams in my pod agreed to work together. Slowly, each team in my pod advanced on the scoreboard.
Then the rules changed again. At the start of turn seven, point values would be 5 times what they were before. Now remember that if we worked together, we would all advance. But if one team betrayed the others, they would reap tremendous points if they could pick the right time to do it.
For turn seven, our team worked with the others in our pod. But while our rep was sent to the conference before turn eight, I turned to my other teammates and looked at them and said, "We're going to win this. Are you ready?" I still don't think even my own teammates at that point really understood the game. But I could see it. In fact, I saw it back at the start of round four. I realized then that we'd be allowed to meet together for the rest of the game and the game would increase in bonus multipliers at least one more time.
By turn nine, everyone would be salivating at the chance for big points. Teams would betray one another. I figured it was highly likely that half the teams in my pod would turn on the other half. By acting in turn eight, my team would have the advantage.
The call went out, and we made our decision known. We gained a ridiculous amount of points, while the other teams in our pod went down in flames.
We were yelled at. A lot. One of the other teams were practically screaming at us. To this day, there are one or two people on the opposing teams that won't talk to me (truth is, they also left the organization immediately following that weekend - but they weren't exactly mentally stable to begin with). I tilted half a room of grown adults. In a room with half the adults yelling, most of them at me, I sat there and smiled.
We played by the rules. No rule said we had to abide by the agreement of the other teams. In fact, it works better if you don't. It's not unlike Magic. There is known information in the game, but there is also hidden information, that may only be known to one player. If that one player can use the information fairly and to his or her advantage, should they not act upon it?
FULL DISCLOSURE - The ultimate purpose of the game in the setting when we played it was to do one of two things. It was either to provide that perfect moment where everyone gets upset, realizes how silly they all are and then provides a point to reset their teams and move forward as one OR it was to provide a total team building experience. I took the low road - but I was tired at that point and was analyzing the game for the sake of figuring out how to break it. I'm told this is one measure of how staff are selected for future courses (and yes, I was invited back to be on staff after 'breaking' the game). I also have anecdotal evidence of this game ending in fist fights. It's amazing how seriously people take things sometimes. Also, as a rule adults are more altruistic as a group than youth are when this game is played. Most youth get to a point very early on where they don't care about working together, they'll all go down with the ship to try to get one chance to make a big gain in points.
Conclusion
And that, my friends, is why I'm red. I like to win, and to do so in a way that sows a small amount of discord at the same time. If you tilt, it's not my fault. You need to realize that tilting is purely a personal issue, and controlling your reaction to a game is something only you can have power over. It doesn't help when you feel betrayed. That is an emotion. In the equation of the game, emotion is your enemy.
Magic is a social game. Too many of us forget what that really means though. It doesn't exclusively refer to the fact that we play it with other people and have a chance for conversation. The full definition of Magic as a social game means that emotions, body language, and a certain amount of sleight of hand (figuratively, not literally) are important components to playing the game. Those that understand this best are the players that will go the furthest. Those that think it only means we come together to talk about the coolest cards in the new set will be stuck in the middle of the pack. I know where I would rather be...do you?
____________________________________
Reblogs & Retweets & Mentions of all kinds are appreciated - as an independent writer I'm only read when others like what they see and share with their friends. Even better for this story, leave me some feedback about why you identify with a particular color. I'd love to hear about your opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment