Friday, April 16, 2010

On Gaming Systems

So I have a particular obsession with gaming systems. I don’t really mean videogames, though I enjoy those as much as anybody. I mean the mechanics behind the games, the things that make the game fun and interesting. I don’t know where I picked it up, but that interest has been with me as far back as I can remember. I was always the weird kid who would read through the instruction manuals for books, study the bestiaries for RPGs, that kind of thing.

Eventually, I found a friend who introduced me to Dungeons and Dragons. I played it for about fifteen minutes and decided I didn’t like how it worked. After that I started a habit of making up my own games. Another friend and I started out making simple pen and paper games, and eventually worked our way up to making our own role playing games. It was something that lasted part of the way through high school, and provided me with a lot of material for my earlier stories.

Nowadays, I still tend to get…distracted… whenever I find a system that interests me. I study it until I understand it, more or less, and then move on. It’s strange sometimes that I know so much about these games without ever having played them. I have the perfect Tau army and fleet planned out for Warhammer 40k, and I’ve never considered buying a model. I’ve planned out the character progress and ships I would use in Eve Online, and yet the closest I came to an MMORPG was a free to play thing that I gave up on. It’s that kind of a thing.

Does anyone else do this, or am I just weird. I guess one explanation is as good as another, but for some reason it is a habit I can’t seem to shake. Perhaps it is linked in with my own worldbuilding mindset, or at least the urge I have to find settings that I could use to tell stories. Oh well. I guess it is one more oddity that is part of my already strange life. :)

6 comments:

  1. Sounds like an INTP :) They love systems and analyzing them...but move on once they get it and never bother to use them. And they like to work alone, not needing to lead or follow.

    Definitely sounds like you. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. ha ha ha. We went and read what INTP was after you posted and it was totally accurate! It was hilarious! So which personality type are you?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Lol. That's hilarious that I guessed right. As for me, I'd say I'm an INFP. What are you Gamila? I'd guess either ISTJ or ISFJ...

    ReplyDelete
  4. I went through and read most of the personality traits on Wikipedia. I was thinking that I was a INFP also. That was the one that seemed to most like me, what with my perfectionism and my need to please my parents when I was a child. My dad yelled at me once when I got an F and I felt so bad that he was disappointed in me that I never got an F again. That was a major motivation in why I got good grades--to please my parents and maintain peace in myself.

    Though ISFJ was really close and could be me, I suppose. But the ISTJ sounded way too robotic and flat to be me, though I can see why you chose it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ha ha. Sounds like I was totally off. Sorry :)

    Wiki isn't the best thing to read for the traits though. I like "http://www.personalitypage.com/portraits.html"

    You can take a test to see which one you are. I like "http://kisa.ca/personality/" but there are several versions you can take and see if they all say the same thing. So far, I've always been an INFP ^_^

    ReplyDelete
  6. So I took the personality test three times. Each time I come up as INTP! What? Here are the stats.

    Ta-dah, your personality type is INTP!

    Introverted (I) 89% Extraverted (E) 11%
    Intuitive (N) 55% Sensing (S) 45%
    Thinking (T) 50% Feeling (F) 50%
    Perceiving (P) 68% Judging (J) 32%

    look I'm 50/50 on T, F, N, and S. This is what happens on all personality tests I take. I have an equal portion of all the different aspects. Looks like I'm pretty solidly a P and a E though.

    Meh! I'm still doubtful about the results though....some of those questions were badly written. Like the exception to the rule one was totally unclear.

    ReplyDelete