Playing the monster and popularity

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 3:59 am

So, White Wolf games were crazy popular, to the point where the shitty game design was easily overlooked

But that's really the only game I can think of where players play the monster doing monster things that was actually popular.

Hecatomb was about playing Big Bad Evil Guys controlling murderous cultists and evil monsters to destroy worlds to further your evil agenda of being powerful. It was Magic skewed a bit older if all the colours were mixed with black, basically.

Horrorclix was HeroClix except with monsters and the goal was to defeat the opposing player's monster army and kill the bystanders. It had a lot of shout outs to classic slasher and monster movie stuff.

Both of these games flopped, at least to the point where I usually have to tell people what they were and they were produced for only about a year.

WotC, after cancelling production of Hecatomb then tried a minis game called Dreamblade, which was about people battling in a dreamscape with weird psycho dream monsters.

On the other hand, games where you play people evading monsters seem pretty popular, or at least to have a lot of traction. Arkham Horror, for instance.

So, does anyone have any clue as to what the dichotomy is here? Pokemon is about managing a team of monsters and fighting other teams. Digimon is about having a monster partner that fights other monsters. Magic and Yu Gi Oh are all about summoning monsters and warriors and bashing in another player's head with them. Clearly the use of monsters is not really the problem.

tl;dr- why are Horror Movie sims popular, but actually playing the monsters not?

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:24 am

World of Darkness wasn't popular, Vampire was popular. And VtM's popularity had nothing to do with "playing a monster" (indeed, barring a couple of clans they don't look like monsters) and had everything to do with goth chicks.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:45 am

Really that just adds to the point. Apparently playing the monster is so unpopular that even Vampire was only popular because goth chicks are hot and sexually available (usually).

Whipstitch · Post by **Whipstitch** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:45 am

Also, vampires are super easy to relate to compared to being a Narnian talking badger or displacer beast. Your basic VTM character spent their formative years as a normal human being and often has some pretty typical prejudices and motivations. The big thing that makes them different from most people is their lust for blood, and even vampires readily acknowledge how inconvenient their new addiction is.

Aryxbez · Post by **Aryxbez** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:58 am

If you're looking for popular games where people play monsters, League of Legends is one where people seem to be cool with it. Albeit lot of the popular characters tend to be midgets or humanoid shape in general, that's more due to competitive bit I think, opposed to monsters not being popular enough.

However, I will say when it comes to "World of Darkness/Supernatural" styled monster mash, I'm more interested in playing the hunters, than the creature itself.

Sakuya Izayoi · Post by **Sakuya Izayoi** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:59 am

Being a monster in fantasyland is cool when you can basically be a hero despite villainous breeding, like Drizzt, Thrall, Dante, etc. Or you're a former monster given free will and the capacity for good, like Dorfl the golem, or IF Prototype LQ-84i "Blade Wolf".

Occluded Sun · Post by **Occluded Sun** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 5:36 am

The thirst for blood has been associated with forbidden sexuality for... well, it's been quite a while, although I don't think there's any consensus on when it started.

The oWoD Vampires that weren't sexy - I'm thinking mostly the Malkavians - offered the attraction of being 'crazy'. Not in the sense of any actual form of insanity, or a disturbance of the most basic perceptions of what is real, but in being Fishmalks and acting like Monty Python dropping acid.

People like the games that let them associate themselves with a desirable state, or let off steam in ways that they can't normally do. If they wanted to be monsters, they'd play first-person-shooters... or The Sims.

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 7:18 am

Dungeon Keeper was pretty popular and the whole appeal of the game was that you got to play as Team Monster and kill the good guys who keep breaking into your dungeon.

There are a few things here. First of all, most people like to imagine themselves as the 'hero' in the story of their life - or at least, the protagonist. Even when people aren't really very good, as a species we're really good at justifying our behavior. I cut you off because I honestly didn't see you and I'm usually so careful. You cut me off because you're a terrible human being and ought to be crucified and you're lucky I'm not in charge.

In a 'team game', it doesn't usually work if everyone is on team monster - the fun of being the monster is usually that you get to 'kick down the sandcastle' that everyone else made. It can be cathartic, but it doesn't work when everyone gets to play. In a cooperative story game, it's harder to justify working together.

That said, if you do work together, you can play as team evil under the standard rules. If there are special rules for team evil, they usually seem stupid or offensive (or both). Take a look at Book of Vile Darkness for instance.

When you look at the whole thing, I think it comes down to satisfying narrative arc. Playing Succubus turned Paladin shows a type of character development that feels meaningful. Playing a puppy-kicking demon who is still a puppy-kicking demon doesn't offer that. On the other hand, playing a good character who descends into evil is pretty compelling, as is playing a good character who must overcome temptation to remain on the path of the righteous. If you want team evil be compelling, the best way to achieve that is to have them working on the same side as team good for their own reasons. Ie, if Great C'thulu is rising, the Cobra can work with GI Joe to save the world (even though they plan on conquering it for themselves when the greater threat is banished).

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 7:44 am

That wasn't the whole appeal of Dungeon Keeper

But the rest of your post, deaddmwalking, isn't exactly what I'm talking about.

Magic: The most poular trading card game in the world. WoW can only compete because Blizzard has found a way to put cocaine in a conceptual form.

Hecatomb: Cancelled after one year and eleven months.

Heroclix: The most endurring form of Wizkids' Clix System. Outlasted it's fantasy predecessor Mage Knight (well, as a single property), the licensed Mechwarrior, the licensed Crimson Skies, the more mainstream appealing SportsClix (ok, maybe no surprise there), and has more recognition and shelf space than pretty much any other Clix game. Renewed pretty much immediately when Neca bought WizKids in '09.

HorrorClix: Released in '06, cancelled when WizKids shut down in '08, purchased as part of the company by Neca in '09, with nothing done with it.

Hell, even going outside games, look at the two main "group of preteens have an adventure" movies of the 90s, Goonies was shit with lines written by people who think kids talked like the Beaver and that racism, making fun of the mentally challenged and weight bullying were harmless and charming, and Monster Squad was awesome with kids that sounded like kids, no mentally disabled characters used as a joke and a moment when the fat kid gets to make the bullies shit their pants, and yet Goonies is vastly more popular than Monster Squad for no adequately explained reason.

Occluded Sun · Post by **Occluded Sun** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:56 am

Monster Squad merely raises the question of why any of those young men couldn't have served as readers of the magic text, since they were also all virgins... or they'd better have been. Also there are Holocaust references which really harsh our mellow. And so many violent and tragic deaths. Well, at least one.

Goonies also involves pirate treasure, which people love.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:17 am

"Everyone knows" when a magic ritual refers to a virgin, it means a female virgin. And the holocaust reference was actually really poignant.

Occluded Sun · Post by **Occluded Sun** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 10:55 am

From TvTropes:

Mood Whiplash: A major problem with the film is that it doesn't really know if it wants to be a a tongue-in-cheek Monster Mash or a family friendly adventure film with little horror-flavor thrown in. This leads into awkward moments where the level of gore/body count doesn't really match with the general mood of the scene and funny moments are followed by serious ones with little to none time catch breath in between.
Scary German Guy's implied backstory is a serious case of this — many of the target audience didn't understand the significance of his tattoo, and had to ask their rather stunned parents.

Also, The Goonies has Cyndi Lauper.

I think there's something to the idea that video and computer games have the player being monsters more often than tabletop rpgs - possibly because the latter are more social than the two former. People enjoy acting out monstrousness, but not so much when other people can see them. How often have you been in an Evil D&D party? Or done awful things in Vampire? That's not really the mood of either game.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:10 am

Cyndi Lauper or no, mood whiplash or no, Goonies will always be the one where kids who talked like they came out of a 50s domestic sitcom laughed at the asian kid and the fat kid, and Monster Squad will always be the one that made a point about real monsters and gave the fat kid a Big Damned Heroes moment instead of a humiliating running joke.

silva · Post by **silva** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 12:50 pm

Protagonists as monsters/half-monsters is a pretty popular trope across all medias. From Frankenstein to Edward Scissor-Hands to Blade to Witcher to Vampire the Masquerade to Dusk Saga etc.

What is not popular is these same protagonists actually behaving like monsters in amoral or sociopathic ways, or in ways we expect true monsters to behave. In other words: When they are the protagonists, monsters turn to heroic / perfectly moral goody-goody monsters. THIS is bizarre in my opinion.

Occluded Sun · Post by **Occluded Sun** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 1:01 pm

Actual monsters are antagonists, always. If we're going to sympathize with someone, even if they're a 'monster', we need to find good things about them.

Evil, or what people perceive as evil, isn't likeable. People only really respect virtue of one kind or another.

silva · Post by **silva** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 1:15 pm

Actually there are instances where protagonists are evil/amoral/sociopaths, you just don't find them in literal "monster" fiction. Hotline Miami videogame series is a perfect example. As are some serial killer movies which follow the murder's POV.

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 1:47 pm

In D&D, we already play the bad guys. We break into folks homes and kill them, take their stuff, and use it to break into more folks homes, so we can take their stuff too.

We flavour our victims as monsters so that we don't have to feel bad about it. Propaganda 101: everything bad is their fault, we are only acting in response to that. Or, you know, really because they have stuff and we want it. See also; every war ever.

Playing the monsters is, by default, playing the victims of that. But most people can't get their head around that and, like Drizzt, just swap teams to become another victimiser. Usually set up as a turncoat to fight your own kind and show what a loyal gangster you now are. It's fun that way, and a hell of a lot less harmful than the real thing.

Basically, we know deep down that the monsters lose, no matter how scary they are some authority figure will dust them, and we want to be that authority figure. The fact that we're playing on the bad guys team just makes it more exiting along the way. Lawful Good, in your house, stealing your accumulated treasures, killing your families, you monsters!

maglag · Post by **maglag** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 1:51 pm

Something that is very popular is playing a human who controls monsters and uses them to do his bidding (cough Pokemon cough). Dragons are usually antagonists, feared and respected, but put an human riding on top and suddenly everybody trusts the dragons.

Something else pretty close is an human who can become a monster. Werewolves were also pretty popular in WoD if I'm not mistaken. Also stuff like the Hulk and manaketes from Fire Emblem. Vampires technically don't transform but they look close enough to humans that they don't need to.

So basically, people are cool with playing monsters as long as they still get an human body now and then to project their human intentions and needs.

Clearly we need a monster game where you play the monster but either get human shape for free or an human cohort for stuff like shopping and diplomacy.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 1:53 pm

In Shadowrun, you play professional Terrorists . .
You may try to hide it behind a mask of Hooding, ra ra fight the powah and all that crap . . but in the end, you lie, you cheat, you steal, you kill, you maim, you torture, you burn and blow up stuff that's the livelyhood of probably several hundred people at once.
Just so you can do that even better and more than before.
In the end, you are in a more immediate sense more of a monster than the people you fight.

silva · Post by **silva** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 2:12 pm

Tussock and Stahl,

While those facts are true, I would like to see more games picturing the protagonists as unashamed amoral sociopaths like Hotline Miami do, instead of picturing them with a coat of heroism or romanticism etc like D&D, Shadowrun and Vampire do.

I find non-mainstream roleplaying games like Unknown Armies, Dogs in the Vineyard or even Apocalypse World more bold in this sense then its more popular cousins. But even those attempts seem timid compared to what Hotline Miami does.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 2:20 pm

You just need to find the correct people to play with . .
It's not so much a problem of the setting/game as it is of the people PLAYING these characters.
If you find somebody who wants to be like that, you need to have a complete group of people who want to be like that, otherwise it just won't work.
And then you take a step back, look at the group and realize you are in with a lot of fucking sociopaths and psychopaths.
Look at the Fallout series. YOU CAN BE that Asshole who kills children and their dogs, steals from everybody and their mom and sells them as slaves afterwards . .
The GAME GIVES YOU THAT POSSIBILITY!
But do YOU want to actually play like that?

And if the game FORCES that kind of behaviour on you, you probably won't want to play it for long i'd guess.

Darth Rabbitt · Post by **Darth Rabbitt** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 2:56 pm

Stahlseele wrote:Look at the Fallout series. YOU CAN BE that Asshole who kills children and their dogs, steals from everybody and their mom and sells them as slaves afterwards . .
The GAME GIVES YOU THAT POSSIBILITY!
But do YOU want to actually play like that?

Hell yeah I do, video game children are usually annoying as fuck. Fallout 3's biggest problem was that you couldn't kill those shitbags at Little Lamplight. Especially that asshole mayor who killing would actually make things better.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 3:11 pm

In Fallout and F² you could kill everybody. Literally. You could depopulate the whole continent if you so desired.
In F³, Important Quest NPCs were, as far as i remember, immortal.
If you played it on PC, as you are supposed to, and not on consoles, you could download a mod that allowed them to be killed again.

But still, even given that possibility, 99% of all players will simply not do it.
They will still want to be the hero, not just another asshole that, if the roles were reversed, they would be killing for loot/money/XP.

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 3:35 pm

I think everyone enjoys playing the villain sometimes.

The problem with a lot of games is that you adopt that role consistently, and it doesn't stay fun long. In any 'story' or game you're going to be overcoming obstacles. If we have anything more than colored dots, being the villain means doing terrible things. Since most people aren't terrible, consistently doing terrible things isn't much fun - at least long term.

Being 'good' usually makes it easy to cooperate. You save the princess. She's rescued.

Bad guys have to work harder. If you're working together to kidnap the princess, you have to agree whether to sacrifice her to your evil god or allow your friend to use her as bait to lure the dragon from its lair so he can dominate it.

The thing about being the villain is that you usually get to be more proactive. Tussuck is right - the good guys normally are fine with the 'status quo' - they only deal with people that do things that are agreed on as 'wrong'. If nobody kidnaps a princess, good guys don't have to do any rescuing.

souran · Post by **souran** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 4:12 pm

tussock wrote:In D&D, we already play the bad guys. We break into folks homes and kill them, take their stuff, and use it to break into more folks homes, so we can take their stuff too.

The "You play the bad guys" in D&D is pretty clearly fallacious. It sounds snazzy and you could build a world or a game where it is true, but by the default definitions of the game it is decidedly untrue. Sort of like how the "Team Evil is more inclusive" is also totally full of shit because there are actually a fuck ton of "good" races, good heroes are just as (or more) willing to accept "good" members of "evil" races, and good races that disagree do not enslave each other (which D&D and pathfinder explicity say evil races do to each other all the time including ones that are nominally one very broad species like goblinoids). For the record slavery =/= inclusivity.

Stahlseele wrote:In Shadowrun, you play professional Terrorists . .

However, "PCs = Terrorists" thing is harder to get away from in shadowrun, simply because the world of shadowrun has much closer to the level of laws closer to what the players are used to AND most of the types of "runs" that their characters go on have some loose real world analogs AND we consider all of those things to be criminal and MOST of those things now fall under the sort of "anti-terrorism" statutes that can get you blown up by a flying death robot.

Its actually amazing to me that shadowrun has managed to have any kind of renassiance after 2001 because its content should make it more toxic than a D&D book about summoning demons in 1985. Sort of like how "The Matrix" could not have been made after 2001, there is no way anybody would let you make a NEW game about shadowrun between 2001-2010 at least.