(This post is part of a series on GMing for
children, drawing on the experience/lessons I’ve gained through 7+ years
working professionally at a business that runs RPGs for children and young
people. For the introductory post that talks about my background and my aims
with this series, look here).
So last time we talked about how to help
kids to grasp and get a fix on the economy of abstract resources (HP, spell
slots, actions per turn, what have you) that are highly prominent in most
roleplaying games.
Today, I want to talk about how to help
them make meaningful choices, and how that intersects with agency.
Let’s start by laying out some things that
I’m going to assume are true: players making choices is a key part of
roleplaying games; choices should have consequences that follow on, and not
just the illusion of choice, and choices made with no clues to what those
consequences might be aren’t actually meaningful.
The wording of the last is important: “what
those consequences might be”.
As my friend Ash said recently while
playing Darkest Dungeon: even if the clues are arbitrary and don’t really
correspond to the consequences, that still feels better than being asked to
choose entirely at randomly.
But I digress: how does all this relate to
children?
To reiterate the core theme of last time,
children are natural roleplayers and can be wonderful to GM for but it is
important to recognise they are children. Their capacities and skills differ
from adults, often in ways that make playing an RPG (which assumes certain
baselines of ability) more complex.
Children have issues with making choices,
often for exactly the same reason they have trouble with resource management.
Abstract thought isn’t real yet to them, and
weighing the cost/benefit of two choices is tricky because everything involved
is abstract and intangible. None of the things that distinguish the two choices
are physical or graspable: the differences cannot be seen, or felt, or
interacted with.
Comparing two similar options and choosing
between them, particularly when mathematical probability/optimisation gets involved,
is a huge struggle for children.
Speaking from experience, they hate wasted time. That thing in games
like Torchbearer and Burning Wheel where certain choices in a Conflict just
mean your action is neutralised?
Kids will fucking riot.
And just in general, present them with too
many and too complex choices and they get disengaged, they get bored, they get
frustrated. Often, they pick at random and then feel betrayed by the outcome
(because they didn’t really grasp the associated consequences, even if you
explicitly identified them).
Now, what can we do about this? There are a
number of strategies, depending on what you like best.
I’m going to stay focused, and talk about
just two: streamlining choice, and incomparables.
So, streamlining.
Anyone who has ever played Dungeons &
Dragons, how many options do you have in any given round? Between the various
questions of what you’re doing, how you’re doing it, the order of your actions,
the question of positioning, the length of a spell-list, the length of the
skill list, and so on, there is a near-infinite combination of things to choose
between.
Now, some of these choices are clearly
sub-optimal (though maybe not-so-clearly to a seven year old) but that still
leaves a large array of options that have to be compared to find the best
choice.
This is too much choice and too much demand
for abstract reasoning for a seven year old.
Way too much.
And especially when the added burden of
learning how to roleplay in a structured manner and learning the game rules is
already in place.
Build to slightly more complexity by all
means, but keep it simple to start with.
Two options, maybe three. Give them a
couple of tools with which to solve their problems – a combat option, a tricky
or sneaky option, a diplomatic option – and then let them learn to use them. Streamline
their options and make them distinct and non-overlapping, so that they have
only a few valid choices to navigate.
Give them a few meaningful choices rather than
subjecting them to death by a tiny thousand decisions.
The other strategy comes down to this idea
of meaningful alternatives, and it’s about the power of (mathematical) incomparables.
Don’t ask a child to compare 2d6 damage and
1d12 damage, don’t ask them to compare risk-reward rations, don’t ask them to
compare a lower chance to hit with more damage and a higher chance to hit with
less.
Give them choices that can’t be compared
based on mathematical advantage or probability.
Give them distinct choices between
genuinely alternate possibilities that don’t need to be compared in those
terms. Make the choice between them a narrative choice, a character choice,
rather than a question of optimal tactics and play.
Do they help the stranger or run away? Do
they focus on offence or focus on defence? Do they kill the bandits with fire
spells or make them all fall asleep?
And to return to the point from before: let
them know what the likely consequences are.
Let them choose between the two distinct
options with a sense of what will happen if they do. Let them choose,
meaningfully. Not between two mathematical equations but between two likely outcomes,
so they can decide which one is more desirable to them.
And of course, there’s an important coda to
all this: make sure to leave space for them to come up with alternative choices
of their own.
That’s one of the most key elements of
making sure that players have agency: give them some authorship powers of their
own. But that’s starting to touch on questions of pre-planning vs.
improvisation and the dreaded GM railroad, and that’s a subject for another
blog.
So, there it is:
Kids don’t like option paralysis, they don’t
like wasted time / trap choices, and they don’t do well with choice that
involves probability and maths-based tactical analysis.
Instead, pare down the options you offer,
and give distinct choices, and prepare to be surprised.