Motivational Exchange in Player Characters

I've been reading Games: Agency as Art and it has me thinking about the levels of submersion players can have when playing a character. It's a really good book, so check it out, but the only thing I will directly reference is the claim that players take on temporary motivations when they play games which end when the game is over. And that has me thinking about the various ways this is expressed in board games through different types of player characters. I haven't finished reading the book yet, so I don't know if Dr. Nguyen gets into this level of thematic territory or not. 

When you sit down to play a game, there are a number of ways you might interact with it on a thematic level. I have addressed some of the avatar roles common in board games, which overlaps somewhat with this topic but that post more directly theme focused. Levels of motivational exchange are more player focused. Which is to say that the same role category could fall into different levels of motivational exchange. 

As is discussed in Games, when a player plays a board game, they exchange their daily, ongoing motivations for the temporary goals of the game. As always, I like to look a step further at how players interact with theme. When playing a thematic game, players may take on not only the mechanical goals but also the game world goals. One result is that players may become more emotionally invested in the fate of their characters beyond just what is needed to win the game.

I don't want to dwell too much on whether you, as a designer, have control over whether a player engages in role-playing or not. Rather, I think it is useful to ask what level of motivational exchange does a game encourage in players, whether or not all players engage. With that said, let's discuss the various levels of motivational exchange. 

Agential: In abstract games and games with layered-on themes that don't interact with the mechanics, players will assume the motivation of the mechanical game objectives only. Players may also assume agential motivation if they are highly competitive, if they dislike the theme, or if they have played the game enough that the theme recedes into the background. (Read more about that phenomenon here.) 

Unseen Operator: In thematic games with players controlling multiple characters, especially if the players have 'unspecified' roles, the players may assume the motivations of the characters in a very surface level way. The players act as puppet masters of the characters and may sacrifice the goals of one character in order to secure the overall goal of the game. This level of exchange could also occur when a player is controlling a single character, but that is less common (and more easily avoided if your goal is 'immersion'). 

Self-Insert Character: 'Self-insert' is a loaded term in the creative writing world, but in board games it is frequently the ideal level of motivational exchange. As in the previous two levels, players still act as themselves, but they act within the thematic bounds of the game. At this level, a player becomes 'player+' a motivationally enhanced version of themself. In Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes, you don't just care about winning the game. You take on the temporary motivation of diffusing a bomb. You, yourself, become the avatar. This is often the maximum level of thematic engagement a certain type of player will tolerate in board games. Many people play board games because they don't like role-play or acting or having to pretend to be someone else. But you can skip that step and still transport them just as thoroughly into the theme with self-insert characters, depending on other factors such as how expressive the game requires you to be.  

Avatar Identification/Embodiment: This may be two or more categories, but I'm putting them together as a single spectrum. When a player identifies with a character they may begin to make game decisions that are not conducive to the player to win the game. Or if the character goals closely align with the player goals, they may gradually 'become' the character, increasingly engaging in role-play over the course of the game. The deepest level of motivational exchange is adopting a temporary personality that aligns with the temporary goals of the player, which is expressed through role-play. I believe that this is best handled by giving players hints at characters' personalities through mechanisms and art, then letting the players decide in the game how their characters would act. In order to achieve this level of motivational exchange, players must be clear on what character they are, what that character wants, and what it might mean to them to achieve that goal. 

How is this relevant to designers? If you want your players to have a certain experience, for example thematic 'immersion,' one element to look at is how players interface with their avatars. Controlling multiple units as a player may hinder thematic transportation, unless players also have a single leader character with comprehensible goals and desires. Self-insert characters have thematic limits that an avatar character does not: the limits of what we can imagine ourselves doing as opposed to a fictional character. There is also the possibility of moving between levels as players learn more about who they are playing as, although that is more challenging to achieve in a board game. Certainly, the agential level is always present when the game world pauses for moments of gameplay upkeep. 

Hopefully, the next time a playtester asks you, "Who are we in this game?" you will have a better understanding of the answer (although you should give them the more straightforward answer). 

ShippBoard Games is a board game design blog that updates most Mondays.