approachable theory: Defining Game Genres

Genres always have soft edges, and any given work may fit into multiple genres (e.g., NYPD Blue is a drama, a police procedural, and arguably a modern noir, but it is not a crime thriller in the way that fellow police procedural Law & Order: Criminal Intent is). Games aren’t well defined by the genres we use for fixed fiction (because games are not fixed in that way, and are not experienced the way we experience books or movies).

This post is by Beau and John W. Sheldon. Check out John’s work here and find him on Twitter. Support Beau through Patreon.com/thoughty! Individual donations at PayPal.me/Thoughty or ko-fi.com/thoughty.

John

A bearded person, John, in a maroon sweater and jeans posing in front of an ivy covered wall and fence.
John W. Sheldon (by Beau).

Genres always have soft edges, and any given work may fit into multiple genres (e.g., NYPD Blue is a drama, a police procedural, and arguably a modern noir, but it is not a crime thriller in the way that fellow police procedural Law & Order: Criminal Intent is). Games aren’t well defined by the genres we use for fixed fiction (because games are not fixed in that way, and are not experienced the way we experience books or movies).

Games need separate genres for their rules as written, for their fictional content, and for the experiences that arise from the confluence of those things with player action.

Rules genres: GURPS and Cortex share a rules genre with the D20 SRD, in that they offer a toolkit approach to providing game rules for “almost anything”. On a different axis of rules genre, GURPS and D20 share a genre because of their simulationist approach to resolving conflicts in a granular way, where Cortex is excluded from that genre.

Content Genres: the fictional and tonal content of a game deserves genre categorization. This includes whether a game is expected to be an action game, a dramatic game, or a comedy, but also the setting and time period, the level of technology, and other trappings of more traditional genres. Games can share content genres without sharing rules genres (e.g., Hackmaster and Dungeon World share several aspects of content genres without sharing much in rules genres).

Beau sitting with a coffee mug and a Shadowrun book.
Each edition of Shadowrun is a little different, too.

Experiential Genre: a category defined by how players experience the interplay between the rules, the content, and their own contributions, the more tightly this genre is defined the less universal and helpful a descriptor it will be (since a separate game table with different people may implement rules differently, focus on different content, and make unique contributions, and thusly have a different Experience of a game with the same rules and content).

One table’s experience of Shadowrun as a cyberPUNK game focused on sticking it to the man and helping disadvantaged communities draws from the same fiction and rules as another table’s experience of Shadowrun as a neon future heist simulator.

Notes on broad category: Doing games vs Being games (those that care about what you do vs those that care about what you are). Most tabletop RPG games are Doing games – the rules respond to actions, and they lead to more actions and changes in action. Many indie LARPs are Being games – the rules instruct the players on how to be and what to consider, and players respond naturally to their new way of being – but the rules are less concerned with Doing. The Climb or Still Life are Being larps, while a V:tM larp or a boffer larp are Doing larps. Turn is a Being game, while every other group tabletop RPG I can think of is a Doing game.


Beau

Beau in a black and grey hoodie tee.
Beau Jágr Sheldon (by John).

When I worked on Turn, I was often asked about its genre. I found this difficult and categorized it as I could but realized over time that games have different ways of being in genres than other media, and realized I needed to address this before we talk more about Wolfenstein: The New Order which defies its own genre conventions…sort of.

I talked to John about this and it prompted his summary, and my summary was as following with a more detailed breakdown of examples of games. It’s mostly something to think about, not argue about, so I felt okay writing it down. Even John and I feel differently about some things, so remember, all is a little subjective.

Ways of Playing

Doing – about taking action, what you do. Most games!

Being – about responding to action, who you are (& how you feel). Turn, many larps, many lonely games. 

Genre Categories

  • Experiential genre – how the game is experienced, narrative driven, character driven, etc.
  • Game/mechanics genre – the mechanical design and intent, generic, specific, fps, action, etc.
  • Content genre – type of content, presentation of content, supernatural, noir
  • Tonal genre – how the game feels, intense, slice of life, dramatic, cozy, etc.
A table covered in different games.
All of these games have similarities and differences in genre and in ways of playing.

We used these to break down the following genre tags for a few different games. The initial bullet points are our brainstormed ideas of what suits a game, but are not all-inclusive, and the breakdowns follow. Each one of these categories has the potential to break down even further, especially content and mechanics, which could break down into in-game tone and meta tone or various mechanical systems for live action, video, or tabletop games.


Examples

  • GURPS – doing, generic, tabletop rpg
    • Mechanical: tabletop RPG
    • Content: generic
  • The Climb – being, scenario driven dramatic realistic live action rpg
    • Experiential: scenario driven
    • Mechanical: live action RPG
    • Content: dramatic
    • Tonal: realistic
  • Still Life – being, character driven slice of life live action rpg
    • Experiential: character driven
    • Mechanical: live action RPG
    • Tonal: slice of life
  • Vampire Larp – doing, fantasy, urban supernatural dramatic character driven, player driven live action rpg
    • Experiential: character driven, player driven
    • Mechanical: live action RPG
    • Content: fantasy, urban supernatural
  • Boffer Larp – doing, scenario driven, dungeon fantasy live action rpg
    • Experiential: scenario driven
    • Mechanical: live action RPG
    • Content: dungeon fantasy
  • The Story of My Face – being, horror adventure and scenario driven, player driven lonely live action rpg, selfie game
    • Experiential: scenario driven, player driven
    • Mechanical: lonely game, selfie game, live action RPG
    • Content: Horror, adventure
    • Tonal: lonely game
  • Dungeons & Dragons – doing, dungeon fantasy, adventure narrative driven character driven tabletop rpg
    • Experiential: narrative driven, character driven
    • Mechanical: tabletop RPG
    • Content: dungeon fantasy, adventure
  • Shadowrun 5e – doing, cyberpunk alternative futuristic narrative driven scenario driven tabletop rpg
    • Experiential: narrative driven, scenario driven
    • Mechanical: tabletop RPG
    • Content: CYBERpunk, alternative futuristic
  • Shadowrun: Anarchy – doing, cyberpunk alternative futuristic character driven scenario driven tabletop rpg
    • Experiential: character driven, scenario driven
    • Mechanical: tabletop RPG
    • Content: cyberPUNK, alternative futuristic
  • Turn – being, slice of life character driven supernatural rural shapeshifters tabletop rpg
    • Experiential: character driven
    • Mechanical: roleplaying game
    • Content: supernatural, rural, shapeshifters
    • Tonal: slice of life
  • Wolfenstein The New Order – doing, fps drama/dramatic historical/period alternate universe punk, character driven video game
    • Experiential: character driven
    • Mechanical: first person shooter (FPS), video game
    • Content: drama, historical/period, alternate universe, punk
    • Tonal: dramatic
The Ultimate Micro RPG book cover.
A collection of games can range widely based on how it was curated, because every game is so very different but has so much in common!

Genre Principles

These breakdowns might take a little while to fully make sense of, but here are the core principles.

  1. Games have different genres than other media.
  2. The experience of games influences the genre of a game.
  3. Sometimes genre tags fit in multiple categories.
  4. Different people will assign different meanings to different genre tags and categories.
  5. Doing and being can be isolated or they can be combined, a number of games have a little bit of both, and their dominant way of playing can change how they are experienced, influencing genre.
  6. Genre is a tool, but is not necessarily something everyone must use or understand. It is something, however, people can bend or break, adhere to or queer, without using or understanding it actively. 

This is just the start of a longer conversation about how we use genre to apply a moral value to various games, or to belittle the quality without questioning of games. Wolfenstein is simply an FPS, but is one of the deepest games I’ve ever played. The only difference between Shadowrun 5e and Shadowrun Anarchy is the experience and where the emphasis is on cyberpunk but it makes two very different games. Turn is a combination of genre tags that don’t really have a place when they’re all combined, but it results in a unique play experience as a being game. 

What is your game’s genre breakdown using this metric? Does it play like you’re doing or being? How do you feel about ignoring genre or exploring it more deeply? Respectfully discuss in the comments and elsewhere. I look forward to hearing your discussions!

A table setup to play Roar of Alliance.
What matters most is that we have fun in these games. And fun? Fun is its own genre!

Making an Anti-Fascist Game about War

The following is an essay by John W. Sheldon, someone you may know as the art director for Turn, or as the creator of Roar of Alliance, playtested at Big Bad Con and elsewhere.

A photo of a playmat on a table with cards laid out and stacked in various piles. The playmat has instructional text for the players to reference, and is titled Roar of Alliance.
The Roar of Alliance playmat, photo by John W. Sheldon.

My name is John W. Sheldon, and I’ve been working on a tabletop game called Roar of Alliance for a few years (I used to call it Armored Reckoning). The game is about crewing an Allied tank in an alt-history World War Two and fighting through waves Nazis to set things right. What could be more anti-fascist than that? Lots of stuff, it turns out. The problem is that Nazis aren’t the only fascists, and my game does some things that potentially support fascist ways of thinking. In the political climate of the United States in 2019, it is especially important that we be aware of these things and work to mitigate them as much as possible. I’m writing about my process here in the hopes that others might find a useful example in the steps I’ve taken, and so that people with more experience can point out ways I can further improve.

What My Game Does Wrong

How does a game about destroying Nazi tanks and blowing up their infantry risk supporting fascist modes of thought? One cornerstone of fascist ideology is that they (the fascists) are oppressed by an enemy that is numerous, pervasive, powerful, and simultaneously inferior (stupid, incompetent, or morally weak). Another cornerstone is that the only appropriate way to deal with that enemy is by force.

The rules of my game do specifically these things:

The enemies you face in Roar of Alliance are numerous (outnumbering the players in just about every engagement), dangerous (their vehicles are often more advanced and better armed), and lack intelligence (their actions are automated by simple if/then statements that they never deviate from). The only way players ever interact with these foes is via deadly force. You will lose the game if you do not destroy their vehicles and disperse their infantry.

So, in these ways at least, my game actually promotes a core set of fascist ideologies. Some of this is hard to avoid, given that the game doesn’t have anyone in a central directorial role to moderate portrayals of the enemy or to restrict player behaviors in direct contact with the enemy outside combat, therefore no character in the game is ever confronted by a Nazi outside the specific circumstance of combat. This is a conscious choice to make sure nobody at the table is ever tasked with portraying a Nazi, and it keeps torture* and certain other types of violent fantasy outside the scope of the game as written. Players also have some leeway in narrating the effects of their actions on the enemy: when enemy infantry are removed from the field, players can choose to narrate the enemy’s retreat or death, and players do the same for surviving crew of disabled enemy vehicles.

Since violence and a portrayal of the enemy as numerous and unintelligent are essential to the way the game functions, and I don’t want to scrap the whole thing and start over, how do I make sure the rest of the game refutes fascism?

Focusing on Diversity

An illustration of a woman in fatigues who stands on top of a busted tank, smoke pouring out of it.
by John W. Sheldon

I start with something nationalists and fascists hate: I make sure that every other aspect of the game supports and emphasizes diversity and demonstrates how it creates strength. This paragraph kicks off the rulebook:

This game is set during the 2nd World War in Europe, a time when even the historical victors were rife with bigoted beliefs and policies. You should not let those real world bigotries limit the characters you choose to portray and accept. People of all races and genders from six continents and countless backgrounds fought against fascism and Nazism in Europe, and your characters should reflect some of that diversity.

Moreover, players are asked to identify their character’s country of origin, to help emphasize the diversity of geographic origin of the people who challenge fascism. Some of these choices are informed at a basic level by the themes of the character archetypes the game offers. In particular, the Partisan archetype was a resident of Nazi-occupied territory and a resistance fighter before joining up with the crew, the Collateral is a member of a population oppressed by the Allies and nevertheless pressed into service against the Nazis (e.g., Black Americans or colonial subjects of the British Empire), and the Duty was someone who volunteered for the fight because they new defeating fascism and Nazism was the right thing to do.

For actually producing the game, I’m doing what I’d never recommend: I’m doing the rules writing, layout, and illustrations all myself. What this does mean is that I can make sure that all of the art upholds my stated dedication to multiple axes of diversity. The art within the rules documents already portrays people of multiple genders, races, and body types as members of the player tank crew. Additional art I’m working on will include crew members with visible disabilities, crew wearing items of non-European traditional dress, and different cultural grooming standards.

An illustration of a person with natural hair in fatigues who is loading a shell into a tank.
by John W. Sheldon

Part of my plan for taking the game to crowdfunding is to offer backers the opportunity to have their portraits included as the card back art for some of the character archetypes, and as the face cards in the crew deck. Since I believe the audience for my game (one about Tanks in World War Two) skews significantly male, white, able-bodied, and cis, simply offering all of these art opportunities on a first-come, first-served basis would further skew the art for my game towards a monolithic default. To maintain my dedication to diversity, I need to give up potential sources of revenue and pre-stack the art with diverse portraits. I’ll won’t be offering backer levels for the Jacks in the Crew Deck, or for half of the character archetypes. Instead, I’ll be creating those portraits before the crowdfunding campaign begins. The portraits for the Jacks will be portraits of non-binary volunteers, and those for the first half of the character archetypes will be of volunteers who are one or more of non-white, queer, or visibly disabled.

Heroes that Need Help

Most fascism thrives on mythologizing heroes as paragons of strength, capable of facing great hardship alone and without aid. The heroes of fascism also contain within them a paradox: the enemy they face is terrifying, but they never actually feel fear. Roar of Alliance refutes these mythologized ideas of heroism idea on multiple fronts. The very nature of combat in my game requires players to rely on one another at all times (no person can operate a tank single-handedly). The player characters also begin the game by admitting fear: one of the first tasks of the first session is to identify a fear your character has about the fighting to come.

During the game, player characters will take Stress (the game’s unified resource representing both physical toughness and mental resilience). Characters who max out their Stress during an engagement play out a Last Stand for significant effect, then leave the Crew (the player decides whether they have died or simply become unable for whatever reason to continue on as a tank crew member). While the characters have a limited set of resources called Motivations that the players can expend to avoid stress, the only way to actually recover Stress relies on spending time with the other characters between battles. Only by working together, by comforting one another, and by acknowledging their own dependence on others can characters reduce their Stress and gain new Motivations to help them engage in future battles.

An illustration of two soldiers are crowded by a campfire with a pot cooking food, and one soldier has placed their hand on the shoulder of the other.
by John W. Sheldon.

Every archetype has scene prompts that show them needing help, and the whole game requires players to rely extensively on one another. Even the player’s Crew is supported by a company of non-Crew characters that players will occasionally be called on to portray between battles. No lone strong hero, or even small group of heroes, can accomplish the monumental task the players are facing.

Humanizing the Enemy

Fascism dehumanizes its enemies, making it easier for its adherents to attack, belittle, and eventually exterminate those that oppose it. You can see this in language comparing enemies to animals, assigning them undesirable traits as a group, in racist and anti-Semitic propaganda images that exaggerate enemy features to cartoonish extremes, or even in recent online language where some members of right-leaning web forums call people who oppose them “NPCs” – implying that there is no real individual personhood in those that disagree with their fascist ideology.

In my quest to make the game as hostile as possible to fascist ideologies, I must design the game to humanize the enemies that players face. Everyone should be reminded that the Nazis and members of the Wehrmacht were not inhuman monsters – they were regular people who became willing to commit evil acts because of an abhorrent philosophy. Reminding players of this is important because dehumanizing even Nazis creates an easy defense for modern fascists and authoritarians to mount, in the form of a “but I do these good things over here, I’m not a complete monster” defense. Reminding people that Nazis were regular people, even while they did terrible things, reminds us that we must examine ourselves for the kinds of behavior they exhibited.

Next Steps

Is there more my game can do? Almost certainly. In fact, I’m extremely open to suggestions for additional ways to improve. You can get in touch with me on Twitter, Pluspora, or Mastodon if you want to give me some feedback.

In the meantime, if you’re interested in ways to make your own game hostile to fascist ideologies, check out these two essays that helped inform my own process.

*Despite everything pop culture tells us, torture does not work. It is immoral and wrong in every circumstance, and this would still be true even if it worked – which it categorically does not.

 A photo of two rulebooks for Roar of Alliance, illustrated with tanks in orange-red and black.

Thoughty is supported by the community at ko-fi.com/Thoughty. To be featured on Thoughty, check out the contact page!