Covering the Bases

I’m pretty sure that the three of you that read Sin Aesthetics understand me when I use words like sockets, goals or payoff, but just in case my Great Aunt Gertrude decides to check in on me and is having trouble understanding what the heck I’m talking about, this post is a quick run down. For the sake of my lazy ass, I’m going to quasi cut and paste some from a couple of public conversations I had with Thomas Robertson, who asks too many damn questions for his own good, but as such is useful in getting me to explain my damn self.


The socket is the place in the RPG which serves as the participant’s locus of enjoyment. It’s the place where people plug themselves into game and give and take their focus and energy to and from. Obviously character can be a primary socket, because immersion wouldn’t be such a problematic word without the character being an extremely invested locus.

It’s also easy to identify what some other kinds of sockets are. Setting is obviously a socket for a lot of people. System is an obvious one too. We can be pretty damn sure in our community that there are Story socket players. There are other kinds, too: Social socket people, Choice socket people, probably a lot of others too.

I think that many/most people have more than one socket, that is, more than one place that they can plug into the experience of the game, but I suspect that there is always a primary socket, one that is preferred above others. I would say of myself that character is my primary socket, but that I also have a distant story socket as well. Farther still, I could have a social socket and a setting socket, even a choice socket… but the farther down the road a game pushes me to go to find a socket, the less like an RPG it will feel like to me, the less it will fulfill the body of what I come to games to for, and if always pushed to a different socket, the less likely I will be to continue playing the game.


This one’s simple, though figuring it out often is like pulling teeth. We all have one reason that we play RPG’s. Regardless of the kind of player we are, or the kind of play we do, our reason is one in the same: We come to the game to get out of game what we want out of game. People talk about the concepts of “art” or “game” or “play” as lofty ideals but in reality, gaming has a payoff for everyone who engages in it, which is why we play RPG’s rather than golfing, stamp collecting, worm breeding, singing in a choir or whatever else might have had an appealing payoff if RPG’s didn’t exist, or more importantly, didn’t give us what we want.

That payoff will differ vastly from person to person. For some, the payoff is simply “completely forgetting I am me for a couple of hours”, for others “engaging in an actively creative co-operative endeavor with people I like” might be the payoff. “Feeling fully, really challenged in a social engagement while making something that feels lasting to me” or “proving that I have the biggest dick at the table” might be the thing you want. “Being validated by other people recognizing my talents as a really good GM”, or “participation in creating an epic that was worth telling” might also be what keeps you coming back.

If some of those sound more important than others, if some of them sound right and some wrong, then you’re missing the point of why I am talking about payoff. There’s no right/wrong/better/worse/worthy/not worthy/valuable/not valuable when it comes to you and what keeps you coming back to the game. You want what you want. It’s whether or not you are being honest about what you want, both to yourself and to other people where things can get to being wrong. If my payoff is: “working hard, winning big, and lauding my victory” and your payoff is “non-conflict co-operation towards an emotionally engaging experience” we’re not going to play well together unless we really, consciously work at it. That doesn’t mean that either of our payoffs are better or worse, it just means we like different things out of the hobby.

You’ll notice too, that many of those payoffs in the list up top sound like they would align really well with the kinds of sockets I was talking about earlier. Is that surprising? It really shouldn’t be… we do most what works to get us the payoffs we desire, after all. In my case, with a primary character socket, a secondary story socket and a penchant for highly emotional cathartic play it shouldn’t be at all surprising that my payoff is something like: “to experientially feel a sense of emotional euphoria as a result of a powerfully engaging story”.


Back in this post, I talked about some possible goals of play, though they were certainly not meant as an exhaustive list.

Goals in this context define what the end experience of the game is that you work towards, and may imply or suggest a method you use to move towards achieving it. Ideally, your goal should closely align with your payoff. I’ve seen lots of situations in reality where that wasn’t the case, but each and every one described a very unhappy player.

I had a friend who came from a heavy competition war gaming background who stumbled upon and came to really like the social dynamic of the LARP scene. Playing in it drastically changed the kind of payoff he expected from RPGs. He went from a payoff of “validation of my intelligence and cunning through hard won challenge” to something like “escapist enjoyment of being someone else in a highly theatrical mode”. The problem was that when he came back to table top, he employed his old high challenge, high competition skills and techniques towards his old goal, but could never, unsurprisingly, achieve his new payoff. He doesn’t play anymore, and most of the people he used to play with (post LARP) aren’t really sad about that.

So there you are. That there’s the basics: sockets, goals and payoffs. There will probably be more as I ramble on, but that’s where I’m starting from.

RSS feed | Trackback URI


Comment by Mo
2006-11-13 20:24:00

Oh yeah, I should have said: way back when I had first started thinking in these kinds of blocks, Brand pointed me at this thread over on the Forge that was instigated by the inimitable Emily Care Boss. You can probably see that that post has left it’s influence all over my ideas.

Comment by Thomas Robertson
2006-11-14 02:07:00


Good to know I’m good at something, at least. And I guess if I’m going to hold up my end of the bargain, I should ask some questions, huh?

You may be planning on addressing this at a later date, but how intentional is (or can be) socket engagement? So, assume I have two major sockets: Story and Setting, and Story slightly beats out Setting. Can I come to a game and they say ‘This is all about setting’, can I go ‘Awesome, I’ll set my Story socket aside for a bit…’?

Also! From reading this post I get the feeling that sockets are not really goal-oriented. They’re sort of like techniques: they are how we achieve our goals. So maybe I can engage my Challenge socket to tell great stories (assuming the mechanics of the game, or whatever, are set up to support that). Does that sound right at all?


Comment by Mo
2006-11-14 18:25:00


There will, sort of, be longer answers to your questions later on. In the interim I’ll give you short answers: A socket isn’t so much a technique as it is about a preference or an inclination. The more you know about what you do, the more you can intentionally shift it if your heart desires, but just because you can learn to appreciate eating pickles doesn’t mean you will likely want to eat them when you’re sitting down to dessert. Unless you’re pregnant.

Thomas… are you *pregnant*!?!?

2009-06-24 07:21:26

[...] discussion of “sockets” as a player’s “loci of enjoyment” in playing a game ( An early instance of Vincent Baker discussing Simulationism is locted on his blog “anyway,” [...]

2009-09-14 01:49:05

[...] Buried Without Ceremony there is an article, Plugging in Scenes and System, that talks about Mo’s socket theory and how it relates to satisfying play and personal (in)compatibility with different game systems.  [...]

Trackback by Storyjammers
2010-02-01 00:01:30

Session #1: Why Do We Play?…

We play table-top roleplaying games. Why? We start off our first session with GNS theory, sockets, drama therapy, and escapism. Does it really answer the question to just say “fun” and leave it at that, or do we get something from a tableto…

2010-06-02 14:44:19

[...] am, in many regards, a very visual person. As a roleplayer I am very invested in the aesthetic socket: as a player I seek out wondrous and strange places in the game’s setting to immerse in them; [...]

2012-01-20 21:48:14

[...] at the table, and the social element of play. These different modalities of engagement are known as sockets: they’re how we “plug into” the game and our enjoyment of it. To quote directly [...]

Comment by Arnoldo Rosso
2012-02-28 14:00:43

hello there and thank you for your information – I have definitely picked up something new from right here. I did however expertise a few technical issues using this web site, since I experienced to reload the website lots of times previous to I could get it to load properly. I had been wondering if your hosting is OK? Not that I am complaining, but sluggish loading instances times will sometimes affect your placement in google and can damage your high quality score if ads and marketing with Adwords. Anyway I’m adding this RSS to my email and can look out for a lot more of your respective exciting content. Ensure that you update this again very soon..

Comment by Loraine Bumps
2012-03-05 16:02:35

Can I simply say what a relief to find someone who really is aware of what theyre speaking about on the internet. You positively know the best way to bring a difficulty to mild and make it important. Extra people have to read this and understand this aspect of the story. I cant imagine youre no more standard since you definitely have the gift.

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Bad Behavior has blocked 329 access attempts in the last 7 days.