Game Theory (Response)
A friend of mine posted some issues he has about gaming in a specific forum. So I thought I'd put in my 2 cents about gaming in any forum.
I think it's difficult to find good roleplayers and good GMs/Storytellers in any forum. I wonder if people are just too lazy and just throw out the first thing they think of, or do they just mimic story lines that are the most prominent in popular culture? Either way to run a good game/story, it takes a bit of work. Theoretical, according to George Polti, there is only a list of about 36 plots to choose from. So up front it seems like there are limited options. Most people probably stick to those 36 themes (plots/dramatic situations/etc) but how do you get more out of those 36 plots? - Variations on a theme, different influences and interactions, change driving force, combine plots, change motivation, etc.
I remember talking to oldgrue about this one night (well we have discussed it a few times). Often there is a group dynamic most players don't consider. When a group makes decisions the most simple solution is to consider each person will make a binomial choice (they will or will not do something-you can apply this to each decision). You then you need to consider the framework the decision is made in: Standard distribution, Prisoner's Dilemma, Occam's Razor, Zeno's Paradox, etc. This is where the risk occurs in the game (you inadvertently do a risk benefit analysis here-some players just take more risk). Many like the Prisoner's Dilemma since it simplifies the problem in a zero-sum game (not exactly the case in roleplaying, but with some assumptions, it wouldn't be too far off since Selton predicts an act may introduce nonzero sum probability by choice or by mistake...though Selton considers this probability small). You must also consider if decisions being made are in a static (like Nash's Equilibrium) or dynamic forum (and it is usually the latter-which is why it is so difficult). Complicate this with modular rationality (decision at every step where a gamer can take an action), interpreting the payoffs, sequential equilibria, nonzero sum (intensity of preference, i.e. von Neumann), beliefs, coordination games (repeated/ongoing), and of course, risk and uncertainty. If you are a gamer and haven't read any game theory you owe it to yourself to do so. Even simple games like tic-tac-toe and rock paper scissors are difficult frameworks to conceptualize in game theory. Once you do you can consider games like go, backgammon, reversi, checkers, chess, and even variant chess. After understanding this you can see some of the frameworks in RPG. Here you start to see more in line with the theory of commitment (where players can improve outcome of later actions by committing to present actions...though commitment may help previous actions too...but this is considered the 'paradox of backward induction'). Furthermore you can consider evolution in game theory and evolution in your OWN GAME. That's enough about game theory.
The other thing oldgrue and I discussed was something lacking in Cam, (Amtgard (sp?) and Solar don't they use elves?), and other organizations where characters have a long life. Everyone plays for immediate gratification. You VERY RARELY see a player use the time wisely. I don't see three year plans. Let me explain - immortals don't need to be in a hurry since they don't have time constraints. Now, since we really are mortal and just playing a game we can't try to pursue a 100 year plan or 10-20 year (unless it is your plan in your life) even 5 years is a bit long. Now 2-3 years is a good compromise (give or take). Less than a year is ridiculous. You see very few players with a 2 or 3 year plan. Many players play night to night. I know some immortals would have a short term plan but it would feed into a longer term plan. I just think most people are too impatient to make this plan and give the game that immortal feel.
By the same token it is the GM/Storyteller's job to create such an environment too, but it really takes cooperativity with the players (no, I don't want to go into the concept of cooperativity in game theory, that is a real bear). There are many dramatic plots/stories in oral tradition, books, movies, theater, performances, etc, etc, etc. So inevitable many stories will look alike. In how many variants can the hero be downtrodden only to come back and defeat the villain? Apparently we have many variants. So GM/Storyteller and players need to work together too. I've prattled on too much. Ultimately a good game takes work. Back to studying.
If you do nothing else take a look at George Polti's 36 dramatic plots George Polti's 36 dramatic plots
(i.e. even if you don't look into game theory).
word,
toxins
I think it's difficult to find good roleplayers and good GMs/Storytellers in any forum. I wonder if people are just too lazy and just throw out the first thing they think of, or do they just mimic story lines that are the most prominent in popular culture? Either way to run a good game/story, it takes a bit of work. Theoretical, according to George Polti, there is only a list of about 36 plots to choose from. So up front it seems like there are limited options. Most people probably stick to those 36 themes (plots/dramatic situations/etc) but how do you get more out of those 36 plots? - Variations on a theme, different influences and interactions, change driving force, combine plots, change motivation, etc.
I remember talking to oldgrue about this one night (well we have discussed it a few times). Often there is a group dynamic most players don't consider. When a group makes decisions the most simple solution is to consider each person will make a binomial choice (they will or will not do something-you can apply this to each decision). You then you need to consider the framework the decision is made in: Standard distribution, Prisoner's Dilemma, Occam's Razor, Zeno's Paradox, etc. This is where the risk occurs in the game (you inadvertently do a risk benefit analysis here-some players just take more risk). Many like the Prisoner's Dilemma since it simplifies the problem in a zero-sum game (not exactly the case in roleplaying, but with some assumptions, it wouldn't be too far off since Selton predicts an act may introduce nonzero sum probability by choice or by mistake...though Selton considers this probability small). You must also consider if decisions being made are in a static (like Nash's Equilibrium) or dynamic forum (and it is usually the latter-which is why it is so difficult). Complicate this with modular rationality (decision at every step where a gamer can take an action), interpreting the payoffs, sequential equilibria, nonzero sum (intensity of preference, i.e. von Neumann), beliefs, coordination games (repeated/ongoing), and of course, risk and uncertainty. If you are a gamer and haven't read any game theory you owe it to yourself to do so. Even simple games like tic-tac-toe and rock paper scissors are difficult frameworks to conceptualize in game theory. Once you do you can consider games like go, backgammon, reversi, checkers, chess, and even variant chess. After understanding this you can see some of the frameworks in RPG. Here you start to see more in line with the theory of commitment (where players can improve outcome of later actions by committing to present actions...though commitment may help previous actions too...but this is considered the 'paradox of backward induction'). Furthermore you can consider evolution in game theory and evolution in your OWN GAME. That's enough about game theory.
The other thing oldgrue and I discussed was something lacking in Cam, (Amtgard (sp?) and Solar don't they use elves?), and other organizations where characters have a long life. Everyone plays for immediate gratification. You VERY RARELY see a player use the time wisely. I don't see three year plans. Let me explain - immortals don't need to be in a hurry since they don't have time constraints. Now, since we really are mortal and just playing a game we can't try to pursue a 100 year plan or 10-20 year (unless it is your plan in your life) even 5 years is a bit long. Now 2-3 years is a good compromise (give or take). Less than a year is ridiculous. You see very few players with a 2 or 3 year plan. Many players play night to night. I know some immortals would have a short term plan but it would feed into a longer term plan. I just think most people are too impatient to make this plan and give the game that immortal feel.
By the same token it is the GM/Storyteller's job to create such an environment too, but it really takes cooperativity with the players (no, I don't want to go into the concept of cooperativity in game theory, that is a real bear). There are many dramatic plots/stories in oral tradition, books, movies, theater, performances, etc, etc, etc. So inevitable many stories will look alike. In how many variants can the hero be downtrodden only to come back and defeat the villain? Apparently we have many variants. So GM/Storyteller and players need to work together too. I've prattled on too much. Ultimately a good game takes work. Back to studying.
If you do nothing else take a look at George Polti's 36 dramatic plots George Polti's 36 dramatic plots
(i.e. even if you don't look into game theory).
word,
toxins