Roleplaying and Mental Health (Psychology)

[fireinthedust]

Any system design should be done around the capabilities of your subjects. If you have children with discalcula, there isn't a point hammering them with palladium numbers, for example.

I think you may want to base whatever you use on specific activities that would be helpful for children of a particular group. There isn't a point until you have a group, as having "this game helps children with (variable issue) in this way" isn't going to look good in a paper.


also: why not ask Hasbro? Tell them what you're trying to do. Be up front, and say that you honestly think it could help a vulnerable demographic. If they say no, make up your own system or try a different company's product. (Tri-stat is simple. True20 also, and may be a great help for younger children).


What is the specific field you're working in? Clinical with Adults? Young children? Autism? Depression?

And whatever you do, how can you broach it in a respectful way? If I was talking to a clinical psychiatrist, or even trying this out, I'd worry they were being condescending.

I work in a recovery home for men aged 50+, some with mental health issues. I wouldn't bother bringing this up for most of them.

However, for children as a learning game (for whom it would have a vastly different format) I would have no issue playing with them and having a great time.

[Aberzanzorax]

Defining the group seems pretty key, I agree.

I was thinking of people of the age that usually play roleplaying games (so I guess 12+ according to WotC...though I know there are some players who start much younger than that).

I'm starting broad at this point, but likely will need to narrow things down significantly.

I suppose I could ask Hasbro...but I don't think I need to. The OGL lets me use most of what I would want for the last edition, and I wouldn't want to use fourth edition for this particular project due to its reliance on minis (not trying to go toward an edition war here, at all).

In fact, I think the use of minis is something else I need to consider, as they provide another barrier to the emotional interaction of "getting into character". That might be good or bad, but it's a factor to consider.

Generally I work with adults and older adolescents.

I'm not sure what you mean by broaching it in a respectful way. I hope I haven't been disrespectful in this thread to anyone. If I have, please let me know and I'll fix it and apologize immediately.

I'm guessing you mean something to the effect of how I might get an adult who doesn't play roleplaying games to try one as a therapeutic exercise? There are a couple of populations where this might be less of an issue, in my opinion. Both are stuck in places where they are somewhat wanting for entertainment. Inpatient mental health facilities often have group therapy. A variety of techniques are used in this venue, and I think roleplaying would work just as well as (if not better than) others. The other venue would be the prison system. I'm aware that roleplaying is popular among inmates as well. Working anger management or ethical decisions into a scenario could be a possibility.

As roleplaying is a group activity, I'm thinking that this would be applied best to group therapy of some sort. Outpatient group activity seems to be the one that you are suggesting might be the one where the most convincing would be needed...and I think also where this might not be as useful as another method of therapy that addresses the problems more directly. I can only think of this being particularly useful for individuals who need to improve socially. Potential groups would be people with Asperger's syndrome or high functioning autism, social phobia, schizoid personality disorder, and panic disorder with agorophobia (maybe...not sure about that last one).

I think it would be easiest to broach with children as you have mentioned.

Regarding the home you work in, are there structured activities (like just fun stuff to do to be entertained by)? Is there group therapy for those with mental health concerns? I ask because I wonder why specifically you'd shy away from something like this with those individuals?

[Aberzanzorax]

Originally Posted by Neubert

I find the World of Darkness rules fairly simple (at least the basics - there are always complex corner cases), but again you have the problem with the usage.

Perhaps the easiest is to make up your own system? Then you can make it as simple or complex as you like.
An idea would be for it to use d6's, if you want parents and other "non-gamers" to use it, without having to go out and buy a set of dice.

You also mentioned you were worried about getting lots of Luke's, Han Solo's, etc from using the Star Wars system - but you don't have to let the players know what the system is called. If you want to change it even more, throw out/change the parts that doesn't fit and use it in a fantasy setting.

Whoops, almost missed your post because of the new page.

I like the idea of d6's for the "non-gamer" set. That's a pretty important component/potential barrier if there is additional equipment required for this, and the harder to find it, the less likely it would be to be used. Even if this were ever sold, including enough dice for a whole group probably wouldn't really be an option.

Good point about filing the serial numbers off to prevent the Lukes and Han Solos.

[Aberzanzorax]

For those interested in reading up on some of the articles I've been finding, here are three neat places that I found:

Studies About Fantasy Role-Playing Games

Psychological Studies on Role-Playing Games

RPG Research Project Website

[Neubert]

Looks interesting, I will have a read later.

If you do decide to make your own system, I am sure people here would be happy to help. I'd like to give a hand at least.

[Aberzanzorax]

Thank you Neubert.

[Umbran]

Originally Posted by Aberzanzorax

Level of complication:
Well, I'd like it to be more simulationist and less gamist...I want them to work hard on characters and decisions, not to just be wargaming. I realize that this may require more complication, but also it might not.

In terms of problem-solving, both simulationist and gamist structures should work. In both cases the players use their knowledge of the rules to find a solution. The basic difference is whether those rules are designed just to be fun to play with, or to model some specific behavior for the fictional universe.

The real world is terribly complex. Good simulation akin to the real world and "simple" don't go together very well.

Umbran,
your suggestion looks like a good "one shot" game that would be really useful.

However, I'm looking for something that is more of an "immersed in a story for a while" roleplaying game, in which the players have the same characters for some time. I'm not looking for a fun "one shot" sort of game, although I do think that would be quite a possible option (I can see Og Unearthed as a very interesting and fun lesson in communication).

I'm shooting more for "growth over time" rather than a "one shot lesson plan" if that makes sense.

Yes, it makes sense. But who says the characters in Once Upon a Time don't persist from game to game? You simply build the next play as the next in the series of tales about the same characters.

Admittedly, this doesn't have the characters *defined* on a sheet, with limitations on what they can do. That is either a detriment, or a bonus, depending on your group. Using a sheet of numbers to describe a person is a fairly abstract thing.

[Aberzanzorax]

Originally Posted by Umbran

In terms of problem-solving, both simulationist and gamist structures should work. In both cases the players use their knowledge of the rules to find a solution. The basic difference is whether those rules are designed just to be fun to play with, or to model some specific behavior for the fictional universe.

The real world is terribly complex. Good simulation akin to the real world and "simple" don't go together very well.

That's absolutely true that both work for problem solving. In fact gamist might work better if that is the sole goal (as the balance and cohesiveness of rules is usually better in a gamist situation).

Maybe simulationist is the wrong term. I don't want rules for every little thing...I want it to be immersive...more of a focus on characters with less of "feel" of playing a game to a degree. I'm starting to think a rules light system might be best.

Originally Posted by Umbran

Yes, it makes sense. But who says the characters in Once Upon a Time don't persist from game to game? You simply build the next play as the next in the series of tales about the same characters.

Admittedly, this doesn't have the characters *defined* on a sheet, with limitations on what they can do. That is either a detriment, or a bonus, depending on your group. Using a sheet of numbers to describe a person is a fairly abstract thing.

Good point. I'll think further on that. And as I research more, you're right about it being a detriment or a bonus. It'll depend on population, really.

[Aberzanzorax]

Yesterday I did a majority of the "research crawl" through the databases.

I think I have just about all, or very close to all of the references (abstracts) for academic arcticles involving roleplaying games. (Right now that number is 99 if anyone is curious).


The next step is to read through all of them and write up that literature review. That should answer some of the questions that you all, and myself, have had about who this is targeted for, what system/style makes the most sense etc.


Thank you to everyone who has helped me out so far, and please keep comments coming. It's really helpful to be able to discuss this with a knowledgable roleplaying community, as I'm fairly positive that none of my academic advisors will be able to help much with the roleplaying aspect of the project.

[Atlatl Jones]

Hi Aberzanzorax,
I'm the guy Mallus talked about. I'm finishing my doctoral dissertation in clinical psychology, and I've been a gamer for most of my life, so I'll give you whatever feedback I can. My training and experience has been with adults and adolescents, not children, so there may be considerations specific to child therapy that I'm not familiar with.

Originally Posted by Aberzanzorax

I'm abandoning my prior dissertation for clinical psychology, and I'm starting a new one.

That way lies madness. Speaking from personal experience.

I'd like it to be on a protocol of how to teach children (or perhaps socially impaired adults) a number of things using a roleplaying game.

These include (but are not limited to):
-social interaction skills
-problem solving
-improved math skills
-improved vocabulary
-emotional control

My first impression about this is that you might be trying to do too much. Don't try to make a general "make children better" treatment, make a focused treatment for a focused goal. Otherwise the treatment will be diffuse, and it'll be more difficult to make into a manualized protocol. IMO RPGs probably lend themselves best to teaching problem solving, as well as social interaction skills if you run it right. Be careful though, because the highly structured and ritualized interactions of playing an RPG may not transfer much to outside-world social interactions.

As for the system, I would recommend a system that's quite transparent, that fades into the background while you roleplay and talk. Games like D&D (especially 4e) draw attention to the game mechanics, distracting the players from what you're trying to teach, and socially anxious players might withdraw into them. If people are thinking in terms of game-mechanical tactics, they'll be spending less effort on the real-world problem-solving and interaction. Something like Fudge (or Fate) could work well IMO, as would Unisystem Light (used in the Buffy RPG).

I wouldn't worry too much about the game system at first, if I were you. First get a concrete idea of what you want to teach, and what sorts of stories or scenarios the game will revolve around. Knowing the sorts of scenarios is key. For example, a lot of problem-solving training involves teaching people to identify the problem and any underlying contributing factors, to brainstorm possible solutions, to break down overarching goals and actions into a succession of achievable sub-steps, and evaluate which of the possible actions will best satisfy the various goals and challenges. If you're making a game to teach that sort of problem-solving, what sort of game scenario would encourage the use of those skills? The first that comes to my mind is the modern "heist" story, like Ocean's 11 or any number of other movies. It starts with an overarching goal, and will necessarily involve a lot of breaking down the big problem into little ones, and thinking of creative solutions to those problems. Then, the players will need to go through and execute the plan, which will involve learning to deal with complications on the fly. It would also involve social skills at time as they try to gather information, persuade people, and deal with unexpected circumstances.

Mind you, I'm not sure how accepting the psychology community would be of a treatment that involves teaching people how to be con-artists and criminals.

I'm not saying that this example is what you should be doing. But IMO you'd be best off to focus your attention on the specific things you'll want to achieve therapeutically, and the scenarios and game system will emerge naturally from that.

The setting should also stem from that consideration. When it comes to any sort of learning or emotional conditioning, the more similar the model experience is to the real-world experience, the better the learned skills will transfer, generally. I personally would avoid fantasy and sci-fi settings for that reason, and use a setting more grounded in the real world, akin to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, modern action movies, or various cyberpunk and near-future settings. But again, it depends on what you're doing with it (I hope I'm not sounding like a broken record about that. ).

As part of the protocol/dissertation, I might even include a "sample adventure" that I write as well.

Definitely a good idea. The most clearly-understandable and useful textbooks I've read had lots of examples of how to do the treatment.

Good luck with this. I'm very curious about what you'll develop.

[Kamikaze Midget]

Games teach things by repeated behavior (practice) and basic carrot/stick reinforcement (you loose, which is bad, or you win, which is good).

Any skill that you want the kids to "learn" from the game should be part of the victory conditions.

For instance, say you want "social skills" to be one of the benefits. They game should reward you for talking to other players, maybe even having a conversation with them, or trying to team up with them. The more you talk, the better you do (up to a point, of course -- you probably don't want to encourage spotlight-hogs).

One way RPG's do this is by having you play a character, and then having you work on a team with other characters. You have to describe what your character looks like, what he acts like, what his abilities are, and how others can help you in order to do your best. You can't just sit there and roll dice and be an effective player...you will loose.

I'd keep the mechanics simple. When going with simulationism, simplicity is also a byword for "abstract."

Say each kid has a character, and maybe also has a hand of, say, 5 cards that represent their "powers" or "attributes" or something. You can go with basic poker hands: the better the hands, the better the powers, but no hand starts off as a good hand. What makes it a good hand is when they combine their cards to make a "group hand" of five cards. In order to find out what cards they have, they need to talk and interact. If, amongst the "team" they can put together a royal straight flush or something, they'll win when compared to the other "team's" cards.

Of course, you'll want to keep the randomness in there so that one team doesn't just come up with the best hand and keep winning...

But yeah, basically, whatever you want to teach, have it happen over and over again as the prerequisite for victory, and if you don't do it, you'll loose. Math, writing, social interaction, whatever -- if you need it to win the game, you'll either develop the skill, or you'll keep loosing (possibly to the point of not liking the game, but that's a more subtle design issue).

[doctorhook]

Personally, I think you might have the most luck by creating your own game for this purpose. This way, you can start with something dirt-simple (and I mean SIMPLE!) and expose players/clients to progressively more complex elements as need be. Probably the last thing you want is for clients (or your dissertation) to get eff'd up by any confusing or frustrating rules.

Some suggestions as a starting point:

• Turn hit points into something tangible, like a stack of ten red poker chips.
• (In fact, you might be able to use poker chips to represent a number of things, like a "mana" or "strength" mechanic, or as a form of action point.)
• Start with very few stats to represent the most basic character types. I'm imagining three to five stats: health, strength, magic, and possibly a "miscellaneous"/action point stat.
• Don't include social stats to begin with. If you want to have players use a persona separate from their own, have predesigned "personalities" for the character to have, rather than relying upon an abstraction to represent a personality. (For example, have a "brave" personality, a "loyal" personality, and a "compassionate" personality, for starters. The simpler, the better.)
• Use d6s to begin with; they're common, simple to use, and familiar to everyone. When the DM is making rolls, make them in front of the players; you don't want clients to think you're being unfair.
• If you're going to include magical powers, again, keep it simple. Have an "attack" power, a "defence" power, and two or three "utility" powers, each with very specific capacities. (For example, utility A can make an object that you can carry fly for one turn; utility B can make up to one man-sized object invisible.) Let the player describe the appearance of the effect.
• Introduce new, more complex game elements (perhaps ripped straight from other games) as the player becomes more comfortable with the concept of roleplaying.

IMHO, by using a game with as few and as simple mechanics as possible, you'll be able to have more direct interactions with the players.

I have no idea whether or not my suggestions here are the least bit helpful to you, but hopefully they are. Best of luck to you with your dissertation!

[Starfox]

I'd have a VERY simple basic system, Like say; you have four attributes, Charisma, Dexterity, Intelligence and Strength. Make one of them strong; you always succeed at tasks using this attribute. Make one of them weak; you never succeed at tasks using this attribute. The other two are mediocre and go about as expected. Each player must have a unique strong attribute. Cooperate and make up for each other's weakneses.

But this might be too simplistic; I am in no way trained in psychology.

A word of caution: Back in my teens (I am now 44) I had a pretty hurtful role-playing experience when I tried to play mind-games in role-playing. I had to face a dark side of myself and was pretty much disgusted. That made me shy away from role-playing games as a social instruction tool.

[Lord Ipplepop]

Many, many moons ago, I helped my mother take care of her foster kids after Dad died. Most of her kids had some sort of emotional or social issue that we had to deal with. One of the things that she used to assist them with life in the "real world" was The Sims, because you are required to have your Sim go to work, pay bills, eat, clean, make friends, etc.
After discussing it with their shrink (a former gamer), we decided that an RPG would be the perfect way to teach them how to interact with others, and do all of the things that we, as experienced gamers, do without even thinking.

With some research help, I threw together a world of late Roman/early medievel influence, using various "real" events and items and people for the players to encounter. The kids were told that I was taking things out of the history book, and they went off to "cheat" so that they could beat me at my own game (silly them).
As part of the various adventures, I made sure that the typical "see it/kill it/ steal their gold" was not always the best course of action. I threw in portions of Orcs needing to be rescued by the party (I tried it on a group later, only to have one of the players come in with a Paladin... man, was that screwy), or things not being what they seemed, or situations where each of the players had to step forward or allow someone else to be the center of attention. It was a bit more difficult to build adventures around then lesson of the week; however, the kids actually began using the lessons they learned in their OOG life.

They learned to think quickly and to see as much of the battlefield (so to speak) as possible at one time to asssit with their decision making; work with groups of people that you don't like or have nothing in common with; think before you act; studying and doing schoolwork can help you out of school; etc.
Their reading level also improved, because the books had words they had to look up. I also handed them The Hobbit, and the LOTR series, as well as Terry Brooks, Michael moorcock, Piers Anthony, et al to read.
Adding up die rolls, adding hit points, figuring out their final to hit rolls, etc also helped them improve their basic math scores.

The game that we used was 1ed. Other games that you can use would be:
Tunnels and Trolls (as basic as the game can get), GURPS, Shadowrun (4th ed... requires point buys, or use of sample characters).

If there is a very small group of players (no more than 2 or 3) a game that I was introduced to <mumble> years ago is called "Improv". No dice, no characters, no papers... the GM decides on a scenario, and the players decide how THEY would react, to which the GM reacts, to which the players react, to which...etc.

I wish you the best of luck on your paper.

[Kwalish Kid]

Originally Posted by Aberzanzorax

That's absolutely true that both work for problem solving. In fact gamist might work better if that is the sole goal (as the balance and cohesiveness of rules is usually better in a gamist situation).

Maybe simulationist is the wrong term. I don't want rules for every little thing...I want it to be immersive...more of a focus on characters with less of "feel" of playing a game to a degree. I'm starting to think a rules light system might be best.

You should beware using the terms of GNS/The Big Model/Yada yada yada. They are controversial within the game design community and they have little, if any, academic support.

[howandwhy99]

Not to be contrary, but hobby RPGs rarely have anything to do with reality. My suggestion would be to use roleplaying exercises from outside the hobby. Ones that actually deal with the real world rather than a fantasy one. Also, you may wish to select a number of different games to achieve different objectives. In non-hobby roleplaying, games/exercises are designed upon two different models: Convergent and Divergent.

Convergent game models are like most traditional RPGs, they are world exploring and teach role performance. They are all about solving problems, thinking of creative solutions, and learning through trial and error. Most Roleplay Simulation games are convergent designed games. If success matters, this is what you want.

Divergent game models are like Indie or Forge RPGs, they deal with self exploration and the trying on of different personalities. They are about discovering one's own desires and testing new ways of being. Most psychology-based roleplaying exercises are divergent designed games. Look especially to drama therapy and psychodrama therapists for exercises in roleplayed inner exploration.

Hobby games are really only going to help the kids in an ancillary way. It's not that pretending to be an elf in a fantasy world doesn't require some proficiency at problem solving, or allow for character exploration. But the lessons learned are only as useful as they relate to the real world. Which means pretending to be one's self in a simulated real world environment tends to be best.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Kwalish Kid

You should beware using the terms of GNS/The Big Model/Yada yada yada. They are controversial within the game design community and they have little, if any, academic support.

I've done tons of research these last few years and I've found no academic support whatsoever for GNS or the "Big Model". It's strictly hobby-based internet theorizing.

[ArghMark]

True20 is fairly easy to digest, if still a print product. It can do pretty much any setting with a relatively high level of lethality. I find its just loose enough with the rules you can bend them easily, and tight enough that munchkinism doesn't set in.

Would you prefer more of a game and less of a story/role playing session? Hows about board games with the groups? There are non-competitive or games which the players don't work against each other.

[howandwhy99]

If this is really to be the thesis for your Ph.D., if you haven't already you should do some research about the future for roleplaying in psychology: (link) The author, Robert J. Landy at NYU, is probably the biggest name in the field of Drama Therapy in the States that I know of today. He has a number of very good books on rolepaying and the design of roleplaying exercises. (I assume by your user location you're in MN or MA for schooling, so the U.S. is appropriate). Where roleplaying is really going through the roof academically though is in Australia.

After reading through the thread (I tend to respond to the original posts) I think typical, non-d20 D&D is your best bet. It is "simulationist" under the Forge ideology and pretty simple for the Players. Good DMs require practice to really gain some proficiency however. But you said that will be the therapist, right? Director is the typical therapist's role in psychological roleplay. Also, well designed game modules are the most important element for you to focus on the objectives you wish the players to accomplish. D&D does only have the 4 main roles in truth, but I can't imagine you are asking for other roles based upon your previous answers. It isn't a character explorer like an Indie game, but the rules are totally unnecessary for the players to be knowledgeable of in order to play. (check out the latest "Game Transparency" article at WotC on the hobby theorists coming back around to old school design). While convergent designed games like most hobby RPGs place a lot of work on the GM, it does offer your self-described "immersion" requirement.

[Aberzanzorax]

I want to thank everyone who has contributed to helping me since I last posted.

I've been busy looking into the articles I've pulled up.

Also, I've been searching the forums here and at WotC for threads on DMing/GMing with kids.

I'll have a separate post up in the next couple of hours that compiles these links.

Also, I ordered the following books for resources:
Kobold Guide to Game Design 1 Kobold's Guide to Game Design, Vol. 1 (PDF) [KGGD1e] - $14.95 : Kobold Quarterly, http://www.koboldquarterly.com/

Kobold Guide to Game Design 2 Kobold's Guide to Game Design, Vol. 2 (PDF) [KGGD2e] - $14.95 : Kobold Quarterly, http://www.koboldquarterly.com/

The Fantasy Role-Playing Game: A New Performing Art (Paperback)Amazon.com: The Fantasy Role-Playing Game: A New...

Gaming As Culture: Essays on Reality, Identity And Experience in Fantasy Games (Paperback) Amazon.com: Gaming As Culture: Essays on Reality,...

Shared Fantasy: Role Playing Games as Social Worlds (Paperback) Amazon.com: Shared Fantasy: Role Playing Games as...


If anyone knows of other books that could help me in my endeavor, please, don't be shy about posting them! Thanks.

[Aberzanzorax]

The other threads are up!

Compilation threads on gaming with children:

Parents: roleplaying with children / kids compilation thread

Roleplaying with children / kids - Wizards Community