The Next Innovation in Gaming

[Thornir Alekeg]

Eliminating the gamemaster doesn't have to eliminate the imagination. Thinking like this is the sort of thing that will hinder the next innovation. The innovators don't think "this will never work" they think "how can I make this work?"

I consider the amount of weight on a gamemaster to be one of the biggest hurdles to get people into the game. So much responsibility for the game lies on their shoulders that a bad GM can prevent people from trying the game again.

A good place to look for innovation in RPGs is at the role of the gamemaster. Can we take the role and spread out the responsibilities among the players. Can we come up with a way to create "crutches" to help the fledgling or below average gamemasters without hindering the inspired?

Changing the role of the GM, or possibly even eliminating it, is a very good place to look for innovation in RPGs.

I could see the elimination of the GM as we currently see with some technological innovation, and some agreement to cooperatve DMing.

Take an adventure path style game, create a set of digital tools designed to hold the information and present it to the players when appropriate. Players mark where they are going, the system presents a description of the area the players see for somebody to read. When PCs enter combat, the system presents a listing of the opponents. Players would have to make decisions about the opponents attacking since there isn't a GM to do that, and a computerized system to do so would be complex, but the system could provide a basic decision tree to the players based upon what the author of the adventure expects (Orc # 1 will typically charge the PC who appears to be the most powerful or attack any PC attacking the Shamen. Orc #2 will typically fall back and provide cover with his bow, will use X encounter power if drawn into melee).

When a player decides to do something in game that requires adjudication beyond a straight rule decision, other players could be provided with a system to privately enter their decision and the system would tabulate and present the results.

This probably won't work will for more free-form sandbox games, or more roleplaying intense games, but could be done with more linear hack-n-slash style games.

 

[Mark]

I could see the elimination of the GM as we currently see with some technological innovation, and some agreement to cooperatve DMing.

(. . .)

This probably won't work will for more free-form sandbox games, or more roleplaying intense games, but could be done with more linear hack-n-slash style games.

It raises the question (perhaps, again) as to where the threshold is between RPG and CRPG. But if no RPing is occurring beyond pointing toward a "role" in combat, then it raises the question where the threshold is between RPG and G. I am of a mind that not only does removing the "DM" cross that threshold but even severely reducing the function and responsibility of the "DM" crosses it.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

It raises the question (perhaps, again) as to where the threshold is between RPG and CRPG. But if no RPing is occurring beyond pointing toward a "role" in combat, then it raises the question where the threshold is between RPG and G. I am of a mind that not only does removing the "DM" cross that threshold but even severely reducing the function and responsibility of the "DM" crosses it.

So what is the role of the DM and how does their function and responsibility define a game as a role-playing game? Do players roleplay for the DM, or do they roleplay for everyone?

DM's have the knowledge of the adventure to give to the players. In a more linear style game, that knowledge could be stored by a computer and given to the players as needed - not really any different than a DM reading the appropriate section of a published adventure path.

DMs determine the actions of the opponents. With suggested actions given, the players could take on the decision making process for the opponents. Sure, they could make the opponents act stupidly and make an easy win, but some I'm sure would rather make decisions that make the game fun and a challenge.

DMs adjudicate applications of rules when it is not clearly defined. This could easily be done by a consensus or voting system. Heck, most rules discussions I've encountered turn into that anyway. The only difference is the DM gets final say.

DMs give out hidden information based upon players' questions or actions - this is more difficult to replace a human successfully, but a limited method is possible using decision trees.

DMs make stuff up on the fly and customize games to the players. I don't see that being replaced by a computer, but not every game has a DM who does this, and not doing it does not in my mind make the game no longer an RPG.

I'm sure there is more, but my lunch break is over. What else does a DM do that either a computer or the players working cooperatively cannot do?

 

[Umbran]

I'm sure there is more, but my lunch break is over. What else does a DM do that either a computer or the players working cooperatively cannot do?

Be a person.

Information distribution and tactical decisions can be done lots of different ways, sure. But a computer can't realistically make an NPC get angry in response to a free-form statement or behavior by the PCs. The computer cannot realistically depict any emotional depth.

You could do this cooperatively, however that would mean the players having a lot more information about the background of events, and where the adventure is going. Plot twists would become far more rare.

 

[Mark]

What else does a DM do that either a computer or the players working cooperatively cannot do?

For one, a "DM" (Gamemaster, Referee, etc.) has knowledge the players often do not have and has to not only act but react to the players (in a tabletop roleplaying game this happens in real time as a simulation of social events) in a ways that a computer cannot and that a shared-DMing player cannot and/or would not. It's fundamental to a (non-CRPG) RPG. Once that is off the table, it becomes a different game. Not that this thread is limited to discussion of innovations in RPGs only, as the OP obviously included card games and others as possible avenues of discussion.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

So my question is simple. What if any will be the next innovation or revolution in our beloved hobby? Does anyone have a glimpse or an idea on what will spur the industry into a new and exiting direction?

If I had any ideas of my own about an innovation or new revolution in the hobby I'd be MAKING it, DEVELOPING it rather than telling you what I think it will be.

Speaking just along RPG lines, and simply looking at hints of what I see that's out there being developed by others, I think the most potential lies in an electroning gaming table of somekind. It doesn't even have to be high-end hardware like the MS Surface. It really just needs an appropriately large game display/monitor for the "Wow!" factor, some means of faciliated input from players for controlling characters, sources of graphics to display, and software to coordinate rules to whatever extent is needed or desired.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

But a computer can't realistically make an NPC get angry in response to a free-form statement or behavior by the PCs. The computer cannot realistically depict any emotional depth.

Not yet.

Really, I think opinion on this aspect of the evolution of the game simply comes down to whether or not one believes that a computer can ever mimic a human.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

For one, a "DM" (Gamemaster, Referee, etc.) has knowledge the players often do not have and has to not only act but react to the players (in a tabletop roleplaying game this happens in real time as a simulation of social events) in a ways that a computer cannot and that a shared-DMing player cannot and/or would not. It's fundamental to a (non-CRPG) RPG. Once that is off the table, it becomes a different game. Not that this thread is limited to discussion of innovations in RPGs only, as the OP obviously included card games and others as possible avenues of discussion.

Be a person.

Information distribution and tactical decisions can be done lots of different ways, sure. But a computer can't realistically make an NPC get angry in response to a free-form statement or behavior by the PCs. The computer cannot realistically depict any emotional depth.

You could do this cooperatively, however that would mean the players having a lot more information about the background of events, and where the adventure is going. Plot twists would become far more rare.

I understand and agree with both of you, but honestly I have played in plenty of games where the GM really just read through an adventure and followed it with no improvisation. I would contend that those games can still be called RPGs; perhaps not particularly good or interesting RPGs, but it certainly isn't down to the level of a CRPG, either.

I just feel a decent portion of the GM function could be handled by technology and still be an RPG.

If people want to continue this aspect of the discussion, I will fork this to a new thread rather than keep taking this one off track, otherwise I'll let it drop.

 

[Umbran]

Really, I think opinion on this aspect of the evolution of the game simply comes down to whether or not one believes that a computer can ever mimic a human.

Yes, well, the original question was what the next big thing will be. Not a big thing that might come along sometime in the unforseeable future. AI on such levels has been "20 years away" since the 1960s.

I understand and agree with both of you, but honestly I have played in plenty of games where the GM really just read through an adventure and followed it with no improvisation. I would contend that those games can still be called RPGs; perhaps not particularly good or interesting RPGs, but it certainly isn't down to the level of a CRPG, either.

Hey, we were asked what a DM can do that a computer or collaborative system cannot. We weren't asked what all DMs do well that a computer cannot

 

[Aeolius]

I could see the elimination of the GM as we currently see with some technological innovation, and some agreement to cooperatve DMing.... This probably won't work will for more free-form sandbox games, or more roleplaying intense games, but could be done with more linear hack-n-slash style games.

Not much fun for us DMs, eh? Perhaps the next innovation will be the elimination of players... Oh, wait... Pocket God.

DMs make stuff up on the fly and customize games to the players. I don't see that being replaced by a computer, but not every game has a DM who does this...

To me, making things up, DMing on the fly, and role-play intensive gaming is the essence of D&D... I understand that not everyone feels this way. When I want to interact with a computer, I play PS3.

...I have played in plenty of games where the GM really just read through an adventure and followed it with no improvisation.... I just feel a decent portion of the GM function could be handled by technology and still be an RPG.

Now THAT sounds like a console game. Half of the time when I am DMing, I add items of treasure or magic that I simply pull out of the back of my head. Weeks or months later, I'll figure out the perfect place that item can be used.

I guess all of my games are "litter boxes", instead of sandboxes, because I make up crap all the time.