NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8285610" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I want to say that our (you and I) first interactions included me citing how fundamental cognitive bias is to gaming.  So, in light of that (assuming you recall those exchanges?), it should be clear that I'm very aware of cognitive bias and its impact on gaming.  Its not quite been a "pet topic" of mine for a decade+ but, its in the neighborhood.So how does one limit the signature of cognitive bias in GMing?  The same way its done in the rest of life (oddly enough):1)  You design in reminders to be cognizant of cognitive bias creep and to not be beholden to them.2)  You contract the move-space of GMs and you do it in a way that is table-facing and binding.3)  You make the product of the integration of (1) and (2) above with the rest of play work.  If this stuff works to create functional gaming and the type of rewarding play that is advertised on the tin...people will (a) keep playing your game at all and (b) be incentivized to keep playing it "by the book."[HR][/HR]Here is a for instance:A game says all of the following:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The players roll all the dice.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Everyone must follow the rules.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">There is no metaplot.  No one should impose story.  Play aggressively, but play to find out what happens.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">GMs must honor success.  If the players feel the GM has slipped here...call him/her on it!</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A GMs movespace should be focused on resolving/answering these particular thematic questions which are the premise of play.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">On a success with complications, the GM gives the player success with a complication (and here is how the movespace is contracted for the GM in this case).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">On a failure, the GM gets to bring about a more serious complication (and here is how the movespace is contracted for the GM in this case).</li> </ul>So if a player makes a Lore move about a present situation they're in and a success says (tell them something both interesting and useful) and a success with complication says (tell them something interesting, its on them to make it useful), the GM's movespace is very contracted (particularly in concert with the rest of the game).  If the GM responds with something interesting but not useful (meaning the players can't put it into action right now), they'll call him on it.  But again, why the hell would they do that if (a) telling them something interesting and useful makes play fulfilling/works?  On a failure, the movespace is opened up more (but not remotely fully because there are several facets of the game that still contract the movespace).  Its no coincidence that, overwhelmingly, a GM's move is going to be to respond with "yes, that thing that you thought was true is, in fact, true...but here is a twist about it that sucks!"  And its also no coincidence that the twist is integrated with the PC in questions thematic questions that are embedded in their character...because that is how the movespace is focused for the GM.* Focus a GM's movespace.* Constrain a GM's movespace.* Make things table-facing.* Incentivize the GM to play by the rules because the rules reliably create "as advertised results" (functional play).That is how you limit cognitive bias in GMing.If you want to increase the cognitive bias of a GM in a game (perhaps because you want to leverage it!), therefore increasing the GM's signature on play, you do the opposite of all of those things.</blockquote>

Verification