Cognitive dissonance in YOUR favorite RPG [+]

[Emoshin]

This is a + thread

The purpose of this + thread is to learn if cognitive dissonance happens if/when playing our favorite game, and what if anything we’ve done about it.

What is cognitive dissonance?

Cognitive dissonance is (and hopefully this is an accurate summary):

• Perceiving contradictory information, like two ideas that are inconsistent with each other
• and feeling some amount of mental stress as a result
• and usually trying to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce the mental discomfort

To reduce cognitive dissonance, we have various coping strategies, like:

• Adjusting one's behavior or attitude (for example, eat less junk food if concerned about a healthy diet)
• Rationalizing or justifying the behavior or belief that creates the dissonance
• Ignoring or denying the info that creates the dissonance

Cognitive dissonance can result in frustration and confusion. Sometimes it can ultimately lead to personal growth, if the discomfort drives us to re-evaluate our beliefs and adjust behavior accordingly.

Cognitive dissonance in RPGs?

I propose that many of us have and/or continue to experience some amount of cognitive dissonance in roleplaying games. It can be mild or intense, it can divide us into many different sides, and sometimes we invest a good amount of time and effort arguing and/or resolving it.

From alignment to XP, upon reading or in play, potential sources of cognitive dissonance could be very general (like hit points) to very granular (why do druids not use metal armor but do use metal weapons?). The mental discomfort could be negligible or minor or major. Reducing the dissonance could vary from ignoring it to switching to a new system altogether and everything in between.

But why use that term?

I personally like the term “cognitive dissonance”, because it's:

• a formal theory in psychology
• more precise than “I don’t like this”
• experiential (it doesn’t try to assign an objective formal characteristic to a rule or fiction)
• subjective (it's not a criticism of someone else's experience with the game)

For example

For example, in my favorite RPG (currently 5E), I see PC hit points as primarily a reserve of heroic resilience and good fortune (until it drops into, say, the 10s to reflect more physical endurance). However when, say, a fireball fills up an empty room and the PCs take massive amounts of fire damage, it’s hard for me to see cinematically what happened. Do they have first degree burns? Do the PCs manifest untold defensive powers? I try not to think about it too much. My group is not interested in trying out other systems at this time, so that's not currently a solution. However, as the PCs keep rising in levels, I’ve been thinking about introducing an in-fiction explanation that supports levels and hit points as part of the world-building.

"In my game..."

To facilitate a productive discussion, be as subjective ("in my game...") as possible

Let's NOT make assertions:

• About other people or their experiences or games we’ve barely played
• That if you don't like X, stop playing your favorite RPG
• That X isn't a problem or "should" not be a issue for somebody else
• Using Forge-talk, if only because of the baggage and to be as inclusive as possible in a general forum

 

[schneeland]

Just to clarify: are you using "cognitive dissonance" to be synonymous with "ludonarrative dissonance" (i.e. mismatch between the narrative generated by mechanics and the one established as part of setting and story)?
Main reason I ask is because it seems like there's an aspect of discomfort you are factoring in that is, IMO, typically not present when discussing ludonarrative dissonance.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

Does the promise/premise of a game and its content (rules) not fulfilling it can count as cognitive dissonance?

I bought the Symbaroum books a while ago and read them from cover to cover. For anyone that knows Symbaroum, the premise is a massive forest called Davokar in which you mount expeditions to explore ruins and comer back with treasures. It screams exploration; and the books double down on that. However, when I bought the book there simply was no rules for exploration! Nothing related to food, orienteering or ways to measure progress in the forest.

They added some rules in a later book (book 4 of the campaign if I recall) but I do find them subpar.

 

[Emoshin]

Just to clarify: are you using "cognitive dissonance" to be synonymous with "ludonarrative dissonance" (i.e. mismatch between the narrative generated by mechanics and the one established as part of setting and story)?
Main reason I ask is because it seems like there's an aspect of discomfort you are factoring in that is, IMO, typically not present when discussing ludonarrative dissonance.

I did read about the term "ludonarrative dissonance" but I've elected to leave it out. One, I don't know a whole lot about it. Two, it seems very specific to certain video games. Three, I read somewhere that it is sometimes mocked within the industry, and I just don't know anything much about it.

EDIT: Re-reading your post more carefully a second time, I would think that the mismatch you mention IS a form of cognitive dissonance, but I am not sure what you mean about the type of discomfort specifically for "ludonarrative dissonance"

 

[Emoshin]

Does the promise/premise of a game and its content (rules) not fulfilling it can count as cognitive dissonance?

I am not a psychologist, but yes, I would say that counts.

 

[Gradine]

<RPG Thread>
<"Cognitive Dissonance">


...oh dear god...

 

[Emoshin]

<RPG Thread>
<"Cognitive Dissonance">


...oh dear god...

It sounds foreboding. Who is coming?

 

[Lanefan]

I voted "maybe" as even after reading the OP I'm not 100% clear on what you're after here.

If you mean situations in the fiction that arise only for pure gameplay reasons (go-to example here is only being able to wear two magic rings at once even though most playable species have many more than two places to put them) then yes, I've experienced this dissonance and have never quite fully squared with it.

Instead, all I can do is shrug, accept that these things are done for balance/gameplay reasons, and move on.

If that's not what you mean, then I'm at a loss here.

 

[Emoshin]

I voted "maybe" as even after reading the OP I'm not 100% clear on what you're after here.

If you mean situations in the fiction that arise only for pure gameplay reasons (go-to example here is only being able to wear two magic rings at once even though most playable species have many more than two places to put them) then yes, I've experienced this dissonance and have never quite fully squared with it.

Instead, all I can do is shrug, accept that these things are done for balance/gameplay reasons, and move on.

If that's not what you mean, then I'm at a loss here.

Yep, that sound to right me!

In your example, I'd propose the cognitive dissonance comes from:

• you read the rule, it says only 2 magic rings at once
• your fiction/imagination can see a species wearing multiple magic rings

And then you saying (paraphrasing): "I have never quite fully squared with it, but I'm going to roll with it, because balance/gameplay" is a very common (if not, the most common) strategy to deal with it.

I'm not "after" anything per se, other then to propose that framing it as a subjective experience (like cognitive dissonance) is a better starting point to discuss it compared to some of the other ways (ie., arguments) I've heard in the past.

 

[Bagpuss]

In D&D spell preparation for Clerics. Just seems daft that the deity would deny them aid because them memorized Bull's Strength, instead or Remove Paralysis that morning.

It speeds up the game and stops the clerics turn taking 10 minutes as they look for just the right spell for the occasion.