What is an RPG really? (A look at Game Theory and Psychology)

[Emiricol]

Heyo Jester47 - I hope you don't take my post personally. I just re-read it, and it does sound a bit... confrontationall... It was certainly a good troll, as far as trolls go And not poorly thought out, either.

Anyway, my argument was against the underlying assumptions of the reports you based your post on - not against your post itself. If you see what I mean. You are right that psychology is getting better, but I wouldn't say it is all done cooking yet.

I'd also suggest that saying religion hates D&D because "there an element of the mind that governs behavior and that this element is being used when calculating the behevior of a fictional character" is flawed. The fact that it is fictional is probably not highly relevant, but the behavior part seems to be the crux of the argument.

But, there's too many exceptions - mainstream religion does not hate authors of fiction, but might have issue with the resulting books. It REALLY doesn't hate politicians, and their whole career is based on calculating behavior. Cops. Little League coaches.

I think religious organizations disliking D&D has everything to do with the fact that there are multiple gods, you cast spells, and devils walk the fantasy game world. Clerics perform miracles reserved for god, Jesus and sometimes the Apostles.

That D&D is about the behavior (ie actions) of fictional characters is of peripheral relevance at best. Drunk drivers kill people and cops hate them, so... cops must hate cars. That's a similar train of logic, and it is flawed. What they are really saying is that D&D is like the alcohol in the drunk driver equation. STILL not accurate, but that's the thought process, IMHO.

Thanks for the troll! It was an interesting one.

 

[jester47]

I would have to go get five degrees or somthing like that to actually know what I was talking about. I would say it is more of a hunch rather than a troll. Trolls seem more about pissing people off. I just had a thought and put it out there.

I think my thought is very inarticulate, especially when I think about what I mean and then try to say it. I think D&D promotes free thought and that there are people who are afraid of free thought. I was simply trying to quantify the reason for that fear. No matter how poorly.


Aaron.

 

[Drawmack]

I would have to go get five degrees or somthing like that to actually know what I was talking about. I would say it is more of a hunch rather than a troll. Trolls seem more about pissing people off. I just had a thought and put it out there.

I think my thought is very inarticulate, especially when I think about what I mean and then try to say it. I think D&D promotes free thought and that there are people who are afraid of free thought. I was simply trying to quantify the reason for that fear. No matter how poorly.

Then you shoudl have said that. Maybe a stance that doesn't depend at all on psychology but rather on divergent belief systems. Religion fighting over who is right is a very old practice. The crusades are an example as is the spanish inquisition and the witch hunts of salem. Get into divergent theories of gods between religion and D&D. Although I think that main basis for prejudice against games cannot be adaquatly explained by a gamer because it it the same as the basis of all prejudice. Ignorance builds hatred build ignorance builds hatred. Sit down with your average KKK member and ask them how many blacks, jews, etc. they have personally known and of those they have actually known how many would they clump into the classification with those they do not know. It's the same with antigamers. Four times I have had the opportunity of talking an antigamer into sitting at my table for a session. 1 of them became a players, 1 is now a gaming advocate, 1 has become indifferent on the matter and 1 is still antigaming (but this guys character died I think that could have something to do with it.)

 

[Kwalish Kid]

Someone has to sit down and publish a paper or a book that uses the term, "dictionary fallacy." This term will mean that someone has looked at the dictionary and incorrectly thought that what was written there has something even remotely to do with their subject of inquiry.

The "role-playing" of psychology is just not the "role-playing" of RPGs.

And of course Game Theory can be seen in RPGs-- RPGs are games! More than that, they are about general problem solving strategies, which is what Game Theory is all about. I can't wait for D20 Expected Value or D20 Bayesianism. (Decision Theory jokes. I love them.)

As for some people seeing RPGs as competition: That may be the case, but this agument doesn't prove it. These groups may be making the same dictionary fallacy, but it needs to be established.

 

[boxstop7]

Gotta chime in...

I don't think it's really about psychology, per se. Yes, there is a section of the brain that controls these things. It's called the right brain. It's the creative half of the human brain, with the left brain being more oriented toward mathematical and analytical thinking. To me, RPGs are distinctly different than therapuetic role-playing (henceforth referred to as "TRP"). TRP is used primarily in therapy to confront, and deal with, feelings that have been repressed or hidden from the self. TRP can also be used in helping a client overcome phobias, or to overcome errrors in thinking (for all you cognitive psychologists out there ). It's a tool used by the therapist to get at the perceived root of a psychological problem.

I have never been involved with an RPG that was even akin to this type of role-playing. RPGs are about acting. You're taking on a role that is nowhere near grounded in reality (with the possible exception of modern d20 games). You're thinking and reacting to imaginary situations (and this is the key, here...) with OTHER PEOPLE. You're all sharing the adventure, working with one another to solve a mystery, complete a quest, etc. We're able to step out of our drab everyday world and pretend to be part of something wholly different. The human imagination welcomes these kinds of exercises. But we're able to return from the make-believe worlds and get back to our daily lives as if nothing happened.

I'm actually more intrigued by your game theory analogy. I find game theory, in and of itself, a fascinating proposition. Bearing in mind, of course, that John Nash was a major contributor. I've seen game theory applied to all sorts of things: discussions of (sometimes Machiavellian) military strategy, consumer economics, even the equal allocation and distribution of broadband internet access. As I understand game theory, it does involve determining the "optimal response" to a situation. But there has been a good deal of resistance to game theory, and IMHO it's because it works (but I'm a known conspiracy theorist ).

Regardless, it's a very interesting topic. Unfortunately, it's an exercise in philosophy and therefore unlikely to really take us any place concrete. But a truly intriguing discussion nonetheless. On a final note, I would agree with those that state Christianity's opposition to RPGs lies in the polytheistic, magic-wielding, demon-wandering nature of the games. It's viewed as heresy, and as sin. And since questions arise from a good imagination, it makes sense that any staunch religion would want to avoid situations which could lead members to question the faith. They fail to acknowledge that questioning your faith often leads to a deeper understanding of it. Just my .02

Feel free to continue the debate if I've said anything that shakes your tree. This is a GREAT debate!

~Box

 

[jester47]

Maddman and Seasong made really good points on this and some people have said some things that I think shows that the two types of role playing are related but very different beasts. I think an appraoch of game theory in Role playing games would be very interesting.

 

[Kwalish Kid]

Regardless, it's a very interesting topic. Unfortunately, it's an exercise in philosophy and therefore unlikely to really take us any place concrete.

Game theory and decision theory are quite important for a variety of disciplines. As a conctrete example, current investigators in quantum theory are turning to probabilistic models to provide frameworks in which to model and test theories. Such frameworks will benefit from game theory and other forms of decision theory. These theories are a fit topic for philosophical discussion and philosophers have contributed to their development. As such, they are both exercises in philosophy and take us to concrete applications and discoveries.

Do not discount an investigation into reasoning.

I encourage any gamer who wished to investigate game theory and incorporate it into RPGs. Used wisely, it can markedly improve the game.

 

[Umbran]

I left this all in here because seasong makes really good points with these. I think my point is that given a situation there is an optimal response for the players to have thier characters take that benefit all the characters. The game theory that I am talking about is figureing out that optimal response.

Frequently, RPGs are not about finding an "optimal response". What you say may hold for some goal-oriented groups, but often enough RPGs are about telling story, which has little to do with optimization.

In a sense it is "Ok how do we get through the tomb of horrors where everyone survives?" I think that it is definately a game theory question. But there are two other factors that make it a very complicated one, namely the use of the part of the brain that determines how someone should behave (which can recursively touch again on game theory, citing the ethics example above.) and random numbers, again a related element of game theory.

Usually, game theory analysis calls for extensive knowledge of the situation. You cannot find an optimal response if you don't know what you are up against. You can't ask "How do we get through the Tomb of Horrors?" unless you know beforehand that it's the Tomb you're going through, rather than going on an Expedition to the Barrier Peaks. Since frequently players have very little information about their situation, game theory is often not applicable.

Finally, I think the idea that there is "the part of the brain that determines how someone should behave" is a vast oversimplification of human behavior. Vast enough to be faulty, and your thesis rather depends on it. Human behavior is horribly complex.

The analogy between game role playing and psychological treatment role playing falls apart at a crucial juncture - nobody expects a petient to modify his behavior solely under the influence of the role-playing session itself. It's merely one tool, that must be coupled with many others in order to get results in the patient.

Thus, to say that religious types don't like RPGs because they touch on this supposed single thing that determines human behavior is rather like saying that the local contractor is going to be upset that I pick up a hammer, because he feels threatened that I might start building houses. One hammer does not a house make, and the construction contractor knows that.

 

[Henry]

Thus, to say that religious types don't like RPGs because they touch on this supposed single thing that determines human behavior is rather like saying that the local contractor is going to be upset that I pick up a hammer, because he feels threatened that I might start building houses. One hammer does not a house make, and the construction contractor knows that.

COMPETENT construction contractors know that. The same could be said about leaders in a particular religion, whatever that religion may be. If an incompetent leader sees that his way of life is threatened, even by example, he/she will take action to see that revelation is stifled. I have met some professionals in this world who take even the least criticism as a direct threat or insult to their jobs - which leads me to wonder about their competency in the first place.

 

[Umbran]

COMPETENT construction contractors know that. The same could be said about leaders in a particular religion, whatever that religion may be. If an incompetent leader sees that his way of life is threatened, even by example, he/she will take action to see that revelation is stifled.

Yes, but since he's incompetent, his efforts are largely wasted, and thus not much of a concern.