Misha

I've been working on an alternate model for analyzing roleplaying to the Big Model--here it is!

It incorporates some of Luhmann's work on interlocking but operationally closed systems and looks a bit closer at the process by which the Shared Imagined Space gets created. I'm also just in general leaning hard towards description and away from prescription.

#ttrpg #rpgtheory

https://baatag.blogspot.com/2023/05/rpg-as-system-taking-my-shot-at-ron.html

RPG As System -- Taking My Shot At Ron Edwards

I’ve been getting more into System Theory lately, and Luhmann’s takes on social systems more specifically, and it’s inspired me to take a sh...

May 13, 2023 at 3:37pmWeb
Show threadDan MaruschakMay 13, 2023
@the_goblin I like a lot of what you've got here. I'd quibble with some things (eg I've seen the term "Artifacts of play" used for tangible things created during play that last afterwards, like a shared map, so I'd prefer a diff term here). I also think that Authority isn't a top-level concept, it's downstream of rules. I also question putting System inside SIS, RPG rules are "negotiable" for same reasons as other games, so seems odd to put in an RPG-specific place (but maybe worth considering).
Show threadDan MaruschakMay 13, 2023
@the_goblin I think the Forge's attempt to simplify the SIS was always a dubious idea, the need to keep individual imaginations in sync is complex enough that it can't be glossed over. (Multi-agent dynamic systems are complex so I understand why they wished they could simplify that part, but I think it's unrealistic to do so.) Not a fan of the acronym for Personal Imaginary Space, but it's important for understanding how RPGs work. (To be fair some old Forgies argued that too).
Show threadMishaMay 13, 2023

@DanMaruschak All fair! I'm a little dissatisfied with the entire Artifact section--the distinction between Utterances and Records feels a little flimsy and the name definitely has some bad connotations.

I'm not 100% against moving System. I put it there because it is (especially the Soft Rules) built by collaborative player contribution. My instinct is that this is more core to RPGs than other games, but I don't have a polished argument for why so I might end up shifting my stance eventually.

Show threadDan MaruschakMay 13, 2023
@the_goblin The way I think about System (in the lumpley principle sense) is that human brains are implementing it, so all of human psychology is implicated in how it operates. Usually when we talk about systems we focus on things like mechanics or explicit negotiation, but a lot of what we "agree to" is based on what already seems true to us. As some pandemic-era politics has painfully illustrated in the real world, there's a lot more to what we believe and agree to than Authority.
Show threadDan MaruschakMay 13, 2023
@the_goblin So something like "a unicorn has four legs" is rarely an explicit hard rule, but it's so shared that disagreement doesn't even seem possible. Rules giving certain players authority increases credibility, makes us more likely to agree to their contributions. But things like foreshadowing also do that (eg AW's future badness). Phrasing of rules is also a factor, etc. (eg "take X damage, save to take half" is easier to agree to than "take X/2 dmg, roll to see if you take another X/2").
Show threadMishaMay 13, 2023
@DanMaruschak Putting Authority on the same level as (and maybe even split between) Hard and Soft Rules makes sense. I might do that in the next draft.