Author Topic: A Study in the Logic of Gaming  (Read 62050 times)

Tadanori Oyama

  • Extreme XP CEO
  • *******
  • Posts: 3897
  • The Full Time GM
    • View Profile
    • Full Time GM
A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« on: March 30, 2009, 02:37:57 PM »
We've mentioned Gamer Logic at least once or twice this last week and after some examples from various members Maze has suggested we present the matter directly.

So, this thread is for examples of Gamer Logic. I suppose the quickest way to establish a difference between Gamer Logic and normal logic is that Gamer Logic often doesn't make sense and is most often self-justified.

For example: "Killing the leader of the village (for being firm with the PCs) is really what is best for the village."

Or: "Another player (who's character is a police officer) won't give me his gun. Therefore, he is hording the weapons."

Game Master primarily discover these instances but certainly players see their share, both from other players and from their dungeon masters.

dragonshaos

  • I am worth 100 points in GURPS...ladies
  • ***
  • Posts: 194
  • Amateur DM
    • View Profile
    • Myspace
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2009, 05:03:18 PM »
In a one shot zombie game I played with 2 of my players, one of the players decided that he would kill off the people in his fort who had weapons so he would have them all and thus fight off the zombies.  He didn't manage to kill the other survivors due to the survivors grabbing him and throwing him out a window where he fell squarely on top of a section of zombies that had been outside the base for a few days now.

In a separate zombie scenario, my 2 players had a house on a hill which was barricaded from the street, where of course zombies waited.  I added in a small dog that was supposed to give them a fun factor of sorts and let the players get creative with what the dog can do.  The dog managed to climb up the hill and get into the players very bare house (it had like a table, 2 chairs and a few canned goods, everything else was used to barricade).  However, I played a game with the players and dog and made it where the players didn't know what it was, but it was inside the house.  I pretty much described to them that it was a dog and it was hungry and tired and what not, But they believes it was a zombie dog!  They immediately went outside and burned down the house so they would be safe.  Afterward the barricade on the street collapsed due to a rockslide.  Their logic: 'Burn the house so we'll be safe from the zombie.  Then!  Find another house.  Somewhere.'

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

Tadanori Oyama

  • Extreme XP CEO
  • *******
  • Posts: 3897
  • The Full Time GM
    • View Profile
    • Full Time GM
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2009, 05:11:16 PM »
I love the "burn the house down so we'll be safer" plan. Zombie games really seem to bring it out of people, don't they?

clockworkjoe

  • BUY MY BOOK
  • Administrator
  • Extreme XP CEO
  • *****
  • Posts: 6517
    • View Profile
    • BUY MY BOOK
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2009, 06:41:55 PM »
Player logic is best when they decide on some fact that you haven't mentioned - the dog must be a zombie even the GM hasn't said anything suggesting that at all!


Tadanori Oyama

  • Extreme XP CEO
  • *******
  • Posts: 3897
  • The Full Time GM
    • View Profile
    • Full Time GM
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2009, 06:57:15 PM »
It's like a whole other level of the meta game: Not only does the process include a player's knowledge of things the characters don't know about but also completely made up material that the player doesn't actually know.

Maze

  • Global Moderator
  • Oregon Trail 13 Superstar
  • *****
  • Posts: 665
  • Azathoth Janitorial Services
    • View Profile
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2009, 10:53:15 PM »
Let's see:

When faced with a problem, a player will use brute force to resolve it.
When faced with an opponent, perceived or real, a player will try to cause its death one way or another, regardless of morality or consequences.
Player character morality is an ambiguous thing that cannot be defined satisfyingly.
Player sensibilities will show up in a player character even if it goes against that character logic or mores. (e.g.: damsels in distress, kids, etc.)
When denied a virtual object in a imaginary world, a player will sell his mother to obtain it.
Pop culture elements will influence any imaginary and distant settings to varying degrees. (Fuck you katana!)

Correct me if I'm wrong. Add to it.

clockworkjoe

  • BUY MY BOOK
  • Administrator
  • Extreme XP CEO
  • *****
  • Posts: 6517
    • View Profile
    • BUY MY BOOK
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2009, 11:04:38 PM »
NPCs exist to fight or give quests to the player.
If the police suspect a PC of a crime, the PC will either steal the evidence or kill the police.
If the PCs like an NPC, they will demolish anything that threatens them.
The players will never like any NPC that GM intends the players to like.
If the PCs dislike an NPC, they will kill or betray the NPC, regardless of consequences.

Dawnsteel

  • I dream in graph paper lines
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
  • Dispensing indiscriminate justice
    • View Profile
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2009, 11:05:25 PM »
Quote from: Maze
Pop culture elements will influence any imaginary and distant settings to varying degrees.

Ugh, yes.  Once my group encountered Gargarmaul...a horrifying cross between Jar Jar Binks, Darth Maul, and Gargamel from the Smurfs.  When our warrior finally knocked him down, I (the rogue-assassin) decapitated the motherfucker.
I didn't come here to win. I came to make friends.

Maze

  • Global Moderator
  • Oregon Trail 13 Superstar
  • *****
  • Posts: 665
  • Azathoth Janitorial Services
    • View Profile
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2009, 11:40:47 PM »
Quote from: Maze
Pop culture elements will influence any imaginary and distant settings to varying degrees.

Ugh, yes.  Once my group encountered Gargarmaul...a horrifying cross between Jar Jar Binks, Darth Maul, and Gargamel from the Smurfs.  When our warrior finally knocked him down, I (the rogue-assassin) decapitated the motherfucker.

Oh man, I'm struggling hard not to laugh and wake up my girlfriend- HAHAHAHAHAHA. (biting hard on shirt)

rayner23

  • President of the Apparatus of Kwalish fan club
  • *****
  • Posts: 1306
  • Machine. Unexpectantly, I invented a time
    • View Profile
    • Paladin Curse Blog
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2009, 09:25:34 AM »
NPCs exist to fight or give quests to the player.
If the police suspect a PC of a crime, the PC will either steal the evidence or kill the police.
If the PCs like an NPC, they will demolish anything that threatens them.
The players will never like any NPC that GM intends the players to like.
If the PCs dislike an NPC, they will kill or betray the NPC, regardless of consequences.


I agree with all of these, but I would like to put another on there:

If an NPC is a dick, then the players will do anything to ruin that character's life (whether it be murder the NPC or just be really confrontational to him/her).

Even if the NPC isn't a dick, but the players perceive said NPC to be one, the NPC's life will be ruined.

Let's face it, did Thelonius have to die? No. We took that too far.

I think after awhile, we have done a pretty good job of fixing things and being less confrontational (i.e. dicks). I'll chalk it up to trying to survive in this harsh New World.

SLIGHT SPOILERS FOR THE NEW WORLD CAMPAIGN?

The moment I realized our group was too confrontational (i.e. dicks) was when I left for a session and came back to find that we wanted to kill someone just because they lied to us. I asked, "wait, did she take anything from us?"

"No."

"Did she try to kill us?"

"No."

"Then why are we trying to kill her again."

"She lied to us dude!"

Let's face it, our group has never been the most morally upstanding group of adventurers in the New World and yet, this person was hiding her true identity and now we have to kill her?
I'm from Alaska. About Fifty miles south of Ankorage there's a little fishing town, maybe you've heard of it, it's called fuck your momma.

Tadanori Oyama

  • Extreme XP CEO
  • *******
  • Posts: 3897
  • The Full Time GM
    • View Profile
    • Full Time GM
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2009, 12:00:35 PM »
Player hate being lied to. And my NPCs lie alot. I lose alot of NPCs...


Everything is a trap. This includes all plot hooks.
Son of Sam Laws should have a PC exemption clause.
Always use the dice in social encounters. Unless the number is low. Then use "roleplay".
Guards (town, prision, caravan, all guards basically) never have families or significant connection to the world.
Charisma is directly connected to physical appearance.

rayner23

  • President of the Apparatus of Kwalish fan club
  • *****
  • Posts: 1306
  • Machine. Unexpectantly, I invented a time
    • View Profile
    • Paladin Curse Blog
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2009, 12:41:09 PM »
Guards (town, prision, caravan, all guards basically) never have families or significant connection to the world.


If they did, then they wouldn't be guards! They would be PCs!


For the record, at least PCs that murder guards and NPCs that are dicks do something. My D&D jr. kids are inept and cowardly.

If there is a mystery going on, they run around aimlessly and try to find their party members who have no idea what to do either.

If there is adventure to be had, they try to find reinforcements from the village they are supposed to protect.

Most sessions revolve around one player trying to find another player. If they can't think of anything else to do, they go to a weapon shop and hang out there. Even after I tell them that their weapons are better than anything there, they just hang out and browse the shops.
I'm from Alaska. About Fifty miles south of Ankorage there's a little fishing town, maybe you've heard of it, it's called fuck your momma.

Tadanori Oyama

  • Extreme XP CEO
  • *******
  • Posts: 3897
  • The Full Time GM
    • View Profile
    • Full Time GM
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2009, 01:08:34 PM »
Any situation can be "won" by meeting the victory conditions established by the GM or by killing all of the "enemy units". This applies to all situations, including: dungeon combat, urban slum combat, gladatorial combat, sieges, royal banquets, legal proceedings, shopping trips, and folk festivals.

When told that a given town or individual employs NPC guards of high enough level to be an actual deterant to the PCs, the PCs will be insulted at the implication that someone thinks they might be dangerous. Even if the smoke pillar from the last place they trashed is still visible in the distance.

rayner23

  • President of the Apparatus of Kwalish fan club
  • *****
  • Posts: 1306
  • Machine. Unexpectantly, I invented a time
    • View Profile
    • Paladin Curse Blog
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2009, 02:01:50 PM »
Any situation can be "won" by meeting the victory conditions established by the GM or by killing all of the "enemy units". This applies to all situations, including: dungeon combat, urban slum combat, gladatorial combat, sieges, royal banquets, legal proceedings, shopping trips, and folk festivals.

Well . . . how else can the players win?!
I'm from Alaska. About Fifty miles south of Ankorage there's a little fishing town, maybe you've heard of it, it's called fuck your momma.

Maze

  • Global Moderator
  • Oregon Trail 13 Superstar
  • *****
  • Posts: 665
  • Azathoth Janitorial Services
    • View Profile
Re: A Study in the Logic of Gaming
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2009, 02:02:31 PM »
Upon beginning a game, go to the bard, look for the shady character and ask for a quest.
If he refuses to give quest, consider him "hostile" and treat him appropriately.
A PC with an absent player is a soulless shell that can be controlled by the other player at will.
Domestic animals in a D&D setting usually get burnt by the first baby dragon you meet.
Classes, powers and weapons are all valid socially acceptable topic of conversation in public.
When two options are presented, choose the third one.
When one possible course of action is presented, argue about it then choose the third one.
When a dice rolls to low, change dice.
When a dice rolls very well, protect it with your life from other players. (apples only to certain players)

Let's also define "hostile npc" and "friendly npc".
Friendly NPC: A non-player character that is humble, give us everything we want, let us do anything we want, never so much as think bad of us, is impressed at everything we do and keeps praising our deeds. Must be protected.
Hostile NPC: Anyone else. Must die now.