Philosophy in gaming

[Teuthic]

Or more specifically, Philosophy in Your Game. In the Violence in gaming, everyone's focusing on the media's reaction to violence in games; it's an interesting discussion, but it caused me to think about how violence is portrayed within roleplaying games. Thinking about my own games, I prefer to keep violence to a minimum, and when it does happen, there tend to be rather nasty consequences. I realized that it's because I believe violent solutions tend to beget nastier outcomes than nonviolent solutions; I find violence bad on a conceptual level, so it has harsher consequences in my games.

This got me to thinking about the exploration of philosophical concepts in gaming. In some ways, gaming can be seen as a philosopher's lab; pure thought experiments can actually be played out within a game. For example, consider the mind-body problem.¹ Philosophers can only consider the problem from an abstract standpoint; they make conceivability arguments² and argue for or against monism and dualism. But as a gamer, I can run a game where the alternate philosophical models are reality. The characters playing in my game act out the subject through roleplaying, making arguments based on their actions. This kind of game can give everyone playing a stronger understanding of an idea while everyone is still having fun.

I suspect everyone who decides to run a game does this. Ross, for example, once mentioned that he finds how his players make difficult decisions to be the most interesting part of gaming; he wants to study ethics through his game. My games usually touch upon solipsism and the uncertainty of external reality; this is why I'm fascinated by the strangeness of Carcosa and Don't Rest Your Head. I've noticed Caleb's games usually have an underlying theme of the Cost of Truth; in Know Evil, joining Firewall means you're more clued-in to reality, but you also have to fight ex-threats. In the Leviathan mini-campaign, you learn all sorts of things about a super-prison, but it also means the government may be out to get you.

So, what interests you most in games, and how does that come out in your own games?

¹ For those uninterested in reading through the link, the problem involves the relationship between the mind and matter, or consciousness and the brain. Is consciousness another aspect of one's body, electrical signals firing off to make thought? Or does the brain merely house consciousness, which in itself derives from something else? If the first case is true, then we live in a deterministic world; all the neurochemical reactions that cause electricity to spark through your brain were caused by something else, which was caused by something else, and so on back to the big bang. If the second option is true, then we have to accept that there is a physical and non-physical world, that the universe isn't governed by a single set of rules.

²Conceivability argument: in philosophy, if something is conceivable or imaginable, it must be metaphysically possible, but certain models of consciousness cannot work if other models are conceivable. Let's say I conceive of a world where everything is identical to my own, but no one is actually conscious; they act identically to humans in all their actions, (yelping when stabbed, smiling when complimented, saying what you would say when asked a question) but they have no internal monologue, no consciousness. They're robots (or zombies). Since the world is identical to our own, that means there must be a zombie Teuthic running around doing whatever it is that I'm doing at this moment, but he has no consciousness; our bodies are identical in every way, but I'm conscious. If our bodies are identical, but I'm conscious, then conceivably, this means my consciousness is not physically part of me.

[Tadanori Oyama]

I try work some into my long term games, especially World of Darkness games like Mage and Promethean were the human conditionn and one's place in the universe are central elements of the game. Ethics are very interesting to me as well and I always try to present my players with complex choices.

I find it personally interesting to play a character with enforced ethics. In the most recent Vampire game I got to be a player in, I decided to play a character working hard to maintain his Humanity. I would try to veto any plans involving guns, swords, or other weapons for the simple reason that hurting people was morally wrong.

[Cthuluzord]

I never thought of the Cost of Truth angle on my own games, but I can totally see that. The next campaign has a whole mechanic built into it just for that purpose; you literally have to pay for plot information. I'll have to watch myself in the future to keep out of a rut.

At the risk of sounding like a pretentious douche-nozzle, I viewed the Know Evil campaign as built in a world (e.g. canon EP) where moral relativity is the only sane worldview and moral absolutes are nearly impossible to find. But my hope (and it was fulfilled) was that the PC's would have to operate from a set of certainties, taboos, and unshakable principles, regardless of the evidence to the contrary or the presence of doubt. The goal was that the contrast between the GM's truth (objective, or a simulacrum thereof) and the PC's interpretation thereof (subjective) would lead to interesting conflicts, and I was pleasantly surprised.

Without giving anything away, I think the moral relativity/ethics angle becomes more apparent in the last act. But we'll see. Either way, I really like this thread. Being able to articulate these philosophical themes at the front end could lead to better game design.

[Teapot]

I'm a bit confused, but largely I'm a big catharsis junkie. I think reaction and esclation to choices lead to that in a way that often makes me happiest.

I would ask, if you are choosing a philosophical operating system for your game world, do you tell the players? Is it like the axis of design or just a world you set up and they have to figure it out.

[Teuthic]

I would ask, if you are choosing a philosophical operating system for your game world, do you tell the players? Is it like the axis of design or just a world you set up and they have to figure it out.

It depends on the game, I suppose; if the game's about the mind-body problem above, I'd probably have that be intrinsic in character creation, so everyone would know about the basic idea, or I'd doll it up with slightly different wording. Perhaps something about parallel universes; mind-reading works on the PCs in Universe A, but it doesn't work on their counterparts in Universe B. The game would then focus on the implications of this universe.

If I want to play a game about reality, it would probably be more like one of Ross's Night Mall or Night Clerks games, with a bigger focus on the consequences of rejecting reality. So the game would start off with everyone completely clueless, they'd possibly reject reality or not halfway through the game, then I'd imply that it's also a constructed world possibly maybe! Whee, paranoia!

At the risk of sounding like a pretentious douche-nozzle, I viewed the Know Evil campaign as built in a world (e.g. canon EP) where moral relativity is the only sane worldview and moral absolutes are nearly impossible to find. But my hope (and it was fulfilled) was that the PC's would have to operate from a set of certainties, taboos, and unshakable principles, regardless of the evidence to the contrary or the presence of doubt. The goal was that the contrast between the GM's truth (objective, or a simulacrum thereof) and the PC's interpretation thereof (subjective) would lead to interesting conflicts, and I was pleasantly surprised.

Without giving anything away, I think the moral relativity/ethics angle becomes more apparent in the last act. But we'll see. Either way, I really like this thread. Being able to articulate these philosophical themes at the front end could lead to better game design.

It's kind of impossible to sound like anything but a pretentious douche-nozzle when talking philosophy; might as well revel in it. But this is exactly what I'm getting at; this kind of thought process helps make interesting conflict.