Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Joshua A.C. Newman, September 19, 2005, 12:22:38 PM
Quote from: Joshua BishopRoby on October 05, 2005, 05:05:53 PMQuote from: glyphmonkey on October 05, 2005, 02:38:52 PMOK, so, great, what function does randomness serve in... • GURPSFirst off, as an iterative artifact, GURPS does not use dice in a consistent way. You can't simply say "GURPS uses dice to mirror the unpredictability of the real world" or whatever. Dice have been added to the design of GURPS for a number of reasons through the years of its development, often for very different reasons.
Quote from: glyphmonkey on October 05, 2005, 02:38:52 PMOK, so, great, what function does randomness serve in... • GURPS
Quote from: talysman on October 05, 2005, 06:09:50 PMno, see, you're still looking at it wrong.
Quoteyou're looking at all the specific ways dice show up in GURPS, but not abstracting them into general categories, then asking "if we removed dice at this point, what would GURPS lose?" this is the fundamental question that Vincent asked for each of the games he analyzed above.
Quote#2 and #3 serve the same purpose: introduce unexpected effects... #4 essentially fulfills the same function, but also aide in determining when a conflict has been won.
Quote from: Joshua BishopRoby on October 05, 2005, 05:05:53 PMOverall, I would say that GURPS uses dice to support the game part of roleplaying game -- it adds an element of chance that theoretically makes the experience at the table more enjoyable for the participants.
Quote from: Joshua BishopRoby on October 05, 2005, 06:54:11 PMQuote from: talysman on October 05, 2005, 06:09:50 PMno, see, you're still looking at it wrong.Still? I just posted into this thread. o.O
Quote from: RalphThe payoff motivates players to start Complications which is a desired behavior...initiating Complications is a profitable activity. But the uncertainty means that the player's behavior around Complications is much different than if that payoff were a guarenteed, known, non randomized event.
Quote from: Johnif you lose randomness in task resolution, players will concentrate on making a few skills sure-fire and won't risk using other skills;if you lose randomness in damage results, conflict resolution becomes more predictable -- you will always know after the first exchange who will accrue damage faster;if you lose the other two kinds of randomness, all conflicts begin to look the same.
Quote from: jmac on October 06, 2005, 02:09:33 PMIsn't it GM's (or whoever takes most of responsibility) decision to choose if randomness will be used or not, anyway?Is it really still a question - "what randomness gives us" or "how to use it"?imho, using or not using dice etc is more about responsibility and making decisions in real situations - more of a feeling and intuition then system or rules.
Quote from: jmac on October 06, 2005, 02:09:33 PMIsn't it GM's (or whoever takes most of responsibility) decision to choose if randomness will be used or not, anyway?
Quote from: jmac]Is it really still a question - "what randomness gives us" or "how to use it"?imho, using or not using dice etc is more about responsibility and making decisions in real situations - more of a feeling and intuition then system or rules.
Quote from: talysman on October 06, 2005, 02:39:54 PM... the dungeon is basically a flow chart that links together combat and problem-solving scenarios. play is driven by movement from room to room....the problem was: they removed the dungeon as the procedure governing play at high-level, but didn't know what to put in its place. all the games in this period did, at first, was add a skill system to the combat system and say "go forth and adventure"... when that was discovered to be too vague, they started applying the dungeon flowchart to the concept of plot, and you wound up with GM-designed choose-your-own-adventure, which of course lead mainly to Illusionist play or outright railroading.this is why you see "metaplot" arising in this timeperiod. it's a "dungeon" on the conceptual level.
Quote from: lumpley on October 06, 2005, 11:49:28 AMWhat none of you've provided yet is the purely procedural function randomness serves in GURPS. You've listed a bunch of ways that randomness contributes to what happens in the game's fiction, but nothing about how randomness contributes to what the actual people actually do.-Vincent
Quote from: Valamir on October 06, 2005, 09:09:16 PMI think Elliot is right. Randomness in GURPS isn't there to support play from a procedural sense. Its there to support a specific design philosophy, one that stems directly from wargaming and was such an ingrained assumption of the hobby of wargaming that I doubt SJ actually felt the need to articulate the purpose of its use in GURPs.
QuoteNow whether this is something to "blame" GURPS for or applaud it for depends entirely on your feelings of whether Monte Carlo style statistical models of reality are a valid purpose for a game design.
Quote from: marcoI can tell you for certain that JAGS, which uses the same model as GURPS in terms of mechanics (design patterns, if you will) did have a strong component of non-reality based deisgn goals and, in fact, I made a number of non-realism-based game-design decisions that centered around levels of player empowerment and predictability rather than a monte carlo simulation of reality.Specifically, while I was concerned about the game system producing results that caused a strong break in suspension of disbelief, I was far more concerned with how the player felt about being in control of the action (which is why I moved from 2d10 to 4d6-4 early on).