Math in games: why the stigma?

[xiombarg]

I'll say this in an entirely different way: game designers have little sympathy for people who lack the verbal skills to follow their work.  They have great sympathy for those who lack the math.

Perhaps this is a better phrasing. However, there's a simple reason for this, which I believe was brought up before (but I'm too lazy to hunt up the reference): Roleplaying is, at its heart, a verbal activity. Even a LARP, but moreso tabletop play. You can roleplay without numbers, but you can't roleplay without words. Numbers may be a language, but their vocabulary is too limited to roleplay with.

Not that I wouldn't be amused to see someone try to do a "all math, no words" RPG...

[Blake Hutchins]

Hi Jeff,

That's a very interesting comment.  As a general proposition, I submit most people who suffer from a lack of verbal skills such that it interferes with their ability to read, say, a Palladium rulebook, also suffer from a lack of mathematical skills.  Of course, there are people whose brains are more wired for math, people who are innately more inclined or more interested in math, and people who didn't fall prey to innumeracy or poor experiences with math education.

As it happens, I agree with your proposition that math is a form of language, so for me, the manipulations are fairly similar, except that as a practical matter, people get a lot more regular practice with their verbal skills as an unavoidable part of everyday life.  Every day, people speak, listen, and read.  Not so with math beyond the basic arithmatic level.  The American public, at least, does exhibit general innumeracy problems, in my opinion, and perhaps RP books do cater to this in some wise.  But as far as say, logarithmic calculations in gameplay, c'mon: are you saying people should pull out calcuators to determine the outcome of Fortune mechanics?  That seems excessive and unwieldy to me.

As far as the dumbing down of language, to what level of simplicity do you suggest simplifying text content?  Granting that some RP writing is atrocious and/or overblown, what do you prescribe?  Paring down to a series of cut-and-dried simple sentences?  Recipe style instructions?  No four-syllable words?  Nothing past a fifth-grade reading level?  Should books like Nobilis and Dying Earth be criticized for overwriting?

Not seeking confrontation here, sir, just clarification.

Best,

Blake

[Mike Holmes]

As far as the dumbing down of language, to what level of simplicity do you suggest simplifying text content?  Granting that some RP writing is atrocious and/or overblown, what do you prescribe?  Paring down to a series of cut-and-dried simple sentences?  Recipe style instructions?  No four-syllable words?  Nothing past a fifth-grade reading level?  Should books like Nobilis and Dying Earth be criticized for overwriting?

I don't think that Jeff is proposing that at all. Rather the opposite, that we un-dumb the math. Your previous point about those lacking verbal skills also lacking math skills just says that we should dumb down both just in case. I would say that the market in question has little problem with verbal skills, but does have some occasional math problems, hence the current marketing. Those without the verbal skills to read a complex text will probably also have trouble with some of the other basic stuff of RPGs.

OTOH, see Jared's Monster Party.

I think that, in fact there are games designed for every level or Math and verbal proficiency. See Phoenix Command if you really want some math, or if you can find a copy KABAL (Knight's and Berzerkers and Legerdemain), which in the rules required a calculator to play. Eveyone is represented if even only marginally.

Mike

[damion]

There are several issues here.
1) I think Search & Handling is different from math, players can speed up search and handeling, by say having their rolls ready. A system can help here by making it possible for things to be done in parallel.  Delta V would probably be the ultimate example of a system with low search and handling times, but high math.

Also, there are some things to consider.
Any step that a player can do without consulting anything else is much faster than any step that requires outside help.
E.g. Earthdawn can be speeded up ALOT by writing what dice you use next to every step. While Rolemaster charts are still slow. (Because you have to role then search the chart. It's inherently serial, unless you memorize the chart)    
There is also math vs visual tasts. For some people addin a die+modifiers is faster than rolling a buch of dice vs a fixed target and counting successes. (The first task is math, the second is visual).  Stun damage in Hero is an example of the worst of both worlds(add a bunch of visual stuff).


2)I think this also ties into modes of resolution. What mode you prefer varies from person to person, but IMHO it's hard to have Fortune and low math. Mainly because without math you end up with a very limited range of results and it degenrates toward karma resolution. (I say degenerates because the system changes from what was intended to something else, not because karma is worse)
Say the system is 'roll a D6+modifiers'. Any modifier changes this probability quite a lot, a +2 to one side is devastating.  Resolution is mostly based on who has the most modifiers. Example:Reach in Shadowrun 2nd edition melee combat. (it's atually worse than my example)

Math allows you to have a range of results much larger than verbal. This feels more realistic because reality is a continuous range of results. Imagine being in a world with only 3 colors, or imagine I could put my cup 'here' or there, but not somewhere in between. That would feel pretty weird. Haveing everyone be 'strong' 'average' or 'weak' feels the same way. You could probably add more modifiers, but it still feels weird and quickly be comes cumbersome. ('I'm ultra stong' ,'I'm wicked mega strong', which of us is better?) I know for me my mind accepts the descreteness more for math. Also it's easier to add forture with math. (I roll a die and add my 'ultra mega strong' ?) Forture hides the fact that there is small range of possiblities.  

Not that I wouldn't be amused to see someone try to do a "all math, no words" RPG...

This I believe is called a 'wargame' :). The Karma based version would be a card game. :)  Since RPGs are basicly considered to have come out of wargamming, some effort was spent to get away from the all math roots. This might explain any verbal emphasis, so yeah, verbal activity is what distinguishes RPGs from wargames.

Apologies for the long post, only get one per day. :D

[Blake Hutchins]

Hello,

"Reality" in RPG's is subjective.  You're really talking about the degree of granularity in verisimilitude.  It's not, in my opinion, the actual reality being recreated, but the illusion of such for those who want that level of system-embedded detail.  Many games, for example, do not codify hit locations in combat, but surely where one is injured plays a major role in determining outcome.  Most groups either ignore location entirely.

Anyway, I have a sense this is drifting a bit from Jaif's original topic.  I'll try to drag it back by saying that Tribe 8's Silhouette system runs pretty quickly for what I'd call a not-math light game.  The core math is simple addition and multiplication, and the system encourages a one-roll-determines-result kind of resolution, which means handling time is fast.  Read the dice results, multiply by X, and narrate.  OTOH, Traveller 2300, the mechanics of which I'm a bit muddy on these days, incorporated decimal components in die rolls, which I recall did slow things down a bit.

Best,

Blake

[Jaif]

Concering gaming & verbal skills:

1) I'll grant that verbal skills have more coverage in most RPG sessions.  However, I strongly doubt people have played games without using math.  Note that math can be divided into arithmetic, geometry, and analysis (algebra, calculus, etc).  Actions such as counting, comparisons, set logic, spatial descriptions, and so on all fall under the language of "math".  Yes "ten", "square", and "more" are all english words, but they represent math concepts, so when the 10 guards are in the square room and there are more of them than there are of you, that's pretty much a mathematical description, not an english one.

2) Math is neither more expressive nor less expressive than english.  Just different and better at certain things than others.

3) There's an attitude here that says "it's what sells".  Fine, I respect that: capitalism is good.  But consider: in the past, newspapers were written to a higher standard, and it was a common idea to read a paper not just to learn the news but to increase your verbal skills (e.g. vocabulary).  Nowadays, though, newspapers are written to roughly a 9th grade level (last report I heard), and frankly to my eyes are often childish.  Is that the path for games as well?  Give in to the dumbing down of people to make a buck?

-Jeff

[Mike Holmes]

1) I'll grant that verbal skills have more coverage in most RPG sessions.  However, I strongly doubt people have played games without using math.  Note that math can be divided into arithmetic, geometry, and analysis (algebra, calculus, etc).  Actions such as counting, comparisons, set logic, spatial descriptions, and so on all fall under the language of "math".  Yes "ten", "square", and "more" are all english words, but they represent math concepts, so when the 10 guards are in the square room and there are more of them than there are of you, that's pretty much a mathematical description, not an english one.

Yes, but this has nothing to do with the negative side of math which is the potential it may have for distancing people from what they want. What you have described would be a fun use of math for most people, whereas math in resolution systems seems to not be fun for most people as it is not part of the narrative of the game. You keep confounding narration with mechanics, and ignoring peoples preferences in this matter.

3) There's an attitude here that says "it's what sells".  Fine, I respect that: capitalism is good.  But consider: in the past, newspapers were written to a higher standard, and it was a common idea to read a paper not just to learn the news but to increase your verbal skills (e.g. vocabulary).  Nowadays, though, newspapers are written to roughly a 9th grade level (last report I heard), and frankly to my eyes are often childish.  Is that the path for games as well?  Give in to the dumbing down of people to make a buck?

The attitude that I have displayed is that I think that designers have designed games that they feel are appealing to people, which includes trying to take steps to reduce the onerousness (percieved) of any math in the mechanics of the game they are selling. They are responding to a percieved desire, not causing people to be dumb. I certainly don't think it's a good idea myself to reduce math at all costs, but again I don't think that's what people are doing in all cases.

I like math. I can't gush about it like I have before, because Ron said not too. But believe me, I like math. But that doesn't blind me to the fact that I am not the only one that I want to play my games, and as such it's probably a good idea to cater to other players whims as well.

Mike

[Andrew Martin]

...IMHO it's hard to have Fortune and low math. Mainly because without math you end up with a very limited range of results and it degenrates toward karma resolution. (I say degenerates because the system changes from what was intended to something else, not because karma is worse)

On the contrary, it's easily possible to have low math, Fortune, a infinite range of results and a infinite range of descriptor levels. It's my Ratio system and uses a simple D10 roll, that only requires one addition on only some rolls (or a subtraction if you find that easier).

[xiombarg]

...IMHO it's hard to have Fortune and low math. Mainly because without math you end up with a very limited range of results and it degenrates toward karma resolution. (I say degenerates because the system changes from what was intended to something else, not because karma is worse)

On the contrary, it's easily possible to have low math, Fortune, a infinite range of results and a infinite range of descriptor levels. It's my Ratio system and uses a simple D10 roll, that only requires one addition on only some rolls (or a subtraction if you find that easier).

So, you going to post a link, or just stand there and look superior? :)

[Andrew Martin]

...IMHO it's hard to have Fortune and low math. Mainly because without math you end up with a very limited range of results and it degenrates toward karma resolution. (I say degenerates because the system changes from what was intended to something else, not because karma is worse)

On the contrary, it's easily possible to have low math, Fortune, a infinite range of results and a infinite range of descriptor levels. It's my Ratio system and uses a simple D10 roll, that only requires one addition on only some rolls (or a subtraction if you find that easier).

So, you going to post a link, or just stand there and look superior? :)

How about I post a link and look superior? :)

It's in the Actual Play forum, titled: http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2416">Star Odyssey Playtest 9/June/2002, and the http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5923">Ratio system is described on RPG.net Game Design Forum. Unfortunately, I'm not superior enough yet to have written it up better. :)