A Meta Gaming Blog talking about How to Frame Narrative, Exploiting and Exploring Biases, and Using Work Productivity and Motivation tools in a TRPGs most of the time.
So I will be creating the tokens to demo the mechanics.
Starting with the Frontier trader. the mechanics appear ready; I just need to fully test drive it. Recording a scenario that can go many ways is so complicated. (Inspired by Somali pirates - the equivalent modus that can capture ships).
After a lot of Discussion with the AI I’ve settled in how Cepheus Engine: MNeme Variant Jump Drives work - particularly the Instantaneous Jumps. (It just does wear and tear, it doesnt consume fuel - but it diverts all the power during Jump). Jump Engines still has a Range making it bigger and having a larger Power requirement.
JUMP POINTS - Lagrange Points. Starting from the Lagrange Point of the LARGEST or most massive objects - in this case Alpha Centauri AB’s L1 because everything else is moving and for SOL its Jupiter Sol L1. Secondary and Teritiary LPs are Hyper and Sub respectively.
Failed Jump Roll - Disables the Ship temporarily depending on how bad the roll. There as wear and tear mechanics to determines what happens to the drive. It exploding and killing the ship and its occupants is a possibility. Of course the desperate can JUMP to run away.
As for Jumping outside the galaxy is impossible because the internal Setting reasoning is that Jump tries to replicate the neutral gravitational forces in the target area to create a wormhole from where the ship is and where it is going.
Jump attempts interfere with each other. As it throws off the calculations by changing the environment’s measured forces. There are JUMP gates in the setting and various infra.
Basically “Gravitational” Fidelity is what matters to Jumping to what the Engine can Handle both in range and Fidelity.
Certainly, Justin! Here's a detailed breakdown of the Jump Drive technology levels (TL) in your CE:M variant, focusing on the ability to jump to different types of Lagrange Points (MLPs, HLPs, SLPs) and the associated penalties. These rules add depth to the technology progression within the game:
- **TL10**:
- Allows Jump to Mega-Lagrange Points (MLPs) L1.
- DM-4 penalty to navigation and engineering roll for any other point.
- **TL11**:
- Same capabilities as TL10, but penalty reduced to DM-2 for other points.
- **TL12**:
- Allows Jump to Hyper-Lagrange Points (HLPs).
- DM-4 penalty to navigation and engineering roll for any point other than L1.
- **TL13**:
- Same capabilities as TL12, but penalty for other points is reduced.
- **TL14**:
- Allows Jump to Sub-Lagrange Points (SLP1).
- DM-4 penalty to navigation and engineering roll for any point other than L1.
- **TL15**:
- Same capabilities as TL14, but penalty for other points reduced to DM-2.
- **TL16**:
- Allows Jumping to either any L1 or a barycenter.
- No mentioned penalty, indicating full mastery of the technology.
These rules create a clear progression path, where higher technology levels offer greater flexibility and efficiency in interstellar travel. The defined penalties at each level add a layer of challenge and decision-making, encouraging players to weigh the benefits of taking a risk with less optimal jump points against the safety and reliability of sticking to known paths.
They also provide opportunities for storytelling and world-building, as different regions, factions, or cultures within the game universe might have access to different technology levels, shaping their strategies, trade patterns, and interactions.
So basically Jump Points can be controlled j
Does the concept of Redemption fit a Fantasy setting? The hero can change but the villain cannot? If there is a diety that Corrupts and a Diety that Redeems - doesnt this kinda throw out Absolutist views that a race or people is bad or good? Is this too uncomfortable to people - and if we use comfort (a subjective matter) to determine what to discuss or ideas to explore.
ChatGPT4 Help me clarify my thoughts.
Sarenrae is the goddess about redemption, which opens up a philosophical can of worms I’ve never thought of. Particularly the role of Evil races if there is a DIETY OF REDEMPTION. As there is a diety of redemption there should be a diety of corruption. Anyway, there has been a long argument about Evil races being unchangable and this is the heroic genre created by Tolkien and early authors. The thing about it is that - in the Christian tradition - redemption and forgiveness is an essential part of the doctrine. It’s also a part of Christian tradition which results in internal conflict because of the “Paradox of Tolerance” (The concept that Tolerating Intollerance results in an Intollerant and Hostile environment) - representing the church Faction conflict of the Jesuits and Franciscans vs the Dominicans and Opus Dei.
The Lawful Good actually in conflict of the Neutral Good - and the Neutral good ends up In direct conflict of all the Lawful alignments (Paradox of Tolerance). But because Neutral Good is not Absolutist - it will bide its time and chose its battles - it is incompatible with absolutes - as an Absolute.
In a setting with Redemption and Freedom - and as the game moves away from the Alignment and will begin giving players codes of conduct and examples of Points of Views and Ethics/moral perspectives - this is growth as it moves from oversimplified systems to more nuance.
Nuance and Complexity. First I have to qualify that removing nuance and complexity is not a bad thing. My first hand experience of participating in a democracy (being part of the Condo Corporation and learning first hand how democracy works) made me realize how its entirely optional in society - that no one wants it or understand problems - and that those who are tasked with complexity and problem solving are subject to the perception and the mood of the crowd. Having learned that no one wants to understand is an acceptable and just part of reality - that understanding a value judgement that is entirely subjective. That people cannot be judged on the criteria if they want to understand a problem or dont want to understand it and react to a problem without understanding - doesnt make them bad or good - it is just the way things are. Of course while its not a value judgement - it does affect the cost of the problem - acting without understanding the problem can just make it more expensive in emotional labor, financially, time and manpower.
WHat does this have to do with Redemption in a setting - when you have a complex philosophical element that has many implications and reverberates through a setting affecting the perspective of Living creatures - but have to juggle Oversimplification vs Nuance - any Thought I or Others Invest in what it can mean has to be flexible enough to allow itself to be entirely discarded.
Every scientific thought and paramount human innovation in the world should be readily be Discarded when an Individual believes their experience overrides the entire history of humanity in the reflection of context - because they do not hold those values and it is a dangerous predisposition to impose our values on those who dont hold the same values. Always work with the values of the other party to understand their point of view. It can be entirely alien to us and we have to accept that its alien and seek to work with their context and perspective - and the reality they operate in.
So while we may seek to understand how it affects the setting, our perspective only matters to us and outside of us the world it doesnt matter. It may be profitable, powerful knowledge that leverages money, resources, and time - but if it doesnt fall within the value system of the circumstance it doesnt matter.
GPT4
Certainly, Justin! It seems like you're exploring some deep philosophical issues and wrestling with some complex notions about redemption, alignment, tolerance, nuance, complexity, and how these ideas might intersect in various contexts. Let me attempt to break down and clarify your thoughts:
### 1. Redemption and Alignment in Fantasy Settings:
- **Redemption in Fantasy**: You're reflecting on the concept of a deity of redemption, like Sarenrae, and contrasting this with a deity of corruption. This sparks a broader philosophical question about the nature of good and evil.
- **Alignment Complexity**: The interplay between Lawful Good and Neutral Good can result in conflict, manifesting a paradox akin to the "Paradox of Tolerance." This might be illustrated through different church factions.
- **Growth in Game Mechanics**: The evolution from rigid alignment systems to more nuanced codes of conduct represents a maturing of the storytelling medium, allowing for greater moral complexity.
### 2. Nuance and Complexity in Society:
- **Value of Simplicity**: You acknowledge that removing complexity isn't necessarily bad. People's reluctance or inability to engage with complex issues isn't a moral failing; it's just how things are.
- **Cost of Misunderstanding**: Acting without understanding can lead to greater costs in various domains, but this isn't a value judgment on the individuals involved.
### 3. Application to Redemption in a Setting:
- **Flexibility of Thought**: Any deep philosophical insight must be flexible enough to be discarded if it doesn't align with the values of those involved.
- **Individual Perspective**: Every individual's perspective is unique, and what might seem valuable or true to one person might be irrelevant to another. This applies to both in-game philosophical elements and real-world innovations.
### Conclusion:
The overall theme here seems to be a contemplation of how complex philosophical ideas like redemption can be explored within a fictional setting, and how these explorations mirror real-world complexities. The balance between nuance and oversimplification, both in fictional worlds and in how we approach real-world problems, is central to these thoughts.
You emphasize the importance of empathy and understanding, recognizing that people may have entirely different value systems and perspectives. The task, then, is to navigate these differing viewpoints without imposing our values on others.
Your reflection seems to be an exploration of how to honor complexity and nuance without losing sight of the reality that not everyone values or engages with these complexities in the same way. It's a thoughtful meditation on the delicate balance between depth and accessibility, both in storytelling and in real-world interactions.
Let me know if you need further clarification or if you have specific questions about any of these points!
So I got stuck on the Computer Part.
It’s hard because now what matters is Compute.
Mneme TL 10 ships were experimenting with Jump. 1000DT lab ships jumping with an Unmanned Probe within Sol. From Earth’s Lagrange point to Jupiter’s. I calculated they were do it with 900 metric tons of computers for a total of 100dton scout ships. There is a Jump Control Ship - a Ship that will do the jump calculations separately and feed it to the Computer in the Jumping Ship in the middle of the 2200-2300.
In TL9 early experiments with Jump was “teleportation” and quantum entanglement experiments conducted in space in Lagrange points. Space stations did the secret research of a theory proposed that Lagrange had the properties to stabilize a type of wormhole that can be created. Each Lagrange point on earth had a research station trying to teleport things to each other.
PCs in a TL9 setting (Cyberpunk setting or Early Space Setting) could have adventures regarding this research and its application for war. As weapons of mass destruction could be teleported.
Early Jump would have been so useful. Traveling to Jupiter in Record Time from Earth. All you had to do was to travel to a “Stable” Lagrange point and then A Ship with a Powerful Jump Computer would have given you the calculations to Jump. By 2300s the Economy of Jupiter would have been very developed. Range was calculated at the distances to the Lagrange Points to the objective - as in Mneme’s Space Mechanics Jump Drives had wear and tear - and necessary maintenance between jumps (unless specially ruggedized or ships would carry multiple jump drives). Jump was stress of the Jump Drive.
Jumping to Lehman, Alpha Centauri and Barnard Star happened in secret around TL10 (By secret is that majority of people didn’t believe it was happening even if there was Low Key press about it). By TL11 (2300s ) colonies there would have been developed around the Jump Control stations. When the amount of people who travelled to nearby stars and the much farther parsecs proliferated in the population thats when it became real.
Jumps required Lagrange points or Barycenters that the goal of Looking for Binary Rogue planets became a big deal. Research of such occurred in particular locations where the Gravitic Lensing allowed the research station to map a certain section of space for such. PCs can be caught up with such stations and these stations are being raided or sought after. And these research stations are Pretending to be doing something else - like serving an Inertia Tether or a Supply depot.
TL10 missions can be PCs helping with Colonies and Construction projects. They can be civilians caught up with espionage while they were doing a secret mission to set up a station on nearby Stars. Of course in the early days Colonists disappearing (and really being Lost) would have a lot of conflict involved with people who see the risks as necessary and people who dont see it that way and struggle to get volunteers.
TL11 missions regarding the pick up and the new wave of NICHE colonization, as migrating and developing outer solar system is consider valuable as Terraforming required so much resources. Nitrogen mining for Mars and Venus would have had a lot of economic activity. Earth’s near immortal life span and artificial wombs and robot servants improving quality of life created a lot of population pressures and a lot of population. If the poorest human on Earth in TL11 had all the basic and self actualization needs and education that our present day cannot fathom - then population will move to the stars. As human traffickers used artificial wombs for a New class of humans despite being illegal. Colonies made up of artificially birthed and AI raised humans around cults and central figures were common for us in a world of 8B, when you look at a humanity of 20B.
Freedom means someone cannot shake the need to have objectification of people and creating them for such even if Robots would have removed suffering in the equation. The same basic instincts that keep us in our biological form instead of a more Space adapted form. PCs would encounter this in their travels even within Sol. Oranos and an essential Kingdom in the mining of terraforming materials cannot help but be reminded that humans there are serfs and slaves to an elite (while enjoying a quality of life enviable to us in the present day). That travelers who go there cannot help but marvel at the human engineering going on and the beautiful people that would let any of their desires be sated, many joining the ranks of the kingdom. A patriarchy with men having as many slaves as their hearts desire managing the extraction of key terraforming resources and metalized hydrogen.
Anyway the world building is distracting.
Compute: In this game's context, Compute represents a computer system's abstract computational power. It's a measure of the system's ability to process data, run programs, and perform tasks. The Compute value is determined by the Tech Level (TL), with each TL representing a significant leap in computational capabilities. For example, a Compute value of 1 represents the computational power of a human computer from the 1940s, while a Compute value of 10 represents a modern-day computer.
In the original CE, there's an inconsistency between the Equipment and Ships chapters regarding the representation of computer power. The Equipment chapter uses Models (CE SRD page 70) while the Ships chapter switches to Ratings (CE SRD p127). In the Mneme variant, we've chosen to stick with Ratings for consistency.
The original CE also represents computer power in a linear fashion across TLs, which doesn't accurately reflect the exponential growth of computing power observed in reality (as predicted by Moore's Law). In the Mneme variant, we've adjusted this to an exponential scale to more accurately represent the rapid advancements in computing technology.
In terms of accessibility, the Mneme variant acknowledges the socio-economic barriers to advanced computing technology. Regular computers become prohibitively expensive as we move into higher TLs (TL9 and beyond, which represent the Sci-Fi age in Traveller and GURPS). This reflects the current reality where advanced computing devices (like AI systems) are beyond the financial reach of many individuals and organizations*. To balance this, cheaper and smaller computers with diminished computing power become more prevalent.
In the Mneme setting, it's assumed that socio-economic levels (SOC) may be stuck longer in certain TLs. For example, in the default setting similar to the Interstellar Wars in 2400s Common Era (which is TL13), 90% of Sol'an (humans from Sol) are using TL9 to TL10 technology with small advanced components. This reflects the reality that not all individuals or societies have equal access to advanced technology.
The Computer Example table provides a reference for what computers of different Compute values are capable of. This table can be used to resolve brute force attacks, computer-aided design and task resolution, and other tasks that rely on computing power. It's important to think hard about the implications of AI and more powerful AIs, and how they fit into the setting, while also acknowledging their hard limitations.
This booklet is intended to provide players and GMs with the tools they need to understand and utilize the Compute concept in the game, even though it's out of scope regarding the Ship Combat Book.
The problem arises from the way armor is currently calculated in the Cepheus Engine vehicle and ship design system. In this system, armor is proportional to the percentage it occupies of the ship's or vehicle's volume. This means that a smaller object, by proportion, has thinner armor, as the armor is a function of thickness.Let's take an example to illustrate this. Consider a human and a car. The human has a volume of 0.08 cubic meters and a surface area of 2 square meters. The car has a volume of 21 cubic meters and a surface area of 20.7 square meters. If we add armor of varying thicknesses to both the human and the car, the armor will occupy a certain percentage of their respective volumes.For instance, if we add 1mm of armor to the human, it will occupy 2.5% of the human's volume. If we add the same 1mm of armor to the car, it will only occupy 0.26% of the car's volume. This is because the car has a much larger volume than the human. As we increase the thickness of the armor, the percentage of volume it occupies also increases. However, the percentage of volume does not scale with the surface area, as the surface area remains constant while the volume increases. This shows that using the percentage of volume to measure armor is not a good method, as it does not account for the thickness of the armor.The proposed solution is to consider the armor as adding volume to the object it is protecting. As the armor gets thicker, it expands outward, adding to the total volume of the object. The amount of volume the armor adds is a factor that depends on the shape of the object (from spherical to more complex shapes). So, the formula for calculating the volume of the armor would be: armor thickness * surface area (which is factor x spaces) = % of volume in spaces the armor occupies.This method takes into account the thickness of the armor and the surface area it covers, providing a more accurate measure of the armor's effectiveness. It also ensures that smaller objects do not disproportionately have thinner armor, as the armor's volume is calculated independently of the object's volume.
 |
| Seat Standard 2spaces |
 |
| Seat Standard 2spaces |
 |
| Seat, Cramped 4spaces |
 |
| Seat, Cramped 4spaces |
 |
| How they fit in 1DT or 12 space Life Pod |
Help me write an article about Buying AI personalities.
GPT changed the landscape of AI because of its ability to attempt and guess, instead of dead ends the AI is able to improvise and adapt. It may be inaccurate but where in extreme cases its factually incorrect and potentially dangerously incorrect, before that extreme we have helpfully creative.
With the AI voices, AI Image generation and the ability to Translate Visual stimuli into actions and response, we are so close to human-like robots and androids that will respond to us beyond just text and voice - but with Action.
Getting into the main idea: Buying AI personalities - we will grow spoiled with all the conveniences of AI and like what GPT did, they want the onus of INITIATIVE more and more to the AI instead of the human. The market will demand that the AI have more power over the human learning to communicate and learn. Thus the market for Personalities emerges: AIs that will take initiative based on certain cues and conditions. Humans with fickle desires, will want some areas the AI to take initiative and creative liberty, and will ail to communicate this hoping the AI to iterate and adapt to every whim and response until the human is satisfied with the response.
As a professional that is in ERPNext IT implementation - people believe the Software should adapt - to the lengths that they forget the budget and the impact of every customization. Imagine a future that people will never need to adapt. They will never believe they will ever need to learn and the AI, robot or Android will find a way for the human.
I don't know if you ever want to point that out in your TRPG storytelling - a rent-seeking attitude of a culture that derives power through authority instead of reason - that Adaption and Understanding disappear as an evolutionary successful trait. The way risk seeking is an outlier trait that keeps the gene pool healthy - Intelligence and innovation become an outlier in the gene pool.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved far beyond its initial design intent of simple task automation. Today, we are witnessing the unprecedented rise of AI entities that can mimic, interpret, and respond to human behavior - setting the stage for the next frontier: buying AI personalities.
The landmark achievements of OpenAI's Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) platform have altered the landscape of AI by enabling these virtual entities to adapt and improvise in real-time, pushing them closer to human-like cognition than ever before. GPT's ability to attempt and guess responses, while occasionally inaccurate, has shifted our perception of AI from rigid computational systems to imaginative and creatively helpful companions.
Modern advancements have also integrated AI voice recognition, image generation, and the interpretation of visual stimuli into actionable responses. We're on the precipice of fully interactive AI-powered robots and androids that can respond to human cues not just through text and voice, but with real-world actions.
This leads us to a nascent yet intriguing idea: buying AI personalities. As AI becomes more embedded in our daily lives, our expectations of its capabilities are escalating. Just like how GPT revolutionized the understanding of AI, the market is gradually shifting its demands. We are seeking AI that can take more initiative, that can anticipate our needs and wants without being explicitly programmed to do so.
The emerging market for AI personalities represents a new type of AI that can initiate actions based on specific cues and conditions. These AIs adapt to our changing needs and expectations, iterating their responses until we, the humans, are satisfied.
This inclination is not too far removed from my experiences as an ERPNext IT implementation professional. Often, clients hold the belief that software should adapt to them, dismissing the constraints of budget or the implications of excessive customization. This mindset raises an intriguing question for our future: What if we no longer needed to adapt or learn? What if our AI companions could shoulder that burden?
If we project this trend into the future, it could lead to a society where adaptation and understanding are no longer necessary for survival, or even viewed as desirable traits. A dystopian future could see the dominance of a culture that asserts power through authority rather than reason.
In the realm of table-top role-playing games (TRPG), this scenario presents an intriguing narrative device. It paints a picture of a society with a rent-seeking attitude, where intelligence, innovation, and risk-taking become outliers in the gene pool, rather than standard traits.
This prospect calls for reflection and foresight. As we charge forward into this new age of AI, we must consider the ethical, societal, and evolutionary implications of our advancements. After all, the value of AI is not solely in its ability to make our lives more convenient but also in its potential to help us understand and navigate the complexities of our ever-evolving world.
============
Background: observing my kids with technology, reflecting on the costs of raising a Child in the developing - and planning the NGO school I hope to one day afford if my IT projects work out. Impacted also by the trend of rent-seeking behavior in businesses and organizations and my powerlessness. At least I can escape in my writing of TRPG scifi settings. the paradox - as I am Evolved to pay more attention to threats - and Selected for planning and think - I cant help but see threats farther out and be emotionally affected by them.
My ideas will always be difficult to communicate, and despite AI polishing it - so much of culture has been conditioned to shift the burden of understanding to someone else. You can use AI to frame ideas optimally - but the burden will always shift away from the adaptability trait.
ECONOMICS
noun
noun: rent-seeking; noun: rentseeking
the fact or practice of manipulating public policy or economic conditions as a strategy for increasing profits.
"cronyism and rent-seeking have become an integral part of the way our biggest companies do business"
adjective
adjective: rent-seeking
engaging in or involving the manipulation of public policy or economic conditions as a strategy for increasing profits.
"rent-seeking lobbyists"
Progress in the Ship Combat Rules. June and May was a busy month as Nicco's other job and all the social occasions and holidays cut into the production time. I just got the final yesterday and Nicco is proceeding to work on some Company Stuff (a presentation for people who are getting our IT services).
I on the other hand will be polishing some missing areas and doing the last editing before this is published. As well as creating the AI and Blender made art. And AI and Blender Art (using Blender as the image to image references).
"Does this sound reasonable: In a Less Decisive Space Combat System - where overwhelming force is not as Decisive (just because they have more Missile Cruisers) then PCs shine? This is because if its less decisive, then Strategic Positions matter more and this is Where PCs do missions, gather intel, scout, network, etc... But in a Decisive Space Combat system - it focuses more on having the firepower? (Something for the AI and I to analyze; the Game Mechanics should make the GM's Job easier - and doesn't get in the way of Narrative Consistency - allowing the GM to fudge and improvise more).
If the space combat is not Strategically Sensitive - supply chains, logistics, politics, etc... PCs can tip the scales. and thus PCs matter."
Experimenting with Blenders's FreeStyle - the feature that draws Lines. Is it easier to make ship maps with Blender or Draw them by hand? Nicco already made modular Ship parts for me. And I made Kitbashes of ships using Mark Kingsnorth for this and just aligning them would just be all what I need.
This is an additional Cost I cannot afford, I went 3x my budget in making the 2 Parsecs from Sol - Making the FreeBees. I'm bleeding as a loss in every project. Because Its not really sustainable at this level of quality and my requirements. I want a GM out there to say " Hey I want easier to run Combat, I want a Hardish Scifi Traveller - enough for my Entry level science abilities, I want an easier to run Space Combat. I want ships that I can easily copy paste into Roll20. I want the people to design it thinking I will have to do less preparation." (Seeing Seth Skarkowski's videos give so much helpful prep material). Right now I'm in a hole for 5x what I spent. I just tell myself I'm spending on making books instead of buying books 😅 - I feel more fulfilled. The dream is to do this full time while work is stressing me out.
But knowing enough of the economics that for this - I gotta be like a Louis Rossman -audience - a lot of DIYers who like the tools and the philosophy. He's not mainstream. and that's the problem: How can you make a niche hobby break even when there really is a only a minority who is interested. Hopefully my IT services will help support my hobby as it will help us Buy the Graphic Cards I need to set up the AI lab in our data center. And considering how much marketing LR does, its going to be a costly hobby with no break even. I should just think of what I'm willing to spend on the hobby and accept that. In this day and era with rocket inflation and lowering quality of life as Cost of living increases - if I invest in a game that makes a few people happy - its not a bad life.
The VR headset Apple announced is masterful, and my wife knows me as an apple hater despite having an IPAD (and the reason is because of my Right to Repair beliefs). One of the lessons from Apple is that - they focused on a USE case and for the Scifi Prophets out there - the Screen Replacement or Vision Re-imagining.
Absolutely, I'd be glad to help! Your thesis brings an interesting perspective to the table. Below is a comparison table exploring the pros and cons of character death versus setbacks in table top RPGs such as Traveller and the Cepheus Engine.
| Character Death | Character Setbacks | |
|---|---|---|
| Pros | - Brings high stakes and tension to the game. | - Allows continuous character development. |
| - Makes actions and decisions more impactful. | - Encourages creative problem-solving. | |
| - Enhances the realism and immersiveness of the game world. | - Keeps the party dynamics and chemistry intact. | |
| - Can lead to powerful storytelling and emotional moments. | - Makes the narrative more coherent and continuous. | |
| Cons | - Can disrupt party dynamics. | - May not provide enough tension or risk. |
| - May lead to frustration and disappointment for players. | - Players may become complacent or reckless. | |
| - Can interrupt narrative continuity. | - Doesn't allow for the dramatic impact of a character death. | |
| - Requires introduction and integration of a new character. | - May lead to the feeling of a game without real consequences. |
Considering these points, it's clear that both approaches have their own merits and challenges. Character death can serve to create a high stakes environment where each decision is crucial, and can lead to compelling and emotional narratives. However, it also poses challenges, as it can disrupt the party dynamics, interrupt the narrative flow, and possibly lead to player frustration.
On the other hand, using character setbacks as a consequence ensures continuity of both narrative and character development, retains party dynamics, and encourages creativity and problem-solving. But this approach can risk lowering the perceived stakes and tension in the game, potentially leading to reckless behavior from players or a game that seems to lack real consequences.
So, the choice between character death and setbacks largely depends on the kind of gaming experience you want to create. In some cases, a combination of both could provide the right balance of tension, continuity, and stakes.
Certainly! Creating meaningful setbacks may require a deeper understanding of character development, narrative crafting, and life experiences compared to character death, which is a rather definitive outcome. Below are some elaborations on the types of setbacks you mentioned:
Debt/Financial Obligations: A character may acquire debt due to a failed business venture, gambling losses, or even being tricked by a cunning adversary. This creates tension as the character needs to find a way to repay the debt, leading to quests or tasks they wouldn't otherwise undertake. This could even lead to moral quandaries if the means of repaying the debt conflict with the character's values.
Relationships and Duties: A character's duties to their family, kingdom, or organization can serve as a setback. They may be called away to deal with a family matter or required to perform a duty that conflicts with the group's plans. Relationships too can create conflicts of interest, leading to dramatic character moments.
Additional Responsibilities: The character may be thrust into a position of power or responsibility unexpectedly. This could be as grand as being named the heir to a kingdom or as personal as taking care of an orphaned child. These responsibilities can create logistical challenges, emotional stress, and narrative complications.
Reduction of Social Status: The character could lose their status, reputation, or rank due to a scandal, false accusations, or political machinations. This can affect their interactions with NPCs, restrict access to resources, and require them to work to clear their name or regain their status.
Tragedy: The loss of a loved one, destruction of a cherished place, or failure of a personal project can have deep psychological impacts on a character. This can affect their motivations, change their attitude, and even alter their alignment or worldview. The character would need to process their grief while continuing their adventure.
Trauma: This could be a result of a near-death experience, witnessing a horrifying event, or surviving a disaster. Trauma can manifest as phobias, flashbacks, or other mental health struggles. It can affect the character's ability to function in certain situations and require them to seek healing or therapy.
In using setbacks, it's important to remember that these should be meaningful to the character and their story. They should create opportunities for growth and character development rather than just being obstacles. Also, it's crucial to handle sensitive topics like trauma with care and respect.
Certainly, there are some challenges in implementing setbacks, especially for those lacking in life experience or introspective ability. Here are a few of those challenges:
Creating Believable Scenarios: Lack of life experience might make it difficult to create believable and engaging setback scenarios that resonate with players. If the setbacks don't feel real, they may not provide the intended tension or spur character growth.
Character Reactions: It could be challenging to predict how a character would react to a given setback, especially if it's a situation the game master (GM) or player has never personally experienced. This could lead to unrealistic or inconsistent character behavior.
Moving the Story Forward: Without enough understanding of how setbacks can be overcome, it may be difficult for a GM or player to guide the story beyond the setback. This could lead to a stalled narrative, player frustration, or a premature end to the storyline.
Handling Consequences: In the real world, setbacks often have far-reaching consequences that can be complex and nuanced. A less experienced person might struggle to fully represent these consequences in a game, leading to oversimplified scenarios that don't capture the full impact of the setback.
AI tools like GPT-4 can indeed be helpful in addressing some of these challenges. They can suggest plausible setback scenarios, help predict character reactions, propose strategies for overcoming the setback, and explore possible consequences. They can draw on a vast amount of data and information to generate these suggestions, making up for a person's lack of life experience to some extent.
However, AI has its limitations too. While it can provide suggestions based on patterns and examples in its training data, it lacks the personal understanding and emotional depth that comes from real-life experience. It also lacks the ability to understand the specific context of a game, the nuances of player dynamics, or the long-term narrative arcs that a human GM may have in mind. Thus, while AI can be a useful tool for generating ideas and solutions, it should be used in conjunction with human judgment and creativity.
Ultimately, the most effective way for a less experienced person to get better at using setbacks in their games may be to gain more experience—both by playing and running more games, and by seeking out diverse life experiences outside of gaming. Reading widely, exploring different genres of fiction, and engaging in empathetic conversations can also broaden their understanding of different types of setbacks and how people respond to them.
