Econlib Resources
Subscribe to EconLog
XML (Full articles)RDF (Excerpts) Feedburner (One-click subscriptions) Subscribe by author
Bryan CaplanDavid Henderson Garett Jones More
FAQ
(Instructions and more options)
|
TRACKBACKS (3 to date)
TrackBack URL: http://econlog.econlib.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/748
The author at d-n-dblog in a related article titled Why Gen Con... writes:
I don't really want to move directly to the do you dead guys have any ... [Tracked on August 15, 2007 6:58 AM] COMMENTS (4 to date)
Arnold Williams writes:
Just as in theory most economists support the free market, but when asked may not (link to study), so the behavior of game pieces don't reflect real life that much. They reflect instead the drastically lowered cost of failure and the minor cost of correction. It's all in the margins. Posted August 14, 2007 11:35 AM
liberty writes:
then...what exactly is the point of the conference? Posted August 15, 2007 11:43 AM
gabby domingo writes:
i'm not surprised at all that people act differently in these games, as opposed to real life. Why? Because they are role-playing games. You are not supposed to act like yourself, because you are playing a part. Posted August 15, 2007 5:58 PM
Robert Link writes:
The low stakes are probably one reason why characters in RPGs are unrealistically brave, but I think RPG mechanics have something to do with it as well. In real life fortunes of war are mostly a matter of chance. When the bullet (or sword, or lightning bolt... you get the idea) with your number on it comes your way, no amount of skill or planning will save you. RPGs, by contrast, usually have a set of mechanics that allow experienced characters a better chance to survive through higher defense values, more hit points, better skill values, and so on. Also, the players controlling the characters are aware of those mechanics, and they can make an unrealistically accurate of just what a character can and can't handle. In a way, RPG mechanics (apart from making for a more interesting game) represent a sort of post-hoc fallacy. If you take a large cohort of adventurers some of them will unluckily be felled by the first orc they meet, while others will have a long career of doing mighty deeds. These differences can arise through chance alone, and a career of success at bringing down dragons makes you no less susceptible to getting an arrow through the heart at the next ambush you are caught in. RPGs, however, normally assume that past deeds are strong predictors of future success. If you have a lot of campaigning under your belt you must have immense skill at arms and the mark of destiny to boot, so the game mechanics give you an edge against someone not similarly proven. -rpl Posted August 16, 2007 7:11 AM
Comments for this entry
have been closed
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||