Bridging the Player Information Gap
.jpg)
Recently my friend Vishal asked me a question about my post on Philosophers, Heretics and Madmen:
I'd be interested in your take on how a GM can not just recreate that experience [of being transported to another place and culture] but also bridge the gap between the players' culture and effectively interacting with an older one.
I've had so many examples running games when players did not know what to make of an alien culture.
This is a great question. Coming from the most experienced GM I know, it seems likely to be a topic worth exploring further. It reminds me of a concept, the player information gap, first brought to my attention by Shea Valentine at the excellent Living Myth RPG blog. In the post Fixing Social Mechanics and the Player Information Gap, Valentine defines player information gap as "the disparity between what a player knows and what the player's character knows."
Player information gaps can be an issue when players lack knowledge their characters should possess, for example the computer "expert" who couldn't tell a server from a serviette. This can affect strategy, with the players making poor choices or simply being confounded by situations their characters should be able to handle.
This article will focus on how player information gaps affect gameplay and what can be done to address situations where players lack cultural knowledge that would be commonplace within a given setting.¹ I will use the term setting information to describe knowledge the characters would have but players would lack. Often this knowledge comes in two forms: ideas about what a player character might do in a given situation or information about how the characters / setting are likely to react to players' actions.
Getting Into Their Heads
Imagine you are catapulted 750 years into the past. You are a 13th C. European traveller on the Silk Road and need to find guides to lead your caravan through the Pamirs... Imagine you awaken in a cell with no memory surrounded by a group of prisoners speaking an unkown tongue... Imagine a portal whisks you to another dimension where sentient garden furniture runs the government...
What do you do?
Now imagine you are a GM running these games. What do you do?
I think there are several possible approaches that vary based upon when and how players acquire information about the setting.
First you use the "Stranger in a Strange Land" approach. Players and their characters are equally unfamiliar with the particular social context they face. This type of game tries to design around the player information gap by creating a scenario where player and character knowledge are roughly the same. This is a game about discovery in which players must learn the intricacies of a strange culture in order to survive.
In this kind of game it is vital to consider how key setting information will become available to players: Are there NPCs who will help the players? Will they learn through observing others' interactions, through trial-and-error? Do players have access to abilities (like insight) that can help point the way when they are unsure what will work? How do NPCs respond when norms are broken?
Rather than limiting character knowledge, another method to bridge the player information gap is to simply give the players the information they need to act competently within the setting. GMs can do this piecemeal, handing out information whenever it seems timely and appropriate to their characters. Basically, if the player seems to be doing something their character would know is a bad idea, the GM can provide missing info.
Player: I offer the village headman 50 gold pieces to change his mind and hire a boat and rowers to get to the island.
GM: Your character, because of your local background, would know that these people do not use metal currency. Furthermore, considering that he has welcomed you as guests, offering money would be seen as an insult to the headman's hospitality.
When? How often? Basically, whenever players attempt something that doesn't make sense it is worth checking to see whether there is a misalignment of understanding. It is far better to err on the side of too much information in this regard, as information helps player make meaningful decisions, the lifeblood of RPGs. This goes doubly when players are facing situations that would be common knowledge for their characters.
Rather than in-game, the GM could dole out setting information before or between plays via handouts or a wiki or any other method. In my experience this method often misfires. Even dedicated players frequently ignore these kinds of worldbuilding screeds and even when they do read them it can be hard to retrieve pertinent info when necessary during play. Make sure the information you are handing out is something the players want and will use.
Games where GM input acts to bridge the player information gap can work really well but they do require trust and a light touch. Allowing the GM to parcel out info is a flexible and requires relatively little prep. Experienced GMs are good a recognizing when players are missing something, especially if they know their player group well. There are, however, some potential pitfalls to this method. If the GM constantly intervenes players may feel patronized or that the game lacks challenge. In this case there are mechanical solutions to help players seek information from the GM.
Shea Valentine suggests a couple of relevant mechanics called advisory rolls and interrogatory rolls. Advisory rolls allow players to ask for information based on their characters' skills or backgrounds, basically a brainstorm. Interrogatory rolls are similar, but involve a narrow question. For example: "Based on my background as an priest, do I know whether scented oils would be an appropriate gift for the Festival of the Nine?" When using either advisory or interrogatory rolls, the information provided should be include things their character would recognize. The GM could then allow a player to roll for information based on their background, modified by skills and and attributes.
One key point is that this is a player-initiated mechanism, which means that players can ask directly for the checks rather than waiting for the GM to call for a roll. In recent versions of D&D, ability checks are initiated by GM in the rules-as-written, but I know plenty of tables where in practice players can ask for a roll by simply asking the GM "Would my character know something about this [because of x]?"
Passive knowledge checks are another way of using mechanics to transmit character knowledge to players. The idea is that players have a statistic that describes their knowledge in various domains. Skills are one of way of showing this knowledge so that the GM automatically does a skill check whenever a relevant situation arises. For example, Claude has the art appraisal skill, so whenever a sundry statue or etching appears in game, the GM will make a check to see whether Claude can identify it and ascertain the value. This may not even require a die roll. The key point is that is reflexive and transparent, so players and the GM know when the check applies and how likely it is to succeed.
Turning information into a test helps to reward players based on their choices during character creation and advancement. The benefit to knowledge skills, whether passive, GM-triggered, or totally player-initiated is that they provide a great deal of character differentiation and that there are clear rules to help adjudicate when a character knows something. Depending on the system, this can create significant rules overhead or slow down play, but for many the benefits are worth it.
Note that in any of the approaches we've discussed it is important that the setting information exists and that someone can assess the truth value of that information. In circumstances when gameplay centers around navigating a strange culture, there needs to be meaningful information that the players can discover. This sounds painfully obvious, but many games think they center around interacting with strange beings but the beings act basically like any other characters.²
The GM is almost always the one who needs to know the relevant setting information best so they can adjudicate outcomes and reactions, though in some cases players can help if they have important knowledge. In general, the more knowledge about the setting at the table the better; if you want to run a nautical campaign you will achieve greater immersion with people who know lots about sailing and the sea. What if, however, nobody you play with has a strong grasp of the particular setting knowledge you want to investigate through play? Reading a book about the topic is a great idea, but another way to deal with this situation is to outsource setting knowledge to the game designers.
Game Design as Setting Information
There are literally hundreds of games out there focusing on nearly every setting imaginable. You can find a game that covers your preferred setting and it will probably have some good ideas for your game but if you're just reading for information it isn't automatically better to read that book than any other research tome on the topic. Rules and mechanics can help to bend gameplay into the shape you need to cover all sorts of topics and tones. They can also help to bridge the player information gap.
One way to do this is to provide players with a list of actions to help provide suggestions to players about their characters' capabilities. Skill lists are a good example. Some GMs and designers grouse about how skill lists can limit options to what is expressly written down but they do provide a good example of common tactics. This can be a huge boon for new or uncertain players. Powered by the Apocalypse (PbtA) games go a step further and codify all of the actions available to players into playbooks containing moves, basically discrete chunks of rules triggered by player actions.³
Moves are essentially a prompt that leads between the narrative portion of gameplay and the mechanical bits covered by the rules. By defining different sets of moves and character attributes PbtA games allow designers to focus players on different types of gameplay. Move sets directly address the player information gap by telling the player what is possible in unfamiliar roles like World War II female Russian bomber pilots (Night Witches), melodramatic undercover teenage superheroes (Masks), or dystopian rabbits (The Warren).
Let's look at an example of the types of moves available in the game Transit, a PbtA game in which you play an AI controlling an interstellar spacecraft. To my knowledge, none my readers are AI, so this setting is likely to feature a significant player (and GM) information gap unless the participants are highly familiar with genre fiction. The moves and rules help players deal with challenges like dealing with spacecraft systems and anticipating and managing the reactions of the human crew (NPCs). There are moves like Sitrep or Pscychrep or Check the Database moves directly address the player information gap, allowing the player to choose specific questions for the GM. Many of the moves also specifically state possible outcomes or even allow players to choose from a menu of possibilities.
For example, the player demands to board an NPC ship at gunpoint, initiating the Negotiate by Force move. They roll 2d6 adding their User Interface stat modifier. On a 10+ the player can either force their opponent to give in to their demand or enter combat. On a 7-9, the NPC on the receiving end of the move can choose from a list of complications, including stalling for time, taking evasive action, taking a defensive position, acquiescing to a different demand, etc. 6 or lower and the action is a complete failure and the NPC gains the initiative. Note that the move clearly identifies triggers and potential outcomes.
Powered by the Apocalypse games are not the only designs to use focused actions to help players decide what to do. Any system that gives players a set of delineated choices with clearly legible outcomes works to help players understand what their characters would know inside the game. This could be as simple as a set of skills or combat actions or a detailed, player-facing reaction roll table for different NPC types.
The advantages and disadvantages of building player information into game designs are pretty clear. The advantages are a focused game where players can clearly see what to do. However, a narrow design focus may limit player choices by either providing hard boundaries on what players can do or by funneling on attention into specific areas. If moves are too scripted games can feel more like board games than RPGs. In the other direction extensive player options and tables of outcomes can provide a great deal of rules overhead, which may be overwhelming for some players.
Choosing a Bridge
We have outlined a few methods to help players learn key setting information:
a) We can try to minimize the gap by framing the story in a way where player knowledge is roughly similar to character knowledge. A strong option, but not feasible for games where the characters know the setting well.
b) GMs can just offer players setting information whenever it seems relevant and necessary. This is quick and flexible, but subjective and potentially inconsistent.
c) Information can be provided as as a check, whether player or GM driven (knowledge skills, advisory rolls). This can also be inconsistent, and if over-used can slow down the game or hurt immersion.
d) Mechanics can be designed to offer players suggestions of what to do or how the setting / other characters will react. A narrow focus may limit player creativity or the kinds of stories GM wants to tell and too many rules might be overwhelming.
The solutions you choose for your game will depend on your setting, the game and your group. I think any of these options are viable tools. Some groups will have a higher tolerance for rules complexity and so detailed rules systems could be very appealing.³ Other groups will have a lower desire for game verismilitude and so the entire idea of a player information gap may be irrelevant. Personally, as a teacher I am always looking out for miscommunication and gaps in understanding and so option (b) is almost second nature, as I think it is for many GMs. A last suggestion for dealing with the player information gap is to find setting-relevant book and read it. I can't recommend that option highly enough.
Footnotes
1. I would like to note that player information gaps can also work in the reverse, with players knowing more than their characters do. This is often associated with metagaming, and in my opinion frequently overblown. Players should almost always be able to act on their own personal knowledge. Alternatively, if you overhear a private exchange at the table among other players or the GM, etiquette dictates that you act as though you didn't hear it. These two stances, plus some general trust fix the vast majority of issues surrounding metagame knowledge.
2. It isn't wrong to have a game with undifferentiated NPCs wearing various alien / monster / foreigner masks but that isn't a game about interacting with an alien culture. It's a fantasy game with exotic trappings and set dressing.
3. The question as to what is the best rules system is almost certainly insoluble, but I wonder what sort of insights could be gained from asking "What would the best rule system look like?"
Comments
Post a Comment