Re: [s-d] Proto: New Field Match (Paprika)

["Charles Schaefer" <chuckles11489@xxxxxxxxx>]

This is good. Just one question: what happens if someone submits a
consultation regarding this field match? I am assuming that most of the
ordained players will be interested in playing in the match, and therefore
won't have access to all the information.

2008/5/19, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
> So, I was already mulling this over in my head over the past few days and
> its sending in conjunction with the (likely) end/destruction of the current
> Field Match is mainly coincidental.
>
> This isn't even a near-proper write up of what this field match would
> resemble, since a lot of the concept/rules/implementation is still left to
> be discovered. But below is the main idea. Comments please!
>
> This field match requires a dedicated MoP (a sentient DM-type person or a
> bot on some secure server). It also requires no single public display, but
> rather as many regularly-updated private displays as there are players.
>
> In this field match, each player is, at any given moment, either Awake or
> in
> Dream. This could be determined randomly for each day, for example, or
> fluctuate according to some secret mathematical function. The waking state
> of different players is not synchronized. Players are never actually told
> whether they are awake or not.
>
> The "real", platonic state of the field is only ever affected by possible
> field actions and by invokable actions taken by Awake players.
>
> When a player is Awake, he perceives (in his private display) field actions
> and invokable actions taken by other awake players, who are affecting
> "reality". He also perceives his own invokable actions as happening. When a
> player is Dreaming, he perceives his own invokable actions as happening, as
> well as possibly some randomly-generated field actions as well as the
> invokable actions taken by other Dreaming players (yes, the dreams of
> various players interact).
>
> Any actions that are taken and should be reflected in someone's private
> display but are incoherent with his current display are not reflected in
> it,
> as if they never happened. OR we could make it even weirder and have
> whatever was already there and made the action incoherent eliminated.
>
> In order to reduce such incoherence to a minimum and to preserve the
> secrecy
> about real vs imagined gamestates, i think the game requires the following:
> - make moves happen relative to the player, rather than to absolute board
> coordinates. e.g. move 3 spaces forward, not move to (4,7). This way it's
> conceivable that the player can *actually* be in a different spot from
> where
> he sees himself as being.
> - field match is completely independent of everything else that happens in
> B
> Nomic. i.e. no tie ins to mackerel or points or anything, otherwise one
> might be able to tell which actions really happen and which don't.
> - seeing the other players themselves on the field (assuming each person
> has
> an avatar of some sort and moves around, which doesn't have to be the case)
> could in one way facilitate the task of determining which state one is in
> at
> any given time. whoever is seen to have made a move is clearly in the same
> state as the perceiver. e.g. both in dream or both waking. Alternatively,
> we
> could hide the avatars from each other and not reveal which player caused
> any other effect on the board to change, which would further
> isolate/confuse
> people if that's what we want.
>
> So what kind of game would it be? honestly doesn't matter to me so much as
> the dream-waking dimension of it at this point.
>
> The dream-waking dimension, if the game is designed right, should mean that
> the actual platonic state of the game, the one on which it would be
> extremely useful to have a grasp in order to be able to WIN the game, may
> only be truly reachable through careful consultation with other players and
> comparison of the gamestate perceived by each one.
>
> Here's the game I envision currently, thought it could be any number of
> other game types: Players's avatars initially stand near the bottom of a
> longish field. The way to win is to be the first to get one's own avatar to
> the top of the field (and you can't just come out the bottom of that field
> and arrive on top :-p).
>
> Each turn of the field (perhaps automatic every 24 or 48 hours or
> something)
> each player is either awake or dreaming and may make a single move. The
> move
> can be to move one's avatar to an adjacent square (using directions, not
> absolute coordinates). The move may also be one that aims at interacting
> with other players in some fashion, or at setting down obstacles/boosts on
> the way to the finish line.
> e.g.
> - move one space in a chosen direction.
> - leapfrog off a buddy standing in front of you and move several spaces up.
> - shoot a freeze-ray that extends 3 tiles to the [chosen direction]. anyone
> hit by it won't be able to make a move for the 2 next turns.
> - dig a hole immediately behind you. it's permanently there and whoever
> falls in has to start over at the bottom of the board.
> - build a wall that can't actually be crossed and has to be gone around.
> etc.etc.etc.
>
> Certain obstacles or helpers (snakes, chutes, ladders, catapults, etc.)
> could already exist on the board when the game starts. Maybe permanent,
> maybe removeable somehow.
>
> Suppose I'm standing at tile 1 (horizontal), 1 (vertical) to start the
> game.
> And my moves, states, and other events are as follows, here's an idea of
> what my perceived and actual states could be:
>
> MOVE 1 : (WAKING) move one diagonal space up-right
>       PERCEIVED : I'm on (2,2)
>       REALITY: I'm on (2,2)
> MOVE 2 : (DREAM) move one space up
>       PERCEIVED : I'm on (2,3)
>       REALITY: I'm on (2,2)
> MOVE 3 : (WAKING) shoot freeze-ray to my right
>       PERCEIVED : I'm on (2,3) and I've hit Hose, who is now frozen for
> several turns
>       REALITY : I'm on (2,2) and didn't hit Hose (who I perceived as on
> (3,3) but who was actually on (3,1) at this point), and so he is behind but
> not frozen
> MOVE 4 : (WAKING) leapfrog off avatar in front of me
>       PERCEIVED : I'm now on (2,5)
>       REALITY : I'm on (2,4). I actually did leap frog over that guy in
> front of me, even though I thought we were respectively at (2,3) and (2,4)
> but we were really at (2,2) and (2,3) because, during my dream turn earlier
> I saw him moving forward but he was actually in a dream.
> MOVE 5: (DREAM) move forward one spot
>       PERCEIVED :  Shit man, someone before me on the priority list dug a
> hole there. I'm back to (1,1)
>       REALITY : OK So I didn't "really" move, and he didn't "really" dig
> that hole since he was dreaming too. I'm still on (2,4)
>
> etc.
>
> Consultation with other players, especially with notes about who I saw move
> (has to be in the same state I am) and who I didn't see move (either just
> didn't move or moved in a different state) would help me a good bit in
> determining the actual game state.
>
> But will we be able to tell which state is dream, and which is reality?
>
> Does this seem appealing?
>
> BP
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss