>>6332005>>6332104>transgender mathematician reads online fan fiction?>commences insane gun murder rampageAs part of my research into the speculative near future warfare scenarios for my last game, I read a lot of RAND reports. You may insert the Simpsons Milhouse meme about the RAND Corporation and reverse vampires here. But one of their scenarios mentioned the possibility of creating "neurological weapons" (cognitive warfare?) inducing psychosis in otherwise healthy individuals. It is no different to ww2 era psyops and enemy demonisation propaganda, but I imagine AI machine generated content, LLMs manufactured hallucinated realities could serve as an ideal catalytic role for instigating purposes, especially in the creation of those seemingly unaffiliated erratic and isolated "lone individuals" perpetrating stochastic atrocities.
>>6332104It reminds me a bit of the plot of that old sci-fi Joss Whedon Dollhouse tv series, where a PHONE SIGNAL delivered to the entire population of the United States reprograms people and drives everyone insane
>>6328992>>6329028In previous qtgs I discussed how the fulcrum of all game design turns upon the MORAL PURPOSE; the moral physics that determine consequences over whether player actions / choices get rewarded or punished.
Ultimately, this moral purpose is derived from where your game world interpretation / imagination / ideology intersects with your human memory, experiences and behavioural interactions as a living person in the real world; it represents how you derive and deliver your judgement or fictional "game world verdict" upon the player choices in any encounter scenario.
One of my own individual beliefs is you should not try to impose your Will on others. By Will, I mean ideology, world view, behavioural norms and conventions etc. It seems paradoxical to mention this in roleplaying games because the entire notion of the dungeonmaster is contingent upon imposing consequence after consequence and delivering judgement after judgement on player choices.
So one way I always account for this in the architecture of choice is to write one I would do / secretly want, and then also include the diametrical opposite. Usually I also incorporate a tonal extreme / inversion, ie in a series of diplomatic / negotiated answers, I include a psychotic murder rampage extrication, or in an ultra serious moment of moral gravity, I include one deviant choice of sex farce or vulgarity. To my surprise, generally the players never choose my extreme psychotic choices lol, but they are always there, waiting
It is sort of symmetrical, because the role of the dungeonmaster is to hurl the players into SCENARIOS of PERIL and HORROR, and likewise, the player choices confront the dungeonmaster with similar consequences of peril and horror for your own worldbuilding, hehe
