A pen&paper-ish roleplaying game on the blockchain?

[ttookk]

Ok, this may be one of the stupider ideas I had lately, but still:

As some may know, there are still people out there, playing pen-and-paper roleplaying games and some even do it in forums. The concept is not much different from trditional p&p rpgs, only that you write instead of sitting around a table.

Now, my thoughts are not much different from this: you still chat or use forums to go on adventures, but your stats are saved in a blockchain. I would solve this, by having different kinds of tokens that represent different stats. There would be fixed stats, such as strength, intelligence and so on and then, there would be changing stats, such as money, items, health, etc. There would also be some "allround" tokens that you get as awards and that you can exchange for stuff you want.

So basically, the stats of your character, his name, maybe a little backstory and ideally, short synopsisses(?) of past adventures are saved on the blockchain.

How exactly points are rewarded or substracted needs to be figured out. You may have a traditional player-master-system, in which the master can choose (within certain numerical limitations) to distribute points (or the opposite), plus, you could build in a "roll the die" functionality, in which a smart contract (or whatever) determines the amount of points a player gets based on certain inputs (the players stats plus difficulty).

Now, why would you do that?

Well, firstly, because it's fun. This would be a game, so, why the hell not? Yeah, you could play it the "traditional" way, but you could show off faaaar better. You could be like "Go to rpg-explorer.io and look at my chars address. Yeah dude, that's me. Impressive, huh?"

Seriosly, though, here are some reasons I can think of:

Your character would have a story that has to be created. You'd be heavily invested in playing your character. You'd want to improve this single character, you've been working on for a long time, instead of creating a new throw-away character. You wouldn't want it to get hurt, because you worked hard to get it to the point where it is now.

It would make group changes easier. You could change the player group and game leader/master/whatever you call it very easily. Lying to make you look better? Not an option.

You can fuse traditional p&p rpg with text based computer rpgs. It would be possible to create text rpg adventures, that are automated and that you can play alone with your character, or with a group of characters.

It would make you character a historical figure in a coherent world. In traditional roleplaying games, every playing group basically plays in a parallel universe, in which the other player don't exist. While this is nice sometimes, because your team can be the one defeating the single biggest evil in the world, I believe it would be intriguing to have a world in which history is made and in which players may even become heroes or even kings.

Well, just some thoughts

[1715681156]

1715681156

[1715681156]

1715681156

[1715681156]

1715681156

[Febo]

Current blockchain asset games have only some asset on the blockchain, not a whole game. Reason are transactions fees. Counterparty fee can get even $0.5, so even with that you would try to avoid having cheap asset blockanized.  I am not saying transactions will never be cheaper. They already are on other asset platforms. But still something to keep in mind when thinking how game would work.  

[ttookk]

Current blockchain asset games have only some asset on the blockchain, not a whole game. Reason are transactions fees. Counterparty fee can get even $0.5, so even with that you would try to avoid having cheap asset blockanized.  I am not saying transactions will never be cheaper. They already are on other asset platforms. But still something to keep in mind when thinking how game would work.  

Well, I wouldn't use an existing token platform in the first place. Since the game is not supposed to be monetized, I wouldn't use a traditional Pos/PoW structure, which monetarily rewards miner/stakers. Instead, the players will have a vested interest to keep the blockchain alive, because they want to keep playing. I'd use a modified, rewardless PoS.

Obviously, there still are lots of holes in the whole idea, but when you don't focus on capitalizing on it in a monetary value generation sense, but in a "fun value" generation sense, you could do stuff you couldn't do on a regular blockchain.

For example, the fact that there is no way to have predictable token generation (although I would put some boundaries in place) isn't something you'd want to have on a regular blockchain.

Additionally, some tokens are just not tradable, e.g. lifepoints.

[Munti]

I have to say it's very refreshing to see someone explore other uses for blockchain than to become millionair in one day. Please keep posting

[ttookk]

I have to say it's very refreshing to see someone explore other uses for blockchain than to become millionair in one day. Please keep posting

Heh, well, I've come to the conclusion that if you can't make money with it, btctalk is not interested.

But still, I don't know of a better forum, so… I'm still here.

[Ryan Dugan]

I think k ot sounds like a good idea and why can't you make money off of it. You can use gold and buy and sell and trade it inside and outside the game. The gold you get in game can have real value. The problem is how would tou stop huge pumpers buying up all the good stuff. Thst is the greatest challenge.

[ttookk]

I think k ot sounds like a good idea and why can't you make money off of it. You can use gold and buy and sell and trade it inside and outside the game. The gold you get in game can have real value. The problem is how would tou stop huge pumpers buying up all the good stuff. Thst is the greatest challenge.

Which is exactly why I wouldn't want a system with real world value. There are tons of game related currencies developed right now, this shouldn't be one of them.

[CrazyLoaf]

Would recommend looking at Crypto Kingdom:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=819073.0

3 years old and close to 500k page views!

From the OP:

"Hailed as an incredibly immersing game combining Civilization, Second Life and Monopoly, Crypto Kingdom puts you to decide the fortunes of a townsperson in the 1600s world. The game is set up in the kingdom, a sparsely inhabited barren area unclaimed by the neighboring Great Powers of Rossiya, France and others. There, one town was founded in 1430. The players have nurtured it all these years and many great and small buildings have been erected and some now stand as lofty palaces, others are gloomy ruins..."

It is not fully blockchain based, but it is backed by XMR. The "ownership" tokens in the game were recently pushed to Counterparty as "CKGAME" and trade for a market cap of roughly 80k XMR, or around $1 million at current XMR price levels. Of course, there are plenty of assets in the game, such as gold, land, silver, magic relics, and more that have their own active markets as well

[jeffthebaker]

This is a really interesting concept, but I think the major roadblock comes from the question of where earnable assets (money, experience, etc.) come from. You can't give full reign to "masters" or you now have a centralized system. There's no real way to hand these out in an automatic and provably fair manner, unless there is some automated master that acts the same for all players? But now you run into the question of what makes this different from a regular rpg. Beyond this, how would assets be assigned value? If players buy everything with Bitcoin, it ruins the concept. But if there is no Bitcoin value pegged to it, what's the point of having a crypto?

It's a really cool idea but I think a lot of questions must first be answered, and I don't know if everything has an answer.

[generalizethis]

This is a really interesting concept, but I think the major roadblock comes from the question of where earnable assets (money, experience, etc.) come from. You can't give full reign to "masters" or you now have a centralized system. There's no real way to hand these out in an automatic and provably fair manner, unless there is some automated master that acts the same for all players? But now you run into the question of what makes this different from a regular rpg. Beyond this, how would assets be assigned value? If players buy everything with Bitcoin, it ruins the concept. But if there is no Bitcoin value pegged to it, what's the point of having a crypto?

It's a really cool idea but I think a lot of questions must first be answered, and I don't know if everything has an answer.

Decentralizing "all the things" doesn't work well in a complicated game environment as you are creating time and tx expense for the players by using a consensus model--even simple card games suffer lag due to a blockchain. You either need to offload it onto centralized exchange(s) or accept that your game is expensive and slow, or parcel the "goods" onto a blockchain and have players eject and insert their valuables as desired onto centralized servers.

IMO, the latter being preferable as you gain decentralization for those that worry about losing their "goods" to the whims or negligence of centralized controller, and you decrease lag and tx expense for those who want to play in a convenient and inexpensive manner.

[ttookk]

As has been said before, this system should specifically NOT be monetized.

I understand, that you'd need to have some means to prevent spam, since there are no real-world transaction fees.

I would think of something like this:

You basically have a modified PoS System, in which players confirm new entries in the blockchain. In exchange, they earn points that CAN NOT be transferred to other addresses, that are bound to the address that staked them. These points earn the player the right to send information.

Decentralizing "all the things" doesn't work well in a complicated game environment as you are creating time and tx expense for the players by using a consensus model--even simple card games suffer lag due to a blockchain. You either need to offload it onto centralized exchange(s) or accept that your game is expensive and slow, or parcel the "goods" onto a blockchain and have players eject and insert their valuables as desired onto centralized servers.

IMO, the latter being preferable as you gain decentralization for those that worry about losing their "goods" to the whims or negligence of centralized controller, and you decrease lag and tx expense for those who want to play in a convenient and inexpensive manner.

You are right about the lag on "real time" games. But in this case; a pen and paper roleplaying game, points do not change that often and if they do, it is does not slow down the game if they need a few minutes to be confirmed. In fact, the way this would probably go is that adventures are played out off-chain and when an adventure ends or is paused, eventual point changes are sent. Point changes have o be confirmed by all involved players and the master.

I realize, that this holds abusive potential, because a group can collude to have a best possible outcome, but keep in mind, that this is supposed to be a game and it is supposed to be fun. If players are deemed cheaters by a majority of players, they may decide to ignore them, block them of there may be a built-in hardfork feature.

Additionally, I would assume that this game would use an invitation system, in which new accounts can only be created if existing accounts vouch for them.

[generalizethis]

As has been said before, this system should specifically NOT be monetized.

I understand, that you'd need to have some means to prevent spam, since there are no real-world transaction fees.

I would think of something like this:

You basically have a modified PoS System, in which players confirm new entries in the blockchain. In exchange, they earn points that CAN NOT be transferred to other addresses, that are bound to the address that staked them. These points earn the player the right to send information.

Decentralizing "all the things" doesn't work well in a complicated game environment as you are creating time and tx expense for the players by using a consensus model--even simple card games suffer lag due to a blockchain. You either need to offload it onto centralized exchange(s) or accept that your game is expensive and slow, or parcel the "goods" onto a blockchain and have players eject and insert their valuables as desired onto centralized servers.

IMO, the latter being preferable as you gain decentralization for those that worry about losing their "goods" to the whims or negligence of centralized controller, and you decrease lag and tx expense for those who want to play in a convenient and inexpensive manner.

You are right about the lag on "real time" games. But in this case; a pen and paper roleplaying game, points do not change that often and if they do, it is does not slow down the game if they need a few minutes to be confirmed. In fact, the way this would probably go is that adventures are played out off-chain and when an adventure ends or is paused, eventual point changes are sent. Point changes have o be confirmed by all involved players and the master.

I realize, that this holds abusive potential, because a group can collude to have a best possible outcome, but keep in mind, that this is supposed to be a game and it is supposed to be fun. If players are deemed cheaters by a majority of players, they may decide to ignore them, block them of there may be a built-in hardfork feature.

Additionally, I would assume that this game would use an invitation system, in which new accounts can only be created if existing accounts vouch for them.

TBH, you really don't need a blockchain to create a reputation based game if there is no monetary incentive --a google spread sheet with permission only access would be far easier and cheaper.

[ttookk]

As has been said before, this system should specifically NOT be monetized.

I understand, that you'd need to have some means to prevent spam, since there are no real-world transaction fees.

I would think of something like this:

You basically have a modified PoS System, in which players confirm new entries in the blockchain. In exchange, they earn points that CAN NOT be transferred to other addresses, that are bound to the address that staked them. These points earn the player the right to send information.

Decentralizing "all the things" doesn't work well in a complicated game environment as you are creating time and tx expense for the players by using a consensus model--even simple card games suffer lag due to a blockchain. You either need to offload it onto centralized exchange(s) or accept that your game is expensive and slow, or parcel the "goods" onto a blockchain and have players eject and insert their valuables as desired onto centralized servers.

IMO, the latter being preferable as you gain decentralization for those that worry about losing their "goods" to the whims or negligence of centralized controller, and you decrease lag and tx expense for those who want to play in a convenient and inexpensive manner.

You are right about the lag on "real time" games. But in this case; a pen and paper roleplaying game, points do not change that often and if they do, it is does not slow down the game if they need a few minutes to be confirmed. In fact, the way this would probably go is that adventures are played out off-chain and when an adventure ends or is paused, eventual point changes are sent. Point changes have o be confirmed by all involved players and the master.

I realize, that this holds abusive potential, because a group can collude to have a best possible outcome, but keep in mind, that this is supposed to be a game and it is supposed to be fun. If players are deemed cheaters by a majority of players, they may decide to ignore them, block them of there may be a built-in hardfork feature.

Additionally, I would assume that this game would use an invitation system, in which new accounts can only be created if existing accounts vouch for them.

TBH, you really don't need a blockchain to create a reputation based game if there is no monetary incentive --a google spread sheet with permission only access would be far easier and cheaper.

Awww, come on, where is the fun in that

Additionally, I don't think that monetary incentive is always needed to make a blockchain run smoothly and/or a good solution for a given problem.

True, you don't need a blockchain to solve above problem, because it is not a problem in the first place. There is not much lost if google deletes/loses your doc (not saying this is a big risk – or a risk at all). And you could easily set up a shared doc that everybody can write in and that is updated every X amount of time, if you are afraid of losing it.

This was more meant to be a playground for ideas… but yeah, I get your point. And maybe, you are right.

[CrazyLoaf]

I will also say that, in Crypto Kingdom, you can look up the transactions of any player via the changelog as well as their inventory/ownership position. Changelog transactions are also double entry if due to market buy/sells, showing the movement of the asset/item/etc. as well as the movement of the in-game currency between the transacting parties. Can't think of another game that is this open in terms of the data.

[Joint Force]

Current blockchain asset games have only some asset on the blockchain, not a whole game. Reason are transactions fees. Counterparty fee can get even $0.5, so even with that you would try to avoid having cheap asset blockanized.  I am not saying transactions will never be cheaper. They already are on other asset platforms. But still something to keep in mind when thinking how game would work.  

Blockchains don't scale so putting low quality content on a blockchain doesn't work out. The only solution is to make your own PoS blockchain and use that for assets. PoS scales better. You will still need to find at least a few people to be full time nodes which might be hard because that'll probably cost $30 a month and require  a lot of technical skills to maintain. You need people to be network administrators.