TheRPGSite

There's been a lot of talk over the past years about educational role-playing. Role-playing is being used by English teachers in Taipei, LARP schools in Denmark and Californian summer schools.

A lot of these people are basically on their own in unknown territory. I'd like to gather forces to share experiences and get in touch with others who are doing the same thing.

I've set up a forum that's meant to help with that. Here we can talk about our projects, businesses, experiences. There's also a page of links to books, researchers and web articles.

If you're interested, take a look at the Educational Roleplaying (http://www.educationalroleplaying.net/) forum!

Looks like it will be good, but I'm a bit busy right now.  

I'll try to create an account about nine days from now.

I don't know about specifically "educational" RPGs, but I've often thought that playing D&D or other RPGs could be a useful tool in teaching English as a second language (both reading and conversational).

I've often fiddled with the idea of offering English practice classes where I'd run RPG games with groups of people; just never had the time to try such an idea.

RPGPundit

Aren´t these the guys from the "misery tourism" RPG?

In the 70s roleplaying was supposed to be a tool for therapy. Now it's supposed to be one for education. How about not using it as a tool for anything? This kind of thing makes me want to turn into Stanley Fish, which is horrible.

PS: Yes Settembrini, they are. So, education & therapy = one unholy (Skandinavian-)welfare-state-must-provide-cure-for-its-citizens union.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityIn the 70s roleplaying was supposed to be a tool for therapy. Now it's supposed to be one for education. How about not using it as a tool for anything?

In my opinion, roleplaying has a definite place in both therapy and education.  However -- and this bit is crucial -- it is not a "game" when used in either context.  Similarly -- and this is crucial, too -- when you're roleplaying as a game, it should be explicitly intended as neither therapy nor education, whatever therapeutic or educational benefit one may personally derive from the experience.

!i!

I played a session of Land of 1,000 Kings with my son. When I left the room and came back he'd bumped his dice over to different numbers (making some of them 6's). He learned that cheating ends the session immediately. Does that count as educational enough? :)

The funny thing is, it was our first conflict and I was in the middle of explaining the rules. The ones and twos he changed went from successes to failures. :)

QuoteIn the 70s roleplaying was supposed to be a tool for therapy. Now it's supposed to be one for education. How about not using it as a tool for anything?

What do you have against helping people? Or perhaps somebody comes by your house every now and then and tries to force you to play differently?

James, I have no problem with helping people. I have no problem with kids learning to spell Camelot from playing Pendragon, or learning to spell Denmark from reading Hamlet.

I have a massive problem with instrumentalizing culture for pedagogy. Because that's when it gets moralistic and prescriptive, and therefore ultimately anti-cultural. "RPGs teach us sociability." "RPGs teach us the ethics of a good story." See the emo tourism thread on this website, started by the present thread starter, for one consequence of that approach.

Where's the thread? If it's in Off Topic I can go there because I mentioned Dominus Nox's name.

In any case though, people will be stupid with whatever tools you give them. If it work, I say go for it. I can't speak to education, although I know reading Gygax taught me a ton of words I'd probably never have learned otherwise. For counseling though, RPGs can definitely help.

Likewise, the setting will only be as moralistic and prescriptive as the counselor wants it to be and the patient will allow. This will happen no matter the tools. If someone can have fun with an RPG during the process, that's great.

Quote from: James McMurrayWhere's the thread?

Holocaust/Shoah RPG: We All Had Names (http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6528). In the Game Design and Teory forum. It goes on at some length. "Onanistic misery tourism" was the high point in my opinion.

!i!

I didn't make it that far. I got through about half of post 15 or so and gave up. My enthusiasm about playing a holocaust game is nonexistent. My desire to berate someone who makes one is also not there, since I doubt I could say anything that would faze someone who thinks it's a good idea. Basically the only thing that thread could have given me was a depressed feeling, and if I want that I'll just gaze intently at my cube's 3 1/2 walls.

Roleplaying has been used as an educational tool in American schools for yeeeeeeeeeeeears.  It was my first experience with roleplaying. In the 7th grade, each of us in the American history class played a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. We each got a paragraph of background, a list of things we each wanted to see happen, and over four days of negotiation we had to hammer out various questions.

The purpose was to teach modern 7th graders that thought slavery was stupid and obviously wrong why the framers couldn't just throw it out the window. It was really cool. I was Benjamin Franklin.

People can self-therapise, and learn, from roleplaying games that are played for fun.

People can have fun, and self-therapise, in instructional roleplaying games.

People can have fun, and learn, from roleplaying games that are played as therapy.

All these things are good and well and fine.  But attempting to make a game be several of these things at one and the same time, or marketing a game designed to "push" one as if it were another - especially trying to push therapeudic-oriented games as entertainment?

I'm not a fan of that idea.  To the point where I could go all :pundit: on it.

Balloons come down, champagne is popping: I agree with a Levi post.

When Levi threatens to go Pundit - you have no choice but to agree. Resistance is futile.

This stance, by the way, is what makes me a bit twitchy over Poison'd.  It's not that the subject matter is nasty - that stikes me as odd rather than offensive - but that it appears to put pressure on cathartic content past the point of "Shit, man, that game was a fucking rollercoaster" and right into the region where I start to wonder if maybe it isn't more suited to use in therapeudic regimes where the patient needs to confront "being an awful person".

But, then, I haven't yet bought or read the game - just a few slices of actual play.  So I'm not actually sure just how strong the pressure, or how far it pushes.

As I've said before, I'm not going to discuss We All Had Names on this forum, as I understand it to be off topic. Anyone interested can contact me via e-mail.

If anyone's interested in discussing the subject of role-playing games and education, however, feel free to pop by the forum!

Is there anything you will discuss at this forum, or are you just dropping ads? Don't worry though, we don't mind discussing it without you. ;)

Hey, McMurray, how did you end up playing 1000 Kings? How was it?

I started a thread a while back over at Story Games lookiong for a new game for my son and I (he's 6) and possibly my daughter (she's 3). Ben offered me a playtest copy so I snatched it. The game itself looks great, and play looks to be fun, but the aborted session is the only one we've played so far, and we didn't get very far along.

My son ended up with a magic pen that could draw anything he wanted and it would be real (kinda like Chalk Zone if you're familiar with kids' TV). The two went to a kingdom that was in the form of a resort hotel (aka the magical Nickelodeon Hotel) and they explored it for a while, including playing the "Jump off the 15' bunk bed and get caught by the really strong butlers" game. Shortly after this my daughter got bored and wandered off.

My son's mean streak kicked in and he drew some people then drew some painful situations for them. The butlers were upset and alerted the Hotel Manager / King, who came and tried to get him to stop. When the king went for the marker is when the cheating ended the game.

I still owe Ben a playtest report and game review, but I'd like to play an entire session.

It's a really fun, family-oriented, game. Character creation involves thinking up memories of why the other players' characters are Smart, Brave, Beautiful, etc. The game has a built-in time limit, so it's good to play with kids who want to go on forever in spite of the impending doom of bedtime, dinnertime, etc.

I wholeheartedly recommend it to anyone wanting to play games with their kids, although I think the conflict resolution system might be a little too fidgety. IIRC it involves rolling dice, removing ones and twos, and continuing until someone has no dice. Then you set some aside, keep some, and apply some as Wounds or Conditions to the loser, like "hated by Duke Ferdinand," "trapped under ice," or "Fell in the mud and laughed at." We never resolved a conflict though, so I can't be sure.

For adults I'm not sure. You have to know the people you're playing with fairly well, and not be afraid to compliment them. A new person to the group could end up with a blank sheet though, if nobody has any memories of them to share. It's definitely not a pick-up game for strangers, and might be uncomfortable for self conscious or introverted people to play.

Character creation as written lets you share a set number of memories to add to others' characters, and doesn't care how many people play. Because of it, characters could turn out unbalanced to start. Whether this matters depends a lot on the fairness radar of the player. My kids are very concerned with fairness, especially when they can easily see a numerical inequality, so I changed the system so that everyone shares exactly one memory of everyone else per stat.

It also meant we got to pull up more fun memories than we would have otherwise. Character creation and other points of the game involve saying something like "I know you're Smart because " so you start the session off with a nice warm fuzzy for everyone.

Quote from: James McMurrayIs there anything you will discuss at this forum, or are you just dropping ads? Don't worry though, we don't mind discussing it without you. ;)

Heheh :) Sorry, I didn't mean it quite that way - it just seemed that this thread was going to be about everything but educational role-playing games.

Just to state my personal opinion: I am against forcing people to have fun. I'm also against trying to pretend something is for fun when it isn't. So when it comes to educational role-playing, I think that it should be A) voluntary, and B) have a clear agenda.

That being said, I think there's a lot of ways RPGs can be educational - both just in and of themselves, and as techniques for other learning.

Like the Pundit and others have hinted at, I'm pretty sure a lot of us foreign types have learned a lot of English from games - useful words like 'dexterity', 'paladin', 'beholder' and other commonly used terms. And, like it or not, being a GM does teach you a thing or two about group management, cohesion and team leadership, for example. (Not to mention how I learned everything I knew about the European map from playing Diplomacy - which isn't necessarily such a good thing, since Europe changed a fair bit since the 1800s or whenever that game takes place). My computer skills, my writing skills... to a great extent from writing RPG-related material.

Quote from: JDCorleyRoleplaying has been used as an educational tool in American schools for yeeeeeeeeeeeears.  It was my first experience with roleplaying. In the 7th grade, each of us in the American history class played a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. We each got a paragraph of background, a list of things we each wanted to see happen, and over four days of negotiation we had to hammer out various questions.

This is such an effective way of teaching kids to think for themselves, I'm amazed it's not being used more. I don't think we ever did this in school, although I'm pretty sure my teachers must have heard of these methods.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaIn my opinion, roleplaying has a definite place in both therapy and education.  However -- and this bit is crucial -- it is not a "game" when used in either context.  Similarly -- and this is crucial, too -- when you're roleplaying as a game, it should be explicitly intended as neither therapy nor education, whatever therapeutic or educational benefit one may personally derive from the experience.

I sort of agree with this. At the same time, I'm not sure if what people intend a game to do always has all that much to do with what it ends up doing.

As an example, apparently the game Monopoly was made to "explain the single tax theory of Henry George". I'm not sure if people are playing that particular educational game right. Or, going in the other direction, I'm pretty sure the creators of Ars Magica didn't set off to find a way to make teens read medieval European history.

What people learn from, and do with, games is very unpredictable.

I realize I'm alone on this, but I'd like to see more games which could be termed "educational" like Grey Ranks (child soldiers) http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13508.phtml or Steal Away Jordan (slavery) http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13279.phtml (reveiwed by the OP) and the discussions specifically on the "craft" of running such games.

Regards,
David R

I did a roleplaying exercise with a Year 10 class about living under an authoritarian regime. As a game it was the crappiest thing (it was out of some educational supplement), but the kids enjoyed it enough to want to do it again, and they definitely thought about the issues. So I'd certainly like to see some educational material that would actually use some of the expertise in the RP community to make games that were thought-provoking and fun. Fun for me, that is.

I think any kind of educational roleplaying exercise needs to have someone (like a teacher in school) who can bring the facts to bear afterwards, to put the game in context. To use the holocaust game as an example, I think it's fair to say that anyone who claimed that they had a genuine insight into what it was actually like to be a holocaust survivor by playing through a roleplaying exercise is barking up the wrong tree: such an exercise can only ever let you explore your perceptions, and those of the other participants and the people framing the exercise as to what it would have been like to be in a concentration camp.

Going without lunch and sitting in the corner while a classmate shouts at you in a fake German accent can't magically infuse you with the knowledge and experience that survivors had; ultimately, only going back and reading the accounts of those survivors (or, even better, talking to one in person) can give you that insight.

Any educational roleplaying exercise is worthless solipsism unless it is placed in a broader context, and that means you need to have someone supervising it to inject important bits of information, and to put the whole thing in context afterwards.

I agree with Ian: we have to distinguish between roleplaying and roleplaying games.

Roleplaying may be a means towards several ends, but the only end of a game is fun. The fun may have other benefits along the way (fitness in football, improving a second language if doing an rpg with it) but those are side benefits, not the main end of a game - which is fun.

Roleplaying, and roleplaying games - different things.

If you make an rpg to educate me, I will hit you over the head with it, thus educating you as to what gamers think of being educated. If I want an education, I'll go to school with a qualified teacher. If I want therapy, I'll talk to a psychologist, rabbi or whatever.

I mean seriously, here's a game designer.


You going to take some education or therapy from him?

Quote from: Kyle AaronIf you make an rpg to educate me, I will hit you over the head with it, thus educating you as to what gamers think of being educated. If I want an education, I'll go to school with a qualified teacher.

But you wouldn't mind a qualified teacher using role-playing techniques to teach you things, right?

QuoteYou going to take some education or therapy from him?

Heheh :) I'm pretty sure Arneson could teach me lots... but about what, I couldn't say, I don't know the guy.

Quote from: WarthurI think any kind of educational roleplaying exercise needs to have someone (like a teacher in school) who can bring the facts to bear afterwards, to put the game in context.

You certainly need someone to frame the experience and put it in context, yes. And some student debate before and after. What I'm mainly (though not exclusively) talking about when I talk about educational role-playing is role-playing in a school situation, with a teacher leading the exercise with a certain goal in mind.

However, I can also see role-playing being used for self-tutoring, or semi-independent learning of skills - planning and game mastering a campaign in the Napoleonic era, for example, is a learning experience that can be done under supervision, but gives the student a lot of freedom and responsibility.

Quote from: WarthurI think any kind of educational roleplaying exercise needs to have someone (like a teacher in school) who can bring the facts to bear afterwards, to put the game in context. To use the holocaust game as an example, I think it's fair to say that anyone who claimed that they had a genuine insight into what it was actually like to be a holocaust survivor by playing through a roleplaying exercise is barking up the wrong tree: such an exercise can only ever let you explore your perceptions, and those of the other participants and the people framing the exercise as to what it would have been like to be in a concentration camp.

I think that you are talking against best practice as it's currently thought. In best practice, kids direct their own learning to a much larger degree. And perceptions are very important, especially for kids. Part of education is equipping them for making decisions in an increasingly complex world.

In fact, it's the facts that need to be put into perspective. I could chalk and talk about the Holocaust for weeks without making much of an impact. Two things helped me really get it through to the kids, though (different class to the other game). One was showing them the film made by the British of Bergen-Belsen (short on facts, long on gut-wrenching horror). the other was doing a roleplaying exercise based on Blue Eyes, Brown Eyes (http://www.janeelliott.com/). I got some good essays out of them after that.

Quote from: Matthijs HolterBut you wouldn't mind a qualified teacher using role-playing techniques to teach you things, right?

Of course not - provided that I'd signed up for the class.

I sure as shit wouldn't like to come to a game and find out it was actually a class. I've been to a few rpg sessions where the GM was trying to tell me something they thought was an Important Message, and really it was usually just their own personal wank about how Religion X Suxxorz or whatever. Personal banalities presented as universal profundities. And then of course there are those historical games which turn into GM lectures on demurrage in late 12th century southern France, or some shit like that.

If I've signed up for a class by a qualified teacher, or for counselling with a qualified therapist, and they use roleplaying, that's fine by me - they know what they're doing.

But if I sign up for a game, and they try to teach me something or "fix" me in some way - no. Just no.

Like we said about We All Had Names, there's roleplaying, and then there's roleplaying games. The two are different things, just as games are different to roleplaying games. I mean, I've got the guys coming around for the first rpg session of the new year tonight - if I popped up and said, "Actually, tonight we're going to play Axis & Allies," they'd be pissed off. They signed up for a roleplaying game, not just any game.

This site, and our hobby, are about roleplaying games - the two together. That's why you get wary looks, Mattijs, when you come here - because you don't come to talk about roleplaying games, but about roleplaying. If you came to talk about games like chess and monopoly you'd be just as much off-topic for the forum, but you'd just get puzzlement, not the wariness - the wariness comes from wanting to use roleplaying as education and therapy. And most of us don't want that in our game sessions.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron... the wariness comes from wanting to use roleplaying as education and therapy. And most of us don't want that in our game sessions.

I'm sure this is true for most gamers here. I however welcome any discussion on this topic, although I would prefer it, if the discussion centered around a specific game or non game as may be the case. I found the We All Had Names discussion pretty interesting.

Regards,
David R

You, I imagine, David, would be among the last people to deny that RPing can have some profound effects on those who do it. So the question is how to harness that potential for good and not evil. Anyway, for those who are interested, I guess there's now a forum dedicated to it.

Quote from: droogI think that you are talking against best practice as it's currently thought. In best practice, kids direct their own learning to a much larger degree. And perceptions are very important, especially for kids. Part of education is equipping them for making decisions in an increasingly complex world.

In fact, it's the facts that need to be put into perspective. I could chalk and talk about the Holocaust for weeks without making much of an impact. Two things helped me really get it through to the kids, though (different class to the other game). One was showing them the film made by the British of Bergen-Belsen (short on facts, long on gut-wrenching horror). the other was doing a roleplaying exercise based on Blue Eyes, Brown Eyes (http://www.janeelliott.com/). I got some good essays out of them after that.

Yeah, but your exercise was - as I point out - done under your supervision. It gave them some personal experience of a very mild form of prejudice, which helped them have more sympathy with the accounts of Holocaust victims and so forth and understand, in some small way, why the Holocaust was a bad thing. But there's a big leap between "I know what it's like to be discriminated against" and "I have a personal and valid insight into the Holocaust". They didn't learn anything about the Holocaust per se in your exercise - they didn't leave the room knowing more about the Holocaust than they did when they went in - they just learned a bit about prejudice.

Quote from: droogYou, I imagine, David, would be among the last people to deny that RPing can have some profound effects on those who do it. So the question is how to harness that potential for good and not evil. Anyway, for those who are interested, I guess there's now a forum dedicated to it.

Yeah, my stripes are pretty clear. I hold gaming (a new medium) right up there with movies, books, art which has the potential to entertain, educate.... all those things that expose my Swine pedigree. As always I'm interested in discussion.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: WarthurThey didn't learn anything about the Holocaust per se in your exercise - they didn't leave the room knowing more about the Holocaust than they did when they went in - they just learned a bit about prejudice.

I don't think that personal insight can be taught. But what is the point of teaching about the Holocaust? Surely it is to raise the issues of racism, hate, prejudice, the fruits of fascism and so forth, and let the kids discover what they think. You teach in units of work, and such an exercise is only ever going to be part of the toolkit.

They actually did know a bit more factual material when they went out, as it happens. My exercise was to divide the class based on a draw from a stacked deck – the red cards became Jews. Then we went progressively through the Nuremberg laws restricting Jews' freedoms. We had a small knot of 'Jewish' kids in their own area of the classroom being called 'Israel' and 'Sara'; finally they were ejected from the classroom altogether.

Sara?

Quote from: James McMurraySara?

It was made a law that all Jews were to be called 'Israel' for boys or 'Sarah' for girls. Abraham's wife, I suppose.

I said it in the original, other thread - because of the background of one of my players , that whole Holocaust educational thing would be a VERY bad idea.

Accidental bits of education happen in my game all the time. One of my players keeps telling me that I should go back to school and take classes to be a teacher. Because of the various backgrounds of my players I discover and learn stuff all the time.

- Ed C.

Quote from: KoltarI said it in the original, other thread - because of the background of one of my players , that whole Holocaust educational thing would be a VERY bad idea.

Accidental bits of education happen in my game all the time. One of my players keeps telling me that I should go back to school and take classes to be a teacher. Because of the various backgrounds of my players I discover and learn stuff all the time.

Yeah.  I don't get the whole issue that RPGs and games and educational tools have to be slotted into boxes, and that educational tools should never be made to be fun.  Most of the reason why I'm not terribly interested in the Holocaust stuff is because it seemed to not be any fun.  

However, a lot of education can be fun.  I think it's good to mix learning and fun.  Some examples outside of RPGs that spring to mind are the boardgame Therapy (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/4355) developed with some psychiatrists that was successfully marketed.  Also there was the card game Anachronism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anachronism_(game)) that was sponsored and co-developed by the History channel.  

I've often thought that the GURPS historical books were already pretty good for learning history, and with a little tweaking could be much better.

Quote from: Kyle AaronI sure as shit wouldn't like to come to a game and find out it was actually a class.

We're on the same page there. Tell me what I'm signing up for - or, if you're going to surprise me, tell me you're going to surprise me.

QuoteThis site, and our hobby, are about roleplaying games - the two together. That's why you get wary looks, Mattijs, when you come here - because you don't come to talk about roleplaying games, but about roleplaying.

Yeah, I get that. That's why I dropped the other thread - I realized it was off-topic. However, when it comes to education, I do believe that it's possible to have fun and learn at the same time - or that the two can be done alternatively, influencing each other, in the same project, so to speak.

Quote from: Matthijs HolterHowever, when it comes to education, I do believe that it's possible to have fun and learn at the same time - or that the two can be done alternatively, influencing each other, in the same project, so to speak.

....Hrm.

I think that in a given roleplaying thingum, you need at least a partial priority that says "here's what play is".

I mean, let's say you want to teach me about slavery in the antebellum south by means of a semi-virtual experience.  Roleplaying (the basic process) could be good at that, no question.  And what I want is to be entertained by experiencing the cogent life of a given individual character, again by means of a semi-virtual experience.  Roleplaying, again, a good media for this.

And it looks like we've got our shit together.  But in play, there are going to be bits where I want to do "character life" stuff that obviously does not educate me at all - in fact, I might well find something about the character's life which is not educational, but that I want to go into in depth, to the exclusion of your stuff.  To you, I'm missing the whole point of play.

Now, yeah, that's an extreme example; we might well be both flexible, and have such material that this doesn't occur.  The two can fit together just dandy.

But it's a good thing if, overall, we share a basic definition of what play is, neh?

Quote from: Levi KornelsenBut it's a good thing if, overall, we share a basic definition of what play is, neh?

Oh, yes. Quite. And as a teacher in your example, I would probably step in and say "that's cool, but right now, I'd like play to focus on this - perhaps you could do that later?" (And if I'm an experienced game master, I probably have a few tricks up my sleeve to help you get back on track).

On a related point, I think it's important for a teacher to realize that no matter what you do - no matter what technique you use - your students will miss out on some things you try to teach them, and learn other things you weren't trying to teach them. (I mean, give a class a dictionary in a foreign language, and pretty soon some kid will have found all the dirty words in there).

Quote from: Levi KornelsenI think that in a given roleplaying thingum, you need at least a partial priority that says "here's what play is".

No, what you need to agree on his how to play.  You don't need to agree on some deep philosophy or higher purpose to play, or some theoretical classification of the priority.  You might have get different things out of the game that someone else does, but that's fine.

For example, say you're at some sociology class where they do some role-playing exercise to teach about colonial life.  You might be there to learn material for a book on a related subject that you're writing.  Someone else might be curious about the history and need a chance to practice their English.  Someone else might just want the credits and to hang out with some cute guys that are taking the class.  You all have different priorities, and will make different choices, but as long as you all act within the bounds of play, you could still get along fine.

Quote from: jhkimNo, what you need to agree on his how to play.  You don't need to agree on some deep philosophy or higher purpose to play, or some theoretical classification of the priority.

I think that what Levi means as a "priority" is whether the roleplaying is primarily intended as entertainment, education, or therapy, not "deep philosophy or higher purpose".

Everyone seems to be agreeing on the notion that, whatever stated purpose brings you to the table, the individual is free to take away whatever experience transpires for him.  It's also not too controversial to suggest that other agendas may work very well with the primary purpose -- an educational or therapeutic roleplaying exercise that is fun might be more likely to encourage players to engage constructively; a game that is instructive or thought-provoking might be more compelling and engaging for some players.

I don't have a problem with this sort of thing in principle, as long as the primary goal and peripheral experiences aren't conflated or confused.  I do have a big problem with GMs (or game designers) who either bore players by instructing them in their own breadth of knowledge, or -- much worse -- dredge up deep and dangerous emotional states of mind without the capacity to deal with them.

!i!

Quote from: jhkimNo, what you need to agree on his how to play.  You don't need to agree on some deep philosophy or higher purpose to play, or some theoretical classification of the priority.  You might have get different things out of the game that someone else does, but that's fine.

You want to explore social issues, to educate me.

I want to kill monsters and take their shit, to be entertained.

We could easily look at the same set of rules and agree they'll work, and still piss each other off.

It's hardly "deep philosophy" to say that.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenYou want to explore social issues, to educate me.

I want to kill monsters and take their shit, to be entertained.

We could easily look at the same set of rules and agree they'll work, and still piss each other off.

It's hardly "deep philosophy" to say that.

Could we potentially have clashes in how we play that piss each other off?  Sure.  However, that doesn't depend on this.  

Conversely, if I want to educate you, then one of the best successes for me would be if you find it to just be a fun activity and treat it as such.  It is much better for my purposes if you find the game to be entertaining and engaging.  I don't want you to feel like you have to actively avoid what's fun in order to learn.  

More broadly, the typing here seems reductionist to me (i.e. "entertainment" vs. "education", for example -- or "story" vs. "challenge").  In reality, I think people's styles/preferences have a lot of overlap but also a lot of small differences.

Quote from: jhkimMore broadly, the typing here seems reductionist to me (i.e. "entertainment" vs. "education", for example -- or "story" vs. "challenge").  In reality, I think people's styles/preferences have a lot of overlap but also a lot of small differences.

I don't think it's reductionist at all.  It really boils down to the functional role that you hold when conducting a roleplaying session.  As an amateur, a GM, you're an entertainer, and your players will expect to be entertained.  As a teacher, you're an educator, and your students will expect to learn from your lesson.  As a therapist, you're, well, a therapist, and your patients will expect help with exploring personal issues.  When one tries to simultaneously adopt the role of another, particularly if they're not qualified to do so, and upon an unwilling or unwitting audience, they're asking for a volatile reaction.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaI don't think it's reductionist at all.  It really boils down to the functional role that you hold when conducting a roleplaying session.  As an amateur, a GM, you're an entertainer, and your players will expect to be entertained.  As a teacher, you're an educator, and your students will expect to learn from your lesson.  As a therapist, you're, well, a therapist, and your patients will expect help with exploring personal issues.  When one tries to simultaneously adopt the role of another, particularly if they're not qualified to do so, and upon an unwilling or unwitting audience, they're asking for a volatile reaction.

I think you got it Ian.

A couple of things. I see no problem with rpgs used as an educational tool in the traditional teacher/student context but I'm more interested in the idea that rpgs educate (and I'm using the term broadly) about specific subjects. I don't think that this is such a provocative idea, it could be used with almost any system and may just involve a more collaborative approach during campaign creation, mechanics (this I suppose is the contorversial aspect) that reflect the subject etc.

I know I'm not exactly on topic here, but....

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaI don't think it's reductionist at all.  It really boils down to the functional role that you hold when conducting a roleplaying session.  As an amateur, a GM, you're an entertainer, and your players will expect to be entertained.  As a teacher, you're an educator, and your students will expect to learn from your lesson.  As a therapist, you're, well, a therapist, and your patients will expect help with exploring personal issues.  When one tries to simultaneously adopt the role of another, particularly if they're not qualified to do so, and upon an unwilling or unwitting audience, they're asking for a volatile reaction.

If you do anything to an unwilling audience, you're asking for a volatile reaction.  This seems like a trumped-up strawman to dump on the topic of educational role-playing.  

The problem I have is that you're trying to make out that these have to be exclusive roles.  i.e. Entertainers or entertainment shouldn't educate, so stuff like the historical information in GURPS sourcebooks or the real science in games like Traveller or Guns, Guns, Guns should be excised.  Similarly, you are apparently claiming that educators shouldn't be entertaining, so if the students have fun in a class while they're learning -- then apparently the educator is overstepping his bounds.  

I would say that it doesn't matter what sort of box you stick it in.  A game can be educational, but if that is so, then it should do a good job at it and not have misinformation.  A game that tries to be fun should be fun.

Quote from: jhkimIf you do anything to an unwilling audience, you're asking for a volatile reaction.  This seems like a trumped-up strawman to dump on the topic of educational role-playing.

It is not a "strawman".  Tell me that this sort of thing doesn't happen.  That GMs don't try to foist off topical scenarios on players who aren't interested.  That teachers don't try to engage students in non-traditional exercises that they're uncomfortable with.

Okay, so the "unwilling" bit was a little obvious, but I notice that you didn't flinch at the "unwitting" part.  So I'll meet you halfway on the matter of "unwilling and unwitting".

QuoteThe problem I have is that you're trying to make out that these have to be exclusive roles.

Again, no I'm not.  Take a look at my post above (http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=168453&postcount=45).  As I stated very clearly therein, I have no problem with games that are educational or therapuetic, or lessons that are fun or therapuetic, or therapy that's fun and educational, but make sure that your priorities are straight before you try mixing them.  Make sure that your audience wants to mix them.  Make damned sure that you're qualified to mix them.

QuoteEntertainers or entertainment shouldn't educate, so stuff like the historical information in GURPS sourcebooks or the real science in games like Traveller or Guns, Guns, Guns should be excised.

Please, don't be ridiculous.  Do you really think I was trying to say that?

QuoteSimilarly, you are apparently claiming that educators shouldn't be entertaining, so if the students have fun in a class while they're learning -- then apparently the educator is overstepping his bounds.

Again, read what I wrote in my earlier post.  I've stated nothing of the kind.  I don't think I even implied it.  I certainly don't take issue with your assertion that the different purposes of roleplay can't be mixed.  What I do have a problem with is the notion that there needn't be a priority in mind when engaging in roleplay.

Near the beginning of the thread, I stated that it was "crucial" to be explicit about your intention when roleplaying.  Since that statement, I've softened my stance that the roleplaying must be exclusive in its intent somewhat, but I maintain that it is vital to have a primary goal (entertainment, education, or therapy) in mind, that you not attempt to mix in elements that the players are either unaware of or unprepared to deal with, and that you be competent at the elements you're mixing in.  Kind of a no-brainer: Don't do something that you're not good at and that people won't appreciate.

!i!

As a College Professor in my regular job, I use roleplay in my classroom.  I teach History, and part of the grade is participation-- specifically class discussions-- as this is a good oportunity for students to sharpen their critical analysis of the events.  Sometimes in discussion I will say something like, "Okay, it is the year 1600.  Everyone on this side of the room is an explorer who wants to petition the Viceroy of New Spain for the funds and supplies to embark on an expedition to explore California.  Everyone on the other side of the room is an administrator of the Viceroy-- who may or may not want the Viceroy to fund the expedition.  Please give your reasons for your request-- and be sure to explain why he should agree with your side.  And remember-- we're all 17th Century Spaniards here, so think about things in the context of the time."

Then students would take turns trying to justify to me (playing the Viceroy) why I should or shouldn't provide the funds-- and it turns into a rather lively debate and really forces the students to critically analyze-- not memorize-- the material-- which is after all, the purpose of studying history-- and to think of things in terms of the historical context.

As a game designer, I did build a system that could be called "educational" to help "sell" parents on the idea that it was an acceptable hobby.  I was working for the YMCA in an afterschool program, and the director mandated that the program must be all educational all the time.  That coupled with a total ban on anything representing swords, killing, etc, led me to the idea that I wanted to create a Superheroes game (nobody could argue I was teaching kids to kill with that) that honed skills the kids were working on in school.  That led to the creation of a multiplication mechanic for the system. 2d6 times stat / power.  When playing, kids would at first struggle with figuring out what their roll was-- but refusing to "give" them the answer and their own impatience to find out if Dr. Aqua escaped the forcefield in time forced them to get faster at multiplying in their head.

Originally I was intending to market the game soley as an rpg for kids-- but playtesting with adults one time we found it to be a perfectly viable game for adult gamers too.  However, I think I may make a "Young Heroes" edition-- which gets back to the original target audience of kids.

So, Chris...

Having established "Look, I do this shit." - do you find that having a clear set of priorities in the terms we've been arguing about is positive, negative, or hogwash?

And why?

Quote from: BASHMANI wanted to create a Superheroes game (...) that honed skills the kids were working on in school.  (...) When playing, kids would at first struggle with figuring out what their roll was-- but refusing to "give" them the answer and their own impatience to find out if Dr. Aqua escaped the forcefield in time forced them to get faster at multiplying in their head.

That sounds like a brilliantly focused motivational game: I want to teach this skill; in order to get to the fun, players have to use that skill. Win-win situation: Kids get to have fun, and you get to teach them what they need to learn.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenSo, Chris...

Having established "Look, I do this shit." - do you find that having a clear set of priorities in the terms we've been arguing about is positive, negative, or hogwash?

And why?

Hmmmm.  I don't know if it is applicable in my case.  In both cases, I was not working with a captive audience in the way that an elementary school teacher would be if the role-playing were an assignment.  

I would say that the answer depends on the audience.  In the case of the college students, who likely aren't used to professors engaging them in games of pretend, I do explain what the purpose of the exercise is (to go beyond knowing the facts and take the step to begin analyzing their importance).

In the case of my supers game, the students are learning whether they want to or not.  I am not telling them, "Okay we're going to be playing a math game."  That would go over like saying I was giving free tetenus shots.  The math part is just a required component of the game.  You need to be able to multiply the 2d6 roll to find out what happens.  You need to be able to subtract 47-18 to figure out how much damage got through your force field.  The players are not even thinking that they are doing math exercises-- they think they are laying the smack down on a bunch of supervillains and saving the city!

Quote from: BASHMANIn the case of my supers game, the students are learning whether they want to or not.  I am not telling them, "Okay we're going to be playing a math game."  That would go over like saying I was giving free tetenus shots.  The math part is just a required component of the game.  You need to be able to multiply the 2d6 roll to find out what happens.  You need to be able to subtract 47-18 to figure out how much damage got through your force field.  The players are not even thinking that they are doing math exercises-- they think they are laying the smack down on a bunch of supervillains and saving the city!

It sounds cool to me.  The students are "unwittingly" being lead into this in the sense that you have an ulterior motive for the game, but I don't have an issue with that as long as they basically know what they are getting into.  I've never done that, though I would say that when I was a child, Traveller was influential to me in teaching some principles of astronomy and physics.  This was also unwitting on my part, in that I turned to Traveller simply to be cool rather than deliberately to educate myself.

Quote from: jhkimThe students are "unwittingly" being lead into this in the sense that you have an ulterior motive for the game, but I don't have an issue with that as long as they basically know what they are getting into.

Holy cats, you just not letting go of this "unwilling and unwitting" business, are you?  You see?  They're clearly not "unwitting" of the situation -- they're in school, their teacher is giving them a lesson in the form of a game.  He's qualified to do so on the grounds that he is a) a certified educator, and b) he's presumably good at presenting the lesson as a game (or the game as a lesson).  Everything is up-front -- it's first and foremost a lesson that has the side benefit of being fun.  No problem.

Quote...I would say that when I was a child, Traveller was influential to me in teaching some principles of astronomy and physics.  This was also unwitting on my part, in that I turned to Traveller simply to be cool rather than deliberately to educate myself.

See, this wasn't "unwitting" either.  You were, ultimately, conscious of what you were doing with the game.  First and foremost, you approached it as entertainment.  As a side benefit, you discovered that it was based, at least in part, on some very real scientific principles.  No foul, no problem.

No, the real issue of "unwitting" arises from inserting secondary agendas that the participants might otherwise find objectionable, whether due to the nature of the agenda or the question of competence on the part of the instigator.  Okay, it's hard to argue that sneaking education into entertainment or therapy is a bad thing (as Bill Cosby used to say at the beginning of Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids, "...and if you aren't careful, you might learn something."), but the same isn't as easily said for entertainment or therapy.  Especially therapy.

I'm loathe to point fingers at particular titles, but there's been plenty of discussion about misguided efforts to incorporate "cathartic" experiences into roleplaying games.  "But I find some television and movies cathartic...why not RPGs?"  Probably because RPGs are an interpersonal experience, where your catharsis isn't internal, as it would be when watching an emotionally provocative show or film.  Your catharsis hinges on the presence and actions of a handful of others who may not know what to do with what they've loosed.

Okay, but you and your mates may very well want to engage in this sort of psycho-gaming (and by "you" I refer to the general "You", and by "psycho-" I mean "having to do with the psyche").  But your primary goal is still going to be entertainment -- you're all going at this as a game, though you clearly have secondary, and perhaps tertiary agendas in mind.  That's fine -- as ever, what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes is their business.

When this issue of pushing the definition of "roleplaying game" comes up, I like to site this article by John Tynes (http://johntynes.com/revland2000/rl_mofo.html), not because he was a particularly brilliant RPG writer in his time (and I think he was), but because it includes some spectacularly bad advice.  Suggestions #1 and #4, even with the cautionary provisos, show that really good intentions to make a game "fun" can be totally blind-sided by a misunderstanding of the implications of the actions.

So, in summary, I still maintain: Set your primary goal up front, and keep your peripheral goals clear.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaHoly cats, you just not letting go of this "unwilling and unwitting" business, are you?  You see?  They're clearly not "unwitting" of the situation -- they're in school, their teacher is giving them a lesson in the form of a game.  He's qualified to do so on the grounds that he is a) a certified educator, and b) he's presumably good at presenting the lesson as a game (or the game as a lesson).  Everything is up-front -- it's first and foremost a lesson that has the side benefit of being fun.  No problem.See, this wasn't "unwitting" either.  You were, ultimately, conscious of what you were doing with the game.  First and foremost, you approached it as entertainment.  As a side benefit, you discovered that it was based, at least in part, on some very real scientific principles.  No foul, no problem.
!i!

Actually, in the case of the superheroes game, the only people I explained the educational merits of the game to were the administrators who insisted all activities must be educational all the time.  I really created the game to have fun with the kids and introduce them to role-playing-- the educational angle was something to sell the adults on the idea.  I wasn't playing with the kids in order to "secretly make them do math"-- I was playing for fun.  If I didn't make this game, I would have been forced to play "math-ominos" or something lamer with them by the administrators.

Also, in the case of the kids in the supers game, I was not acting in the capacity of their schoolteacher-- I was working in an afterschool program.

Quote from: BASHMANActually, in the case of the superheroes game, the only people I explained the educational merits of the game to were the administrators who insisted all activities must be educational all the time.

So, it was the administration you deceived, flying fun in under their radar.  Shame on you.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaWhen this issue of pushing the definition of "roleplaying game" comes up, I like to site this article by John Tynes (http://johntynes.com/revland2000/rl_mofo.html), not because he was a particularly brilliant RPG writer in his time (and I think he was), but because it includes some spectacularly bad advice.  Suggestions #1 and #4, even with the cautionary provisos, show that really good intentions to make a game "fun" can be totally blind-sided by a misunderstanding of the implications of the actions.

So, in summary, I still maintain: Set your primary goal up front, and keep your peripheral goals clear.

Huh?  The Tynes article is specifically about evoking a horror mood -- i.e. his idea of entertainment. He says nothing about education or therapy in there, only his advice about how to evoke a horror mood.  This dragging in negative material and trying to spuriously attach it to the topic of education, when it has nothing to do with the topic.  

As for a summary -- On the topic of educational role-playing, here's where we apparently agree:  (1) In a game with a primary goal of entertainment, it's fine to include educational material.  (2) In a game with the primary goal of education, it's fine to also be entertaining. However, you seem to feel that there's some horrible danger if (3) the two goals are considered equal, or (4) the creators don't have a primary goal but just pursues their interest without considering it.  I don't see it.  You'll get something which is somewhere between the two good things, which is no worse or better than either.  

Regarding therapy -- it's not on the topic of the thread, and I think it's getting mixed up, so I'm starting a separate thread if you want to discuss that side.

John, you're unhelpfully prone to hyperbole.  And you're being a little thick, too, which may be due to perceiving this discussion as being more combative than it really is.

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaJohn, you're unhelpfully prone to hyperbole.  And you're being a little thick, too, which may be due to perceiving this discussion as being more combative than it really is.

It's true, I did perceive this as combative.  It seems to me that you are also guilty of hyperbole, for example by citing John Tynes' thoughts on how to run horror games, which didn't have anything to do with education.  

So to try again, our point of contention seems to be about priority.  Let's say I'm putting together a game that I want to be both educational and entertaining.  I don't say to myself, "This is education that is entertaining." or "This is entertainment that is educational."  Instead, I say "I want this to be a game that is both fun and educational."  

Is this a problem?  If so, could you explain why?

Quote from: jhkimIt seems to me that you are also guilty of hyperbole, for example by citing John Tynes' thoughts on how to run horror games, which didn't have anything to do with education.

Alternative uses of roleplaying quickly broadened from education to therapy back on Page 1.  Some of Tynes' suggestions for horror GM-ing involve volatile psychological techniques.  Take it up over in your therapy thread if you want.  The fact that you're personally disallowing the broadened discussion to include anything other than education and calling it "hyperbole" is a bullshit cop.

!i!

Quote from: jhkimI say "I want this to be a game that is both fun and educational."  

Is this a problem?  If so, could you explain why?

Because I've yet to hear of a gamer ask their GM to educate them.

All that stuff about GURPS books being educational - in the first place, a game book is not a game session, and secondly, as good as those books are, they're game books. GURPS Imperial Rome teaches you as much about imperial Rome as Monopoly teaches you about free market capitalism. It bears a vague and passing resemblance to it, but the real thing has got a lot more depth and detail.

Being educated through a roleplaying game would be bad not only for the roleplaying and the game, but for the education. It would be a trivial and superficial treatment of the subject, simply by virtue of the medium. What Mel Gibson movies do to history, roleplaying games do to all sorts of subjects. When it's "just a game" that's not a problem at all. When it purports to be real education, it's a problem.

Quote from: Kyle AaronBecause I've yet to hear of a gamer ask their GM to educate them.

All that stuff about GURPS books being educational - in the first place, a game book is not a game session, and secondly, as good as those books are, they're game books. GURPS Imperial Rome teaches you as much about imperial Rome as Monopoly teaches you about free market capitalism. It bears a vague and passing resemblance to it, but the real thing has got a lot more depth and detail.

Since no one actually has a time machine to go back and see the "real thing", I don't see how that is relevant.  The comparison is to various other books.  I don't have GURPS Imperial Rome, but in many cases that I've seen GURPS books contain better information than many of non-fiction kids books about their subject that I have seen in the library.  

Are they ideal for use in a class?  No, I don't think so.  However, I could see them being included in a curriculum along with various other sources.  I'd note that the
Osterskov (http://www.osterskov.dk/) school in Denmark incorporates many role-playing games into its curriculum, though I don't have details on it.  It is a magnet public school with focus on RPGs -- the same way that some schools have a focus on theater or music or tech.  

All of education is inherently about simplifying and abstracting the subject.  I think that many trading games would be excellent for use in teaching free market capitalism (Power Grid springs to mind); much as the U.S. naval academy uses the wargame Harpoon to teach naval tactics to its cadets.  Would just playing the game all by itself going to be as good as a dedicated class?  No, of course not.  

Quote from: Kyle AaronBeing educated through a roleplaying game would be bad not only for the roleplaying and the game, but for the education. It would be a trivial and superficial treatment of the subject, simply by virtue of the medium. What Mel Gibson movies do to history, roleplaying games do to all sorts of subjects. When it's "just a game" that's not a problem at all. When it purports to be real education, it's a problem.

I think this is nonsense.  People have said the same things about comics books, television, and computers -- that their content is inherently trivial and superficial because of the medium.  For example, I might agree that 99.9% of all comic books are trivial and superficial, but I think Larry Gonick's Cartoon History of the Universe and the Cartoon Guide to Physics are excellent educational works.

Quote from: Kyle AaronBecause I've yet to hear of a gamer ask their GM to educate them.

IME it's not a one way street. Gamers learn something as a group, throwing ideas around, engaging in discussion within the game and after it.

Regards,
David R

There seems to be agreement among researchers and practitioners that teaching facts and heavy theory through RPGs doesn't work all that well - or, rather, that there are better ways of doing it - but that teaching understanding of issues, ethics, debating skills, tolerance and other skills work great.

However, that may just be because nobody's come up with the right way to do fact-based educational roleplaying yet. Who knows? It's a pretty new field.

Quote from: Matthijs HolterHowever, that may just be because nobody's come up with the right way to do fact-based educational roleplaying yet. Who knows? It's a pretty new field.

Err.. Multiplication tables are facts...

Quote from: BASHMANErr.. Multiplication tables are facts...

Interesting point. I'll have to think out loud (well, in writing) about this.

Is multiplying two numbers the application of a procedure, or the recalling of a fact? Is it the same thing as remembering the capital of a country?

Let's assume multiplication is fact recall. Would it be the same thing if the game required players to recall the capital of a random country to play? No, because the multiplication is seen as an integral part of the game system - a part of the machinery, even if the machinery could easily be constructed so it didn't require the multiplication.

Traditional role-playing games lend themselves well to teaching mathematical fact recall - it's part of the tradition of RPGs, and part of the whole "game rules = laws of nature" philosophy.

However, other forms of fact recall - such as remembering historical facts - aren't a part of traditional game procedures, are they? They can be part of what players sometimes do, but they're not usually systematically required to achieve things in the game.

What kind of system could be made that required regular recall of historical facts, for example, as part of the game procedures?

Quote from: BASHMANIf I didn't make this game, I would have been forced to play "math-ominos" or something lamer with them by the administrators.

:eek:

As reasons to scramble "fun and education" go?

Avoiding the living hell out of math-ominos strikes me as a hard one to beat.

Just sayin'.

I have to say, I've seen a shitload of academic books on the Roman Empire that were far less academically useful, valid, or rigorous than GURPS Imperial Rome was.

Just saying.

Also, Greg Stafford should probably get a PhD. in Comparative Literature for his Great Pendragon Campaign book.

However, these few exceptions don't negate the fact that the average game book is not in any meaningful way educational, and that the actual PLAYING of games is even less educational than game books.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditHowever, these few exceptions don't negate the fact that the average game book is not in any meaningful way educational, and that the actual PLAYING of games is even less educational than game books.

Bingo.

We've discussed this phenomenon in various alt-history RPG threads.  The GM can be running a game straight out of a university history text, but as soon as the players start exercising their right to freedom of play, it becomes alternative history, which might give some players a rather skewed notion of how real history proceeded.

So this is an example of how the game is the primary goal, and education is secondary, even if the designer and GM intend to put them on equal footing.  Yes, the educational content is there, but it's suborned by the freedom to improvise ahistorically within the context of the game.

!i!

Quote from: RPGPunditI have to say, I've seen a shitload of academic books on the Roman Empire that were far less academically useful, valid, or rigorous than GURPS Imperial Rome was.

Just saying.

Also, Greg Stafford should probably get a PhD. in Comparative Literature for his Great Pendragon Campaign book.

However, these few exceptions don't negate the fact that the average game book is not in any meaningful way educational, and that the actual PLAYING of games is even less educational than game books.

Well, sure.  No one's claiming that the average group playing typical tabletop RPG books is meaningfully educational.  The claim is that RPGs can be educational, without fundamentally changing what they are.  This is demonstrated by existing educational programs as well as exceptional commercial products (like the ones you mention).

Quote from: jhkimThe claim is that RPGs can be educational, without fundamentally changing what they are.

How far a change makes for "fundamental", in your head, though?

Not to wake a screaming thingy, but some story-type-games are at the point now where I'd call them "fundamentally different" from old-school D&D, while still calling them RPGs (others would prefer to not call them RPGs, but whatever).  That is, the base expectations are not the same, and if you walk in with a regular set of expectations, those game just don't go.

That far?  Less far?  Even more out there?

Here's an example:

What about a game where you're actually supposed to push history back on the right track after someone messed with it? You'd definitely have to know your history to find out what to do, otherwise you'd just mess it up worse.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenHow far a change makes for "fundamental", in your head, though?

Not to wake a screaming thingy, but some story-type-games are at the point now where I'd call them "fundamentally different" from old-school D&D, while still calling them RPGs (others would prefer to not call them RPGs, but whatever).  That is, the base expectations are not the same, and if you walk in with a regular set of expectations, those game just don't go.

That far?  Less far?  Even more out there?

Eh?  Why are you bringing up story games -- which are mostly empty of educational content from what I've seen -- and ignoring the actual examples that I've mentioned?  

I had mentioned examples like GURPS histories and Traveller, and noted examples like Chris Rutkowsky's superheroes game and the curriculum o fthe Danish Oesterskov school (which I don't have details on).  I'd also mentioned Rebecca Thomas' Role Play Workshop (http://www.roleplay-workshop.com/).  Brian David Phillips recommended Call of Cthulhu, Fringeworthy, Ghostbusters, and Star Wars based on his experience using RPGs in English conversation classes.  

I don't think those are the limits of the range, though.  It's not like only one particular style or type of RPG can be educational.

Quote from: jhkimEh?  Why are you bringing up story games -- which are mostly empty of educational content from what I've seen -- and ignoring the actual examples that I've mentioned?

Because, frankly, I've never seen any of those game specifically played to educate.

They are books where preparation to play (for entertainment) can be educational, yes.  Where the books themselves contain material which can teach and prompt further learning, yes.

But the actual process of playing isn't specifically an educational affair.

EDIT: I'm on pretty shaky ground here when talking about english-second-language, I'll admit - in that case, the process of play sure does look like educational practice.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenBecause, frankly, I've never seen any of those game specifically played to educate.

They are books where preparation to play (for entertainment) can be educational, yes.  Where the books themselves contain material which can teach and prompt further learning, yes.

But the actual process of playing isn't specifically an educational affair.

So it's not just that you haven't personally see cases like these, but you actually can't imagine how learning would take place during play itself?  Let me try some more examples:

1) In a GURPS historical game, you can see how there is historical information in the book.  Surely it isn't so hard to picture that there could be more historical material that comes up in play?  Actually talking to NPCs and each other in-character can make players think about how many parts of life worked.

2) In Traveller, like in any science class, simply reading the material in a book is different from actually using it.  So when the players figure out how long it takes their 1G thrust starship to reach its' destination, that provides something different than just reading the rules.  Similarly, actually exploring a star system, processing given data to make decisions is different than reading the rules for how star systems are generated.  

Even lacking additional material, though, play can illustrate and help internalize information in the book -- i.e. it may be one thing for there to be a map and descriptions in the book, but it is quite different to study the map and discuss in-character about where the party should go, and hear what they encounter.

Quote from: Kyle AaronBecause I've yet to hear of a gamer ask their GM to educate them.

I think there's a reasonable intersection between games and some degree of education.

0) Games can certainly be used educationally -- I'm thinking about war games, obviously, but it's not uncommon to find games (roleplaying or otherwise) in classroom settings

1) As a player, I've been (happily) surprised and impressed when the GM came to the table with something really interesting and fact-based

2) As a GM, I often do a lot of research and learn all kinds of cool things

This matches my experience with books and movies that open my eyes to real events or facts without compromising their entertainment value. And I'll point out that I didn't just "feel educated"  -- in some cases I've been in class where popular fiction was used as part of the curriculum because the professional educator felt that the content was specific and valuable in an educational way.

Here's my take on this: the intersection between traditional, primarily recreational roleplaying and education is not about the game or (even) about the act of roleplaying. It's entirely a function of what the people in the game want out of it and how the dynamic between them works. For my part, when the GM comes to the table armed with a lot of well researched facts and background based in real history, I find myself gratified. When I learn new words or concepts in a game context, I'm pleased... if the GM was "educating" me at the expense of my enjoyment of the game, I'd probably drop the game like a bad habit.

What about the concept of games designed specifically to be educational?

We've seen it tried before with, perhaps, the most effort being spent in trying to make video games educational. I would say it's been -- to a large extent -- a failure with a few middling successes (Typing of the Dead, or whatever, being the closest thing I'm aware of to a game that's fun to play and actually teaches a usable skill).

My guess is that RPG attempts would run into many of the same issues and would tend to compromise both their educational and recreational mission with some, perhaps, succeeding to a degree in one or the other.

They'd probably be the kinds of games well meaning parents would buy for their teenagers in the hopes that they'd spend their time productively... if you know what I mean.

Cheers,
-E.

I forgot about another educational role-playing thing I did for about six years, four in high school and two in college - Model United Nations! You roleplay being a delegate to the United Nations from a country to a committee discussing 1-2 international issues. You have to research the country's stance and argue it, and interact politically, and with the rules of procedure, and so on. Then at the end people get awards for best/most accurate portrayal of their country and the goals they accomplished. I helped run the Security Council simulation in college, it was an absolute blast for the kids and for the organizers.

Roleplaying is a method, that is used MAINLY and in ORDERS of MAGNITUDES more often in education/training than as a game.

Our hobby shares this method with those training/educational techniques.

Our hobby calls itself "RPG", which is just a name. It does not encompass ALL things using the method or roleplay. Because that would be inane.

Our hobby could as well be called Dongdaloppola. It has as much in common with the training techniques as a game of Risk has with the Royal Airforce planning room from the battle of Britain.