On the Psychology of Stress and the Architecture of Readiness

 While designing two contrasting roleplaying systems, Conflict and Yes, But, I developed mechanics that, quite independently of formal academic reading, have turned out to mirror core psychological theories of resilience and stress. What follows is an attempt to articulate these theories and how they are expressed, often implicitly, in the mechanical structures of the games.


I. Two Games, Two Models

Conflict is a tactical system, oriented around immediate crises. Its core mechanic, Readiness, determines whether a character can act usefully in the opening moment of a violent or high-pressure situation; it adds to the chances of surprise, adds to initiative, and determines the number of actions in a combat round. Without Readiness, a character may be physically unharmed but psychologically frozen, their lack of experience, training, or background renders them inert.

Yes, But, by contrast, is a drama-first system. It incorporates combat, yes, but always in the broader frame of character, relationships, and inner change. Its core mechanic for post-crisis fallout is Distress, which reflects the psychological cost of violence or trauma. As Distress accumulates, it progressively impairs the character's ability to use social and emotional skills (Soul). At high levels, this leads to complete dysfunction.

In short:

Conflict asks: Can you act usefully in a crisis?

Yes, But asks: Can you relate usefully after one?

This distinction, event-centred versus person-centred stress response, turns out to align closely with major psychological frameworks.

He is not ready, or resilient


II. Bonanno's Trajectories of Resilience

Psychologist George Bonanno outlined four broad trajectories people tend to follow after a major stressor:

  • Resilient , stable, functional response with no impairment.
  • Recovery , an initial drop, followed by return to baseline.
  • Delayed Dysfunction , appears functional, but deteriorates later.
  • Chronic Dysfunction , ongoing, unresolved impairment.

In Yes, But, these are functionally modelled:

  • If the character has a relevant skill (Combat or Medical), they incur no Distress: Resilient.
  • If Distress is incurred but later reduced via downtime, nature (expressing the core elements of their personality), or social time: Recovery.
  • At 3 Distress, Soul skills are unusable, even if physical skills remain: Delayed Dysfunction.
  • At 6 Distress, the character becomes non-functional in all areas, and recovery costs a permanent change: Chronic Dysfunction.

Thus the model is not only psychologically faithful but narratively potent.


III. McEwen's Allostatic Load Model

Neuroscientist Bruce McEwen developed the idea of allostatic load, the wear and tear on the body and mind from maintaining equilibrium under stress. Resilience, in this model, is the ability to recover baseline function without excessive damage to one's physiological or psychological systems.

Yes, But divides character function into three domains:

  • Brawn, degraded by Hunger
  • Brains, degraded by Fatigue
  • Soul, degraded by Distress

Each domain is impaired by prolonged effort or trauma, and each requires appropriate recovery. The match to McEwen is again nearly exact: stress impairs function, and if that stress is not metabolised (i.e., the character does not eat, sleep, or rest socially), capacity is lost.

This is less a resource system and more a resilience model.


IV. Hobfoll's Conservation of Resources Theory

Stevan Hobfoll proposed that stress results from threats to or losses of personal resources: time, energy, status, relationships, material needs. Individuals who lack surplus resources are more vulnerable to stress.

In Conflict, Readiness can be gained from:

  • Background: lower social class, with higher exposure to violence and trauma, offers a chance at baseline Readiness. In the rules, I noted: "Part of the purpose in rising in social class is to insulate yourself from the conflicts of the world."
  • Training: thorough training in combat skills can improve Readiness. "I know what to do."
  • Experience: if the GM judges a character has acted usefully in a crisis, Readiness may be granted retroactively.

Importantly, a character with zero Readiness cannot act at all, except in the first turn of an ambush, where initiative lies with them. This builds in a stress trap: those who have no exposure, no training, and no luck remain incapable of ever gaining experience. They freeze, and freezing leads to exclusion.

This reproduces Hobfoll's theory in structure: resource-poor individuals spiral further into helplessness, unless external intervention breaks the loop.

Readiness can be trained


V. Trait vs Process Resilience

Modern psychology recognises two major kinds of resilience:

  • Trait Resilience: a stable predisposition to handle stress well (linked to temperament, upbringing, belief in control)
  • Process Resilience: a dynamic system of skills, behaviours, and supports that allow one to recover from stress

Conflict is built around Trait Resilience: you have Readiness or you don't. It's a game of sharp actions and instant results.

Yes, But models Process Resilience: the character suffers, adapts, and either recovers or spirals downward. It allows for late-stage redemption, and for long-term collapse.

Both approaches are valid. Both exist in the real world.

VI. On Aftermath and the Soul

Perhaps the most under-modelled part of roleplaying games is what happens after a crisis. What happens to the character after the fire. In Yes, But, a character may win a combat and still be left unable to look their spouse in the eye. They may complete a heroic act and be unable to speak.

This, I believe, is the true psychology of stress: it is not what you do under fire. It is what you do after.

A character whose Soul is depleted is not weak, they are psychologically injured. And the game requires that they heal, or change.

Not much fun to roleplay


VII. Implications for Real Life and Play

Designing these systems has sharpened my understanding of people, not just characters. In violent conflicts, in first aid situations, in running a gym, in raising children, in teaching, I have seen precisely the same principles:

  • Some freeze under pressure and never act.
  • Some act, then break.
  • Some recover, but need help.
  • And some learn, through practice and care, to act and recover both.

Games, at their best, can reflect life, though should not try to reproduce it perfectly. And sometimes by helping us understand the world, they help us live in it better.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

CT: Outland

Image
  Cliched? Yes! That's why we like it! Outland is a scifi movie made in 1981, and is of the same vintage and style as Alien and Blade Runner - and Classic Traveller ! As many have noted, it is essentially High Noon in space. A federal Marshal comes to the mining colony of Io run by the interplanetary conglomerate Con-Am, and finds the place violent and corrupt, and the men abusing stimulants to work harder. Scientifically, it falls down in three places: lights inside helmets, explosive decompression, and the composition of Io.  "I can feel schlock crawling all over me!" Scifi films have lights on in people's vacc suit helmets for the same reason medieval films have the hero not wear a helmet at all, so we can see the face of the actor the producers paid all that money for. Explosive decompression, where a sudden loss of pressure leads to people exploding, simply does not happen as depicted; this puts Outland partly in the schlock scifi category. As for Io, in th...
Read more

Rules for effective gamemastering

Image
The Viking Hat Way 1. Bring snacks. 2. The dice are always right. 3. I master the game, the game does not master me. 4. Momentum over perfection. 5. The game must go on! You must bring snacks because gaming is social activity. In every culture and religion worldwide, sharing food is how people bond. You will observe that people who do not bring snacks tend not to contribute in other ways - especially if they never bring, but always take. As with snacks, so with everything else.  The dice are always right because nobody likes boxed text and being railroaded, and gaming like life is meaningless without the risk of failure and death. The dice enhance the creativity of player and gamemaster both.  I master the game, the game does not master me  because no collection of rules can ever anticipate everything that might happen at the game table, and the ideas and whims of players and gamemaster. In other words: " I am the GM, I wear the Viking Hat!"  Momentum over perfec...
Read more

AD&D1e: Common men & the shield wall

Image
  Too often players and DM come to the game table imagining some solitary friendless hero who charges off by themselves. Should the DM not be soft, weak and useless and fudge the dice to save them from their foolhardiness, this would-be Rambo typically perishes horribly sooner rather than later. The wise player realises that they are part of a  party , a team of adventurers who work together to accomplish their goals of gold and glory. As the dwarves in  The Hobbit  put it, Far over the Misty Mountains cold To dungeons deep and caverns old We must away, ere break of day To seek our pale enchanted gold We  must away - not "I", but "we". In the early days of D&D, players often came from wargaming clubs, and so this could be taken for granted. Now when players are coming from watching movies with solitary heroes or playing first-person shooters, it cannot be taken for granted. This is a style forgotten by most, and so we bring in house rules which encourage s...
Read more