Prospect Theory in Lorcana
- Dylan Fair
- Jan 26
- 4 min read
The purpose of this paper is to describe the fundamental gameplay mechanics of Lorcana (a collectible card game by Ravensburger), summarize some of the concepts described in Prospect Theory, and exemplify these concepts with Lorcana gameplay.
Lorcana is a card game typically played between two players. Each player tries to gather 20 Lore by Questing with Character cards (Quick Start Rules, 2). Players can place cards permanently in their Inkwell to create Ink, which can be spent to play cards. Questing with a Character makes them Exerted, which makes them vulnerable to being Challenged; Regardless of who initiates the Challenge, both Characters involved in a Challenge take damage (Quick Start Rules, 9-16). A common term for Challenging a Character with the understanding that both Characters will end up getting banished is “trading. ”
Prospect Theory
Prospect Theory was developed by Kahneman and Tversky as an alternative to the Expected-Utility Theory, which states that people make decisions based on which option has the most utility (Levy, 172-173). Prospect Theory, however, states that “people think in terms of gains and losses rather than in terms of their net assets, and therefore encode choices in terms of deviations from a reference point” (Levy, 174). This means that decisions are made while regarding your current resources and how your choices will affect those resources. In Lorcana, your most important resources include Lore (the winning condition as “victory points”) and Characters (which directly provide Lore).
Risk Aversion and Risk Acceptance
Prospect Theory differentiates how gains and losses are treated. “Individuals tend to be risk-averse with respect to gains and risk-acceptant with respect to losses” (Levy, 174). Potential gains cause people to become more risk-averse, meaning they are more likely to choose a guaranteed, smaller gain over a risky, larger gain. This means that people are more likely to accept a 100% chance to draw 1 card than a 20% chance to draw 5 cards.
With potential losses, however, people prefer a chance for a greater loss over a guaranteed, smaller loss, which is known as risk-acceptant behavior. Even when “faced with the same two negative prospects” people are more inclined to accept risk (Levy, 174).
This means that people are more likely to accept a 20% chance to discard 5 cards than a guaranteed discard of 1 card.
Risk Aversion with Ariel and Mulan
Two cards that exemplify risk-aversion are Ariel and Mulan. Ariel’s card reads, “look at the top 4 cards of your deck. You may reveal a song card and put it into your hand” (Pisoni). Mulan has an ability that says, “you may reveal the top card of your deck. If it’s a song card, you may play it for free” (Carrera).
Both cards allow me to gain a song card; Mulan’s gain is greater, allowing me to sing the song for free, but Ariel only lets me add it to my hand. However, the chance to gain a song card with Ariel is greater than Mulan’s, since Ariel searches 4 times the number of cards Mulan does. Being risk-averse means I am more likely to use Ariel’s ability, since I’m more likely to have a net positive in my resources.
Loss Aversion and Endowment Effect
Loss aversion is a term to describe how people view losses; losses seem more negative than gains are seen positively. Levy writes that people prefer keeping the resources they currently have over a 50/50 chance of adjusting those resources (Levy, 175). This phenomenon affects the secondary market, where people trade cards. These players would be averse to trading a rare card they already own for a booster pack, which could contain an even better card.
These varied valuations of gains and losses led to Thaler coining the endowment effect, with Levy stating, “it implies that people value what they have more than ‘comparable’ things they do not have” (Levy, 175). With this in mind, players value a card in their hand much more than a card in their deck that could get drawn, much like the saying “two in the hand are worth two in the bush.”
Loss Aversion with Characters
Loss aversion is rampant during Lorcana gameplay. Playing a Character does not feel as good as a Character being banished feels bad; to describe it numerically, playing a Character feels like a +1 while a Character being Banished feels like a -2. This makes Challenging with your Character a difficult decision. You can make your opponent lose their Characters, but doing so often damages your own and gets you closer to losing them.
Endowment Effect and the Secondary Market
For my collection of Lorcana cards, I have binders for my master set, boxes for my decks, and a box for my bulk. The first copy of a card I collect goes into my master set, where it stays and does not get traded or sold. Extra copies go into a deckbox if I want to play with them, but if I don’t want to play with a card, it goes into my bulk box so I can trade it for other cards. The cards in my master set perfectly exemplify how the endowment effect changes my interaction with Lorcana’s secondary market; while a Mulan-Reflecting might go for $0. 30 in the secondary market (TCGPlayer), I would be very disappointed with receiving that offer!
Furthermore, Jervis writes that the value of a person’s belongings increases over time (Levy, 176). When the Rise of the Floodborn card set was released, Mulan was valued at $1. 80, but has since dropped to $0. 30 (TCGPlayer). Regardless of this price decrease, the Mulan I have kept in my master increases in value, and the thirty cent offer for my “master Mulan” would become less appealing over time.
References
Levy, J. S. (1992). An Introduction to Prospect Theory, 13 No. 2 (Prospect Theory and Political Psychology), 171–186.
Quick Start Rules. (2024). Retrieved from https://www.disneylorcana.com/en-US/resources/
Alice Pisoni. Ariel-Spectacular Singer
Lissette Carrera. Mulan - Reflecting - Rise of the Floodborn
Komentarze