Taking inspiration from Dr. Rotwang's, Adventure Funnel, Dogs in the Vineyard and Social Networks, I started fiddling with creating game usable networks.

I then wondered, "Am I recreating the wheel?"

Has anyone already done this for their Traveller (or others based on constantly moving to a new location) games?
=

Could you go into a bit more detail how you are "funnelizing"? I think I can guess but your own words would be better.

Might have a look at Levi's (Amagi Games) free Microcosm game on pdf.

Thanks for the link.

As far as how I'm "funnelizing", I'm trying to start with a person they are in contact with and work backwards.

For example, the classic Stranger in a Bar.
Why does he need to find a complete stranger to do a task for him?
What other connections does he have that he doesn't want to know of the task (or he doesn't want to know of them).
What connections can those connections call upon to interfere (or assist) with the task.
How do those connections fit into society at large?
...
=

Ha!  I inspired a verb*!

Really sounds like you're just brainstorming, period -- I'm not sure what you mean by "game usable networks", but if your example is a succint one of what you're thinking, then...yeah, brainstorming, pure and simple.  Sure, the intention is to develop lots of NPCs out of just one NPC, but -- there's always a goal when you're brainstorming.

Are you re-inventing the wheel?  Well...maybe just over-thinking what you're doing with it.  I suggest that you merely seize the wheel, hit the gas and drive like there's a velociraptor on your six.  VROOM VROOOM!

*Well, another one, anyway -- as everyone knows, "to Rotwang!" means "to fall off of something not very tall, repeatedly, because you are a doink."

That's definitely how I work out social networks in my games, particularly Shadowrun, where social networking counts for a lot. [The characters are members of a fairly small community, when all is said and done, and no one in it is going to be more than a degree or two of separation away.]

But it's a little like when I read the Rotwang's Adventure Funnel: I thought, "Yes, that's the way I do it, only written down in a self-contained, logical framework." I find such self-contained logical frameworks to be very useful, personally, but I'm an analytical sort of person.

In a sense, you're not reinventing the wheel, you're trying to describe what a wheel is, so that your wheel design and construction can proceed through a logical, concise process. This can be very wise, although some people probably don't need or want such a clear process; I certainly wouldn't want to be a slave to it, but I find it very useful.

*Screeeeeech!*  Shortcut, go left!  It's still gaining!  AIIIIE, FRUIT CART!

I can think of 2 resources like this.

First, a recent entry in Rob Donoghue's blog:
http://rob-donoghue.livejournal.com/321610.html

Second, a little less social network-y, but a bit Dogs-y, there was a nice entry in Bankui's blog... which went missing, but you can still find it in the internet archive:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060513200737/http://bankuei.blogspot.com/2006/02/flag-framing_03.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20060519100735/bankuei.blogspot.com/2006/02/conflict-web.html

There are other angles to this thing, though, besides the individual person-person connections, which is the shape of the network as a whole. There was an interesting post about this by the dread Jason Corley, on the dread Story Games: Look here.

The point of it, in broad terms, is that the way certain nodes are connected to the rest of the network can have interesting effects. Such as, if you have a group of loosely-connected nodes (characters), such that each one is only connected to half a dozen or so other nodes...and then one node that's connected to every other node, that can be kind of freaky, yes?

Or conversely you have a fairly densely connected network, but there's one node that's only connected to one or two other nodes.

Or you have two mostly-disjoint networks, with sparse connections at a couple of nodes.

One thing that I do not see covered in the concept of social networks (although I've only skimmed the article) or in the graphical representation thereof, however, is the "publicness" of the connections--that is, how much of the network is known to each of the members. I don't have a good solution to the graphical problem, but the issue is something you can think about. E.g., while a simple graph of a social network might have N nodes, and each is connected to all the others, it might be the case that node X's connections are only known to the respective connectees (endpoints). In plain speech: you might have a cohesive group where everyone knows each other and is aware of the relationships within the group, and then one "outside puppetmaster" who has a secret relationship to each member of the group.

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;261328First, a recent entry in Rob Donoghue's blog:
http://rob-donoghue.livejournal.com/321610.html

Beaten to the punch!

Do you think a high level structure needs to be generated or just assumed?
Government, Guild, League, ...

My concern about generating social structures "from the ground up" is that they become disjointed.

Is this usually a concern in a game or does "There's a King see and that guy is under him", all that is needed?  (or Prime Minister, or ...)
=