Interaction Roleplay Investigation

Today you are running controlled conflict simulations with incomplete information and different goals.

Not to create drama.

To inspect interaction decisions.

You will run it, stop it, analyze it, change one decision path, and run it again.

That is an experiment.

Safety boundary

This is simulation work.

You are not required to disclose personal conflicts, repeat harmful language, or reenact harassment.

Roleplay the decision problem, not harmful behavior.

If a scenario crosses a line, stop and involve the instructor.

Group structure

• Player A
• Player B
• Team Lead
• Observer
• Optional Coach or Official

Observer role

Observer does not decide who is right.

Observer records:

• assumptions
• interruptions
• evidence requests
• escalation moves
• de-escalation moves
• decision points
• unresolved issues

Turning point

Most conflicts have a decision moment where direction changes.

Examples:

• assumption stated as fact
• personal attack introduced
• clarifying question asked
• evidence checked
• public argument moved to structured channel
• boundary stated

That moment is the turning point.

Scenario set

Scenario 1: Role dispute

Player A believes role ownership is being undermined.

Player B believes urgent moments required faster calls.

Team Lead sees a real role document, but no process for delayed call response.

Potential people issue plus definite system issue.

Scenario 2: Criticism conflict

Player A uses replay evidence to point out repeated errors.

Player B feels singled out in review culture.

Can both claims be true at once?

Scenario 3: Missing teammate

A teammate missed practice but informed coach, not team.

Is this only commitment failure, or also communication-process failure?

Scenario 4: Post-loss frustration

One player wants immediate review.

Another is too frustrated for productive conversation.

Should normal process be adapted in this moment?

Scenario 5: Rule disagreement

Players disagree about legality of a move.

Rulebook and tournament official exist.

Use the system.

Scenario 6: Public criticism

Feedback posted in team Discord causes escalation.

Conflict may be about channel selection as much as content.

Round 1

Run the scenario for three minutes without intentionally applying CALM.

Observer records.

Freeze analysis

Identify:

• original problem
• first assumption
• first escalating move
• first de-escalating move
• turning point
• evidence used
• decision and unresolved issue

Round 2

Reset and rerun using CALM:

Check
Avoid adding fuel
Locate the real problem
Move to the right response

Compare outcomes.

Build the Conflict Response Playbook

Include at least five conflict types, for example:

Misunderstanding
Role conflict
Performance disagreement
Behavior or conduct issue
Rule dispute
Repeated interpersonal conflict

For each type, include:

First question
First response
Evidence to check
Decision owner
Escalation threshold
Repair/reset step

Also include one immediate escalation card:

Stop peer mediation for threats, safety concerns,
harassment, discrimination, serious bullying,
major integrity violations, or repeated harmful conduct.
Involve a responsible adult or official.

Playbook stress test

Use a final mystery scenario.

You have 90 seconds to answer:

• conflict type
• what is known
• what is unknown
• first move
• decision owner
• escalation point

If the playbook does not help under time pressure, revise it.

Exit ticket

Finish both statements:

The most important turning point in our roleplay happened when...

That changed the interaction because...

Source note

This lab synthesizes Learn with League material from Respect, Responsibility, Resilience, and Positive Attitude around empathy, self-control, frustration, and productive team responses.

The turning-point investigation model, observer sheet, two-round retest structure, and playbook framework are original Robotnix Academy components.