thread: 2005-05-06 : Brainstorming from the Core
On 2005-05-11, Eric Finley wrote:
Working well, although I'm a little fuzzled about the duress thing and how it relates to the focal issue. Honestly I'd call that a miss, when it comes to establishing the issue (either "belonging" or "rebellion"), making characters who have stakes in it, and setting up an unstable situation. It provides a mechanism for tension without direction; it's an unsteered mechanic.
I do think this helping me grasp it, though, but in terms of the specific design I'd argue hard that the relationship-slots module and the duress module are sufficiently overlapping that one or the other would have to go... and then I'd argue equally hard that the slots do that in a way which is not only better but is specifically closer to the thread topic.
So it's almost to the point where Vincent's suggestion helps me understand it - but in the manner of a counterexample. And I'm fairly sure that wasn't what was intended. So, Vincent, maybe help me out here - talking about the duress module specifically, how does this (a) establish the specific issue we want to address in the game; (b) enhance the players' stake in the validity of both sides of the issue; and/or (c) generate situation which will break across the issue. All I see in it right now is an engine for strengthening issues in general, and for steering characters into people who straddle the issue that's hidden in the non-overlap area of the two duresses. What it misses is the bit where it directs which issues to straddle with the duresses chosen, and how to shape duresses so that the incompatibility produces an issue. Also the bit where it generates player (rather than character) investment in the issue; usually suffer one of two largely equivalent penalties, feh.
If it's just that I didn't grasp the suggested mechanism, cool, but right now I don't see how it really accomplishes A+B+C in a useful way. So the duress module is helping me with A+B+C, but it's doing so because it's making me phrase why I think it doesn't accomplish A+B+C - does that make sense?
- Eric
