On 2008-04-10, David Berg wrote:
1. Would it be on-point to just say that formal rules are there to ensure that large-scale, long-term play priorities override small-scale, immediate player preferences?
That seems like a sensible description of Brand's experience, as well as my own, "Character death sucks, but characters MUST die when it makes sense for them to die, otherwise the plausibility of our simulation goes out the window!"
2. Just curious about this:
live negotiation and honest collaboration are a) just as good as, and b) a lot more flexible and robust than, whatever formal rules you'd use otherwise.
My experience with negotiation is that coming to consensus takes more time away from "playing inside the fiction" than my players want. Formal rules that speed up consensus-forming make me happy. Does this mean I just happen to play with indecisive slowpokes?