thread: 2009-05-13 : Now where WAS I...

On 2009-05-13, Vincent wrote:

Ryan: My example rules are the exact rules I'm thinking of, yes. As though in the rulebook it uses literally the word "girlfriend." Maybe there's a whole different rule for when your boyfriend's in danger.

Now, your 1-3 are still quite, quite specific. They're plenty specific enough for my purposes.

For instance, in Dogs in the Vineyard the rules for escalating a conflict go like this:
- The first time your character shoots at someone, you've escalated to gunfighting.
- The first time your character just talks to someone, you've escalated to just talking.
- The first time your character does something physical but nonviolent to someone, you've escalated to physical but not fighting.
- The first time your character attacks someone but not with a gun, you've escalated to fighting.

"The first time your character takes an action that increases the danger of death" would fit right in, it's not any less specific than "physical but nonviolent." Same with your others.

So ... I DO think that the level of specificity matters, in general. But I wouldn't say "the more specific the better," necessarily. I'd say "choose the level of specificity that suits the rest of your game's design."

(This is one of the serious problems with retrofitting this kind of rule to In a Wicked Age. The rule's same level of specificity has to work whether you're playing a midwife in a mud town or an ancient demon-god of avarice and war.)


This makes...
short response
optional explanation (be brief!):

if you're human, not a spambot, type "human":