thread: 2009-07-26 : Very Briefly about Authority
On 2009-07-27, Vincent wrote:
Marco: Yeah.
Hey everybody, nobody argue about who's really playing AD&D or DitV or any given game, okay? It's not an interesting question.
The point is that you can decide in the moment to ignore or change your agreed arrangement, and yet keep playing. The game can go forward changed, with its new arrangement seamlessly superceding its old. People do it all the time.
Frank: That rule in Dogs is a good example. Nobody in Dogs has the authority to (for instance) declare that their raise counts as a legit raise. Instead, every raise has to meet the approval - win the assent - of every player at the table.
Frank and Bwian: I want to write a lot more about my position 3, but I haven't quite figured out how. It's at the leading edge of my thinking.
Here's a rough stab:
If two players' interests come into conflict, you can resolve the conflict by promoting one player's interests over the other's - by assigning authority to one player at the other's expense - or else you can resolve the conflict by reconciling the players' interests so that they go forward in alignment - in which case there's no need to assign authority.
Players' interests here, including the GM's, NOT characters', and I'm not fooling around about that.
Ben: I hesitate to guess!
