thread: 2009-07-26 : Very Briefly about Authority
On 2009-07-28, Bwian wrote:
Thanks Vincent!
I think I am catching up with what you mean here. Very interesting and useful for me. In relation to your item (3), I think what I wanted to know was roughly:
What's the important difference between 'brute assigning authority' and 'establishing expectations and granting permission to avoid the game breaking down into a series of moment-by-moment negotiations about raw assent'?
Having read what you have said since, I think your 'position' at (3) is something like:
- Some people seem to think that just writing a rule that says 'in situation A, player X decides the fictional content ' is enough by itself (to manage dissent).
- But one can do more with one's rules. For example, one can and should write rules that help the players develop similar expectations about fictional content (reducing conflict) and allow each of them to feel that its safe for them to try to influence the content in ways that interest them (promoting participation)'
- One way of making it 'safe for players to try to influence the content' is to provide rules that make it quick and easy to resolve potential conflicts.
Have I understood, roughly?
Then, in expanding on (3) for me and Frank later, you said:
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.
a) An example of 'resolve the conflict by promoting one player's interests over the other's' might be a conflict rule that says 'both parties to the conflict roll a die, and the higher scorer gets to narrate the result'?
(i.e. there is a mechanism for assigning control of the fiction, but it always generates a 'winner' and a 'loser').
b) And your examples in the next thread are of methods for 'reconciling the players' interests'?
(i.e. the mechanism for assigning control of the fiction is essentially a positive sum bidding process, which gives more chance of both players being satisfied).
Your examples in the next thread look like mechanisms where the player who yields control of the fiction on a particular occasion is compensated with a resource/ currency that he or she can use to control of the fiction on later occasions. Is this right?
Very interested to canvass what other general methods for 'reconciling the players' interests' there might be?
Cheers
Bwian
