thread: 2005-03-23 : Participant Resolution vs. Author Resolution
On 2005-03-23, xenopulse wrote:
Best. Example. Evar. :)
I think the agreement on rules is a little more important, however, because of the difference between explicit and implicit rules. Playing cops+robbers (or roleplaying without mechanics as I frequently do) is almost always based on implicit rules. The "you need to take a hit sometime, too, or I'll stop playing" rule (aka give-and-take rule) is implicit, most of the time, so that players get frustrated when their implicit rules don't match up with the ohter players'. By adopting a set of rules, you explicitly state that those rules apply and how they work. Sure, there are points of disagreement (as you said, about application and interpretation), and if players are unwilling to work those out, they'll break the game. But they provide at least a basic explicit framework, and the discussions about disagreements take more and more of the rules from the implicit side and add them, through precedent and agreement, to the explicit side. The goal is to have as many of the rules explicit when you start the game.
Regarding adversity, you're right on point. I don't think I could possibly add anything except to hope that I personally can develop a better sense for keeping a game dynamic. Or a story, for that matter.
- Christian
