thread: 2012-06-25 : "Conflict" "Resolution"
On 2012-06-26, Rafu wrote:
Games not specifically about resolving conflicts through "conflict resolution" methods. Games which don't go "I want A, you want B, who wins?" nor "I want A, do I get it?" as their staple or focus. Lots exist. The Nordic countries seem to be the source of many of them.
Society of Dreamers. None of the rules are about those As and Bs, none. Focus of play: something different. There may be conflicts, yes—but you end up dealing with them some other way. Some take up all of play, thus they grow from "conflicts" to "story arcs". Some stay unresolved.
Montsegur 1244. It's got these lean, plain rules for [doing stuff which is not the real focus of play], so you could use those to set some As and Bs if you so wished. Personally, I've never witnessed that happen. Either because those rules are too plain-looking to be engaging, or maybe just because the focus of play so obviously lies somewhere else.
Fiasco sorta stands in a grey area, depending on how you play it. You don't need to name no As and no Bs, actually, but still, the big picture looks very welcoming to that "patriarchal heroic narrative".
Another grey area case: Ribbon Drive. Explicitly designed to break out of the "conflict resolution" mentality, and very successful in that the point of play is clearly, clearly something else (and it rocks, to boot!). Still, Traits vs. Detours, a sort of a secondary tacked on mechanic: you still happen to have to be on the lookout for As to point at, even if the range of answers allowed to "I want A, do I get it?" consists of only "Yes I do, and I show off/use out this particular side of my character while getting it" and "No, because I don't really want it. I'd rather tag along for the ride and see what happens."
This makes MEK go "I think about half the games at my local, 'nordic' con doesn't have conflict as a significant focus of the game, so yeah"
