thread: 2012-12-28 : Positioning: Disagreements?
On 2012-12-28, Dan Maruschak wrote:
I don't think this rises to the level of substantive disagreement, but I also wanted to say that the emphasis on uncertainty and objections in this model still doesn't make sense to me, so maybe I disagree in terms of focus, issue-framing, or terminology. The potential objections from other players don't spring up spontaneously, but are based on the other players' perceptions of the current game-state (e.g. positioning, etc.), so it seems weird to me to categorize them as "uncertain" in some absolute or objective sense. (I would also find it weird to frame everything a lawyer says in a courtroom as "potentially objectionable" even though there's some sense in which an opposing lawyer is theoretically allowed to object to anything). A functioning RPG is a multi-agent system, so it's important to understand what the system looks like from the perspective of individual agents but also to remember that it's not a complete picture.
This reminds DM of Interpretation is not just in RPGs
This reminds DM of Agreement in all games, not just RPGs
