thread: 2006-01-17 : More Character Co-ownership
On 2006-01-17, Vincent wrote:
Piers, let's narrow down your "it depends." Let's go with my expansion of the pirate-flashback example, from here:
If you have a flashback with a rival:
-Add 2 dice to your pool.
If the scene includes a conflict roll:
-If you win the roll, get +1 Steel.
-If you lose the roll, get +1 Fire.
If it includes more than one conflict roll:
-You choose which single one is the significant one.
Using those rules, in the pirate-flashback example, Ann's guaranteed 2 dice to her pool and she'll probably be able to angle the +1 to her Steel or to her Fire, but she probably won't get to choose which; this is more-or-less independent of Ben's framing of the scene. If he says "okay, we're two barristers in court in London, a year ago..." she still gets the two dice and probably the +1 stat.
In the Dogs example, Ben assigns Ann the 2d4 relationship with the to-be-gutted guy.
In that case, the Dogs rule clearly gives Ben more power over Ann's character's short-term future, over this conflict and its fallout. But what about the long term, any opinions?
This makes PB go "Okay..."
definitely the other way round in the long-run. But it is also very much soft-power vs. hard power. Of course, that's what makes empires...
