Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Jonathan Walton, December 16, 2004, 10:54:44 AM
Quote from: TonyLBPerhaps a person higher in the Sin-hierarchy can foist off the unpleasant rules-effects of their actions on another person.
Quote from: Smerf1. I don't like the idea of capping Self bonuses.2. rules that govern increase and decrease in Self investments. 3. I also think that the Sins should be very broadly applicable... 4. Self crashes5. Vesperteen may be a good candidate for a "win condition".
Quote from: inky1. One leader of a clique.2. They should be able to use the invested Self however they want.3. I would guess that cliques have some way to increase their Self pool by exemplifying their sin somehow as a group
Quote from: EeroWell, actually, it's a combination of "I'm not really interested in that direction" and "Jonathan seems to be doing well on his own".
Quote from: GaryYou ever play Diplomacy? Your resolution could work a lot like that.
Quote from: Jonathan WaltonQuote from: EeroWell, actually, it's a combination of "I'm not really interested in that direction" and "Jonathan seems to be doing well on his own".I'm sorry about the former, but I don't know what I can do about it. In the end, we can only design the games that we want to design, and not those that other people want to play (well, at least if I'm following through on the ideals of creator-owned games). You've been one of the biggest sources of real assistance and encouragement in the process up until this point, and it's unfortunte if the design ends up heading in a direction that you're not as excited about.
Quote4. And then there's the actual Lesson. This is the only part that I'm stumped about. There's all this build up, so something big has to go down here. Maybe the Teacher takes you aside and gives you a personal Lesson, but I guess public Lessons could happen to, especially if you were learning from a person high up in a clique hierarchy. How should this work? Maybe they get you to invest Self in something, an idea, a person, whatever fits the Lesson, and then they destroy it right in front of you, an obvious sign of their superiority and a lesson in the cruelty of the world.
Quote from: LordSmerfIt was my understanding that you didn't actually lose Self through investment. I thought that investment represented a risk of loss. So if you have 9 Self then you can invest 9 Self in anything, but if any one of those things were lost then you would lose 9 Self. This prompted my suggestion that Self loss could cascade your investments down.
Quote from: Jonathan WaltonI'm pondering simplifying the process of gaining Sin, but I really like the Teacher aspect and having to go to the monsters to gain the highest levels. I'll get back to you guys on that...
Quote from: Jonathan WaltonAnd those are my thoughts recently, which move this thing a few steps closer to being playable. Thoughts?
Quote from: Eero TuovinenWell, yeah. I'm coming up as a horrible naysayer, but just disregard to taste. Or, if you feel that negative vibes are unhelpful at this stage, tell me to shut up.
QuoteCompare with the earlier conception, where a central question of the game was: What part does sin have in my adulthood? The ambivalency recedes further and further with these classifications of moral condition.
QuoteThe numeric value of the consequence defines how many points of invested Self are put to risk in a follow-up conflict/something.
QuoteSins in conflicts: you don't necessarily need an objective set of guidelines as long as you require the next act to be worse than the previous one.
Quote from: Jonathan WaltonI guess I'm struggling with how to keep the moral ambivilency with systematic and setting elegance. I like having (at least) some adults be systematically defined as "monsters" even if they don't turn into giant, hairy beasts. I like the simplicity of having adults be another splat, but you're right that it destroys much of the thematic potency. I'll keep thinking about this.