Why have conflicts at all?

[Valamir]

Interesting.  So you're basically taking elements that would have independently defined authority (Traits in Uni, or the enforceable outcome of a die roll in most games) tearing the labels off and converting that situation specific authority into a generic currency that can later be converted back to give authority to something else -- related or unrelated.

The player earns something meaningful, then the game sucks all of the inherent meaning out of what was earned and processes it into concentrated doses of stored power that can then (in "just add water" fashion) be used to recreate meaning at a later time.

Kind of like "mad scientist game design".  Definitely intrigueing

[TonyLB]

What do you mean by "inherent meaning", above?  Do you mean the meaning of the event, independent of the perceptions of the players about that meaning?

I don't think there's any such thing.  Are we disagreeing, or just miscommunicating?

EDIT:  Same question for "independently defined authority," actually.

[Vaxalon]

Mad Scientist Game Design... apt.

And like a Skeksi drinking the vital essence of a Podperson, it only lasts a very short time.

[Valamir]

Well, take your example of Skreeve.  In just about any other game I can think of, Jack convincing Skreeve to stand up for himself would have meaning...it would have the weight of authority behind it.  In Uni Skreeve would probably be given the Trait "Conviced by Jack to Stand up to Master".  In a typical RPG the players would likely expect Jack to Stand up to Master (because that's what the roll said he would do) or expect Master to have a make a roll and get more success than Jack did to over come it.  There is an authority there that this event occured and cannot be ignored.

If I'm understanding Inspiration correctly, in Capes that event has no authority.  The game mechanics don't even recognize that it happened.  At no point in the future will anyone be able to say "hey Jack had convinced Skreeve to stand up for himself" and have that translate into mechanics in any fashion.

Instead, all of the meaning and authority that the event would be given in any other game has been transferred to the currency of Inspiration.  If someone wanted to get a mechanical advantage for Skreeve having been convinced they'd have to then use Inspiration to do it.  But that Inspiration is not tied to specific events.  There is no label on the bottle saying "Inspiration for use with Skreeve".  It can be used for anything at all.

Your explanation conjured up an image for me of some Mad Scientist having used some crazy apparatus to suck all of the meaning out of the event between Jack and Skreeve and then filling a beaker with "distilled essence of authority".

[TonyLB]

Yes, and, y'know... I like the image.  I think that "distilled essence of authority, apply at whim" is pretty much exactly what the system does.

But I don't think there is any inherent meaning to be sucked out of the bottle.  I think it's all a question of labelling.  I think every system  provides bottles of distilled essence of authority, to be applied at whim.  It's just that some of them put big labels saying "Do not open until XMas," or similar niceties.  

I gather that you think there's something more, from your examples.  So I think we genuinely have a disagreement, not just a misunderstanding.  Neat!

I'll try to respond to the Uni example:  Skreeve might be given a "Convinced" Trait, but that's player choice.  That trait might be relevant to opposing the Master, but that's player choice.  At any stage it could go another way, easily.  And that's not dysfunction, that's the core of gaming.

All of the meaning there, absolutely all of it, is created and maintained by the players.  It's only in their heads, no other place.  And it only comes out by their choices, no other means.  They control it all... in every game.

So if you label a bottle "Deathly poison!" that is just a label.  The label cannot slap somebody.  It cannot stay their hand.  If it stops anyone from opening the bottle and chugging it, that's because they read it, interpreted it, and made a choice.  Likewise, if you label an Trait "Skreeve will defy Master" and I appeal to its authority for that purpose it is only because I read the label, interpreted it, and made a choice.  If I appeal to its authority to say that I have a pleasant dinner with a love interest, it is because I read the label, interpreted it, and made a choice.

[Larry L.]

Your explanation conjured up an image for me of some Mad Scientist having used some crazy apparatus to suck all of the meaning out of the event between Jack and Skreeve and then filling a beaker with "distilled essence of authority".

Mechanically correct, but I don't see the "loss of meaning" angle. Inspirations are situation specific. There is supposed to be a link between the conflict the inspiration is used to augment and the original conflict from which they were gained. Admittedly, this link can be very tenuous.

Example:
Doc Hero is getting the living snot beaten out of him by Villainator. He thinks back to that one time when The Parrot was beating him at chess, but in the end Doc Hero made a comeback gambit and won. (And saved the resulting inspiration.) Doc Hero spends his Inspiration, takes control of the Conflict, and regains his will to fight.

That's why they're "Inspirations."

But yeah, the victory does get converted into abstract currency for later use.

[Vaxalon]

I think the meaning that's getting sucked out of it is whatever meaning the players might have attributed to it, because there's no imperative to make the use of the inspiration relate to the creation of the inspiration.

[Brennan Taylor]

The issue is, I think, that only the player who receives the Inspiration is empowered to interpret its meaning. What I think people are objecting to is that the other players have no say over how this Inspiration is brought back into play. To the player who received it, its meaning is entirely under his control and can be brought back into play in whatever way he sees fit. So, it is not true to say the Inspiration is stripped of meaning, instead, only one player at the table has the authority to say what that meaning is.

A lot of the problem I think I am seeing in these multiple discussions here is over control allocation between players. Capes assumes a great deal of trust between players, because ultimately there are no mechanical means of restricting players from doing whatever they like in the game. This is definitely working without a net.

[TonyLB]

I agree with Brennan that it's a distribution of authority issue.  Which I think makes it distinct from "meaning", but perhaps I'm missing the connection.

For sure, there isn't the idea that the rules system always lends its credibility in part to all players, though not always equally.  For instance, if a D&D mage throws a fireball into a room, anyone has authority to borrow credibility from the rules and describe what happens, though the mage and DM probably have more authority than other players:

Mage: "So it fries those five ogres over there."
GM: "Yeah, but the room is too small to contain the whole explosion, so it's going to expand down the corridor you're in."
Rules Guru:  "Not quite... remember that it expands equally out of all four of the corridors from the room.  So it expands only ten feet into our corridor, not quite scorching our front ranks."

The Capes equivalent is:

Mage: "So it fries those five ogres, but doesn't even touch the princess they're holding.
Other player:  "Funny shaped fireball!"
Mage:  "Because I'm just that good."

Same thing applies to the connections of causailty.  Authority is parcelled out to individuals in small units.  No unit is ever shared between two people.  Example:

Fighter:  Ah, but they're mummies!  My magic flaming sword will do extra damage, because they're flammable.
GM:  Nah, they aren't very well preserved, and not very old.  More sort of damp swamp mummies.
Fighter:  Hey, it's a really hot sword.  Wouldn't it dry them out on contact?

Fighter:  Mummies, eh?  I'm spending my "Retrieve Flaming Sword" Inspiration.  The heat of the blade sets their wrappings on fire!