Semantics on goals...important?

[drnuncheon]

So the carrot you can dangle is...  character growth.  I would *love* to pay off someone with story tokens to create conflicts that let me slowly and with purpose grow and develop my character.

Simple answer: make those the conflicts you invest the most debt in.  When you win, they get the bribe.

Capes is all about the carrot.

J

[Sindyr]

I am *so* on top of that.

The trick in Capes is, I think, growing a thick skin to refuse to invest debt into any conflict type you dont want to see more of. Because if you fight this time, it just teaches the other players that you want more.

So if a player use a conflict to put my good name at risk, or kill my beloved, or any other type of story I *don't* want to see happen again, then I just have to refuse to engage.

When they finally create for me the kind of story options that I like, stake debt like mad to train them what I want them to be doing.

[Matthew Glover]

The trick in Capes is, I think, growing a thick skin to refuse to invest debt into any conflict type you dont want to see more of. Because if you fight this time, it just teaches the other players that you want more.

Really?  My interpretation was that the "trick" is to (A) fight like hell to prevent the things you don't want to see happen and (B) loosen your grip on the character a little so that you can still enjoy the game it if you lose, knowing that the debt and story tokens you'll get will give you an edge the next time.

[Sindyr]

I think that is one way to play, but a more subtle strategy would be to not fight (and therefor lose) a few Conflicts if that causes the other players to not waste their time creating the kinds of conflicts that one will not engage in.

Ultimately, the other players will try to latch onto your hot buttons to try to manipulate you to giving them story tokens.

If you simply refuse to reward them so unless they engage you the way you want to be engaged, you have won the war, even if you have surrendered a few battles along the way.

Getting a player to stake debt is the only effective way to get a LOT of tokens.  YOU have the debt, and you have ABSOLUTE control over it.

So if you want to have a story where the main issue is, say, your parents identity, then simply let it be known that you will fight for those goals, and see if they don't get supplied.

Or, if you are tired of the endless loop of the other players putting your character's girlfriend in jeopardy over and over again, then (and I admit this is hard) don't rescue her.  Or rescue her and then narrate breaking up with her.

Better yet, develop a cavalier attitude.  If other players threaten the life of your hero's girlfriend, have that hero go with "there's more fish in the sea".

Sure, I know that may see unheroic, but this is Capes, and unless you either like the rescue of the week stories your best bet is to let it go.  You let enough of those go, the players will stop putting them at risk.

Remember, the core fact is anytime you fight for control of a conflict, you are *teaching* the other players that you want more conflicts just like this one.

Be careful what you train them to do.

Capes is a brilliant game.

[TonyLB]

This looks achingly similar to what you're saying over in Are abilities *always* available for use?  This new topic emerged when you drifted off-topic there, and it's emerging as you drift off-topic here.  My recommendation is the same:  Quote what you want, and make a thread that's actually about your search for a way to drive people away from certain areas of story without rewarding them in the process.

[Sindyr]

As you noted on the other thread - you are correct that drift has occured.  May start a new topic later, no time to right now.  Thanks.