Awarding tokens: another possible flaw in Capes?

[R. Jason Boss]

I think it's more like, "Whether this (the popularity issue) ever happens or not, the system can handle it and the game will go fine."

That's how I'm reading it.  Others are debating whether it would happen or not, Tony is saying that it doesn't really matter if it does, the system can handle it.  Saying that it's /part/ of the system is probably taking it too far.  I could be wrong.  (I should make that my sig, I'm full of disclaimers, heh.)

Jason

[Sydney Freedberg]

"Rewarding popularity" is not what the system does, and Tony's not saying that. If the guy who is "most popular" outside the context of the game is unable to provide entertaining, engaging conflicts that draw in the other players, he won't get as many Inspirations and Story Tokens, no matter how much the other players would defer to him (and it's almost always a "him") in unstructured social settings or less-structured games. As I've said before, I've seen this happen.

Conversely, if a particular person is providing the most entertaining, engaging conflicts and drawing in the other players, s/he'll get the most Story Tokens and Inspirations, and will probably become the "most popular" in the context of the game -- but in that case the popularity is itself the reward, not the thing being rewarded.

[TonyLB]

I find that fasincating and it counters an above post that said it would be a bad idea to hose me off, because they are gonna want to not alienate me - maybe you 2 should debate each other?

Okay.

Hey, Ralph!

• Sometimes a player will reward another player precisely for being a good potential/future source of resources.  They'll let future tactical considerations influence their judgment of where they should distribute their resources, because they value the future chance to earn resources off of people more than they value the current fun of humor and kibbitzing.
• And sometimes people care more about the fun that is happening in out of game kibbitzing, even to the extent that they'll reward it at the cost of reducing their future chance to earn resources off of people who are more engaged with the system.

You cool with that?

In any case, Tony, it seems you are actively saying that rewarding popularity is not a flaw, it's part of the system.

You consistently rephrase "Reward stuff that people like" with "Reward a person that's popular."

Yes, I am saying that rewarding the stuff that people like is not a flaw, it's part of the system.

[Valamir]

Hey, Ralph!

• Sometimes a player will reward another player precisely for being a good potential/future source of resources.  They'll let future tactical considerations influence their judgment of where they should distribute their resources, because they value the future chance to earn resources off of people more than they value the current fun of humor and kibbitzing.
• And sometimes people care more about the fun that is happening in out of game kibbitzing, even to the extent that they'll reward it at the cost of reducing their future chance to earn resources off of people who are more engaged with the system.

You cool with that?

Absolutely.  You play Capes to win...whatever your definition of "win" might be at the particular moment of interface. 

[LemmingLord]

Please don't all start with the hating, but I may have discovered another possible flaw in Capes, which may also be fixed in post via the Social Contract.

I don't hate you Sindyr; you provide valuable conflict that interests me.  You can have my debt as story tokens anytime!

Just as a side note - If I were Tony and a mod I think I would replace every instance of the word "flaw" where it refers to capes with "feature;" that's what we do in the IT world.. :)

[TonyLB]

Absolutely.  You play Capes to win...whatever your definition of "win" might be at the particular moment of interface. 

Y'know, I sort of suspected this would be an awful short-lived "argument."