Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by museleading, October 09, 2006, 05:00:02 PM
QuoteThe hobby as a sustainable activity (which requires no-murk) is still in its infancy. I can still see it everywhere - the ongoing failure to understand Giving in Dogs, the confusion about the bonus dice in My Life with Master, the bizarre general failure to grasp the conflict-resolution (and role-playing!) rules in Universalis, the stumbling-blocks about when to expect rewards that arise when playing Perfect or carry or Capes, and more. I hope we got somewhere, such that the answer is "not yet," rather than "bzzzt! try again please," but at this point only time will tell.
QuoteThe Necessity of an Aesthetic SenseAs I mentioned earlier, I have been writing a lot about tactics, particular the tactics of playing the Mistake. However, it is important to remember that Polaris is not about "winning". The goal really is to create a good story through the use of the strategy and tactics. As a result, all the jockeying for position between Heart and Mistaken needs to be counterbalanced by a shared aesthetic sense of what makes for a good conflict outcome. (I mention this idea here.) There were several times over the course of our game that a Heart or Mistaken said, "But I don't want to object to that. I like it!" That is good. It's important for all players to be willing to say, "I like the outcome of this challenge, even though it means admitting that my opponent got the better of me." When a player says something and everyone else nods, being a Jerk needs to go out the window. The scene is right; don't mess it up.
Quote from: memolith on October 10, 2006, 10:04:05 AMI see two reasons for Giving (there may be more):1) You don't want to Escalate.2) The conflict has reached an interesting turning point, and you don't want to push any further. You concede the stakes, and cut your losses for a potential follow-up conflict.I think the first reason for Giving is pretty easy to understand, and often occurs at the table. The second is more elusive, because you have to be in tune with what's happening, and be aware that this is a good point to Give. It's almost as if the focus shifts from the Stakes to the story. Hrm...
Quote from: Ron Edwards on October 10, 2006, 06:17:24 PMYou nailed it, Seth. The one point I'd like to emphasize is that we're not talking about some airy-fairy, "gee I like this story" vague thing, but a decisive and often harsh authorial judgment, with consequence, with weight relative to the Premise at hand (i.e. the local jargon meaning of the term).
Quote from: museleading on October 10, 2006, 05:21:10 AMOk, a conflict in which one player Gave. Once which escalated into another. I am choosing a cool conflict to use as an example. Let me know if you want an average one instead/as well.I played Br Greg. We found out a Sister in town made whiskey, so we went to talk to her. Br Carson knocked on the door. The woman threw the door open, yelled at us to leave and opened fire with her shotgun. She shot at Br Carson, but he Blocked. I used Br Greg's "damn fine shot 3d8" to raise shoot past Br Carson and kill the woman. I don't remember the dice roll, the GM Gave immediately and the woman died. The conflict was literally one Raise from the GM, one from me.Later that night Br Carson asked Br Greg why he shot to kill. Br Greg said something along the lines of 'No one shoots a Dog. Not without meaning it. So I killed her' (one of his traits was 'heartless bastard'. Br Carson replied with 'A Dog without compassion is no Dog at all'. Then he went to bed.The line was so perfect for that situation; the fact Br Greg's own line had been served back at him - it was cool. I Gave the conflict.That conflict was the turning point for Br Greg – he lost 1d in 'heartless bastard' from fallout and gained 1d6 in 'I believe in the King of Life' from experience.
Quote from: Valamir on October 10, 2006, 09:58:56 PMNot to derail the thread, but unless your initial stakes were to kill the sister, giving at that point actually would avoid her death. i.e. a "Give" automatically successfully blocks the raise by automatically losing the stakes.So if the stakes were something to the nature of "get the Sister to repent of her wickedness" and the raise was "I shoot her dead" then by giving she is not shot dead but she does repend of her wickedness.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on October 10, 2006, 09:58:15 AMOne detail I was interested in was whether the person who Gave did so in the presence of dice which might have led to him winning. But your description leads me to think that even with such dice, the situation/role-playing is the primary factor in the decision in these examples.