Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 18, 2022, 06:11:11 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4285 Members Latest Member: - Jason DAngelo Most online today: 77 - most online ever: 565 (October 17, 2020, 02:08:06 PM)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: SIS Control Take 3, EUREKA!  (Read 2926 times)

Posts: 1351

« on: April 04, 2008, 10:51:34 AM »

I just totally had an epiphany!  Conflict declaration in Capes is backwards from almost all other RPGs.

In most games a player declares an action and then either someone steps up to oppose them or a third party arbitrator (like a GM) steps in calls for a roll.  In other words recognizing and calling for a conflict happens most often on the part of the DEFENSE or an ARBITER.

But in Capes the responsibility for declaring a conflict lies with the AGGRESSOR.  The aggressor has to anticipate that what he's about to do will be opposed and put it out on the table.  I can see now how this can be more problematic beyond just, "Dude, you're not respecting the fiction."

1) I've been in games where a player has taken action totally expecting it to trigger a conflict and have it go unopposed instead.  Player A, " I DO X!" Player B, "Yeah and...?"  Player A, "Oh...."  In Capes this would lead to Goals just going on the table and resolving with no opposition.  Not really a bad thing mechanically but is sort of a waste of time.

2) Sometimes a player doesn't realize their action would go opposed until someone steps up to stop them.  In other words sometimes a genuinely well meaning and amiable player doesn't realize their being an aggressor until the conflict is called for.  It's been a while since I've played Capes because I think this can be solved with plain old table talk.among a socially functional group.

Either way that's the weirdness of Capes.  You can't just play, play, play until someone steps up to stop you.  You actually have to consider each action yourself, and anticipate if someone would want to stop what you're about to do.

Posts: 3702

« Reply #1 on: April 05, 2008, 04:14:30 AM »

But in Capes the responsibility for declaring a conflict lies with the AGGRESSOR.  The aggressor has to anticipate that what he's about to do will be opposed and put it out on the table.
Well ... somebody needs to anticipate that something that's about to happen could be profitably opposed.  It doesn't have to be the person about to do that thing, though.

If the villain is defeated, the music is swelling, and Captain Virtue is leaning in close to feisty female reporter Doris Dane ... it's perfectly legitimate for Doctor Spite's player to lay down a conflict "Goal:  Cap and Doris have a tender moment".

You can pre-emptively insist that other people work their asses off for something.  It's possible (and profitable) to be the defender, though it does take some foresight.  You've got to get the conflict down before somebody does the thing in free narration, which can be hard in groups with a break-neck pace.

One of the most profitable conflicts I ever layed down (to the tune of twelve story tokens to me) was simply "Tasha enters the fight."  She was about to do it, she totally wanted to do it ... so I figured I'd make her pay for it.  I didn't know why it would be difficult, at the time, but I figured a speed-bump couldn't go amiss.

Just published: Capes
New Project:  Misery Bubblegum
Pages: [1]
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!