Dominion and Dependency: a game mechanic for an ugly society

[henebry]

list]
[li]acts of cruelty establish a dominance hierarchy [/li]
<

too much cruelty will lead eventually to the underling rebelling and betraying his master

resentment (and eventual rebellion) is kept in check by the master shielding his underling from harm

<

• The master describes his act of cruelty and hands the victim as many red chips as he deems appropriate, though this number can be questioned by other players if they think it unreasonably large or small. 
<
• If the victim resists, run a conflict where the stakes are accepting or refusing the proffered dose of suffering AND double or nothing on the current pool of black chips (minimum increase = 2x the # red chips at stake in the conflict).

Shield Underling: A master can reduce the resentment felt by an underling by taking his place in a conflict. This reduces the stack of red chips without affecting the stack of black chips. (I'm leaving out details here that reference the game's conflict resolution system.) The choice of whether to intervene and help out is entirely up to the master.

<<<<

Refusal: short of betrayal, an underling can simply refuse to do his master's bidding. To do so he must win an internal conflict against the master's store of black chips. Winning means a reduction in black chips; losing an increase.

[li]too much cruelty will lead eventually to the underling rebelling and betraying his master [/li]
[li]resentment (and eventual rebellion) is kept in check by the master shielding his underling from harm [/li]
<

• The master describes his act of cruelty and hands the victim as many red chips as he deems appropriate, though this number can be questioned by other players if they think it unreasonably large or small. 
<
• If the victim resists, run a conflict where the stakes are accepting or refusing the proffered dose of suffering AND double or nothing on the current pool of black chips (minimum increase = 2x the # red chips at stake in the conflict).

Shield Underling: A master can reduce the resentment felt by an underling by taking his place in a conflict. This reduces the stack of red chips without affecting the stack of black chips. (I'm leaving out details here that reference the game's conflict resolution system.) The choice of whether to intervene and help out is entirely up to the master.

<<<<

Refusal: short of betrayal, an underling can simply refuse to do his master's bidding. To do so he must win an internal conflict against the master's store of black chips. Winning means a reduction in black chips; losing an increase.

[Adam Dray]

This is pretty damned interesting. I don't necessarily agree with all of your design choices, but that doesn't mean you're doing it wrong. Here's where I disagree:

You've read essays about The Fruitful Void, right? You know, that space in play that all of your game mechanics touch and point at without ever really trampling? I think you've trampled into your Fruitful Void.

Of course, for that to be true, you have to agree with me about what the Fruitful Void is. I think it's loyalty. If you don't agree, then you're likely not trampling on your own design.

You hint at it being loyalty with your Refusal mechanics, but then you go the route that My Life with Master did, making the minion resist the will of the master to disobey an order. I think you trod a bit on the underling's free will that way. Also in Call for Aid and Crew Vote, unless the underling can make a Refusal there, too.

I have a hard time believing that underlings get subjugated without getting something out of the relationship: protection, status, belonging. Model how the master can dole out those things to his underlings, then let the underling refuse without rolling, and see what happens. Now the masters aren't near-omnipotent beings but are just manipulative bullies who need to play a balancing act themselves.

How is your game set up? How are players divided into masters and underlings? Is everyone is vying to be a master all the time, and people build master-underling alliances to get stuff done? Or is the GM the master and all the PCs are underlings? I can't quite tell from your description.

So, to answer your question, I don't think this systematization of a psychological process inhibits role-play, but it might inhibit game-play. There will be plenty to role-play here. Question is, will the players have freedom to make meaningful choices? My Life with Master constrains players in exactly the same way you are doing, and it is a wonderful game, so the answer isn't clear.

[henebry]

[contracycle]

There is quite a distinction between being in someones power and being an toady.  I'm not sure if you mean one in particuler, or are confusing them.  The toady-type relationship is certainly at least partially voluntary, and the toady gets something out of it.  But there can be highly coercive relationships in which the subordinate person gets nothing out of it, and everything is totally one way.  I think you need to clarify precisely what you mean in this regard.

When you say, 'behave as pirates do', you are really referring to fictional pirates.  Real pirates were sort of proto-democratic more often than not, with a few dramatic exceptions.

[henebry]

list]
[li] if you commit a cruel act,/li]
<

[Sebastian K. Hickey]

Really interesting.

Though I'm a bit confused as to how the lackeys are rewarded by their Master with chips (outside of conflict).  I believe that coercive rule is most enduring when tempered with kindness.  I heard about a phenomenon, which you guys will know more about, where in some cases the soldier in privation can learn to admire their torturer, to become subservient beyond the reaction to privation.  Perhaps because there is perceived kindness.  I'd like to see more obvious balancing just as Adam Dray describes:

I have a hard time believing that underlings get subjugated without getting something out of the relationship: protection, status, belonging. Model how the master can dole out those things to his underlings, then let the underling refuse without rolling, and see what happens. Now the masters aren't near-omnipotent beings but are just manipulative bullies who need to play a balancing act themselves.

[Sebastian K. Hickey]

P.S.

	Logged

Cobweb Games | Twitter | Hell for Leather: 1 min Video Tutorial