Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8697159" data-attributes="member: 42582">As a point of logic, Person X conceals information Q entails Person X knows information Q.In other words, and putting to one side weird, deviant cases, you can't conceal what you don't know.If it's not established, in the shared fiction, what the medical scientist NPC is doing in the sickbay - because no one has made it a focus of play - then there is nothing I (or any other participant) knows about that, and hence nothing to be concealed.In this case, the resolution system is clear: there is no established fiction about who made the arrows until someone authors it in accordance with the game procedures, and because it is a high stakes question - the PC wants his brother to be innocent! - the procedures don't permit unilateral GM authorship. The player puts the stakes into play by declaring the Aura Reading check, and again the procedure is clear: if the Aura Reading check succeeds, the player's intent is realised (so, in this case, the character confirms that someone other than the brother made the Black Arrows); if it fails, then the GM is obliged to narrate an adverse consequence (in this case, the PC reads the aura and confirms that his brother made the Black Arrows).And as a point of logic, Person X lies about information Q entails Person X has acquired information Q. In this case, the player and the GM acquire the relevant information at the same time, and neither lies to the other about it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8697159, member: 42582"] As a point of logic, [i]Person X conceals information Q[/i] entails [i]Person X knows information Q[/i]. In other words, and putting to one side weird, deviant cases, you can't conceal what you don't know. If it's not established, in the shared fiction, what the medical scientist NPC is doing in the sickbay - because no one has made it a focus of play - then there is nothing I (or any other participant) knows about that, and hence nothing to be concealed. In this case, the resolution system is clear: there is no established fiction about who made the arrows until someone authors it in accordance with the game procedures, and because it is a high stakes question - the PC wants his brother to be innocent! - the procedures don't permit unilateral GM authorship. The player puts the stakes into play by declaring the Aura Reading check, and again the procedure is clear: if the Aura Reading check succeeds, the player's intent is realised (so, in this case, the character confirms that someone other than the brother made the Black Arrows); if it fails, then the GM is obliged to narrate an adverse consequence (in this case, the PC reads the aura and confirms that his brother made the Black Arrows). And as a point of logic, [i]Person X lies about information Q[/i] entails [i]Person X has acquired information Q[/i]. In this case, the player and the GM acquire the relevant information at the same time, and neither lies to the other about it. [/QUOTE]

Verification