Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6633574" data-attributes="member: 42582">I'm not sure about (a).A few posts up I talked about the possibility of a campaign where part of what is at stake is the proper interpretation of the National Socialist government of Germany (or some imagined variant - eg Civil War in MHRP). In that sort of game, law and chaos aren't unambiguous at the start. While there is a clear sense of their contrast at the abstract level (for the lawfuls, they contrast social rules and order with self-indulgence and disregard; for the chaotics, they contrast self-realisation with social domination and hierarchy), what counts as an instance of one or the other in the actual (imagined) world is still up for grabs. Ie everyone knows that the Nazis (or SHIELD in the Civil War variant) are wrong, but they disagree, and are fighting over, whether the wrongness is of the lawful or the chaotic variety.You would still have (b): protagonists who are committed advocates for either law or chaos, and hence are committed to presenting the unambiguously bad situation as the fault/result of the other side.And (c) becomes interesting, because what is being pushed for is not an ingame outcome (ie it's not like the original sort of example I had in mind, where via play we discover whether adhering to social norms leads to wellbeing or suffering). Rather what is being pushed for is the vindication of a certain sort of interpretation of already-given events.This might be achieved by rallying others to one's cause - eg if there is a NPC whose moral compass is unambiguously accepted as sound, getting thatperson to agree with you. For instance, in the MHRP game that NPC would be Captain America, os if you can get Captain America to agree with your side's interpretation of the wrong of what SHIELD is doing (eg the lawfuls get him to agree that it is really chaos and rampant individualism merely wearing a mask of legality) then that counts as a win for your side.It could also be achieved by interacting with the evil organisation and getting it to change and ameliorate in a certain way - and if that change/amelioration takes the form of permitting self-realisation to emerge then the chaotic good side is winning, whereas if that change/amelioration takes the form of restoring genuine legality then the lawful good side is winning. (In MHRP, the first approach might take the form of persuading SHIELD to let superheroes escape to exile in Wakanda; the second approach might take the form of persuading a Congressional Committee to conduct an investigation into SHIELD's excesses in enforcing registration and holding them to account.)Just some thoughts!</blockquote>

Verification