Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9228307" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't understand what issue you think I am evading.The safe opening is Vincent Baker's example. He discusses it through the lens of both task- and conflict-resolution, <a href="http://lumpley.com/hardcore.html" target="_blank">here</a>. You can read it for yourself if you like - it's a short blog entry, the fourth as one scrolls down the page.If you are asserting: if (i) what is at stake in the safe scene is finding dirt, and (ii) the cracking of the safe is being resolved via conflict resolution, then (iii) it cannot be the case that prior fiction establishes that no dirt is in the safe, then yes, that is correct. Self-evidently so, I would think.Hence why, upthread, in reply to you, I posted this:The post of yours that I expressed doubt about finished like this:The second sentence seems obviously true, as [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] already posted several pages ago (post 741).The first sentence doesn't seem true to me. No myth can be combined with task resolution - the upshot will be largely GM-driven play, of the sort that Lewis Pulsipher lamented as &quot;the GM telling a novel to the players&quot; in his essays on D&amp;D around 40 to 45 years ago. I've GMed and played in this sort of mode. (Though not for about 25+ years.)And conflict resolution, as I've posted, doesn't require no myth. For instance, and with reference to earlier in this post, there are techniques for avoiding things going wrong, by ensuring (iii), other than no myth.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 9228307, member: 42582"] I don't understand what issue you think I am evading. The safe opening is Vincent Baker's example. He discusses it through the lens of both task- and conflict-resolution, [url=http://lumpley.com/hardcore.html]here[/url]. You can read it for yourself if you like - it's a short blog entry, the fourth as one scrolls down the page. If you are asserting: if (i) what is at stake in the safe scene is finding dirt, and (ii) the cracking of the safe is being resolved via conflict resolution, then (iii) it cannot be the case that prior fiction establishes that no dirt is in the safe, then yes, that is correct. Self-evidently so, I would think. Hence why, upthread, in reply to you, I posted this: The post of yours that I expressed doubt about finished like this: The second sentence seems obviously true, as [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] already posted several pages ago (post 741). The first sentence doesn't seem true to me. No myth can be combined with task resolution - the upshot will be largely GM-driven play, of the sort that Lewis Pulsipher lamented as "the GM telling a novel to the players" in his essays on D&D around 40 to 45 years ago. I've GMed and played in this sort of mode. (Though not for about 25+ years.) And conflict resolution, as I've posted, doesn't require no myth. For instance, and with reference to earlier in this post, there are techniques for avoiding things going wrong, by ensuring (iii), other than [I]no myth[/I]. [/QUOTE]

Verification