Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8631830" data-attributes="member: 71699">I don't dislike your bigwig, I just see them as optional. What counts is the inner conflict of the character. Where you like bigwig, I like saddling them with ongoing consequences. S-N doesn't turn on that. Stylistically, I read a lot of &quot;like a stolen car&quot; etc professions of high-octane action. I'm as partial to a slow burner. Start with the furnace turned down, not up. It's still a furnace.W2 is more interesting to me than W1. Suppose a character is LG. They've thought about the L part, but not the G. I moot that making a discovery about what it is to be good, and that going on to produce conflicts should also count. As it feeds in to future Nows. Character commitments have to originate at some point in time. The location of that point in time is never Now. Discovering a commitment that will go on to feed into conflict should count, or you need to say that S-N is disapplied to all points in the game where characters discover new commitments. Discovering new commitments isn't S-N, is where you land.What I'm suggesting in W2 that it is as much a part of S-N play to discover (decide, introduce, whatever) commitments, as it is to test them.Either way W1 alone is sufficient to make the case I was making.I'd have to go back and reread the definitions. Although I'm not too sure that I feel they're lines I need to draw inside.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8631830, member: 71699"] I don't dislike your bigwig, I just see them as optional. What counts is the inner conflict of the character. Where you like bigwig, I like saddling them with ongoing consequences. S-N doesn't turn on that. Stylistically, I read a lot of "like a stolen car" etc professions of high-octane action. I'm as partial to a slow burner. Start with the furnace turned down, not up. It's still a furnace. W2 is more interesting to me than W1. Suppose a character is LG. They've thought about the L part, but not the G. I moot that making a discovery about what it is to be good, and that [I]going on to produce conflicts [/I]should also count. As it feeds in to future Nows. Character commitments have to originate at some point in time. The location of that point in time is never Now. Discovering a commitment that will go on to feed into conflict should count, or you need to say that S-N is disapplied to all points in the game where characters discover new commitments. Discovering new commitments isn't S-N, is where you land. What I'm suggesting in W2 that it is as much a part of S-N play to discover (decide, introduce, whatever) commitments, as it is to test them. Either way W1 alone is sufficient to make the case I was making. I'd have to go back and reread the definitions. Although I'm not too sure that I feel they're lines I need to draw inside. [/QUOTE]

Verification