Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bsss" data-source="post: 9872792" data-attributes="member: 7054302">I think in this approach (which I like, at least in some contexts), to answer your subsequent question, it's not that there are no mechanical consequences or that the NPC's reaction/feeling is taken on by the player, but rather that the resolution of the conflict is in the "game state" rather than the "character state".A context where I think this works is diplomacy --- the NPC is successful and the PC's position is weakened; even if the PC/player remains devout to their cause, their (NPC) allies retreat from the PC's position, plans are put in motion despite the PC, no one trusts the PC in further negotiations, whatever. Stuff like that. The PC (and by extension the player) have zero compels to do anything, but the world around them sucks for them more than it used to.A context where I'm less sure if it works is the vices situation, because that's so internal to a character. But I could just be uninspired off the cuff.</blockquote>