Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="thefutilist" data-source="post: 9262462" data-attributes="member: 7044566">My take on the Vincent thing is,Really he’s talking about conflict resolution.Whenever there is a conflict of interest between two characters, use a randomiser to decide which interest prevails.The unwanted really only consists of the wrong characters interests being triumphant, in fact I think Vincent’s reasoning is probably post-hoc and happened upon examination of Ron Edwards designs (basically he was playing Sorcerer). Why does conflict resolution work so well? Because it brings about the unwanted but still compelling.I think AW is a really terrible teaching text though and the wide spread interpretation of the text and many of the subsequent games turn it into: Intuitive continuity, aka no myth.<a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/how-do-you-create-story.140779/post-2430652" target="_blank">https://www.enworld.org/threads/how-do-you-create-story.140779/post-2430652</a><a href="https://inky.org/rpg/no-myth.html" target="_blank">https://inky.org/rpg/no-myth.html</a>With the result that conflict resolution loses it’s bite. Why? Because in a closed and fixed situation any resolution has a knock on effect on the fictional positioning of the entirety of the situation. In a non fixed situation resolution will always be subject to what the GM decides to introduce next.Ron Edwards general critique (He talks about AW from the 8:00 but it’s worthwhile watching the whole video to get context)[MEDIA=youtube]wC2L14X6ORo[/MEDIA]I slightly disagree with Ron about ‘why’ it’s bad, his main contentions are that it produces predictable plots that tend toward genre emulation and relies on GM force.Anyway, this is all to say that if you use the AW resolution system as a conflict resolution system (not the improv content generator it often gets used as) and if you fix the situation, then it produces a very different type of game to FF games (as do all the good narrative games).</blockquote>

Verification