Started by David Berg, January 01, 2008, 08:16:04 PM
Quote from: Ron Edwards on January 04, 2008, 03:16:52 PM(as well as the original constructive denial threads, which I just reviewed)
QuoteOkay, cool, I'll try to stay focused on "The Right" in the thread, and not get sidetracked by other Simulationism issues. I have this idea brewing, though, and I'd like to hear your thoughts on it
Quote from: David Berg on January 04, 2008, 05:53:45 PMP.S. It would also make sense to me to take "Right to Dream" + "the 'inviolable package' statement of purpose" and talk about them jointly as an individual game's Creative Agenda. This would then render Simulationism a type of CA; there would be as many distinct Simulationist CAs as there would be "packages". Just throwin' it out there; clearly, my understanding of CA in pure abstraction is fuzzy.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on January 04, 2008, 03:16:52 PMI suggest that rights are always recognized, exerted, and preserved in the context of a set of historical agreements which everyone pretends don't exist, instead referencing things like "natural" or "inalienable" or "human."So let's look at rights in action: they can be invoked to permit someone to do something without being blocked, to provide force and convincing power to something that is being done at the moment, and to seek redress for someone who tried to do something but was prevented or punished for it. In all cases, in order for the concept of "right" to function in any of these ways, the set of agreements I just wrote about must be operating among the members of the larger society. Otherwise the talk of rights will be squashed, and the actions prevented, disrupted, or punished – the right by itself has no actual power; the agreements within which they operate is where the power is.As we are talking about Simulationist play, the constructive denial is the context that applies at any stage of dealing with the SIS, in whatever way works for that particular stage.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsI hope you can see that your Werewolf game was already unable to be played as safely as you describe.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsWhat you're really talking about is the Black Curtain as I've defined it, with the interesting twist that the GM told you that her decision was not as fraught with risk as he wanted her to believe.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsI was trying to counterweight your stated emphasis on initiating scenes . . . I'll say it this way: "Don't forget that within-scene stuff and outcome-of-scene stuff are also subject to consideration from the perspective of the constructive denial going on for that group." Does that help?