Started by lumpley, April 17, 2008, 10:43:58 AM
Quote from: jburneko on April 17, 2008, 06:08:30 PMYou're looking at a Best Interest as something to be actively pursued, whether by the character in fiction or by the player at the meta-level regardless of what the character is up to. My understanding is that NEITHER is the case. Best Interests are not something to be pursued by anyone. They are simply facts of the situation. I think the hardest part about them is that WHY this or that is in a character's Best Interest is left undefined until someone has an epiphany moment mid-play and says, "And THAT'S why it's in that character's Best Interest to such and such."
QuoteThey are not something to be driven towards but rather something that the state of the fiction should be constantly compared to.
Quote from: Mike Holmes on April 18, 2008, 11:12:15 AM#1 This one isn't very controversial, but along with Jesse's advice it does feel to me like "Don't make the character you would make, and play them to the hilt, instead make a character that'll make you play so that the system doesn't have problems." ....#2 ....if you win, you get to negotiate for the ring with the stick. I mean a player could, if they wanted, change these stakes at this point, and negotiate for something else... but why wouldn't they be focused on getting what it was that they were attempting to get in the first place? #3 I think this is a good idea. But it is a change to the rules. Narrow construction says that any right that is not given to any one player specifically is had by all. As it reads, the player can call his shots on forms. ....