"Protection" in rules structures

Started by JoyWriter, August 25, 2009, 02:44:02 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


This is an offshoot of this thread. The specific thing I wanted to focus on was making useful (and productive) Callan's idea of protection:

As a quick summary, up until that point we roughly established that what he sees as the core essence of a working rules structure is something called "protection", which relates to authority attribution and rules clarity in some undisclosed way. I've tried to underline that this is not obvious design stuff but a unique insight, and that rules designers seem to be able to achieve it while working towards quite different objectives. Hopefully getting a clear picture of it will help people make it intentionally, and not step on it when shifting rules around.

So to kick this off we'll need an example: Callan, in what games, roleplaying or otherwise, have you seen this opperating well, and what would the game have been like if it wasn't there?

(If that's not the right kind of question to fit your concept, feel free to ignore it and replace with a more illustrative example, and if I've mis-summarised feel free to supplement)

Ron Edwards

You should come up with your own example and let Callan tell you whether that's what he's talking about. As written, your post is too much like a gauntlet thrown down.

Best, Ron


Hmm that's pretty much what it is; I tried to think of my own examples but couldn't as I didn't really get his thing. We've done a bit of PM chatting and I think I'll scrap this method. We'll be better able to talk I think, via him critiquing my actual game designs.

As a general thing I'm not sure what the problem is with challenging someone to contribute, so long as you don't push it if it's not working.