Re: Implicit and explicit factors in Extended Contests

From: Paul Andrew King <paul_at_...>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:35:12 +0000

>wrote:
>>> I notice that you haven't stated the objectives for the contest.
>
>yes, thats the point. The whole idea of objectives for a group
>extended contest is confused and incoherent, abandon that and
>everything makes a lot more sense.

Well I disagree - the whole point of a contest is an attempt to achieve an objective.

>
>A contest in which it is impossible for anyone to change their goals
>or tactics is a simple contest. With no decisions to be made by the
>participants, one dice roll is enough, and two is one too many. By
>making something an extended contest you are stating that there are
>decisions to be made half way through, which means that you should be
>prepared for the players making those decisions in some other way
>than you expect.

Which is permitted by allowing a change of objectives. I grant that there are problems in some cases, but I am not convinced that abandoning objectives altogether as you seem to suggest is the solution.

-- 
--
"The T'ang emperors were strong believers in the pills of 
immortality.  More emperors died of poisoning from ingesting minerals 
in the T'ang than in any other dynasty" - Eva Wong _The Shambhala 
Guide to Taoism_

Paul K.