So, what I think becomes apparent if you reframe a previous model is a clearer picture of what gets done or what happens. I am not interested in a taxonomy or labels, I want to get to the mechanisms. From there we can choose the mechanisms which best reach our goals. In this case, what this revision of KFD suggested to me was: One or more players decide. One or more players decide with the aid of a randomizer. One or more players decide by negotiation. One or more players decide by using a resource (buying). This lets us see what we do when we play and it is easy to see which layers of play they might work well on or cause disruption in. The farther down this list we go, the more OoC talking we might expect, for example (unless we establish a technique to mitigate that). Here endeth my welllakshually. ;)
![[UA] NAVI vs MOUZ | BO5 | IEM Rio 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CMBYk0cbGoA/mqdefault.jpg)
So, what I think becomes apparent if you reframe a previous model is a clearer picture of what gets done or what happens. I am not interested in a taxonomy or labels, I want to get to the mechanisms. From there we can choose the mechanisms which best reach our goals. In this case, what this revision of KFD suggested to me was:
One or more players decide.
One or more players decide with the aid of a randomizer.
One or more players decide by negotiation.
One or more players decide by using a resource (buying).
This lets us see what we do when we play and it is easy to see which layers of play they might work well on or cause disruption in. The farther down this list we go, the more OoC talking we might expect, for example (unless we establish a technique to mitigate that).
Here endeth my welllakshually.
;)
So, how many bass guitars do I have to buy for you to get my successes in game?
Just one 😆