mkkuhner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Mary K. Kuhner) writes:
>In article <fiic7p$45d$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>Jim Burgess <burgess@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>Let your inner insanity out to play! I've had people very seriously
>>accuse me of trying to make them insane. I can be pretty annoyingly out
>>there when I want to be (anyone around here want to admit when I did it
to
>>them??). FTF though, people can see your gestures etc., but still, yes,
>>I've done this FTF too.
>Hm. My FTF experience with players who annoy me badly is that it's
>a tremendously unproductive tactic for them--it will push me from
>"I'm cru****ng you now but if the situation changes we can be
>friends again" to "I'm going to eliminate you NOW even if it's
>not exactly best play." The one thing that's clear about Dip is
>that there's more hope before you get eliminated than after, so
>I never want to convince someone that the game will be more
>enjoyable if I'm gone.
>It's possible that making me angry might give you a weakness to
>exploit, but more likely, I think, it will give a third party a
>weakness to exploit--so both you and I lose.
>Of all the games I've played, perhaps my favorite was the
>last round of a FTF tournament when a rather famous player
>managed to piss off all four of the minor powers (who were
>at 2-3 dots each after he stabbed them all). I got one
>of them to help organize, we wrote orders for five sets of
>pieces (plus me sweet-talking my one big ally into, mostly,
>helping) and the famous player imploded.
>It left me convinced that pissing people off is not a wise
>thing to do. My hapless big ally ended up saying to the
>four minor-power players, "You know Mary will solo, don't
>you?" and being unable to distract them from their
>enjoyment of dismembering their hated foe. Me? I was
>cheering them all the way in to the kill. (And never
>had to take a dot from them till the last move, so I
>got to be a nice person to the very end.)
>Mary Kuhner mkkuhner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
be more specific, I'm better at experimenting with ways to raise the
"level of the game"@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
sometimes than I am about trying to win some
particular games. Some of my efforts to raise the level of the game are
interpreted by others as pissing them off. I note this as evidence for
all the reasons you say, since one wants to both raise the levels of the
game to one's advantage and in some control -- and once the other player's
emotions kick in, control usually is lost pretty quickly.
I also think that one does some of these things BETTER when one is letting
one's natural inner insanity out to play than dreaming up something. That
was my original point. For those who forayed in the gaming into D&D at
times, the chaotic/lawful distinction there is a useful way of visualizing
what I was talking about. I think good/chaotic is possible and useful,
but some people disagree.
Jim-Bob
|
