[imported_Synozeer]

In Wes Platt's latest Backstage column, he suggests that players prefer a rigid storyline than an open-ended one (under certain conditions).

You can read this article here.

Synozeer

[Burr]

Brody, how would you apply that concept to situations in which characters are on opposing sides in a conflict? Would you consistently seek a win-win flavor of ending, or would you mainly just try to be fair in choosing which side wins? And if every character always wins, would it be correct to say there is never any conflict in the first place?

[Brody]

Burr asks:

Originally Posted by How would you apply that concept to situations in which characters are on opposing sides in a conflict? Would you consistently seek a win-win flavor of ending, or would you mainly just try to be fair in choosing which side wins? And if every character always wins, would it be correct to say there is never any conflict in the first place?

That's a great question. The column specifically deals with plots and storylines developed as a staffer - so, it assumes the staffer is playing "the opposing side." However, as one might expect, multiple PC factions can end up vying for the same goal. In that case, I don't think it's reasonable (or particularly sane) to seek a win-win situation. Just try to be fair in determining who emerges victorious.