Post by chriscrawford on Apr 29, 2016 17:53:40 GMT -8
Currently there are 7 levels of certainty in the game, mirroring the number of quantifiers. But in practice I seldom need that much resolution. So why not reduce the number of levels of certainty?
An interesting question is the concept of "zero certainty", which falls between certainty and uncertainty. It's a clumsy concept, and now I think that I should remove it. That would mean six levels of certainty.
The only plausible alternative is four levels of certainty:
very uncertain uncertain certain very certain
No, I think I'll stick with the six levels:
very uncertain uncertain slightly uncertain slightly certain certain very certain
Post by Chris Conley on May 1, 2016 8:08:55 GMT -8
Honestly, in playing, I hardly feel the difference in expressing myself between most of the certainties anyway. Maybe it would be worthwhile to keep the many values of uncertainty for displaying the player's displayed, known certainties, but limit the certainties speakable in eeyal to 2 or 3?
Post by chriscrawford on May 2, 2016 11:52:39 GMT -8
I found the problem with your idea. Here's the sequence of events for a deal:
A propose deal to B B asks "What do you want?" A says "I want X". B says "and I want Y" A agrees to the deal. A tells B Y. B tells A X.
end of deal.
Here's the problem: how does either party inject an "Are you sure?" question without upsetting the process? And what if they both ask the same question simultaneously? It is possible to make it work like so:
A propose deal to B B asks "What do you want?" A says "I want X". B says "and I want Y" A agrees to the deal. A tells B Y. B says "Are you sure?" A says "I am slightly uncertain" B tells A X. A says "Are you sure?" B says "I am slightly certain."
So it's plausible, but it seems a bit clumsy. Then there's the question whether demanding "are you sure?" becomes standard. Why *wouldn't* a character demand the certainty? The only restraint seems to be that it might irritate the other character if it's done too often.