Cantr II Discussion Forum

The folowing rant resulted from events covered by the 4-day rule, but I won't address the events directly.

Two parites negotiate when each has power over the other. This can be negative, threatening power or the positive power of having something to offer (note, this is really the power to not give the good thing...but that's another rant). Thus a party would have to be insane to voluntarily or semi-voluntarily give up all their power prior to negotiation. Refusing to negotiate can be sound, but not expecting your opponent to use their power if you won't deal with them is also deranged.

When one party has no power, the correct interaction is for the party with power to dictate to the helpless, and for the helpless to obey. Again, for either party to do otherwise would be madness.

So why have I seen people:
-Set the other side giving up all their power as a precondition for negotiation?
-Negotiate with people who have absolutely no power over them?
-Conceed entirely when in an obviously advantageous position?

I mean, I know that part of the point is RP things other than pure rational agents...but I look around and everyone I see is completely, frighteningly irrational.

by the same token, why do we see people negotiating at all when they are obviously in charge, have the power, and need NOTHING from those they are willing to negotiate with rather then just take over, kill, mayhem or destroy the un-needed, un-nessisary extra baggage that is the powerless party?


big smiles! biiiiig smiles!!!!!!

Pixie

After deleting my first post and re-reading this, I am ready to say something unimportant

When you say one party to dictate another, do you mean in like the same town or in all cases? Cause if its in another town, people don't really want to leave so that they're town is helpless, even when there are some armed people to protect, you might have enemies and leaving the town to command another might not be such a good idea since you might be alone and poorly protected, and i'm sure no one wants to die, so basically, home is safe, keep it safe, don't worry about the other people if they aren't doing anything to you...in some cases, i guess.


Giving up their power as a precondition for negotiation....now thats just stupid. I don't really believe someone would do that...have they done that? I can't believe that, but the people giving up their power might not be giving it up, just making others believe they are, or have a secret trump card, i don't really know, just throwing out some guesses....really, they give up power? I guess they just want peace and want to prove that they and there people are willing trust the enemy for peace.

Negotiate with people that have no power....maybe just to look good to there people, so they wouldn't look like a tyrant, and spread word that they are nice and fair and hopefully get traders who would trade with them....dunno, just a guess. Or they might have no power, but allies are needed...or they might have some connections they themselves haven't even considered....or just to make a friend?

Time watching prime time and female prisons, friend said it was interesting, so I'll watch. Good night

Sounds like tbr and karnon forest

If by power, he means weapons, then it sounds like a very funny situation going on with one of my characters involving a raft. It's to recent to go into details, but it HAS kept me laughing all day, however.

Ah, that's you, Agar? A little amusing, perhaps.

The Industrialist wrote:I mean, I know that part of the point is RP things other than pure rational agents...but I look around and everyone I see is completely, frighteningly irrational.

You sounds like Ayn Rand. Maybe, if you read 'Atlas shrugged', and managed to not take it seriously, you wouldn't have to worry so much about irrational deficiencies.

Revanael wrote:Ah, that's you, Agar? A little amusing, perhaps.

That all depends on who I am in the situation, doesn't it?

Agar has correctly identified my inspiration. But I do mean generalized power. Just the ability to yell at everyone in the area is a small bit of power, at least. Though one that's not to hard to defeat.

>Thomas Pickert
Haven't read it...but if it's a book that agrees with this reaction I'm having, as I believe it does, I don't see why you would expect it to make me feel better about rampant insanity.

Psycho Pixie wrote:by the same token, why do we see people negotiating at all when they are obviously in charge, have the power, and need NOTHING from those they are willing to negotiate with rather then just take over, kill, mayhem or destroy the un-needed, un-nessisary extra baggage that is the powerless party?

That's why 90% of my chars don't negotiate, they simply dictate the terms and inform those dictated to as to what will happen if they refuse . Even if on the bad side they won't negotiate (except to buy time), and will go down fighting. That's the one piece of my perssonallity that shows through in all my chars, surrender isn't an option.

But surely *some* negotiating and comprome is always necessary, or none of your characters would live very long. Is your character going to start off trying to give orders to the sabre-wielding leader of your town the day they spawn in? For most people who aren't actively trying to get that character killed, the answer would be 'no', as common sense would dictate you wait until you're in a better position first, no matter how ambitious or impatient your character is.

No, no, you don't understand. I'm talking about powerful, established, chars that could take out someone in an eyeblink. Newspawns normally aren't ever put into a position to negotiate or compromise unless they screw around and get themselves in trouble somehow, something my newspawns don't do anyway so therefore never have to worry about it.

I think that would mean he avoids confrontations until he has a winning hand...

But you loose a lot of opportunity that way. Negotiation is good for both parties involved, or they shouldn't be doing it. Not all negotiations involve weapons...

It depends on the negotiations whether they're good or not, normally though, negotiations are carried out between parties in which there is bad blood (otherwise there wouldn't be a problem to begin with), and if one party is the stronger and can take out the other without negotiations then they will get more from doing that then what any negotiations could have produced, plus have one less "problem" to worry about. Bottom line is, friends don't negotiate, and it's always better to do away with an enemy then "deal" with them. One you start dealing with an enemy you open yourself up to all kinds of other problems, specifically blackmail and trickery.

blackmail..... blackmail is gooooooooood.

hehehehehe


pixie