Project:Realpolitik/CR: Difference between revisions

Line 71:

=[On the matter of Narrative Tunneling]=

There are three key phrase in event chains, each playing a distinct role --

;There are three key phrase in event chains, each playing a distinct role --

#"''and then''"

#"''therefore''"

#"''but''"

Structurally, state machines as a basis for constructing narratives has obvious upsides for carefully iterating through story beats. The pitfalls are a potential narrowing of diverse outcomes to a given scenario. As a network of intertwined factors grows it becomes increasingly difficult to stray from the web of priorities. This is what I colloquially refer to as narrative tunneling - the failure to consider events '''may not resolve to expected outcomes, even if proper order is adhered to'''.

:Structurally, state machines as a basis for constructing narratives has obvious upsides for carefully iterating through story beats. The pitfalls are a potential narrowing of diverse outcomes to a given scenario. As a network of intertwined factors grows it becomes increasingly difficult to stray from the web of priorities. This is what I colloquially refer to as narrative tunneling - the failure to consider events '''may not resolve to expected outcomes, even if proper order is adhered to'''.

:One of the defining factors of a theory is that it must be tested and proven by supporting data. Sometimes the world doesn't provide the results we expect. The best laid plans of man and machines...

:The Holy Nation takes hold of the desert. The Cannibals in turn overrun it all. Is this a forced outcome? Or is this unexpected? Was the logic to arrive there sound? ''Should'' the actors involved be operating logically? Is a logical outcome necessarily always desirable? Let's be blatant here - of course not. Rational, logical, sane results are interpretive attempts to make sense of a chaotic system -- human relationships.

@@ Line 71: / Line 71: @@
 =[On the matter of Narrative Tunneling]=
-There are three key phrase in event chains, each playing a distinct role --
+;There are three key phrase in event chains, each playing a distinct role --
 #"''and then''"
 #"''therefore''"
 #"''but''"
-Structurally, state machines as a basis for constructing narratives has obvious upsides for carefully iterating through story beats. The pitfalls are a potential narrowing of diverse outcomes to a given scenario. As a network of intertwined factors grows it becomes increasingly difficult to stray from the web of priorities. This is what I colloquially refer to as narrative tunneling - the failure to consider events '''may not resolve to expected outcomes, even if proper order is adhered to'''.
+:Structurally, state machines as a basis for constructing narratives has obvious upsides for carefully iterating through story beats. The pitfalls are a potential narrowing of diverse outcomes to a given scenario. As a network of intertwined factors grows it becomes increasingly difficult to stray from the web of priorities. This is what I colloquially refer to as narrative tunneling - the failure to consider events '''may not resolve to expected outcomes, even if proper order is adhered to'''.
 :One of the defining factors of a theory is that it must be tested and proven by supporting data. Sometimes the world doesn't provide the results we expect. The best laid plans of man and machines...
 :The Holy Nation takes hold of the desert. The Cannibals in turn overrun it all. Is this a forced outcome? Or is this unexpected? Was the logic to arrive there sound? ''Should'' the actors involved be operating logically? Is a logical outcome necessarily always desirable? Let's be blatant here - of course not. Rational, logical, sane results are interpretive attempts to make sense of a chaotic system -- human relationships.