In another thread Robert posted this:
Posted By: komradebobIf you're going ahead with this, maybe you'd get more out of it by being upfront with your players and also having them play characters on both sides, and some on neither or even just in a faction of their own.
In my opinion, this is exactly the sort of set up where dirty hippy games with lots of player ability to go outside of character monogamy really work well, specifically because there is some distance between player and character direct identification.
This is what I answered: - I think not. What you proposing is an intellectual exercise, with next to no emotional investment in character. That is, to me, a dull place to be. I'm not overly fond of the character polygamy of a lot of modern games. In this instance it would totally kill my objective. The agenda of tapping into the soul of the oppressor, would be null and void if executed in the manner you propose.
I suspect that a lot of players really feel as I do; a safe distance between player and character is not something they enjoy; they find it dull. So when trying modern games of the type Robert describes, after the first rush of hacing all threads in their hands, and doing what they want with them ... after this a great portion of players realize that they miss something ...
- they miss out on the really heartbreaking relationship with their character; identifying with it, and sharing in its successes and failures.
Looking at it from a safe distance is not quite the same.
So, to be a bit cheeky here; I propose for the kind of play Robert is propagating, to be games made by and for people who are very much dependent on keeping inside their comfort zone. Having an intellectual exercise is fine and fun, but having emotional investment is potentially disturbing, and to be avoided.Character polygamy ensures aloofness!