I’m currently at Edge City Lanna in Chiang Mai, where I’ll facilitate some sessions of the Tensions Game. The game is still evolving quickly, but based on the positive response from attendees of the first play test at Edge Esmeralda, it has potential.
I know there are many people here interested in games, so I thought I’d share the instructions for the game here in case anyone wants to give feedback or even test it out on their own, tinker with it, propose some tensions, etc.
One thing that isn’t in the doc – we have a few subgames formulated:
- Boundary Punk: combine ~8 tension cards to model a commons that you would like to disrupt, then figure out a path forward (such as a product, or a protocol improvement) that fits within the constraints imposed by the tensions in play, but will eventually lead to shifting the boundaries of those tensions.
- Protocol Literacy: choose a large number of tension cards that you find particularly interesting or important. Create an Anki deck with the tension on the front (e.g. Safety vs. Productivity) and a description on the back. Practice with these flashcards, taking advantage of the spaced repetition that Anki provides.
- d/acc: 3-5 players choose two tension cards each, as well as any technology of their choice (real or hypothetical). The goal is to balance technological acceleration with risk management. Each player sets a tension level from 1-10, with 1 being maximum Force A and 10 being maximum Force B. Players reveal their cards and technologies, then redo their choices as a group.
- Hardened Commons: Similar to Boundary Punk, model a commons (e.g. a city square, a national park, a local reservoir) using a set of eight tension cards. This time, identify some behaviors that reduce that value of the commons, then strategize for how to harden the commons against that behavior. For example, telecomms infrastructure could be hardened against state capture by the use of antitrust regulation.
Link to instructions: Tensions Game Instructions v2 - Google Docs
Here are some example tensions, to get you oriented:
Bards vs Messiahs. Under lighthouse: hardened commons. Editorial recommendation— weakly bard. Description: Bards carry an existing traditional narrative. Messiahs offer radical breaks from traditional narratives.
Chesterton’s Fence vs Gordian Knot: Under lighthouse hardened commons. Description: Should you try to understand the reason for the way things are before attempting to change them, or cut through them without necessarily understanding?
Tyranny of traditions vs tyranny of tyrants. Lighthouse: punk. Recommendation: weakly tyranny of tradition. Description: For the rebel which is the lesser evil? A hidebound dead tradition or a living tyrant?
Pwn state capacity vs build commons capacity. Lighthouse: punk. Recommendation: weakly pwn state. Description: Is it more effective to gain control over existing state resources and risk provoking the politically misaligned state, or build politically unencumbered resources from scratch?