Some Emotioneering techniques, as you might have noticed, perform more than one function for example, Taking Responsibility for Another. In our hypothetical game, when you (playing Jen) take responsibility for Citlali, four Emotioneering functions are performed simultaneously:
You (through Jen, the character you play) rescue Citlali, and you'll protect her from many dangers during the game, as the beings who trapped her there now try to find her and capture her again.
As was discussed a bit earlier, responsibility for an NPC makes us identify with the NPC for whom we take responsibility. Thus, it's a Rooting Interest Technique.
Taking responsibility for another character emotionally bonds you to that character. It's one of many ways of creating Chemistry between you and that character, and is thus a Player Toward NPC Chemistry Technique (see Chapter 2.11).
When you are bonded to one or more characters in a game, as you'll be bonded to Citlali, you're more willing to participate in the world of that game. Thus, this Taking Responsibility is also a World Induction Technique (see Chapter 2.18).
When a player takes responsibility for another character, it actually gives the player himself or herself emotional depth just as taking responsibility for a friend or a child in real life gives a person depth. That's because you need to expand your vision to see not just what you need, but what that other person needs. Thus, you taking responsibility for Citlali is also a First-Person Deepening Technique (see Chapter 2.21).
It's rare to see techniques function in so many ways. I certainly know no other technique such as "Taking Responsibility," which occupies a slot in four distinct Emotioneering categories.
Usually techniques don't perform multiple functions. For example, a Character Exhibiting Insight is an NPC Deepening Technique, but it isn't an NPC Rooting Interest Technique. A Character Being Genuine is an NPC Rooting Interest Technique, but not a Character Deepening Technique.
But some techniques do occasionally overlap into different categories. I therefore thought it worth pointing out so that it doesn't seem confusing or even a mistake when you periodically come upon other examples later in this book.