Much like my decision about my character.
Some risk? What I described wasn't "some risk." What I described was suicide. And who knows(well, I would), maybe he would mouth off anyway. Depends on the character.
It's not discovery. I didn't learn about the character. I learned about a random die roll or whatever mechanic was involved. The only way I will learn about my character is by immersing myself and making those decisions myself. All of those questions you ask there require me to answer them in order for me to learn about the PC.
That's not true. If I don't know the answer before I answer them, I've discovered the answer. Contrast that to a mechanic that might have me mouth off to one guy, but not the next(because mechanics have an element of randomness). What have I discovered? I've discovered that mechanics are inconsistent is all. I've learned nothing about the actual character.
ROFL Now you're challenging my integrity if I want to make the decision myself? If I actually want to learn about my character, rather than only learning that rolls are random?
I often do the same thing, if that's what my character would do in that situation. I learn that when I enter those situations.
No. The trait remains. He just managed to control himself in that situation..............................or not. Maybe he didn't. It would depend on what I know of the character involved.
...reads to me as saying, "The people advocating for complete control of character thought and action declaration are really advocating for non-mechanical resolution of combat as well, they just aren't admitting it."
If this were as surefire as you seemingly assert, then I doubt that I would have seen some of the most compelling fiction and roleplay result from these mechanics nearly as often as I have nor some of the absolute dullest and least compelling nonsense when thes minds of these same people in games where these mechanics are absent.
As I said before, in a lot of these discussed games with mental/social mechanics, there is a HEAVY and I do want to stress HEAVY emphasis on how the negotiation of the fiction is a shared responsibility between the GM and players. Again, with Pemerton's Steel roll for Burning Wheel, he had a series of choices that he could make about what made the most sense for his character. Contests in Cortex Prime are generally player-initiated, and there are numerous points where players have say on the flow and outcomes of Contests. In Fate, Aspects and Troubles are decided by the player and meant to serve as self-inflicted lightning rods for the GM to provide complications, but there are ways to mitigate them. But throughout all of this, there is often a HEAVY emphasis on fiction-first play as well as the fiction being negotiated in a conversation with the GM rather than being heavy GM-authority games.
Incapable? For some people yes, for others no. I doubt it would mean much to me, and there have been times when I role playing that I've had an emotional/sympathetic response to what's going on in my PC's world. Pretty rare, but that's not the primary reason I play the game anyway.
This seems closer to just authoring a character in fanfiction than discovering a character through a roleplaying game. I could certainly write a story for my character, but I don't really feel as if I am engaged in roleplaying at that point. It's just authoring my own fiction.
That's much broader than what I was trying to communicate. My point was limited to the idea that changing how a character interacts with the world around them from what the player previously understood about that character to me qualifies as redefining the character. I certainly was not trying to convey that an IC decision-making process that includes a character changing their mind qualifies as redefining the character.
