Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 6683894" data-attributes="member: 6775031">I acknowledge that the word &quot;role&quot; has two definitions, and I purport that one of them is relevant to the topic at hand. My fundamental premise is that, when you play a role-playing game, you are taking on the role of a fictional character and acting from that perspective. You are taking on a role in the same way that an actor would.This is the definition I'm using. I strongly believe that, whether anyone has ever read the passage directly, or even whether they consciously acknowledge it, this is what most players understand role-playing to be about.As I said, this is role-playing in the 4E sense - the word &quot;role&quot; is being used as a synonym for &quot;job&quot; (not that you can't use 4E to role-play in the traditional sense, of course, but 4E actually codified the alternate meaning). You're taking up a specific set of abilities, which help you to accomplish a specific set of goals, but you aren't taking on a role in the acting sense of the term. The court barrister doesn't have a name or mannerisms apart from those which belong to the law student. The fighter is, essentially, a package of rule mechanics which aid toward a vaguely-defined victory condition.And I strongly believe that your usage of the term is misleading, in much the same way that a pretentious citizen of the United States might travel through Europe or South America and claim misunderstanding over usage of the word &quot;football&quot;. Your usage might be technically correct within certain contexts, but it's obviously not the prevailing usage of anyone else around you, and your insistence on retaining the terminology is creating a barrier to effective communication.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Crimson Binome, post: 6683894, member: 6775031"] I acknowledge that the word "role" has two definitions, and I purport that one of them is relevant to the topic at hand. My fundamental premise is that, when you play a role-playing game, you are taking on the role of a fictional character and acting from that perspective. You are taking on a role in the same way that an actor would. This is the definition I'm using. I strongly believe that, whether anyone has ever read the passage directly, or even whether they consciously acknowledge it, [I]this[/I] is what most players understand role-playing to be about. As I said, this is role-playing in the 4E sense - the word "role" is being used as a synonym for "job" (not that you can't use 4E to role-play in the traditional sense, of course, but 4E actually codified the alternate meaning). You're taking up a specific set of abilities, which help you to accomplish a specific set of goals, but you aren't taking on a role in the acting sense of the term. The court barrister doesn't have a name or mannerisms apart from those which belong to the law student. The fighter is, essentially, a package of rule mechanics which aid toward a vaguely-defined victory condition. And I strongly believe that your usage of the term is misleading, in much the same way that a pretentious citizen of the United States might travel through Europe or South America and claim misunderstanding over usage of the word "football". Your usage might be technically correct within certain contexts, but it's [I]obviously[/I] not the prevailing usage of anyone else around you, and your insistence on retaining the terminology is creating a barrier to effective communication. [/QUOTE]

Verification