Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6683928" data-attributes="member: 42582">Again, I feel that your last sentence begs the question. Not everyone is using the AD&amp;D 2nd ed definition of roleplaying, at least in the sense that you read it. Certainly not the OSRers, for instance. Nor many of the 4e players. Nor all of the 5e players, given the diversity of opinion and approach of 5e GMs posting in this thread.And there is a reading of the AD&amp;D definition which is different from your preferred reading. The key passage is &quot;whenever the character is called on to do something or make a decision, the player pretends that he is in that situation and chooses an appropriate course of action.&quot; That passage doesn't mandate the sort of approach you prefer. For instance, a player who imagines him-/herself in that situation, motivated as the PC would be motivated, and therefore decides to spend a fate point to enhance the prospects of success for a skill check has done exactly what that passage mandates.Likewise, a player who imagines him-/herself in that situation, and who imagines him-/herself into the mind of a perceptive character, and thereby declares as an action &quot;I look for a chink in the armour&quot;, has done what that passage mandates: s/he has pretended that s/he is in that situation and has chosen an appropriate course of action. Nothing in that passage prescribes how the chosen course of action is to be resolved, nor how questions of authorship are to be determined. For instance, it doesn't contradict anything in that passage for the existence of a chink in the armour to be determined in part by the success of a Perception check.You are asserting an equation between identifying with a character and particular methods of action resolution and authorship which simply doesn't obtain.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6683928, member: 42582"] Again, I feel that your last sentence begs the question. Not everyone is using the AD&D 2nd ed definition of roleplaying, at least in the sense that you read it. Certainly not the OSRers, for instance. Nor many of the 4e players. Nor all of the 5e players, given the diversity of opinion and approach of 5e GMs posting in this thread. And there is a reading of the AD&D definition which is different from your preferred reading. The key passage is "whenever the character is called on to do something or make a decision, the player pretends that he is in that situation and chooses an appropriate course of action." That passage doesn't mandate the sort of approach you prefer. For instance, a player who imagines him-/herself in that situation, motivated as the PC would be motivated, and therefore decides to spend a fate point to enhance the prospects of success for a skill check has done exactly what that passage mandates. Likewise, a player who imagines him-/herself in that situation, and who imagines him-/herself into the mind of a perceptive character, and thereby declares as an action "I look for a chink in the armour", has done what that passage mandates: s/he has pretended that s/he is in that situation and has chosen an appropriate course of action. Nothing in that passage prescribes how the chosen course of action is to be resolved, nor how questions of authorship are to be determined. For instance, it doesn't contradict anything in that passage for the existence of a chink in the armour to be determined in part by the success of a Perception check. You are asserting an equation between [I]identifying with a character[/I] and particular methods of action resolution and authorship which simply doesn't obtain. [/QUOTE]

Verification