Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 7584548" data-attributes="member: 5142"><p>I guess that I should not be surprised by more intellectually dishonest semantics from you. Assuming people aren't trying to score points in a debate and actually demonstrate a willingness to discuss the matter in good faith, most would not apply such a ridiculously restrictive, literalist reading of "only." Otherwise we find ourselves in the discussion where the dishonest argument that "Ron Edwards does not include the word 'experience' since it is 'only knowledge and perceptions,' so character experience is not part of Actor stance" is presented as a valid reading of the definition. </p><p></p><p>So where does 'motivations' factor into the definition? I would wager that most halfway intelligent people would implicitly recognize that it is entailed in the "decisions and actions using..." part of the phrase, especially given that motivations generally inform the thought process of decisions and actions most (ir)rational agents make. </p><p></p><p>Surely you recognize that the definitions provided by the Forge are fairly minimal or barebones? I don't think that they were meant to be all-comprehensive of everything that is entailed in or surrounding the understanding of the terms. This is generally how we understand how definitions work. Definitions are minimally descriptive but not comprehensively prescriptive. </p><p></p><p>The blog entry and emboldened text were meant to highlight the inclusion of "motivations" in the understanding of the Actor stance. It was not meant to highlight or discuss anything else. So your attempted "gotcha moments" kinda fall flat. But if you are making yourself feel better about yourself for feeling clever, then I'm glad you are getting something out of this conversation, but you are missing the point. </p><p></p><p>Edit: If you want to use this blog entry to argue with pemerton about walking into a forest or whatever, then you are welcome to do so. But again, my purpose was simply to correct your error regarding the exclusion of "motivation" in the general understanding of the Actor stance. Nothing more. </p><p></p><p>Except for the part where I mention it towards the end. If you are going to respond, please bother to put in a modicum of effort to read what I wrote, Max. That is a courteous thing to do. Otherwise it makes you look like an inconsiderate dolt. </p><p></p><p>Simply bringing this back 'round to an earlier point. I am permitted to do that. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 7584548, member: 5142"] I guess that I should not be surprised by more intellectually dishonest semantics from you. Assuming people aren't trying to score points in a debate and actually demonstrate a willingness to discuss the matter in good faith, most would not apply such a ridiculously restrictive, literalist reading of "only." Otherwise we find ourselves in the discussion where the dishonest argument that "Ron Edwards does not include the word 'experience' since it is 'only knowledge and perceptions,' so character experience is not part of Actor stance" is presented as a valid reading of the definition. So where does 'motivations' factor into the definition? I would wager that most halfway intelligent people would implicitly recognize that it is entailed in the "decisions and actions using..." part of the phrase, especially given that motivations generally inform the thought process of decisions and actions most (ir)rational agents make. Surely you recognize that the definitions provided by the Forge are fairly minimal or barebones? I don't think that they were meant to be all-comprehensive of everything that is entailed in or surrounding the understanding of the terms. This is generally how we understand how definitions work. Definitions are minimally descriptive but not comprehensively prescriptive. The blog entry and emboldened text were meant to highlight the inclusion of "motivations" in the understanding of the Actor stance. It was not meant to highlight or discuss anything else. So your attempted "gotcha moments" kinda fall flat. But if you are making yourself feel better about yourself for feeling clever, then I'm glad you are getting something out of this conversation, but you are missing the point. Edit: If you want to use this blog entry to argue with pemerton about walking into a forest or whatever, then you are welcome to do so. But again, my purpose was simply to correct your error regarding the exclusion of "motivation" in the general understanding of the Actor stance. Nothing more. Except for the part where I mention it towards the end. If you are going to respond, please bother to put in a modicum of effort to read what I wrote, Max. That is a courteous thing to do. Otherwise it makes you look like an inconsiderate dolt. Simply bringing this back 'round to an earlier point. I am permitted to do that. ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
Top