Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7917529" data-attributes="member: 16814">No, acting is orthogonal to exploring character growth.  Orthogonal, in this sense, meaning 'not related to.'  I say this because I can look at acting and determine if it is either necessary to have character growth, meaning that acting must be present to have character growth, or if it is sufficient to have character growth, meaning that acting alone can cause character growth.  The necessary part you've already noted isn't true -- there are other ways to have character growth, so therefore it's not necessary to have acting be present to have character growth.  I'll leave aside your attempt to limit other methods to writing for now.That leave sufficiency.  This is as easy to show because all I have to do is show that you can have acting while not having character growth.  This is a trivial show -- there's a wealth of acted parts with no character growth in all forms of media, including at the table. I, personally, have acted the part of many NPCs that have had no growth, and not a few PCs that have likewise had no growth, in both 1-shots, short campaigns, and even in longer campaigns.  So, therefore, acing is not sufficient to have character growth.If acting is neither necessary nor sufficient for character growth, then it's not really part of the discussion of 'how do we do character growth.'  It is a useful discussion for 'how to we connect to our characters in play?'  This is because, while acting is not necessary to connect to character, it can be sufficient.  It's just not terribly interesting in regards to the discussion on character arcs, as it's not an important component of having character arcs.</blockquote>

Verification