Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 4508518" data-attributes="member: 3192">You're right. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; In another thread about the difference of role-playing and storytelling I made a point of giving this one exception.&nbsp; Nice catch.BIG EDIT:Here's a funny story on how &quot;story&quot; might be confused with role-playing as so many are bringing up objections to stories not happening in their game.Playing Baseball is not telling a story.&nbsp; It is a game testing one's ability to play Baseball, to follow the rules to win.&nbsp; Agreed?But what about when a major leaguer dresses up as Mickey Mantle and improvisationally acts as if he were that guy?&nbsp; All the while playing a real Baseball game?&nbsp; Now let's add on the telling of a story while in character, like &quot;I remember when I homered one out of Fenway and into the parking lot, back when....&quot;True, this is a bit hard to imagine happening in the Majors, but I bet plenty of kids do it in sandlot.The question is: Is Baseball actually a story game because, 1. You can improvisationally act as another person while playing the game?and/or 2. You can tell stories while playing the game (whether you're engaged in 1. or not)Of course the answer is no.&nbsp; This isn't theatre.&nbsp; You have to be good enough to hit homeruns yourself.&nbsp; Pretending to be Mickey Mantle isn't going to help you with that (well probably it won't <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> )&nbsp; Just as in role-playing, the challenge is in the doing of the thing.&nbsp; Where as in acting, the challenge is in the portrayal.&nbsp; Both are fun, just in different ways.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 4508518, member: 3192"] You're right. :) In another thread about the difference of role-playing and storytelling I made a point of giving this one exception. Nice catch. BIG EDIT: Here's a funny story on how "story" might be confused with role-playing as so many are bringing up objections to stories not happening in their game. Playing Baseball is not telling a story. It is a game testing one's ability to play Baseball, to follow the rules to win. Agreed? But what about when a major leaguer dresses up as Mickey Mantle and improvisationally acts as if he were that guy? All the while playing a real Baseball game? Now let's add on the telling of a story while in character, like "I remember when I homered one out of Fenway and into the parking lot, back when...." True, this is a bit hard to imagine happening in the Majors, but I bet plenty of kids do it in sandlot. The question is: Is Baseball actually a story game because, 1. You can improvisationally act as another person while playing the game? and/or 2. You can tell stories while playing the game (whether you're engaged in 1. or not) Of course the answer is no. This isn't theatre. You have to be good enough to hit homeruns yourself. Pretending to be Mickey Mantle isn't going to help you with that (well probably it won't ;) ) Just as in role-playing, the challenge is in the doing of the thing. Where as in acting, the challenge is in the portrayal. Both are fun, just in different ways. [/QUOTE]

Verification