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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 4508632" data-attributes="member: 3192">Here's a quick example for people still confused.  It uses role-playing as defined in the dictionary and an example from outside the hobby, so we don't get confused by "Big Model" theory.At a Medical School a professor decides to put her students through a role-playing experiment.  She has been teaching them emergency medicine and ER protocols for weeks and now wants to see how well the students do in a simulated environment.  She assigns each a name tag with fictional doctor names like, Meredith Grey, Cristina Yang, and "Izzie" Stevens.  The professor takes them into the gymnasium where she has a mock up of a 10 car pile up. It is complete with dummies as accident victims and some other props. She could do this in a conference room with figurines and toy cars, but they have the space available and the gym seems easier.  With a stop watch she keeps time, but remembers to stop it when she needs to explain things so that the fictional reality gives more accurate results of students' response times.  As the scenario plays out (the role-play is being done) the "doctors" work hard to save the "patients".  What that entails is the test of the role-playing scenario.  The students (and professor) are learning how good of doctors they are in such a situation.  Just as D&D RPGers learn and better themselves at how good they are as fighters, wizards, clerics, etc. in fantasy world situations.Now just because the student role-playing "Doctor Merideth Grey" starts talking like the character in the TV show (Grey's Anatomy), it doesn't mean the game just became a television episode or, more clearly, an improvisational theatre play.  It is role-playing because the student is succeeding based upon here ability to save "patients", not have Emmy Award winning nervous breakdowns.  She can do the same at the same time, but when it interferes with her ability to role-play it's getting in the way of scenario.  The professor or any fellow student could easily ask her to "get back on track" or whatever and address the difficulty of the game.  Now what happens if the Professor stops the scenario and changes it?  If she decides to change the situation, "Let's say this patient lost 2 pints of blood, not 1.  What now, doctor?", then she's altering the game.  This isn't narrative authority as she is not saying how one may or may not portray their character.  Is this her "role-playing" because she is explaining the environment the students are interacting with?  Of course not.  Is she running the modeled scenario when she does this?  No, again.  She is redesigning the game.  As professor, she is the one in charge of the game and is using it as a teaching tool, so she redesigns the scenario to best test the students in a variety of ways.  In a role-playing game played for amusement, it would seem the entire group would have to agree on altering the gameworld.  Because you cannot change the game without stopping role-playing and redesigning the game these redesigns are not the character changing the game.  They are everyone agreeing the game should be altered without role-playing to get from one game scenario to the next.  Essentially, you are skipping across across different game scenarios like skipping between adventure modules without successfully role-playing your way there.  It is playing the game to skip the consequences of role-playing thereby causing your role-playing successes to be shallower and shallower in their importance.</blockquote>

Verification