Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6414016" data-attributes="member: 177">It is more complicated than that.&nbsp; The thing that we name is a human experience, &quot;Purple&quot;.&nbsp; It comes about from a mix of signals from different kinds of light receptors in our eyes.&nbsp; Any combination of light that sets off the right signals is &quot;purple&quot;.&nbsp; What you have to mix up to get that final experience depends upon your medium - if you are mixing paint, then equal amounts of red and blue get you purple (this is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGB_color_model" target="_blank">the RBG Color Model</a>).&nbsp; But, if you are working with inkjet printers, you're probably going to use a lot of Magenta with a bit of Cyan (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMYK_color_model" target="_blank">The CMYK color model</a>).&nbsp; But, if you can work directly with light, you can just find one wavelength, and it alone will generate &quot;purple&quot; for your audience.GNS gave us names for things, and those who have been exposed to it strongly tend to think only in terms of those things - as if there were no other way to approach the issue.The <a href="http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/BreakdownOfRPGPlayers.html" target="_blank">1999 WotC survey</a> gave us another framework we could use - a story/combat and strategy/tactics approach we could use.&nbsp; And the fact that we can do this supports your point that these aren't incompatible.F'rex: Maybe that &quot;Gamist&quot; player is really a *tactical* player, but all he's been exposed to are games with strong tactical combat minigames, and he hasn't been presented with a coherent and interesting way to approach story from a *tactical* perspective.&nbsp; Or maybe that &quot;Narrative&quot; player is really strategic - he has a natural ability to make good long-term choices fitting with fictional genre, but D&amp;D's strategic combat tools are weak, so he's never really approached that area.Yep.&nbsp; And I think the WotC results above pretty much put a hole in that boat.&nbsp; If he had the mathematical education, Edwards never thought in terms of coordinate systems.&nbsp; GNS is one set of coordinates.&nbsp; WotC had another show up in their data.&nbsp; Just like you can map a globe in polar coordinates or rectangular ones.&nbsp; Both are merely frames of reference for talking about a physical planet.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 6414016, member: 177"] It is more complicated than that. The thing that we name is a human experience, "Purple". It comes about from a mix of signals from different kinds of light receptors in our eyes. Any combination of light that sets off the right signals is "purple". What you have to mix up to get that final experience depends upon your medium - if you are mixing paint, then equal amounts of red and blue get you purple (this is the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGB_color_model]the RBG Color Model[/url]). But, if you are working with inkjet printers, you're probably going to use a lot of Magenta with a bit of Cyan ([url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMYK_color_model]The CMYK color model[/url]). But, if you can work directly with light, you can just find one wavelength, and it alone will generate "purple" for your audience. GNS gave us names for things, and those who have been exposed to it strongly tend to think only in terms of those things - as if there were no other way to approach the issue. The [url=http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/BreakdownOfRPGPlayers.html]1999 WotC survey[/url] gave us another framework we could use - a story/combat and strategy/tactics approach we could use. And the fact that we can do this supports your point that these aren't incompatible. F'rex: Maybe that "Gamist" player is really a *tactical* player, but all he's been exposed to are games with strong tactical combat minigames, and he hasn't been presented with a coherent and interesting way to approach story from a *tactical* perspective. Or maybe that "Narrative" player is really strategic - he has a natural ability to make good long-term choices fitting with fictional genre, but D&D's strategic combat tools are weak, so he's never really approached that area. Yep. And I think the WotC results above pretty much put a hole in that boat. If he had the mathematical education, Edwards never thought in terms of coordinate systems. GNS is one set of coordinates. WotC had another show up in their data. Just like you can map a globe in polar coordinates or rectangular ones. Both are merely frames of reference for talking about a physical planet. [/QUOTE]

Verification