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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8929764" data-attributes="member: 42582">In this passage you are talking about what is happening in the fiction.I am talking about what is actually happening at the table when the game is played. To repost:In the example with the tapestry, the player reasons about tapestries, ropes, knots, running away - all elements of the shared fiction.In the example of the Rope Trick and Wall of Force, the player reasons about spell descriptions - ie the game rules, not the fiction.That's the difference. The difference doesn't disappear by quibbling over framings of questions.This doesn't bear upon my point at all. I'm not saying that no ingenuity is involved in parsing spell descriptions and identifying the conceptual and logical relations between them. I'm just saying that this is different from engaging the fiction, which for me is the core of RPGing. And I am relating this back to [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER]'s post about not reconceptualising the fiction in the course of a "unit" of play.No. I even posted an example upthread of how the use of magic can involve engaging the fiction: resolving your scenario in MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic.Another example is one I've posted about in this thread: my player who had to decide whether or not his PC was performing a ritual before working out whether or not a bonus was applicable - this meant thinking about what is happening in the fiction, and how it relates to the way magic works as part of the shared fiction developed through play.</blockquote>

Verification