Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4041404" data-attributes="member: 42582">There is a long tradition in European philosophy (beginning with Plato at least) that does&nbsp; not identify &quot;existence&quot; with &quot;the property to affect the material world&quot;.But I really don't think that this thread needs to touch on these difficult technical questions of metaphysics.Actually, I think he used a term which is already well established as a term for describing RPG play (and is borrowed from the technical terminology of other literary/narrative pursuits).In the same way that others in the thread have used the term &quot;physics&quot;.Does &quot;game&quot; here mean &quot;gameworld&quot;? Then your claim is false - the gameworld includes the rain. Does &quot;game&quot; here mean &quot;action resolution mechanics&quot;? Then your claim is true, but seems to not establish anything non-tautologous.The reasoning here is completely obscure to me, especially because you seem to use &quot;game&quot; and &quot;gameworld&quot; as equivalent, when clearly they are not.Your analogy is completely inapt for anyone who doesn't play an RPG so as to experience outputs that are calculated, logically/mathematically, from certain inputs. In short - if you play non-narrativistly, then you may well think that the mechanics are the physics of the gameworld. But narrativists don't play non-narrativistly. If they did, they wouldn't be narrativists.Exactly right. &quot;Enforceable&quot; is an odd word to use here. But I take you roughly to be saying that &quot;If you have players who only respond to the action resolution mechanics, and are not interested in the gameworld for any other reason, then narrativist play will fail.&quot; That claim is true, but it doesn't remotely show that narrativist play cannot take place. Every day, narrativist RPGers are refuting that suggestion by doing it.The key to their success is that such players are interested in the gameworld for another reason - namely, for the way in which its elements constitute statements of thematic importance.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 4041404, member: 42582"] There is a long tradition in European philosophy (beginning with Plato at least) that does not identify "existence" with "the property to affect the material world". But I really don't think that this thread needs to touch on these difficult technical questions of metaphysics. Actually, I think he used a term which is already well established as a term for describing RPG play (and is borrowed from the technical terminology of other literary/narrative pursuits). In the same way that others in the thread have used the term "physics". Does "game" here mean "gameworld"? Then your claim is false - the gameworld includes the rain. Does "game" here mean "action resolution mechanics"? Then your claim is true, but seems to not establish anything non-tautologous. The reasoning here is completely obscure to me, especially because you seem to use "game" and "gameworld" as equivalent, when clearly they are not. Your analogy is completely inapt for anyone who doesn't play an RPG so as to experience outputs that are calculated, logically/mathematically, from certain inputs. In short - if you play non-narrativistly, then you may well think that the mechanics are the physics of the gameworld. But narrativists don't play non-narrativistly. If they did, they wouldn't be narrativists. Exactly right. "Enforceable" is an odd word to use here. But I take you roughly to be saying that "If you have players who only respond to the action resolution mechanics, and are not interested in the gameworld for any other reason, then narrativist play will fail." That claim is true, but it doesn't remotely show that narrativist play cannot take place. Every day, narrativist RPGers are refuting that suggestion by doing it. The key to their success is that such players are interested in the gameworld for another reason - namely, for the way in which its elements constitute statements of thematic importance. [/QUOTE]

Verification