Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6883351" data-attributes="member: 16814">As Bold was asked his definition of genius, and this was the only condition he presented, I think you're imagining more conditions that he chose to, for some reason, not explain in his definition of genius.&nbsp; I can only work with what's presented, and he presented only that.&nbsp; Until he expands, though, you're only guessing that my examples aren't on target.I disagree with Maxperson -- I'm perfectly fine with the ideas presented by Gygax, and by Six's hobgoblin, and by 3 of the 4 &quot;geniuses&quot; presented in the OP.&nbsp; They are find reasons to narrate the results of the mechanics in a coherent (if a bit juvenile and ridiculous in the case of the &quot;geniuses&quot;) within their concept.However, I must strongly disagree that LOL is a further expansion of this concept.&nbsp; I say this because the core of the LOL concept is to narrate counter to the mechanics in relation to INT.&nbsp; And to divorce completely the fictional narration from the events of the game, going so far as to maintain two separate narrative threads -- what LOL narrates vs what happens for everyone else in the game.&nbsp; That's not an expansion of the narrative license discussed by Gygax and shown by Six and the other &quot;geniuses&quot;.&nbsp; It's an abrogation of one of the core concepts of the game -- that you're telling a joint story and using the game mechanics to resolve the uncertain parts that come up in that story.&nbsp; LOL is just telling a story, not playing a game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 6883351, member: 16814"] As Bold was asked his definition of genius, and this was the only condition he presented, I think you're imagining more conditions that he chose to, for some reason, not explain in his definition of genius. I can only work with what's presented, and he presented only that. Until he expands, though, you're only guessing that my examples aren't on target. I disagree with Maxperson -- I'm perfectly fine with the ideas presented by Gygax, and by Six's hobgoblin, and by 3 of the 4 "geniuses" presented in the OP. They are find reasons to narrate the results of the mechanics in a coherent (if a bit juvenile and ridiculous in the case of the "geniuses") within their concept. However, I must strongly disagree that LOL is a further expansion of this concept. I say this because the core of the LOL concept is to narrate counter to the mechanics in relation to INT. And to divorce completely the fictional narration from the events of the game, going so far as to maintain two separate narrative threads -- what LOL narrates vs what happens for everyone else in the game. That's not an expansion of the narrative license discussed by Gygax and shown by Six and the other "geniuses". It's an abrogation of one of the core concepts of the game -- that you're telling a joint story and using the game mechanics to resolve the uncertain parts that come up in that story. LOL is just telling a story, not playing a game. [/QUOTE]

Verification