Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovi" data-source="post: 8764586" data-attributes="member: 7037596">Okay, then you're using extremely low bars.I completely disagree that they're left behind.&nbsp; This requires defining Discovery as only how D&amp;D works the exploration pillar -- again going for the tautological to exclude others.&nbsp; If you look at the list from the source of the concepts, Discovery is much broader than this and achieved very easily by Dresden Files -- not at all negated.&nbsp; It's only by narrowly defining the terms to apply to&nbsp; D&amp;Disms that you can exclude other games.&nbsp; That's still tautological.It's nonsense, because the word literally means the opposite of what it's being used to describe.&nbsp; And Angry actually uses both the term and the definition from the MDA paper, which is &quot;submission.&quot;&nbsp; He says he likes the EC coined term abnegation because it sounds cooler.&nbsp; I'm not sure he knows what that term means because it doesn't mean submission and doesn't align to the description of that aesthetic.&nbsp; Angry also refers to the MDA paper as the source for that article, although he mangles &quot;sensation&quot; into sensory pleasure a good bit, and I'm not sure that's really useful to exclude descriptions and voices and imagery from &quot;sensation&quot; to stick only to physical props when talking about RPGs.&nbsp; If I play D&amp;D via Roll20, there's nothing physical present, so does D&amp;D on Roll20 fail &quot;sensory pleasure?&quot;&nbsp; No, of course it doesn't.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovi, post: 8764586, member: 7037596"] Okay, then you're using extremely low bars. I completely disagree that they're left behind. This requires defining Discovery as only how D&D works the exploration pillar -- again going for the tautological to exclude others. If you look at the list from the source of the concepts, Discovery is much broader than this and achieved very easily by Dresden Files -- not at all negated. It's only by narrowly defining the terms to apply to D&Disms that you can exclude other games. That's still tautological. It's nonsense, because the word literally means the opposite of what it's being used to describe. And Angry actually uses both the term and the definition from the MDA paper, which is "submission." He says he likes the EC coined term abnegation because it sounds cooler. I'm not sure he knows what that term means because it doesn't mean submission and doesn't align to the description of that aesthetic. Angry also refers to the MDA paper as the source for that article, although he mangles "sensation" into sensory pleasure a good bit, and I'm not sure that's really useful to exclude descriptions and voices and imagery from "sensation" to stick only to physical props when talking about RPGs. If I play D&D via Roll20, there's nothing physical present, so does D&D on Roll20 fail "sensory pleasure?" No, of course it doesn't. [/QUOTE]

Verification