Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6745886" data-attributes="member: 42582">Umbran, I'm still in the room!On &quot;purism&quot;: I don't think it can be true both that my game is not distinguishable from Celebrim's (or anyone elses) and that my game is something that Celebrim (and others) reject. I know the latter to be the case, from threads like <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?301282-Actual-play-examples-balance-between-fiction-and-mechanics" target="_blank">this one</a>, plus a billion 4e threads, plus this thread, plus, plus, plus. Hence I infer that there is a difference.My own view is that Edwards, in some of the passages I've already quoted in this thread, identifies some of the broad differences of technique and approach involved.If you want to know what my actual play looks like, I've got plenty of posts on these boards - mostly 4e but also BW and MHRP.The passage you quote as the contradictory evidence doesn't say anything about &quot;playing your character&quot;. It talks about &quot;wriggling out of a difficult situation&quot;. This is because difficult situations are intended to be at the heart of the game. The game awards &quot;artha&quot; - BW's term for fate/hero points - in the following circumstance (among others):If a player comes to a point in the story where his Beliefs, Instincts and traits conflict with a decision he must make - a direction in which he must go - and he plays out the inner turmoil, the conflict within his own guts, in a believable and engaging manner, then he earns a persona point.This reinforces that the &quot;contract&quot; of the game is not to stick to character, but to engage with the dramatic pressures upon the character and actually play out the resulting transformation.This is the bit of Umbran's post that I gave XP for.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6745886, member: 42582"] Umbran, I'm still in the room! On "purism": I don't think it can be true [I]both[/I] that my game is not distinguishable from Celebrim's (or anyone elses) [I]and[/I] that my game is something that Celebrim (and others) reject. I know the latter to be the case, from threads like [url=http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?301282-Actual-play-examples-balance-between-fiction-and-mechanics]this one[/url], plus a billion 4e threads, plus this thread, plus, plus, plus. Hence I infer that there [I]is[/I] a difference. My own view is that Edwards, in some of the passages I've already quoted in this thread, identifies some of the broad differences of technique and approach involved. If you want to know what my actual play looks like, I've got plenty of posts on these boards - mostly 4e but also BW and MHRP. The passage you quote as the contradictory evidence doesn't say anything about "playing your character". It talks about "wriggling out of a difficult situation". This is because [I]difficult situations[/I] are intended to be at the heart of the game. The game awards "artha" - BW's term for fate/hero points - in the following circumstance (among others): [indent]If a player comes to a point in the story where his Beliefs, Instincts and traits conflict with a decision he must make - a direction in which he must go - and he plays out the inner turmoil, the conflict within his own guts, in a believable and engaging manner, then he earns a persona point.[/indent] This reinforces that the "contract" of the game is not to stick to character, but to engage with the dramatic pressures upon the character and actually play out the resulting transformation. This is the bit of Umbran's post that I gave XP for. [/QUOTE]

Verification