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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 7611188">I am not staking out one particular meaning for Literary. I am pointing out that there are multiple meanings and the crux of this debate centers around posters equivocating around meaning A and meaning B and not recognizing what they are doing. This fundamentally makes the argument impossible to have. But also I think Aldarc and I have been very clear: no matter what meaning you utilize, it seems pretty shaky to say because roleplaying games involve Literary A, B or C, they are therefore literary endeavors. The cooking and sports analogy is a perfect example of why. Now Maxperson was willing to argue that sports are literary when this point was made. But that is clearly an absurd claim. Also, to what end are we having this discussion about definitions? What is it about RPGs being literary that is important to you Hussar and why are you so insistent that we see RPGs in this way as well? Again, I suspect the answer will bring us to points about playstyle. If that is the case, then make your playstyle claims, don't try to win a playstyle argument by controlling definitions and terms. RPGs are X or are not Y is a classic debating tactic that I've just seen too frequently, and even used myself, in arguments around playstyle. And clearly, based on you and Maxperson's posts, we are debating what should be going on at the gaming table, what GM advice is good or bad, etc. Whether you think me not caring about pacing is a playstyle point that has almost nothing to do with wether pacing is or is not a literary concern. The reason you dislike it is going to be something more like "because it makes the game dull" than "because it isn't literary". So let's focus on what the actual lines of dispute are, rather than fight endlessly over the definition of literary.</blockquote>

Verification