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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5470260" data-attributes="member: 59082">I can describe my experience but that doesn't define yours. That's the personal element at play. Setting aside those qualities that are common to all of the games you mentioned, each of them have distinct qualities - themes, tropes, races, flavor, but more so a kind of "energetic signature" that is uniquely their own. You and I may have different associations with what D&D is, we may experience it differently, but we both are drawing from the same legacy, if you will - the gestalt of ALL D&Disms, all the unique monsters, takes on fantasy concepts, themes, tropes, etc etc etc.Sure, it can, but it can also limit understanding, or reduce it to something that it is not, just as a map reduces the territory to a two-dimension representation. Nothing wrong with maps (I love maps), unless we confuse them for the territory, as the famous saying goes.I would argue that when we analyze poetry we kill it or at least reduce it to something less than it is; but that's another topic of conversation - related, though. The same with concepts and types of love - those are mental simulations or recreations of something that is not mental.Right. But I've already given you two differentiations of D&D: One being the feeling or tonal quality, the other being the technical/factual definition (the threefold model). I've been saying that what I've been talking about is the former, and that it is not easily reducible or definable, yet you keep on insisting that I define it.Only by those that either don't understand what I'm talking about or insist upon a narrow and easily quantifiable definition.What I'm trying to understand, Danny, is where you're trying to go with this? Why do you keep drawing this out?</blockquote>

Verification