Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5570953" data-attributes="member: 18280">Erm...No.&nbsp; I said nothing there about the game; only about the idea that the &quot;mythical&quot; fiction could not have primacy over the rules &quot;because it doesn't have an independent existence&quot;....And, yes, that demonstrates a very shallow understanding of fiction.I also wonder where you get the &quot;shallow and simple&quot; from?&nbsp; Even were you to grant my contention that 4e includes elements that impede (but do not prevent) role-playing, that hardly makes it &quot;shallow and simple&quot;.&nbsp; Chess is not shallow or simple, and it has far greater impediments to role-playing that 4e does.Also, if one is able to X with impediments the same way that another person does without, that doesn't usually imply that the first person is shallow or simple (at least, regarding X).&nbsp; Anyone who is capable of the same depth of immersion with 4e as I am with my game of choice, by my own argument, would have to be better at it that I am.And that's cool.&nbsp; I am willing to grant that this might be the case for many folks.&nbsp; I'm just not willing to grant that it is the case for folks who believe that the fiction is &quot;mythical&quot;, or that immersion in that fiction cannot take precedence over the rules.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5570953, member: 18280"] Erm...No. I said nothing there about the game; only about the idea that the "mythical" fiction could not have primacy over the rules "because it doesn't have an independent existence"....And, yes, that demonstrates a very shallow understanding of fiction. I also wonder where you get the "shallow and simple" from? Even were you to grant my contention that 4e includes elements that impede (but do not prevent) role-playing, that hardly makes it "shallow and simple". Chess is not shallow or simple, and it has far greater impediments to role-playing that 4e does. Also, if one is able to X with impediments the same way that another person does without, that doesn't usually imply that the first person is shallow or simple (at least, regarding X). Anyone who is capable of the same depth of immersion with 4e as I am with my game of choice, by my own argument, would have to be [B][I]better at it that I am[/I][/B]. And that's cool. I am willing to grant that this might be the case for many folks. I'm just not willing to grant that it is the case for folks who believe that the fiction is "mythical", or that immersion in that fiction cannot take precedence over the rules. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification