Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5600848" data-attributes="member: 42582">[MENTION=15538]pawsplay[/MENTION], my objection to what you're saying is that, if you're right, than quite a good chunk of gaming that get's called RPGing isn't actually RPGing. And a lot of advice in books that are generally regarded as mainstream RPG manuals in fact becomes advice on how not to run an RPG.I think at a certain point usage has to bow to reality.And if you think about it from the point of view of the non-GM participants in an illusionist game, they may experience their contribution of colour - funny voices, choice of equipment, even perhaps the occasional but ultimately irrelevant sidequest - as a genuine contribution to the game. As playing. (After all, by "roleplaying" at least some posters on these boards seem to mean funny voices and other expressions of colour that are ultimately irrelevant to action resolution.)Not that I want to make our disagreement about this a big deal - it's only terminology, although terminology in which some people have an emotionally invested stake. I think my defence of KM against your criticisms is perhaps the real point on which we disagree (that is, if we disagree at all, which perhaps we don't).</blockquote>