Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="prabe" data-source="post: 8018647" data-attributes="member: 7016699">I figured I was misunderstanding you, because for the reasons I mentioned it didn't seem plausible that you were saying what my brain was telling me you were saying. Thanks for clearing that up. If anything else in my earlier response seems overly defensive, please take that misunderstanding into account.Yes, I'm probably one of the people you're thinking of, who's described being in the character as a preferred play priority.Yes. I agree that it is possible to be motivated--possibly even compelled--by forces inside and outside the character, and that that motivation or compulsion isn't strictly a matter of choice. I agree that immersion and habitation are different things from roleplaying--possibly helpful, but different. Verisimilitude is less a state of mind to me, but I'll agree that something &quot;seeming realistic&quot; (as opposed to &quot;being realistic&quot;) is different from roleplaying.I don't think I believe that in order to project oneself into a character, to understand that character, to behave in-fiction as they would, it's necessary to have those compulsions applied from outside the game. Any writer of fiction who has been surprised by the behavior of a character whose story he was writing seems likely to understand my point of view, here: I've recently been surprised by the decisions of at least one character I was playing, who ended up behaving in arguably suboptimal ways that made some sense looking back.Even if compulsion from outside the fiction was a good way to model the forces you're talking about, I'm not sure it would make for good game play, and it might not make for verisimilitude for a player who doesn't know about (or buy) the current neuroscience--it's not going to seem believable to them if it doesn't fit their theory of mind.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="prabe, post: 8018647, member: 7016699"] I figured I was misunderstanding you, because for the reasons I mentioned it didn't seem plausible that you were saying what my brain was telling me you were saying. Thanks for clearing that up. If anything else in my earlier response seems overly defensive, please take that misunderstanding into account. Yes, I'm probably one of the people you're thinking of, who's described being in the character as a preferred play priority. Yes. I agree that it is possible to be motivated--possibly even compelled--by forces inside and outside the character, and that that motivation or compulsion isn't strictly a matter of choice. I agree that immersion and habitation are different things from roleplaying--possibly helpful, but different. Verisimilitude is less a state of mind to me, but I'll agree that something "seeming realistic" (as opposed to "being realistic") is different from roleplaying. I don't think I believe that in order to project oneself into a character, to understand that character, to behave in-fiction as they would, it's necessary to have those compulsions applied from outside the game. Any writer of fiction who has been surprised by the behavior of a character whose story he was writing seems likely to understand my point of view, here: I've recently been surprised by the decisions of at least one character I was playing, who ended up behaving in arguably suboptimal ways that made some sense looking back. Even if compulsion from outside the fiction was a good way to model the forces you're talking about, I'm not sure it would make for good game play, and it might not make for verisimilitude for a player who doesn't know about (or buy) the current neuroscience--it's not going to seem believable to them if it doesn't fit their theory of mind. [/QUOTE]

Verification