Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8501174" data-attributes="member: 82106">I would close the loop. Fictionally an orc attacks your PC. It hits, and the GM describes this as the orc whacking you with his battle axe, ouch it hurts! The GM tells the player his PC took 9 points of damage. The player notes this and further notes that his PC is below his bloodied value and indicates this, pointing out that this triggers a reaction. The player carries out the reaction, which results in the orc taking 6 points of damage and being pushed back a square, which the player describes as a reposte in which he smashes his shield into the orc's face and it falls back. This is why the arrows go in various directions in the model [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] is discussing. fiction happens, which invokes mediation using cues in accordance with rules, which modifies game state, which in turn evokes more fiction, possibly with the mediation of more cues. I find your reformulation of Lumpley to be a bit high level. I don't think the original was intended to capture things like WHY people are playing or what the goals are, specifically. It was about what play consists of, its nature. I think 'theme' as you are putting it, or maybe better 'objective' or 'goal' is a useful concept as well, but that can live beside Lumpley comfortably, they are not exclusive or contradictory.</blockquote>