Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8803288" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Surly but doughty dwarves are more of a rubber mask than dwarves with some physical differences, and some differences of basic perspective as a result, but capable of the same range of behavior as humans.Put simply, fiction isn't, generally, a roleplaying game. You aren't taking on a persona when you read Lord of The Rings. And make no mistake, other fiction is being examined in this light as well. I think roleplaying games have gotten hit first, insofar as they have been, because your character is, for many people, personal. Roleplaying games also tend to describe races in a way that is distinct. I'm not sure how to articulate the difference, but it very much &quot;hits different&quot; as the kids say.IMO that makes Klingons less good for roleplaying than Ithorians. But, it also isn't quite true. Star Wars species do differ from humans quite a bit, they just aren't as monolithic as Star Trek species, because Star Trek species often seem to be basically exactly the same person repeated over and over again. Neither are wholly monolithic, but Star Wars, IMO, treats sentient beings as sentient beings. If all dwarves act a certain way, and even one that acts differently is to some degree fighting their inborn nature and impulses, I'm not sure dwarves are as free of will as a human. I, like many others, have no interest in roleplaying a lack of free will.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8803288, member: 6704184"] Surly but doughty dwarves are [I]more[/I] of a rubber mask than dwarves with some physical differences, and some differences of basic perspective as a result, but capable of the same range of behavior as humans. Put simply, fiction isn't, generally, a roleplaying game. You aren't taking on a persona when you read Lord of The Rings. And make no mistake, other fiction is being examined in this light as well. I think roleplaying games have gotten hit first, insofar as they have been, because your character is, for many people, personal. Roleplaying games also tend to describe races in a way that is distinct. I'm not sure how to articulate the difference, but it very much "hits different" as the kids say. IMO that makes Klingons less good for roleplaying than Ithorians. But, it also isn't quite true. Star Wars species do differ from humans quite a bit, they just aren't as monolithic as Star Trek species, because Star Trek species often seem to be basically exactly the same person repeated over and over again. Neither are wholly monolithic, but Star Wars, IMO, treats sentient beings as sentient beings. If all dwarves act a certain way, and even one that acts differently is to some degree fighting their inborn nature and impulses, I'm not sure dwarves are as free of will as a human. I, like many others, have no interest in roleplaying a lack of free will. [/QUOTE]

Verification