Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7821831" data-attributes="member: 4937">You can say what ever you like, but it doesn't make it true. I can say "GTFA" doesn't carry inherently negative and rude connotations all I like, and that it is meant to be an entirely neutral term, but if I wanted to create an entirely neutral term I probably shouldn't have started with that as a basis. The truth is "bleed" is a very loaded word, bringing to mind as it does injury and the like.Yeah, I understand all that but people aren't books or paints, and in the context of talking about people and emotions experiencing bleed, that's heavily loaded language that's going to be really easy to weaponize. There are plenty of alternative terms that you could use - "spillover" is I think a better term, especially as a shortened form of "emotional spillover" which is much more descriptive anyway and requires far less explanation to get where everyone understands the meaning of your jargon.Or heck, let's try this term from 1983(!): "This issue is particularly problematic in campaign play, where long-term immersion into a particular character or fiction without distinct stopping points can produce what Gary Alan Fine calls overinvolvement, a phenomenon in which the players do not sufficiently shed the role and fail to fully reintegrate into their mundane lives." There, that's a useful starting point. But not particularly interested in starting with the term "bleed".I don't care what you think it is trying to say. I'm evaluating it not on its stated good intentions but what I think it will actually accomplish. And I'm basing that not only on my first impression, but actually having gone to read the links in the article, which confirmed my first impressions. There are some important concepts here but I don't agree with a lot of the framing of the discussion, which seems to me to provide way too much emotional cover for a manipulative person to abuse the system.Now, there is part of this that I think is vastly more relative to LARPing than typical table top play. I'm not a big fan of LARPing because I find way to much self-identification with character going on, and there are a lot of negatives I associate with some of the aesthetics of play I find in LARPing - including what is here being described as "bleed". But I think in the context of a LARP you better be up front about the reality that people are "bleeding" all over the bloody place, and not think for a second that the rivalries and relationships that are intensely felt in game are just something that can easily be separated out by a "magic circle" that you can step in and out of. You know, if this such a mature thing in the method acting community, then perhaps that should have been imported into the discussion rather than inventing this "bleed" term. When you start talking about method acting, I think how for the movie "The Breakfast Club" the actor Judd Nelson stayed entirely in character as "Bender" both on and off the set for the duration of the movie. And we could have an argument about how in a professional setting, whether or not that behavior is justifiable for the purposes of creating commercial art, but just my opinion here is that no actors should have to put up with you being a jerk all the time for the sake of your art, and that certainly should also apply to recreational roleplayers who are just doing this for fun and not getting paid to be a jerk.</blockquote>

Verification