Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Immortal Sun" data-source="post: 7594932">I get what you're saying a little better but...I'm still not terribly sure why you're stacking these things as separate elements.&nbsp; This is, again like what I got at in my first post in this thread, it's weird to me to ask these to be separate.&nbsp; Not from a DM perspective mind you, since there are times when the flavor can make the crunch unclear or difficult to understand.&nbsp; But it's something of a package deal.&nbsp; And you can achieve the emotive experience responding to a situation laced with flavor just as well as you can achieve the emotive experience responding to a situation that is not.You call it &quot;RPGing&quot; like, this is some thing that is separate from acting or storytelling.&nbsp; But it's not really its own thing not because it is stands out uniquely in its own right, but because it combines gaming, acting, storytelling into one complete whole.&nbsp; In some respects, you are an audience member, because you get to sit back and watch the performances of the other players, the DM being the NPCs, and the descriptive elements the DM adds to help set the stage.&nbsp; But you're also an active participant, you have a turn where then others get to watch your performance and respond to the elements you add to the scene.Hence why the name &quot;RPG&quot; is an acronym.&nbsp; &quot;Role&quot; &quot;Playing&quot; &quot;Game&quot;.&nbsp; There are multiple elements combining to form a unique experience that in some respects is like watching a movie or reading a book, at least when it's not your turn.&nbsp; But also isn't totally like a game either.&nbsp; And it isn't wholly acting either.It's great that your character had an emotion....but like the people who started this discussion, I still feel like you're trying to draw a line between you and your character which is an inherently fuzzy boundary.&nbsp; But someone should be reacting to the flavor of the information put forward, be it you or your character.&nbsp; And if you want information completely devoid of flavor, then quite frankly I just don't understand the worlds that your characters live in.&nbsp; If your issue here is that I was referring to &quot;you&quot;, then keep in mind I refer to &quot;you&quot; in a general sense as the Player/PC unit.&nbsp; I don't consider these things to be separate.&nbsp; I talk to the player at my table, and the PC takes actions within the game.&nbsp; To me these are not separate and distinct units.&nbsp; A PC has no life of its own, no decision-making capacity, no ability to act without the player.&nbsp; The player similarly has no ability to actually act within the game world, other than through the window that is their character.&nbsp; Your perspective still seems strange to me.&nbsp; What about the performance of the DM behind NPCs?&nbsp; Does your DM not run NPCs?&nbsp; Who does?&nbsp; Are they interesting?&nbsp; Who makes them interesting?&nbsp; Whose performance is responsible for that?&nbsp; I still feel like, in asking for everything to be cut and dry, you're making an argument that you don't actually participate in at the table.&nbsp; There must be some performative elements on behalf of the DM, otherwise to me, it sounds like your game world is little more than Matrix-code running down a screen.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Immortal Sun, post: 7594932"] I get what you're saying a little better but... I'm still not terribly sure why you're stacking these things as separate elements. This is, [I]again[/I] like what I got at in my first post in this thread, it's weird to me to ask these to be separate. Not from a DM perspective mind you, since there are times when the flavor can make the crunch unclear or difficult to understand. But it's something of a package deal. And you can achieve the emotive experience responding to a situation laced with flavor just as well as you can achieve the emotive experience responding to a situation that is not. You call it "RPGing" like, this is some [I]thing[/I] that is separate from acting or storytelling. But it's not really its own thing not because it is stands out uniquely in its own right, but because it combines gaming, acting, storytelling into one complete whole. In some respects, you [I]are[/I] an audience member, because you get to sit back and watch the performances of the other players, the DM being the NPCs, and the descriptive elements the DM adds to help set the stage. But you're also an active participant, you have a turn where then others get to watch [I]your[/I] performance and respond to the elements [I]you[/I] add to the scene. Hence why the name "RPG" is an acronym. "Role" "Playing" "Game". There are multiple elements combining to form a unique experience that in some respects is like watching a movie or reading a book, at least when it's not your turn. But also isn't totally like a game either. And it isn't wholly acting either. It's great that your character had an emotion....but like the people who started this discussion, I still feel like you're trying to draw a line between you and your character which is an inherently fuzzy boundary. But [I]someone[/I] should be reacting to the flavor of the information put forward, be it you or your character. And if you want information completely devoid of flavor, then quite frankly I just don't understand the worlds that your characters live in. If your issue here is that I was referring to "you", then keep in mind I refer to "you" in a general sense as the Player/PC unit. I don't consider these things to be separate. I talk to the player at my table, and the PC takes actions within the game. To me these are not separate and distinct units. A PC has no life of its own, no decision-making capacity, no ability to act without the player. The player similarly has no ability to actually act within the game world, other than through the window that is their character. Your perspective still seems strange to me. What about the performance of the DM behind NPCs? Does your DM not run NPCs? Who does? Are they interesting? Who makes them interesting? Whose [I]performance[/I] is responsible for that? I still feel like, in asking for everything to be cut and dry, you're making an argument that you don't actually participate in at the table. There must be [I]some[/I] performative elements on behalf of the DM, otherwise to me, it sounds like your game world is little more than Matrix-code running down a screen. [/QUOTE]

Verification