Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 8254195" data-attributes="member: 85555">I don't understand why you are so upset Fenris. I am just trying to clarify what I mean (I didn't know if you knew or not, but I was trying to explain that I am not being a postmodernist). I don't have any problem with you. Usually I find you easy to get along with. I can definitely accept the possibility I am wrong. But I can assure you my motivation here isn't that I am looking for something where it doesn't exist. Equivocation around story is something I have genuinely encountered a lot of in RPG discussions. Fiction seems ripe for that too. Plus, like I said, it really seems to cloud the line between 'stuff that happened' and the setting (which for some play styles is going to present an issue in these discussions). I see a lot of room for equivocation with fiction. I have a feeling if you asked a more general audience you would see a lot more confusion around the term. Like I said to Hawkeye, I don't get to decide whether it gets used. But I can give my concern. And for the past several pages, it isn't that I am trying to harp on things. I am just responding to posts taking me to task for bringing up equivocation. I would reject that i am being a postmodernist here. My worldview is very far from postmodernist. But if we are talking about terms and language, getting into a concept like equivocation is fair in my view. Fiction referring to novels and stories is not a very outlandish thing. And it isn't like I am denying the meaning of fiction. but I do have issues with it being the term for the imagined stuff in a campaign.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 8254195, member: 85555"] I don't understand why you are so upset Fenris. I am just trying to clarify what I mean (I didn't know if you knew or not, but I was trying to explain that I am not being a postmodernist). I don't have any problem with you. Usually I find you easy to get along with. I can definitely accept the possibility I am wrong. But I can assure you my motivation here isn't that I am looking for something where it doesn't exist. Equivocation around story is something I have genuinely encountered a lot of in RPG discussions. Fiction seems ripe for that too. Plus, like I said, it really seems to cloud the line between 'stuff that happened' and the setting (which for some play styles is going to present an issue in these discussions). I see a lot of room for equivocation with fiction. I have a feeling if you asked a more general audience you would see a lot more confusion around the term. Like I said to Hawkeye, I don't get to decide whether it gets used. But I can give my concern. And for the past several pages, it isn't that I am trying to harp on things. I am just responding to posts taking me to task for bringing up equivocation. I would reject that i am being a postmodernist here. My worldview is very far from postmodernist. But if we are talking about terms and language, getting into a concept like equivocation is fair in my view. Fiction referring to novels and stories is not a very outlandish thing. And it isn't like I am denying the meaning of fiction. but I do have issues with it being the term for the imagined stuff in a campaign. [/QUOTE]

Verification