Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9334965" data-attributes="member: 71699">In a sense, we're all forced to be modalists when describing what actually exists right now in the domain. Because local physical reality does not (and cannot) contain every feasible instance along the continuum.Example: In our local solar system, we have a few planets. It would be mistaken to imagine that these are the only possible planets, and that across the vastness of the visible Universe there are no similar-but-not-perfectly-similar along with obviously-different planets. And were it to turn out that the Universe were infinite, then every possible planet would perforce be instantiated, thus reifying the continuum... although this is a tremendous digression!Another example: Compare Daggerheart with say Monster of the Week and D&amp;D. I have noticed mechanics and principles seen in each of those games appearing in Daggerheart. Advantage and Disadvantage is an obvious one from D&amp;D, but also the classes. But then WRT classes one sees progression tracks not so far from MotW. And so on. Or consider the Rulings Over Rules principle of Daggerheart... that many read into text in the D&amp;D core books. Which is immediately followed by &quot;Player Principles&quot; that include &quot;Play to Find Out What Happens&quot;.I personally find value in using topologies to picture conceptual spaces. I first started considering it when I read a paper (that I cannot recall title or author of now) on engaging the visuo-spatial component of generalized intelligence to grasp and solve complex problems. Specifically by finding ways to render the problem space topologically. I find that heatmaps are similarly helpful. I've noticed that some folk are let's say &quot;visual-thinkers&quot;, and this works for them. I wouldn't expect it to work for everyone.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9334965, member: 71699"] In a sense, we're all forced to be modalists when describing what actually exists right now in the domain. Because local physical reality does not (and cannot) contain every feasible instance along the continuum. [I]Example: In our local solar system, we have a few planets. It would be mistaken to imagine that these are the only possible planets, and that across the vastness of the visible Universe there are [B]no [/B]similar-but-not-perfectly-similar along with obviously-different planets. And were it to turn out that the Universe were infinite, then every possible planet would perforce be instantiated, thus reifying the continuum... although this is a tremendous digression! Another example: Compare Daggerheart with say Monster of the Week and D&D. I have noticed mechanics and principles seen in each of those games appearing in Daggerheart. Advantage and Disadvantage is an obvious one from D&D, but also the classes. But then WRT classes one sees progression tracks not so far from MotW. And so on. Or consider the Rulings Over Rules principle of Daggerheart... that many read into text in the D&D core books. Which is immediately followed by "Player Principles" that include "Play to Find Out What Happens".[/I] I personally find value in using topologies to picture conceptual spaces. I first started considering it when I read a paper (that I cannot recall title or author of now) on engaging the visuo-spatial component of generalized intelligence to grasp and solve complex problems. Specifically by finding ways to render the problem space topologically. I find that heatmaps are similarly helpful. I've noticed that some folk are let's say "visual-thinkers", and this works for them. I wouldn't expect it to work for everyone. [/QUOTE]

Verification