Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 4271302" data-attributes="member: 15538">Re: pawn stance. Pawn stance is not inimical to role-playing. Allow me.The Ron says:In Actor stance, a person determines a character's decisions and actions using only knowledge and perceptions that the character would have. In Author stance, a person determines a character's decisions and actions based on the real person's priorities, then retroactively &quot;motivates&quot; the character to perform them. (Without that second, retroactive step, this is fairly called Pawn stance.) In Director stance, a person determines aspects of the environment relative to the character in some fashion, entirely separately from the character's knowledge or ability to influence events. Therefore the player has not only determined the character's actions, but the context, timing, and spatial circumstances of those actions, or even features of the world separate from the characters. So there is really only one stance: author stance. Based on my real world priorities, I might either determine a character's decisions and actions using only knowledge and personality of the character, or I might define their actions, include environmental elements that affect their actions, separately from their awareness. I could state my character has a heretofore unknown psychic power and declare it activates, I could say, &quot;Budd would never do that&quot;, or whatever. It's all authorial. In my model, there is only authorial stance.The distinction between authorial stance and pawn stance is meaningless. &quot;Wormface stabs the innkeeper.&quot; &quot;Why?&quot; &quot;That's the kind of guy he is.&quot;&nbsp; Or even better:&quot;Wormface stabs the innkeeper.&quot;&quot;Why?&quot;&quot;Because a being outside his reality that is all powerful dictates his actions.&quot;So in reality, all stances are author stance. Or all are Pawn stance, but I'm not going to denigrate other people's choices. I might view the random slaughter of innkeepers as abhorrent, but it's integral to the RPG experience that such freedom exist for those who require it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pawsplay, post: 4271302, member: 15538"] Re: pawn stance. Pawn stance is not inimical to role-playing. Allow me. The Ron says: [i]In Actor stance, a person determines a character's decisions and actions using only knowledge and perceptions that the character would have. In Author stance, a person determines a character's decisions and actions based on the real person's priorities, then retroactively "motivates" the character to perform them. (Without that second, retroactive step, this is fairly called Pawn stance.) In Director stance, a person determines aspects of the environment relative to the character in some fashion, entirely separately from the character's knowledge or ability to influence events. Therefore the player has not only determined the character's actions, but the context, timing, and spatial circumstances of those actions, or even features of the world separate from the characters. [/i] So there is really only one stance: author stance. Based on my real world priorities, I might either determine a character's decisions and actions using only knowledge and personality of the character, or I might define their actions, include environmental elements that affect their actions, separately from their awareness. I could state my character has a heretofore unknown psychic power and declare it activates, I could say, "Budd would never do that", or whatever. It's all authorial. In my model, there is only authorial stance. The distinction between authorial stance and pawn stance is meaningless. "Wormface stabs the innkeeper." "Why?" "That's the kind of guy he is." Or even better: "Wormface stabs the innkeeper." "Why?" "Because a being outside his reality that is all powerful dictates his actions." So in reality, all stances are author stance. Or all are Pawn stance, but I'm not going to denigrate other people's choices. I might view the random slaughter of innkeepers as abhorrent, but it's integral to the RPG experience that such freedom exist for those who require it. [/QUOTE]

Verification