Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7623865" data-attributes="member: 16814">The below is the post of yours immediately before my enumerated argument.&nbsp; Emphasis mine:I hope this clears up your confusion on this matter.I actually do address why your argumeny is not quantitative but qualitative, you just keep ignoring it.&nbsp; Also, as I've been sayin that acting may be sufficient but is not necessary, I fail to understand hiw you could categorize that as &quot;binary.&quot;&nbsp; You've made a clear absolute statement -- that &quot;acting,&quot; however defined, is necessary for superior roleplay.&nbsp; I only have to show thus false in one particular to defeat it.&nbsp; This isn't a false binary, it's how you argue against absolute statements.[Quite]Again, what I am talking about and have always been talking about works pretty much the same way whether we are at a table together or playing a MUSH.&nbsp;&nbsp; So I can separate dialogue from acting.&nbsp; All your issues of mannerism and description and what have you can be addressed just as well in text as live performance, and pretty much anything that can be written can be stated in play to address gaps in the players ability to act - which again I consider largely irrelevant to the conversation but has, as I've demonstrated, been your thing.</blockquote>I deny this is true.&nbsp; Again, take the text, &quot;I believe you.&quot;&nbsp; Delivered in a sarcastic tone, the meaning conveyed is actually opposite of the literal meaning.&nbsp; It's also very different from the same text delivered in an awed tone, or a fearful one.&nbsp; You cannot claim that dialog alone conveys all necessary meaning.&nbsp; You have to include the performative aspects because, once you insist on performance, it's a package deal.&nbsp; You are declaring that you ignore performance when it is not sufficuent and then argue performance is necessary.&nbsp; Can't have it both ways. Look, wanting performance at your table is a perfectly valid preference.&nbsp; I have no idea why you're insisting your preference defines GoodRightFun for roleplaying.&nbsp; I quite often find my game is sometimes improved be my not acting out parts and instead just describing, on both sides of the screen.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7623865, member: 16814"] The below is the post of yours immediately before my enumerated argument. Emphasis mine: I hope this clears up your confusion on this matter. I actually do address why your argumeny is not quantitative but qualitative, you just keep ignoring it. Also, as I've been sayin that acting may be sufficient but is not necessary, I fail to understand hiw you could categorize that as "binary." You've made a clear absolute statement -- that "acting," however defined, is necessary for superior roleplay. I only have to show thus false in one particular to defeat it. This isn't a false binary, it's how you argue against absolute statements. [Quite] Again, what I am talking about and have always been talking about works pretty much the same way whether we are at a table together or playing a MUSH. So I can separate dialogue from acting. All your issues of mannerism and description and what have you can be addressed just as well in text as live performance, and pretty much anything that can be written can be stated in play to address gaps in the players ability to act - which again I consider largely irrelevant to the conversation but has, as I've demonstrated, been your thing.[/QUOTE] I deny this is true. Again, take the text, "I believe you." Delivered in a sarcastic tone, the meaning conveyed is actually opposite of the literal meaning. It's also very different from the same text delivered in an awed tone, or a fearful one. You cannot claim that dialog alone conveys all necessary meaning. You have to include the performative aspects because, once you insist on performance, it's a package deal. You are declaring that you ignore performance when it is not sufficuent and then argue performance is necessary. Can't have it both ways. Look, wanting performance at your table is a perfectly valid preference. I have no idea why you're insisting your preference defines GoodRightFun for roleplaying. I quite often find my game is sometimes improved be my not acting out parts and instead just describing, on both sides of the screen. [/QUOTE]

Verification