Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9040854" data-attributes="member: 71699">If one really accepts the sorts of arguments you and others are making, then my definition of &quot;real&quot; puts the work in the right place. To make the imagined world facts external to player purposes is to put the world on a &quot;realistic&quot; - physicalist or as it used to be called materialist - metaphysical footing from the perspective of their characters.World facts that are external to and independent of player goals do not suit the purposes of dramatism. Various posters have been vocal in not seeing the use of such world facts... wondered aloud how such could be of use to player characters. I take that to agree with this point.Meaning that if there is a form of realism that exists in setups where world facts are adopted without regard to characters, then that is clearly distinct from dramatism. &quot;Realistic&quot; is used to mean many different things: if for some meaning of realistic that meaning is also of use to and present in dramatism (i.e. if you are right for said meaning), then there is nothing about that meaning that makes modes prioritising it distinct from dramatism (beyond said prioritisation, which isn't nothing but is also an easily blurred line.)Therefore the definitions of &quot;real&quot; worth having must include the one I propose: it has consequences that dramatism has no use for and should reject. The triumvirate of definitions I proposed work collectively; but this is the one that makes the resultant &quot;realism&quot; most distinct.I've read something like this apprehension many times now. All I can say is that the externality or independence of the world facts is not intended to thwart players. They form their goals within the context of those facts, just as in real-life we act within the world: reality does not warp around our dramatic needs.That's whoever or whatever process is controlling the NPCs. I should also call attention to the desirability of players conflicting with players in this mode. I don't find it ideal to assume a single harmonious party. Even where player characters are notionally working together, each should think about their character's motives within the world.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9040854, member: 71699"] If one really accepts the sorts of arguments you and others are making, then my definition of "real" puts the work in the right place. To make the imagined world facts external to player purposes is to put the world on a "realistic" - physicalist or as it used to be called materialist - metaphysical footing from the perspective of their characters. World facts that are external to and independent of player goals do not suit the purposes of dramatism. Various posters have been vocal in not seeing the use of such world facts... wondered aloud how such could be of use to player characters. I take that to agree with this point. Meaning that if there is a form of realism that exists in setups where world facts are adopted without regard to characters, then that is clearly distinct from dramatism. "Realistic" is used to mean many different things: if for some meaning of realistic that meaning is also of use to and present in dramatism (i.e. if you are right for said meaning), then there is nothing about that meaning that makes modes prioritising it distinct from dramatism (beyond said prioritisation, which isn't nothing but is also an easily blurred line.) Therefore the definitions of "real" worth having must include the one I propose: it has consequences that dramatism has no use for and should reject. The triumvirate of definitions I proposed work collectively; but this is the one that makes the resultant "realism" most distinct. I've read something like this apprehension many times now. All I can say is that the externality or independence of the world facts is not intended to thwart players. They form their goals within the context of those facts, just as in real-life we act within the world: reality does not warp around our dramatic needs. That's whoever or whatever process is controlling the NPCs. I should also call attention to the desirability of players conflicting with players in this mode. I don't find it ideal to assume a single harmonious party. Even where player characters are notionally working together, each should think about their character's motives within the world. [/QUOTE]

Verification