Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jay Verkuilen" data-source="post: 7762365" data-attributes="member: 6873517">This is particularly important and I think is the thing that really sets RPGs apart from other types of games. But of course, the boundaries are porous. So you could, for instance, RP your Talisman piece if it happens to be, say, the Warrior of Chaos. Talisman is the old Games Workshop boardgame and is clearly set in the Warhammer world. I'd say it's not an RPG but it clearly has some RPG inspired elements. This is, IMO, a very good point. Words often have multiple, contextual definitions. This reminds me of Luria's classic study of folk vs scientific classifications. They're not the same and neither is &quot;wrong.&quot; To a chef trained in traditional Western cuisine, a tomato is a vegetable (99% of the time, anyway). It acts in a manner that is much more like other vegetables than does, say, an apple, although apples are often used in savory dishes as well. To a botanist, an apple and a tomato are both fruits. Of course, this is cuisine-specific: North African cuisine uses the same basic ingredients in quite different ways, for instance putting many things traditionally considered &quot;fruits&quot; in Western cuisine in savory dishes or using spices deemed &quot;sweet&quot; in a savory way. Thus it is with words like &quot;game.&quot; They have a broad meaning but within specific contexts they gain more specific meanings. You can have a game within a game, for instance, if you're playing an RPG but the PCs end up playing cards with each other or with opposition. People playing definitional games are often trying to use definitions to get away with something, typically trying to win an argument with foes by defining adversaries off the field. That Wittgenstein guy seems smarter every day. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jay Verkuilen, post: 7762365, member: 6873517"] This is particularly important and I think is the thing that really sets RPGs apart from other types of games. But of course, the boundaries are porous. So you could, for instance, RP your [I]Talisman[/I] piece if it happens to be, say, the Warrior of Chaos. [I]Talisman[/I] is the old Games Workshop boardgame and is clearly set in the Warhammer world. I'd say it's not an RPG but it clearly has some RPG inspired elements. This is, IMO, a very good point. Words often have multiple, contextual definitions. This reminds me of Luria's classic study of folk vs scientific classifications. They're not the same and neither is "wrong." To a chef trained in traditional Western cuisine, a tomato is a vegetable (99% of the time, anyway). It acts in a manner that is much more like other vegetables than does, say, an apple, although apples are often used in savory dishes as well. To a botanist, an apple and a tomato are both fruits. Of course, this is cuisine-specific: North African cuisine uses the same basic ingredients in quite different ways, for instance putting many things traditionally considered "fruits" in Western cuisine in savory dishes or using spices deemed "sweet" in a savory way. Thus it is with words like "game." They have a broad meaning but within specific contexts they gain more specific meanings. You can have a game within a game, for instance, if you're playing an RPG but the PCs end up playing cards with each other or with opposition. People playing definitional games are often trying to use definitions to get away with something, typically trying to win an argument with foes by defining adversaries off the field. That Wittgenstein guy seems smarter every day. :p [/QUOTE]

Verification