Jon A. Lambert
jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com
Wed Jun 4 00:52:30 New Zealand Standard Time 1997
> From: Jeff Kesselman <jeffk at tenetwork.com>
> To: mud-dev at null.net
> At 09:04 PM 6/2/97 PST8PDT, JK wrote:
> >On Mon 02 Jun, Adam Wiggins wrote:
> >> Ah...another good analogy. Unfortunately, there's a small problem with it
> >> that I think is point of my argument. *When*, pray tell, is the novel
> >> complete? Never? When you decide it's complete?
> To answer this in short, from my perspective... usually yes, wehn the
> roleplayer decides its complete. Usually a character hits a reasonable
> "retirement" point where most of the potential in its immediate story has
> been exploited. Like any author's character howevre it may come "out of
> retirement" from time to time as a supporting character or for a "short
This is a distinctive subset of role-playing. It more particularly
defines the story-telling group.
> A judge who throws 10th level NPC against his 2nd level players doesn't
> have a game group very long.
True. But its just as likely a 10th level player can die an ignoble
death at the hands of a 1st level character.
> Similarly a game that allowsd such to happen is likely to lose its
> Does this lay out the differences clearly enough?
You clearly lay out a distinctive group of role-players. I have never
seen the PvP advice and consent concept outside of the story-telling
style of play. The differences that lie between strategic/tactical
gameplayer and totally immersive roleplayer have a great deal of
gray area between them.
I would contend that the totally immersive roleplayer does not seek
advice and consent for actions affecting another player and is not
forced by the game system to play cooperatively.
These strike me as peculiarly OOC actions.
"If I'd known it was harmless, I would have killed it myself"
*- Through a Scanner Darkly - PKD -*
More information about the MUD-Dev