jeffk at tenetwork.com
Thu Jun 5 22:31:09 New Zealand Standard Time 1997
At 07:51 PM 6/5/97 PST8PDT, JC Lawrence wrote:
>>This breaks the ethos of the roleplayer. If we ignored the bad
>>things when they happened we woudl end u pwith very uninteresting
>Here I suspect you part company with the sotryu telling branch of RP.
Hmm. Interesting. As I say I've never played Vampire TM or any of the other
heavy "story teller" pen and papers. I have played Theatrix... but there
you definatelty do have limits to what you can do to change the plot line..
>I'd see this coming from a different principle: The RP'ers want to
>address their game problems within the confines of the game. The
>concept of dropping carrier doesn't really exist to them as the whole
>concept of a carrier is unreal to their characters.
Yes, an excellent point. You reached what I was reaching for. "Breaking
character" is a cardinal sin to the roleplayer and this is tantamount to a
charatcer break... thats probably an unwritten rule of somekind if I could
figure out the right formulation. You are expected to react in charatcer
even if such a reaction is to your own detriment. By the same token though
you don't "use this" against the other guy by plotting to put them in such
situations. And as I mentioedn before, groups I've playwed with ahve
always had the "curcuit breakers" implied-- places you DONT go even if its
the msot logical character action, instead you find the NEXT most logical
one and use it.
Generally this includes muder, rape, and other nasty things much too real
world for us to want to be doing to each other in fantasy as the result is
genuine psychological stress on the result of the victim's player.
>The GOPs however play the game as a part of their RL, so dropping
>character is an obvious ploy in dealing with another player IRL.
><<I could see that we are saying the same things in different words
Nah. Yours are better :)
More information about the MUD-Dev