Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > Roleplaying in General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-06-2022, 07:59 AM   #51
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos View Post
For another example, consider how botanists’ co-optation of “fruit” and “nut” to be technical terms have resulted in fatuous arguments over whether cucumbers are fruit and walnuts are nuts.
Yes, though I've mostly heard about tomatoes as an example of fruit.
__________________
Bill Stoddard

I don't think we're in Oz any more.
whswhs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2022, 03:31 PM   #52
TGLS
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthered View Post
Which is the true character: the one written down on the sheet or the one that exists in the mind of the player?
Take your pick:
A) Neither, it's the one that exists in the backstory.
B) The one on the character sheet. This is why the player should be deducted character points when their characterization doesn't match their disadvantages.
C) The one that exists in the minds of all the players and the GM. The character sheet is just a description of the character to give the players and the GM a starting point.
TGLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2022, 09:20 AM   #53
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
And the true character is the one the audience experiences.
I'd have to agree with this, while pointing out that there's thus not a single "true character", as every player's perceptions of that character are different. That includes the perception in the mind of the character's player -- certainly an important one, as it's the one from which all the other player's perceptions are derived. But that's an indirect and errorful process, not a simple copy of an idea (as I'm all too aware from my own limitations in managing to portray characters in play).
Anaraxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2022, 11:50 AM   #54
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Cule View Post
If 3d6 fall in the forest with no one to add them up, how do you know if you've criticalled?

If, contrary to Einstein, God does play dice what sort does He/She/It use?

How to apply John Rawl's Veil of Ignorance to the design of a gaming world? (Easier with random character generation, I think. People who design characters are always going to want to create loopholes.)
He's the GM. Only PCs play dice.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2022, 11:52 AM   #55
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos View Post
Hoards are socially constructed.
Money is socially constructed and hoards are made of money. But then social constructs are a social construct.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2022, 08:52 PM   #56
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by jason taylor View Post
Money is socially constructed and hoards are made of money. But then social constructs are a social construct.
True, but let’s not succumb to the Fallacy of Composition.
__________________

© copyright Brett Evill
Discussion of FLAT BLACK
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2022, 02:24 PM   #57
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by jason taylor View Post
He's the GM. Only PCs play dice.
In the prototypical RPGs, the GM rolled dice to find out if a dungeon room or a wilderness hex was inhabited, what kind of inhabitants it had, how many there were, if they had treasure, how much, what kind, and if there were traps, among other things.

A world created in this way tends to have a certain lack of coherence, as the dice rolls in successive spaces are not correlated with each other.

My experience in creating alien races, for example, using the rules in GURPS Space has tended to be that they also have a certain lack of coherence.

Does physical reality have enough coherence to support the conclusion that God is not rolling dice to create its occupants? Or is God an old school GM?
__________________
Bill Stoddard

I don't think we're in Oz any more.
whswhs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2022, 05:14 AM   #58
Michael Cule
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by jason taylor View Post
He's the GM. Only PCs play dice.
So the world is Powered by The Apocalypse?

Worse, the world is Player Centered!
__________________
Michael Cule,
Genius for Hire,
Gaming Dinosaur Second Class
Michael Cule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2022, 11:52 AM   #59
RogerBW
 
RogerBW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: near London, UK
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Cule View Post
So the world is Powered by The Apocalypse?

Worse, the world is Player Centered!
Watch out - some of the dodgier fringes of the men's rights / incel / PUA group of communities talk about men who don't agree with them as NPCs.
RogerBW is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2022, 12:34 PM   #60
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Default Re: Gaming philosophy conundra

Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerBW View Post
Watch out - some of the dodgier fringes of the men's rights / incel / PUA group of communities talk about men who don't agree with them as NPCs.
I suspect that thinking of the outgroup as not really being people may go back to the Paleolithic, even if the word for "not really people" changes.
__________________
Bill Stoddard

I don't think we're in Oz any more.
whswhs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
philosophy, sisyphus, theseus, trolley problem

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.